4K Blu-ray Confirmed, Coming in

[bailey1987]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

The sound specs. will more than likely be the same as regular Blu-ray (which can already accept Dolby Atmos and DTS: X object surround and totally channel based Auro3D). DTS does have a Coreless Lossless version of their codec that may get added into the mix, however.

I think you're criminally down playing the sound side of things. I still think that it's to fire it's biggest shot yet. Anything we have heard about next generation audio has been mentioned along with standard Blu-ray's, I personally think ATMOS will see an upgrade for it Ultra HD Blu-ray counterpart i.e. higher bit depth more channels and higher bit rate you know the whole job lot.

As for DTS I think it may be the first time where we actually see what Ultra HD audio can do which they will announce along side the version they will put on a standard Blu-ray.

[Tech-UK]

Higher bit-depth to what, 32-bit/floating point?

Equipment cannot even produce 24-bit worth of DR, more like 20-bit worth.

Even if it could, full DR of 24-bit would blow your ears.

There are advantages when mixing/creating music/soundtracks at 32-bit FP, but in terms of playback, it is overkill.

[BozQ]

Current Blu-ray audio is damn near perfect. The only improvement required is to support more discrete channels (overhead or otherwise) without resorting to matrix down mix like Auro 3D.

[Kirsty_Mc]

Originally Posted by BozQ

Current Blu-ray audio is damn near perfect. The only improvement required is to support more discrete channels (overhead or otherwise) without resorting to matrix down mix like Auro 3D.

Yes indeed, I would take quality over more channels than we have now any day. In any case most current Blu-Rays are still released with 5.1 audio, 7.1 releases are the icing on the cake for us with gear that can make use of it.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by bailey1987

I think you're criminally down playing the sound side of things. I still think that it's to fire it's biggest shot yet. Anything we have heard about next generation audio has been mentioned along with standard Blu-ray's, I personally think ATMOS will see an upgrade for it Ultra HD Blu-ray counterpart i.e. higher bit depth more channels and higher bit rate you know the whole job lot.

As for DTS I think it may be the first time where we actually see what Ultra HD audio can do which they will announce along side the version they will put on a standard Blu-ray.

Dolby has already publicly stated that the Atmos codec for the home is where they want it to be. The only upgrade would possibly come on the renderer side (hardware/software in the A/V gear) with possibly more options for speaker re-mapping to other non-Atmos prescribed layouts. Consumer Atmos already maps out at up to 34.1 surround.

The only unknown right now is DTS:X, where we should see a press release happen in March. News out of CES stated it handles up to 22.2 surround and also can do re-mapping as well as user object manipulation. The first hardware releases from mainstream companies (Denon, Yamaha, etc.) will map objects to Dolby Atmos locations and more advanced processors (Trinnov, Datasat, etc.) will have all the bells 'n' whistles.

You want more than that?

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Kirsty_Mc

Yes indeed, I would take quality over more channels than we have now any day. In any case most current Blu-Rays are still released with 5.1 audio, 7.1 releases are the icing on the cake for us with gear that can make use of it.

As more audio post mixing houses start adding Dolby Atmos and DTS MDA (aka DTS:X) capabilities you will see a major move towards object oriented surround, which will continue to trickle into the consumer video market until it's pretty much standard fare.

If 34.1 and 22.2 surround for Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray doesn't hack it, then I don't know what will.

Now, the advancements need to come on the hardware side where we can have more than 11.1 outputs without buying a $20,000 processor.

[Kirsty_Mc]

... And enough wall space to put all those speakers. Quite a bit of space will be taken up by the wallet / purse required to buy them .

[Kirsty_Mc]

Originally Posted by Richard Paul

The problem with that is that scaling 4096 down to 3840 would get rid of a lot of the benefit of having 4K resolution. I don't think the consumer market will go to 4096 since that causes a lot of problems and delivers very little benefit.

I would imagine if this could be done by the player output options, ie.

• Display 17:9 cropped to 16:9 (perfect pixel mapping).
• Display 17:9 resized to 16:9 (interpolated).

After all, if something is shot and processed in 17:9 4K for the cinema, it will have to be processed to 16:9 UHD anyway, either way we're losing. why not give the end user the choice of how this is handled? If you have a 17:9 display (like a Sony projector), then you will get 4K with no interpolation or cropping.

To me it seems like a silly and pointless way of differentiating between professional and consumer, just for the sake of it.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

As more audio post mixing houses start adding Dolby Atmos and DTS MDA (aka DTS:X) capabilities you will see a major move towards object oriented surround, which will continue to trickle into the consumer video market until it's pretty much standard fare.

If 34.1 and 22.2 surround for Blu-ray and Ultra HD Blu-ray doesn't hack it, then I don't know what will.

Now, the advancements need to come on the hardware side where we can have more than 11.1 outputs without buying a $20,000 processor.

I think we can stop using DTS MDA or DTS UHD now. It's now officially DTS:X.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by BozQ

I think we can stop using DTS MDA or DTS UHD now. It's now officially DTS:X.

DTS MDA is used for both cinema and the home version.

However, the consumer version is called DTS:X for marketing purposes.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

DTS MDA is used for both cinema and the home version.

However, the consumer version is called DTS:X for marketing purposes.

It's "vaporware" to me right now.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

DTS MDA is used for both cinema and the home version.

However, the consumer version is called DTS:X for marketing purposes.

mda is such an unfortunate name

[AK65]

I wonder what % of blu ray owners even have 7.1 setups. 2%?

[mjcavinder]

I wonder how many movies over the last 10-15 years that have only been shot in 1080p. they won't be able to upgrade because you can't scan film footage from a movie not shot on film.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by mjcavinder

I wonder how many movies over the last 10-15 years that have only been shot in 1080p. they won't be able to upgrade because you can't scan film footage from a movie not shot on film.

Resolution does not dictate it's place on the format

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by mjcavinder

I wonder how many movies over the last 10-15 years that have only been shot in 1080p. they won't be able to upgrade because you can't scan film footage from a movie not shot on film.

Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith for sure.

[Geoff D]

You can add a few early/mid Noughties movies from Robert Rodriguez and Michael Mann to the list too.

But as Mike said, resolution isn't the ultimate arbiter of what will/won't end up on UHD BD...

[mjcavinder]

Originally Posted by dvdmike

Resolution does not dictate it's place on the format

28 days later for sure...that movie even looked weird on dvd.

[BozQ]

The resolution don't matter. UHD BD is more than just the resolution. The updated video codecs, HDR and WCG will always benefit the movie in some manner.

28 Days Later might have been shot on DV, sure. But it definitely has improvements on Blu-ray over the heavily compressed DVDs in the past.

[dvdmike]

Originally Posted by BozQ

The resolution don't matter. UHD BD is more than just the resolution. The updated video codecs, HDR and WCG will always benefit the movie in some manner.

28 Days Later might have been shot on DV, sure. But it definitely has improvements on Blu-ray over the heavily compressed DVDs in the past.

I will keep saying it, resolution is nothing, compression is everything