Warner Brothers and missed opportunities

[saprano]

Oh damn i forgot warner took over new line.......... $#%

LOTR lossy track confirmed.

Does new line still have a say if they want use a lossless track on any movie?

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by SBrooks1

I think Warner continuing to give us lossy audio is a much worse issue than the DNR issue.!

I'm rather sure that 100 out of 100 people with normal vision can tell apart without problems Patton as is and without DNR on a display/screen of suitable size. I'm equally sure that very few if any ouf of 100 can tell two versions of the same soundtrack apart in a double blind test on high end equipment in a good room: Uncompressed 24 bit and DTS 1.5 Mbit/s 16 bit.

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by mhafner

I'm rather sure that 100 out of 100 people with normal vision can tell apart without problems Patton as is and without DNR on a display/screen of suitable size. I'm equally sure that very few if any ouf of 100 can tell two versions of the same soundtrack apart in a double blind test on high end equipment in a good room: Uncompressed 24 bit and DTS 1.5 Mbit/s 16 bit.

Warner is using Dolby Digital and not DTS, so I am not sure how your analogy applies to the discussion.

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by mhafner

I'm equally sure that very few if any ouf of 100 can tell two versions of the same soundtrack apart in a double blind test on high end equipment in a good room: Uncompressed 24 bit and DTS 1.5 Mbit/s 16 bit.

The two biggest giveaways are usually dynamic range and stereo imaging. ("Soundstage imaging" is I guess what it's called for multichannel.) As for what % of people can tell ... perhaps the person has to know what to listen for.

(Sorry to tread in your thread Penton.)

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by mhafner

I'm rather sure that 100 out of 100 people with normal vision can tell apart without problems Patton as is and without DNR on a display/screen of suitable size. I'm equally sure that very few if any ouf of 100 can tell two versions of the same soundtrack apart in a double blind test on high end equipment in a good room: Uncompressed 24 bit and DTS 1.5 Mbit/s 16 bit.

Agree with the first. Strongly disagree with the second. Although most J6P probably wouldn't care as both sound "good", more than just a "very few" would be able to tell the difference. The differences in depth of bass are easy to pick out. I'd take that challenge any day of the week on a properly set up, high end system.

[lgans316]

I would also like to add Zodiac Director's Cut (39 GB) and The Prestige that weren't given lossless audio treatment despite plenty of room left.

[theprophecy247]

Warner needs to step it up, although i cant imagine blood diamond looking any better

[kjacobs03]

Originally Posted by lgans316

I would also like to add Zodiac Director's Cut (39 GB) and The Prestige that weren't given lossless audio treatment despite plenty of room left.

The Prestige is Buena Vista and has LPCM
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=262

[AnimeOnBlu]

Originally Posted by kjacobs03

The Prestige is Buena Vista and has LPCM
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=262

The European Version was distributed by WB and was done in VC-1 with 5.1 DD. The US version was by BV, done in AVC with 5.1 PCM. The Japanese by Gaga was done in AVC with a TrueHD and PCM 5.1.

[cipher]

I posted these related thoughts in another thread but thought I'd copy them here for others to read...

The worst part of this for Warner is that they are continuing to put forward the idea, whether it's true or not, that they are both the cheapest studio and the one who cares the least about their HD customers. If this is an actual business plan, with the future intent to double-dip lossless versions, then I can only hope they end this policy soon so they prevent more damage to their goodwill.

At the very least they should come out an announce that they are comitted to lossless audio on all releases as of a certain date. I think it's time for their home video division to show some leadership rather than being continually embarrassed compared to the other studios, especially when one looks at their lackluster comittment to the format as a whole. Many people can have long memories about such things, regardless of the occasional spectacular release like Blade Runner.

[kjacobs03]

Originally Posted by AnimeOnBlu

The European Version was distributed by WB and was done in VC-1 with 5.1 DD. The US version was by BV, done in AVC with 5.1 PCM. The Japanese by Gaga was done in AVC with a TrueHD and PCM 5.1.

Didn't know that. Now I do.

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

Warner is using Dolby Digital and not DTS, so I am not sure how your analogy applies to the discussion.

It applies to the general cry for lossless sound, whether compared to DTS or DD. DD can also go higher than 640 Kbit/s without being lossless. The difference between lossless and the less lossy versions >= 1 Mbit/s are minimal at best and you need professional quality equipment and rooms and very high quality sources to hear them. The former is very rarely installed in normal people's systems and the latter affects all older films.

[mhafner]

Originally Posted by Brain Sturgeon

Agree with the first. Strongly disagree with the second. Although most J6P probably wouldn't care as both sound "good", more than just a "very few" would be able to tell the difference. The differences in depth of bass are easy to pick out. I'd take that challenge any day of the week on a properly set up, high end system.

Why would depth of bass depend much on lossless compression? No soundstaging with bass anyway, no HF detail.

[lgans316]

http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/content.php?contentid=68259

[Nathan P]

Originally Posted by Bullseye

Could you imagine the LoTR trilogy with lossy audio

i'm trying not to, having got both versions on dvd i'm dying to see how the film will look and sound on blu. To think it may only have the same soundtrack as dvd will put me off for sure. My only saving grace is that living in the UK Entertainment in Video handled the dvd distribution so they might use a different master or failing that an import that has a lossless english track from somewhere else in europe.

P-Man, Wicky , Max Please pass on our concerns to the powers that be, This is a trilogy that a lot of people want but in the current economic climate might not be able to afford the double dip

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

So stop buying WB's products and show them there aren't any sales in Blu-Ray so that they can really push for downloads and abandon Blu-Ray completely.

I didn't say to stop buying all WB products, just the ones without lossless. But if you're happy with just Dolby Digital, by all means buy it. It's your money.

[WickyWoo]

There is no possible way that LOTR will ship with lossy audio

The brass at WB have gotten the message about lossless. The problem is that that message takes time to filter down, and they're not going to go back and re-do already completed product either. It's going to take a year, and maybe longer for that to shake out down the chain of command (much less than a year) and to get those discs waiting for a date out the door. Please keep in mind that there's about a 4 month minimum lead time on most Blu-rays, so anything you do today will not show on shelves until Novemberish at best, and probably later since Christmas product is done early.

IN THE MEANTIME. Do not automatically assume that titles, EVEN IF THE PRELIMINARY BOX ART SHOWS IT, have lossy audio. They have a lot of graphic designers who have been sticking "Dolby Digital" on everything for 10 years, and they do slip up occasionally (See Perfect Storm)

[GarettP]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

There is no possible way that LOTR will ship with lossy audio

The brass at WB have gotten the message about lossless. The problem is that that message takes time to filter down, and they're not going to go back and re-do already completed product either. It's going to take a year, and maybe longer for that to shake out down the chain of command (much less than a year) and to get those discs waiting for a date out the door. Please keep in mind that there's about a 4 month minimum lead time on most Blu-rays, so anything you do today will not show on shelves until Novemberish at best, and probably later since Christmas product is done early.

IN THE MEANTIME. Do not automatically assume that titles, EVEN IF THE PRELIMINARY BOX ART SHOWS IT, have lossy audio. They have a lot of graphic designers who have been sticking "Dolby Digital" on everything for 10 years, and they do slip up occasionally (See Perfect Storm)

Thanks for all of your work and contributions for all of us and I hope you are right, because no HD sound on discs is unexcusable to me and a lot of us!

[Teazle]

Originally Posted by mhafner

It applies to the general cry for lossless sound, whether compared to DTS or DD. DD can also go higher than 640 Kbit/s without being lossless. The difference between lossless and the less lossy versions >= 1 Mbit/s are minimal at best and you need professional quality equipment and rooms and very high quality sources to hear them. The former is not very rarely installed in normal people's systems and the latter affects all older films.

I'm in sympathy with the feeling that most people can't natively tell the difference between lossy and lossless audio. From this I conclude that they should be taught to do so, not that lossless should be denied the rest of us.

Lack of high quality equipment and pro installations do present an obstacle, but not an insurmountable one. A cheap and easy way for anyone to get a handle on the difference between 1.5 Mbps _total_ audio data (e.g. DTS lossy multichannel or 16-bit PCM stereo) and 1.2 Mbps _per channel_ for 24/48 PCM is through headphones. A good ($75) pair, decent computer sound card or respectable headphone output in a receiver, and some hi-res music (with an ordinary CD for comparison) should do.

I think the listener will usually have to be told (at first) to attend to the greater possible range in volume, bigger ambience ("more stereophonic!") and so on. But once you know what to listen for it's hard to forget.

From there I'd tell the lossless trainee to imagine the experiment repeated for 5.1 or 7.1 external speakers. So some amount of education could occur even if there isn't a magnificent home theatre setup immediately to hand.

EDIT: Pace Brain Sturgeon, I agree with mhafner that the improved frequency response is going to be a toughie for most people to pick up. Distinguishing the bottom especially won't be easy because people don't hear too well in that register. I might tell the trainee, though, "Listen to the kick drum", "Now pick out the bass guitar" etc. I think that many people will be able qualitatively to distinguish the 1.5 vs. 2.4 Mbps representations of instruments which occupy the low end.

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by mhafner

Why would depth of bass depend much on lossless compression? No soundstaging with bass anyway, no HF detail.

I don't know how the engineers for the codecs would explain this, but it is certainly there-- I've heard that difference time and again in A-B comparisons. There is a certain presence and palpability to deep bass in lossless that is not there with lossy schemes. The best way I can explain it is a feeling/sense that the floor has fallen out of your room with the bass assuming a "reach out and touch it" kind of realism. Your auditory sense of space is so much different with this than with lossy, which in comparison feels "fuzzy"-- it's around you but its not something that I can delineate clearly. This is just my experience with it, but I think others have had similar listening experiences.

[]
Whether or not everyone can tell the difference between lossy & lossless, I think the point that should be made regarding these movie releases is that we (home theater enthusiasts) want maxed out, as-close-to-the-director's/artist's-intended-experience-as-possible releases which, in addition to optimum video transfers (± changes in color timing, DNR, etc; all hopefully under the director's/DP's direction/supervison), should also include a lossless audio track. Even if a lossy track is excellent, and there are many that are-- particularly 1.5 Mbps DTS (Master and Commander and Kingdom of Heaven come to mind), I don't think anyone out there would disagree that a lossless track, properly done from the same source material, would perform better than the lossy track. The technology and physical space are there-- use it and make BD what it should be: the best video and audio presentation that consumers have ever had access to.
[/]