Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Theatrical Versions) - April 6, 2010

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

I believe it appears this way because your PS3 is internally handling the track. Your receiver believes it is a 6.1 mix because your PS3 is giving it a 6.1 mix. If you go into your PS3 options and set it so your receiver decodes the track (rather than your PS3), I would imagine your receiver will suddenly display the correct icons to denote a 5.1 matrixed mix.

When I set the PS3 to bitstream the display for The Last Stand on the screen is DTS Multichannel 48 Khz 1.5 mbps (fixed not variable) and the display on the receiver is DTS-ES Discrete. Same display on the screen for LOTR FOTR. On the receiver it shows DTS-ES Matrix.

This is not conclusive since I do not have the DTS-HD MA decoder in my AVR. My hangup is the definition of DTS-HD MA on the DTS website. 'Up to 7.1 discrete channels" the operative word being 'discrete' and the max bitrate figure of 1.5 mbps for dts-es since I am seeing variable bit rates of up to 5.8 in LOTR and The Last Stand using the decoder in the PS3.

http://www.dts.com/DTS_Audio_Formats...o_Formats.aspx

I appreciate all the attention you and the other posters have given me. This is a great forum. My netflix queue is filled exclusively with BDs and I don't bother renting anything that doesn't have a review here of PQ and AQ around 4.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

how many of the "Hobbit" dwarves is Gimli connected to?

Here is a better link than the wiki page. If you scroll to the bottom, you will see the family tree relationship table:
http://www.tuckborough.net/gimli.html

Also, some minor trivia. Many people think that Aragorn's sword, Anduril, was an elven sword like Glamdring (Gandalf's sword). Narsil, which was the name of Aragorn's sword before it was reforged, was made in the First Age by the dwarf Telchar, the greatest smith in Middle-earth.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

My hangup is the definition of DTS-HD MA on the DTS website. 'Up to 7.1 discrete channels" the operative word being 'discrete' and the max bitrate figure of 1.5 mbps for dts-es since I am seeing variable bit rates of up to 5.8 in LOTR and The Last Stand using the decoder in the PS3.

Up to 7.1 discrete...they just leave off the matrixed configurations.

2.0 is 4 channels matrixed. Throw in Criterion's The Last Emperor and that's what you will get. DTS-HD MA 2.0

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Up to 7.1 discrete...they just leave off the matrixed configurations.

2.0 is 4 channels matrixed. Throw in Criterion's The Last Emperor and that's what you will get. DTS-HD MA 2.0

OOps! I don't own The Last Emperor, so I will add it to my Netflix cueue and check it out.

Does anyone out there have a PS3 slim that bitstreams and a AVR that has a DTS-HD MA decoder built in? I would be curious to hear what you see on the video display and the receiver graphic when you decode in the receiver and alternatively the PS3 slim. (audio codec and bitrate specifically) Playing one of the LOTR BDs, of course.

I still don't understand why I see a higher bitrate with the PS3 decode.

Subjectively, I hear a richer, fuller rear sound field with the PS3 decode.

PS3, it only does everthing, almost.

[jonmoz]

raygendreau.

If you think about it Dts have two Es formats "Dts 6.1 Es discrete" and "Dts 6.1 Es matrix",if both were true 6.1 mixes why have two seperate formats.

The reason is that one of them is 5.1,its made 6.1 in a similar way "Dolby Pro-logic" created it's centre channel from the front left and right speaker channels.

Any reciever stating it's true 6.1 is not correct as it's matrixed.

My Pioneer Bdp-09fd Blu-ray player shows it to be a 5.1 track.

[Musketeer]

Jackson got it right because the main themes of the book played through in the movie. He needed to focus on some "Hollywood nonsense" because he needed to sell a movie to millions of people, most of whom will never read the book and have no interest in the finer points being argued here. There will always be things I would like to change but overall Jackson hit it out of the park. If you have an issue with it then convince a studio to back your production.

[joenostalgia23]

I don't think it was Hollywood that made the changes in LOTR and The Shining. They were probably the artist's choices. I believe an artist deserves to make whatever changes he wants. That is what an artist does. He/she is supposed to express his/herself.
There's a difference between an artist and an illustrator. You can simply adapt a material, OR you can make it your own. My favorite parts of Watchmen were the first 10 minutes because it was original and creative. The rest of the film followed the book so well, but that also made it uninteresting. I applaud Snyder's ability to adapt, but he also has creativity that shouldn't be tied down by 1. source material and 2. Hollywood.
Peter Jackson made changes to the Lord of the Rings that would make the story fit better cinematically. Some changes I disliked(Bilbo, Galadriel freaking out), but it wasn't because it was a change, I just didn't like them at all for aesthetic reasons. However, he also made changes that made it a much more engaging film.
Watchmen works better as a companion to the books than as an entire film. I watch Watchmen when I don't feel like reading the book. The dialogue and plot are practically the same but the book executes it better while the movie is just faster paced. Lord of the Rings on the other hand is a fantastic film trilogy by itself. Whether they are better or worse than the books is subject to opinion.

[danny_boy]

Regarding the controversy of the quality of the picture(especially FOTR)

Maybe HD 1080/24p is better than 35mm film.


James Cameron says as much in an interview with Hollywood reporter in 2002:

James Cameron
"The amount of data available from a 35mm negative is much less than the amount of data available from an HD frame."


The Hollywood Reporter:

"Film purists argue the opposite. "

James Cameron:
" They're wrong. You can take an HD image and blow it up by double before you start to see the same amount of granularity you have with a 35mm negative. George Lucas did some tests that I flew up to see, and it corresponded to what we'd found. I'd say the Sony HD 900 series cameras are generating an image that's about equivalent to a 65mm original negative".
http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org...tml?1030913916.


Here is Industrial Light & Magic’s HD engineer Fred Meyers.
"We knew going in that our cameras(1080*1920) had a greater depth of field, 2 to 2 1/2 times greater than 35mm film," Meyers says.
http://www.theasc.com/magazine/sep02...ate/index.html

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

raygendreau.

If you think about it Dts have two Es formats "Dts 6.1 Es discrete" and "Dts 6.1 Es matrix",if both were true 6.1 mixes why have two seperate formats.

The reason is that one of them is 5.1,its made 6.1 in a similar way "Dolby Pro-logic" created it's centre channel from the front left and right speaker channels.

Any reciever stating it's true 6.1 is not correct as it's matrixed.

My Pioneer Bdp-09fd Blu-ray player shows it to be a 5.1 track.

I assume 'it' is one of LOTR BDs. So you are showing 5.1 and your bit rate is 1.509 mbps (fixed)

Thanks for your response. I am still hoping someone with a PS3 slim that actually has bitstream output will respond to my prior post. The PS3 'fat' that I have does not 'do' bitstream.

I'm still trying to get my head around the difference in bitrate that I see with the PS3 decoder. The bitrate is variable and averages around 4.7 mbps except in some of the battle scenes where it peaks at about 5.8 mbps. The DTS "legal limit" on DTS-HD MA is 24.5 mbps variable.

The PS3 isn't creating the extra audio info. It has to be on the disk. Am I missing something? Does anyone else out there see these higher variable bit rates??

Just for the heck of it I checked Lionsgate's 3:10 to Yuma and The Descent. Both have LPCM 7.1 tracks and the display reads Linear PCM 7.1 with the bit rate fixed at 6.0 mbps.

[Underworld54]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

raygendreau.

If you think about it Dts have two Es formats "Dts 6.1 Es discrete" and "Dts 6.1 Es matrix",if both were true 6.1 mixes why have two seperate formats.

The reason is that one of them is 5.1,its made 6.1 in a similar way "Dolby Pro-logic" created it's centre channel from the front left and right speaker channels.

Any reciever stating it's true 6.1 is not correct as it's matrixed.

My Pioneer Bdp-09fd Blu-ray player shows it to be a 5.1 track.

As does my Sony BDP-S350. I am bitsreaming and I use to use PLIIX Movie in order to get rear surround sound.

[Witch King of Angmar]

Originally Posted by radagast

Are you a member of our reading group? BTW, thanks for reminding me of the absolute worst scene in the movie which was 180% out of phase with Tolkien's universe.

lol I am teracore.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Witch King of Angmar

lol I am teracore.

lol.

[DIGITALBATH]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I assume 'it' is one of LOTR BDs. So you are showing 5.1 and your bit rate is 1.509 mbps (fixed)

Thanks for your response. I am still hoping someone with a PS3 slim that actually has bitrate output will respond to my prior post. The PS3 'fat' that I have does not 'do' bitrate.

I'm still trying to get my head around the difference in bitrate that I see with the PS3 decoder. The bit rate is variable and averages around 4.7 mbps except in some of the battle scenes where it peaks at about 5.8 mbps. The DTS "legal limit" on DTS-HD MA is 24.5 mbps variable.

The PS3 isn't creating the extra audio info. It has to be on the disk. Am I missing something? Does anyone else out there see these higher variable bit rates??

Just for the heck of it I checked Lionsgate's 3:10 to Yuma and The Descent. Both have LPCM 7.1 tracks and the display reads Linear PCM 7.1 with the bit rate fixed at 6.0 mbps.

Basically the theaters use a 5.1 mix and matrix the rears to create a 6.1 in theater experience. The core DTS-matrix or discrete is 1.5 MBPS, DTS-MA has the higher end bit rates that only the newer receivers encode.

So yeah, he's right. If you have 6.1 or 7.1, the processing is the same. I'm pretty sure the discrete offerings of 6.1, or 7.1 are mixed after the theater release. So essentially, it is like using Dolby PLIIX, but you get much higher bit-rates, or even using DTS-Matrix.

Lionsgate is one of the only companys that puts out 7.1 on a regular basis. You want to leave on LPCM to get the higher bit rates.

Check this out though, you know how some movies only do 5.1? You might be wishing that everything was 7.1. Well guess what, I know how to make this happen. Go into the PS3 settings, uncheck any of the 6.1, or 7.1 settings, so you only have 2 channel to 5.1 channel selected. Provided you are in LPCM and not bitstream, you are able to matrix the two rear channels and still get the the high bit rates.

The only downside is when you are back to playing games, or watching movies in 6.1 or 7.1, you need to re-tweak the PS3 settings. I found that out from a helpful member on here. It's pretty cool when you find out your 2+ year old receiver has a few more tricks up it's sleeve. Try it out and let me know how it goes.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

2.0 is 4 channels matrixed. Throw in Criterion's The Last Emperor and that's what you will get. DTS-HD MA 2.0

What bitrate do you get with the Last Emperor and is it fixed or Variable?

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

What bitrate do you get with the Last Emperor and is it fixed or Variable?

All DTS-MA tracks are variable. It's only the lossy core that's fixed.

The function of the lossless tracks (both TrueHD and DTS-MA) is to compress the original PCM as much as possible without losing any information.

The Last Emperor has a 1.5Mbps core, the MA track itself doesn't venture above 2.1-2.2Mbps, usually hovering around 1.8-1.9Mbps.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by BankytheHack

Look at it this way: Jackson was tasked with Introducing 3 new, and major, characters during the Council scene: Boromir, Gimli, and Legolas. In a scene already chocked full of characters both old and new, it simply makes sense to excise any characters not needed. Plus, who's to say Ian Holm simply hadn't already finished all of his filming by the time the Council of Elrond rolled around? Sometimes practicality, and real life rules all...not the One Ring

It's also important to remember that Jackson's Bilbo is physically and mentally addicted to the ring. Had he attended the Council in the film, he would have been frothing at the mouth to get a hold of it again. It would have injected another unnecessary element into the mix, and distracted from the narrative task, plot progression, and character introductions at hand.

Many of the changes Jackson made became necessary because of earlier decisions he and his writers made. They were constantly battling a ripple effect. Faramir's on-screen incarnation is so different from the books because Denethor is so different. And Denethor is so different because Gondor is slightly different. Gondor is slightly different because of the many minor changes Jackson had to make to 'LotR's political sphere (alterations employed to make Tolkien's world more digestible early in the trilogy). Small changes in 'Fellowship' ultimately led to drastic changes in 'Return of the King.'

Jackson's commentaries on the EE DVDs are invaluable when evaluating the differences between the books and the films. He's rather blunt and forthcoming in his explanations, and it helps tremendously when examining the various changes (whether one agrees with those changes or not ).

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown

It's also important to remember that Jackson's Bilbo is physically and mentally addicted to the ring. Had he attended the Council in the film, he would have been frothing at the mouth to get a hold of it again. It would have injected another unnecessary element into the mix, and distracted from the narrative task, plot progression, and character introductions at hand.

Many of the changes Jackson made became necessary because of earlier decisions he and his writers made. They were constantly battling a ripple effect. Faramir's on-screen incarnation is so different from the books because Denethor is so different. And Denethor is so different because Gondor is slightly different. Gondor is slightly different because of the many minor changes Jackson had to make to 'LotR's political sphere (alterations employed to make Tolkien's world more digestible early in the trilogy). Small changes in 'Fellowship' ultimately led to drastic changes in 'Return of the King.'

Jackson's commentaries on the EE DVDs are invaluable when evaluating the differences between the books and the films. He's rather blunt and forthcoming in his explanations, and it helps tremendously when examining the various changes (whether one agrees with those changes or not ).

I hate you Ken because now I'm actually tempted to get the EEs on blu-ray.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by DIGITALBATH

Check this out though, you know how some movies only do 5.1? You might be wishing that everything was 7.1. Well guess what, I know how to make this happen. Go into the PS3 settings, uncheck any of the 6.1, or 7.1 settings, so you only have 2 channel to 5.1 channel selected. Provided you are in LPCM and not bitstream, you are able to matrix the two rear channels and still get the the high bit rates.

Didn't work for me. Tried it on Iron Man (Dolby True HD 5.1) and Hurt Locker (DTS-HD MA 5.1) Variable bitrates average 3.5 Mbps. By deselecting all 5.1 options and selecting all 7.1 options, my speaker surround back icons indicate they are active but there is no sound from them. I do get sound from the backs when I leave the PS3 audio settings on auto (all options are selected). On the receiver the back speaker icons are outlined rather than filled in indicating internal dematrixing from the two surrounds for the back channels.

There is no difference in the codec and variable bitrate from my PS3 either way.

Were you referring to Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtracks? Perhaps you could name a title that this works on.

There may be some equipment issues here as well, since the PS3 takes control of my Sony 7.1 AVR via the high speed HDMI interconnect, so the AFD feature on the receiver is disabled when the PS3 has LPCM selected.

We may be straying to far from LOTR with this. I'm afraid of the Thread Police. Maybe this will help:

LOTR 2010 thread:

[DIGITALBATH]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

Didn't work for me. Tried it on Iron Man (Dolby True HD 5.1) and Hurt Locker (DTS-HD MA 5.1) Variable bitrates average 3.5 Mbps. By deselecting all 5.1 options and selecting all 7.1 options, my speaker surround back icons indicate they are active but there is no sound from them. I do get sound from the backs when I leave the PS3 audio settings on auto (all options are selected). On the receiver the back speaker icons are outlined rather than filled in indicating internal dematrixing from the two surrounds for the back channels.

There is no difference in the codec and variable bitrate from my PS3 either way.

Were you referring to Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtracks? Perhaps you could name a title that this works on.

There may be some equipment issues here as well, since the PS3 takes control of my Sony 7.1 AVR via the high speed HDMI interconnect, so the AFD feature on the receiver is disabled when the PS3 has LPCM selected.

We may be straying to far from LOTR with this. I'm afraid of the Thread Police. Maybe this will help:

LOTR 2010 thread:

What I was trying to say, is that on the 5.1 tracks, if you're in your PS3 settings, uncheck anything that is above 5.1, like 6.1 and 7.1-this makes it so you're receiver thinks that your back surrounds and rear surrounds are thought to be one set of speakers, so it uses right surround, and right rear as one speaker...I think. This worked on Troy and 300. Here's the dialogue of the gentlemen that helped me out.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/receivers-...by-tru-hd.html

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by DIGITALBATH

What I was trying to say, is that on the 5.1 tracks, if you're in your PS3 settings, uncheck anything that is above 5.1, like 6.1 and 7.1-this makes it so you're receiver thinks that your back surrounds and rear surrounds are thought to be one set of speakers, so it uses right surround, and right rear as one speaker...I think. This worked on Troy and 300. Here's the dialogue of the gentlemen that helped me out.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/receivers-...by-tru-hd.html

I did exactly what you said and got the results noted in my prior post. I think it may be due to differences in AVR's. You and I have the same version PS3. I don't own Troy or 300. Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.

I'm back. Wow! His response got you excited enough to give him a banana.

My conclusion is its the receivers. With my PS3 audio set to automatic, I get the higher variable bitrates and sound to all speakers. But thanks for expanding my knowledge base.

Anyone want to talk Hobbit movies? LOTR appealed to adults while The Hobbit is more of a children's story. I wonder what changes they'll make to appeal to a wider audience in the movie?