Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[threefiftyrocket]

Originally Posted by Indyjones

I didn't even notice that about Bambi.

Yup, AT LEAST its DTS HD and not just DTS like the other crap coming out right now... I usually check everything before I buy it too, but I figured it was Disney so I just grabbed it...

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

I don't care how good the movie is, if I look at the back and it doesn't say TrueHD, DTS HD MA, or PCM, I won't buy it. Bambi was the exception b/c my wife really wanted it...

While you're certainly entitled to make any purchasing decisions that you like, this is somewhat absurd for pre-1977 films and very absurd for pre-1950's films. The frequency response for optically recorded films (or for late 40's mag-recorded films for which the mag tracks no longer exist) frequently didn't extend beyond 6K. (Some don't extend much beyond 2K). You cannot tell the difference between the so-called "lossy" and the "lossless" formats under these circumstances. People hear the term "lossy" and they go nuts without realizing how good the technology is behind it. In a proper A-B test, you'd never be able to tell the difference.

Bambi was made in 1942. We (the U.S.) hadn't stolen magnetic tape technology from the Germans yet. It was recorded optically. In theatres, the old Academy Curve (which was used on optical soundtracks until the advent of Dolby Stereo Optical SVA in 1977) started rolling off from 2K. There's nothing there to lose. It's like complaining that a telephone call or a CB or AM radio transcription was recorded "lossy".

[Doctorossi]

While it's true that the majority of audible compression artifacts found in the higher-quality lossy compressed recordings occur in the upper end of the audio spectrum, they don't exclusively live there.

Furthermore, there's a principle involved here. If lossy compression is not used, it can't have an impact, however small that impact may be. With Blu-ray, we're being asked to pay for fidelity to the source. We shouldn't have to wonder whether we are truly getting it, when the format is designed to afford us utter confidence in the matter, at no additional cost to the media distributor.

And, as PeterTHX notes, it sets a bad precedent. Even if we can't hear the difference on Bambi, the market acceptance of such a disc makes room for releases like Uncle Buck and The Sandlot, on which we may very well hear the difference.

[Bobby Henderson]

Bambi is barely over 1 hour in length. I simply don't understand why Disney would use a lossy 2046kb/s DTS-HD HR track rather than go lossless.

The entire contents of Bambi disc 1 (movie & extras) take up 43GB of a dual layer BD50 disc. The average bit rate is around 25Mb/s. There was more than enough room for a DTS-HD Master Audio track running in the 3Mb-4Mb range.

Originally Posted by wallendo

I wonder if DTS has stopped subsidizing DTS HD MA?

I don't know the details on how or if studios pay companies like DTS and Dolby licensing fees to encode movie soundtracks for mass release Blu-ray discs. It may just be a simple matter of the post production studio buying the appropriate hardware or software from DTS.

Anyone can buy a copy of the DTS-HD Master Audio suite from DTS for $1500. The software runs on Mac OSX and Windows XP or Win7. The DTS Surround suite, which only does the lossy versions of DTS for DVD, Music CD, etc. is relatively cheap: $249.

Dolby has a few software products for encoding audio in Dolby Digital, DD Plus or DD TrueHD. They vary in price from $595 for Media Encoder SE to nearly $4000 for the Media Producer Suite Network Bundle. Dolby's audio encoding products only work on the Mac OSX platform.

I think the Mac-only thing is an area that might explain why so many Blu-ray discs feature DTS-based audio rather than Dolby. Every enterprise level Blu-ray authoring system is Windows-based. None of it runs on the Mac platform. Sony Blu-print, Sony Blu-code and Sonic Scenarist BD are the most popular enterprise level BD authoring tools. The only way to run them on a Mac is to install Windows on another disc partition. Even then you're going to be jumping from Mac to PC to do Dolby TrueHD encoding and then use it in a Blu-ray project. It's faster to just use DTS. A friend of mine who does a lot of video work has used both Dolby & DTS software suites, he says the DTS suite is "crazy easy" to use while Dolby's is not nearly so user friendly.

Any serious video making hobbyists wanting to make their own Blu-ray discs with DTS-HD Master Audio tracks should be warned. No mainstream, affordable Blu-ray authoring software on the market can currently import .dtshd audio files. Same goes for Dolby TrueHD. Adobe Encore, Sony Vegas, Final Cut Pro, etc. are all limited to using lossy audio for 5.1 surround sound. The Adobe and Apple products can import lossy DTS encoded audio. The situation seems pretty odd considering the Apple and Adobe video authoring products can bring in all kinds of professional level video formats. Adobe's stuff will even bring in native Red One camera data without transcoding it. With all that capability on the video end one would think they would up their game on the audio side of things too. Oh well.

[nathan_393]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

While it's true that the majority of audible compression artifacts found in the higher-quality lossy compressed recordings occur in the upper end of the audio spectrum, they don't exclusively live there.

Furthermore, there's a principle involved here. If lossy compression is not used, it can't have an impact, however small that impact may be. With Blu-ray, we're being asked to pay for fidelity to the source. We shouldn't have to wonder whether we are truly getting it, when the format is designed to afford us utter confidence in the matter, at no additional cost to the media distributor.

And, as PeterTHX notes, it sets a bad precedent. Even if we can't hear the difference on Bambi, the market acceptance of such a disc makes room for releases like Uncle Buck and The Sandlot, on which we may very well hear the difference.

Have you heard Bambi? There would definitely be a difference in tracks; there's very little as far as dynamics in the music, vocals, or sound effects. It's just one flat level. That's probably the biggest flaw with every lossy track I've heard.

Uncle Buck seemed to be the first, followed by Bambi. Universal I expect to be lazy shmucks, but Disney? Bad form. I really hope they don't take that attitude towards future films, or I'll be disappointed.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by threefiftyrocket

Yup, AT LEAST its DTS HD and not just DTS like the other crap coming out right now... I usually check everything before I buy it too, but I figured it was Disney so I just grabbed it...

It's basically DTS (1.5Mbps) + 2 extra channels + extension packets for a total of 2Mbps. So it really is "regular" lossy. The only reason they had to use HD was for the 7.1, regular DTS doesn't support it, just like any lossy Dolby Digital track would require the "Plus" extension for 7.1

What grinds my gears is that it's a DIAMOND EDITION, the "best of the best".
Now, not so much.

Zoet: Disney had the best recording equipment available, the quality of the masters is not lowly AM radio.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

While it's true that the majority of audible compression artifacts found in the higher-quality lossy compressed recordings occur in the upper end of the audio spectrum, they don't exclusively live there.

Furthermore, there's a principle involved here. If lossy compression is not used, it can't have an impact, however small that impact may be. With Blu-ray, we're being asked to pay for fidelity to the source. We shouldn't have to wonder whether we are truly getting it, when the format is designed to afford us utter confidence in the matter, at no additional cost to the media distributor.

And, as PeterTHX notes, it sets a bad precedent. Even if we can't hear the difference on Bambi, the market acceptance of such a disc makes room for releases like Uncle Buck and The Sandlot, on which we may very well hear the difference.

How sure are we of that?

Intuitively this does seem like a strange place to cut corners. It wouldn't seem like there are any significant cost savings to going lossy but I wonder if that's the case.

[Bill Hunt]

Just a quick heads-up to everyone: As many of you know, our own Jeff Kleist is in Japan at the moment. Turns out, the big quake happened as his plane was on final approach, so he didn't feel it. However, he's obviously experienced all the aftershocks and the chaos that ensued in the aftermath. The good news is, I just talked with him by phone a few minutes ago, and he's just fine. He's in Tokyo at the moment, and he'd like everyone to know that things there are slowly returning to normal - it's not quite as apocalyptic as you might think from the news! He's busy taking meetings and conducting his business over there, and he returns about a week and a half from now. He hasn't had time to check in here, but he'll try to do so in a few days. Meanwhile, just know that he's safe and he appreciates all the concern.

Cheers!

[FlipperWasIrish]

Thanks so much for the update.

[DenonCI]

Great to hear Bill, I'm glad he's OK.

I'm just shocked the news media is blowing things out of proportion. The next thing you'll tell me is there's gambling in Casablanca.

[Azyiu]

Thanks for the update on Jeff, Bill.

[pab1219]

Thank you Bill, we were concerned.

[nathan_393]

Fantastic to hear he's safe.

[DarkDune]

Thanks Bill,

Glad to hear it...so eloquently put

[Hep]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

[Show spoiler]Just a quick heads-up to everyone: As many of you know, our own Jeff Kleist is in Japan at the moment. Turns out, the big quake happened as his plane was on final approach, so he didn't feel it. However, he's obviously experienced all the aftershocks and the chaos that ensued in the aftermath.

The good news is, I just talked with him by phone a few minutes ago, and he's just fine.

[Show spoiler]He's in Tokyo at the moment, and he'd like everyone to know that things there are slowly returning to normal - it's not quite as apocalyptic as you might think from the news! He's busy taking meetings and conducting his business over there, and he returns about a week and a half from now. He hasn't had time to check in here, but he'll try to do so in a few days. Meanwhile, just know that he's safe and he appreciates all the concern.

Cheers!

Great news Bill, thanks for the update .

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Furthermore, there's a principle involved here. If lossy compression is not used, it can't have an impact, however small that impact may be. With Blu-ray, we're being asked to pay for fidelity to the source. We shouldn't have to wonder whether we are truly getting it, when the format is designed to afford us utter confidence in the matter, at no additional cost to the media distributor.

Agree, it always bugs me when the "you most likely can't tell the difference. I can't understand why it is hard for some to get it. It does not matter, it is all about piece of mind. And that is true in every case (who cares if it is more compressed......)

(though in the Bambi case it is extremely high bit rate HD)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

The entire contents of Bambi disc 1 (movie & extras) take up 43GB of a dual layer BD50 disc. The average bit rate is around 25Mb/s. There was more than enough room for a DTS-HD Master Audio track running in the 3Mb-4Mb range.

What bitrate is that? I did not get Bambi, since Disney screws Quebecers by not allowing them to get the X$ off for an upgrade. But many of their other titles have a lot of languages on them. In this case it is not the Average bitratte but the total/peak that matters since there is a 48mbps max bitrate which includes the video and all the audio.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Bill Hunt

Just a quick heads-up to everyone: As many of you know, our own Jeff Kleist is in Japan at the moment. Turns out, the big quake happened as his plane was on final approach, so he didn't feel it. However, he's obviously experienced all the aftershocks and the chaos that ensued in the aftermath. The good news is, I just talked with him by phone a few minutes ago, and he's just fine. He's in Tokyo at the moment, and he'd like everyone to know that things there are slowly returning to normal - it's not quite as apocalyptic as you might think from the news! He's busy taking meetings and conducting his business over there, and he returns about a week and a half from now. He hasn't had time to check in here, but he'll try to do so in a few days. Meanwhile, just know that he's safe and he appreciates all the concern.

Cheers!

thanks for the update

[PaulGo]

Glad to read that Jeff is OK.

[Uxi]

That must be interesting. Land and see all the chaos. Good news, though.