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

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

Underworld54,it depends on your Blu-ray player but to display the bitrate you use your remotes "display" button.

You may have to refer to your manual.

On the Ps3 just bring up the osd and select the display icon.

As far as i am aware the Ps3 slim will not have a dual setting for the Hdmi,it will just have bitstream which will output the full 3/6 Mbps codec,and stand alone Blu-ray players will do the same.

The "slim" can also be set to LPCM, thereby using the onboard DTS-HD MA decoder.

"On the Ps3 just bring up the osd and select the display icon."

Pressing 'select' on the controller will also activate the display if you dont have the remote.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

No love for the Na'vi??

Well...they are kinda bluish.

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

I hear Santa's hiring temps in Nov. Application is at santa.com/careers. Good Luck!

Ha

[bytor_one]

I voted YES. Im a big LOTR fan, but less than stellar transfers and standard editions forced me to cancel my preorder. Im not even sure id pick it up for $20, just not worth anything at all to me.

Ive seen these movies too many times I think anyway between all the DVD versions and TNT playing it every other weekend, so I catch bits here and there. Over exposure big time.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Fayth

Yes, but the person I quoted said Elrond was her child. I didn't think that was referring to son-in-law.

You are right. I was restating what you said. Elrond was not Galadriel's son, but rather her son-in-law.

[lDlisturb3d]

Originally Posted by bytor_one

I voted YES. Im a big LOTR fan, but less than stellar transfers and standard editions forced me to cancel my preorder. Im not even sure id pick it up for $20, just not worth anything at all to me.

Ive seen these movies too many times I think anyway between all the DVD versions and TNT playing it every other weekend, so I catch bits here and there. Over exposure big time.

Don't go off of reviews, go and rent it. You will be surprised. FOTR is a ok or average transfer but TT, ROTK are great.

[borninusa]

Everyone is going to have his/her own opinion. I bought it and have enjoyed it.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by PUsokrJosh305

Ok, this is what I think about the DTS-HDMA situations. From what experiences I get from my reciever, DTS-HDMA audio will output to 7.1 no matter if it's 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1. Now it isn't "true" 7.1. In a 5.1 mix, it duplicates the audio from the left and right surround speakers to my surround back speackers, to create a theater like setting, because that's what theaters do, have dulpicate sound in some speakers. For a 6.1 mix, the surround back speakers output the same audio, and of course 7.1 has it's own discrete channels. DTS-HDMA is the only audio that I have seen that does this. Dolby-TruHD only outputs to what it says, unless if you matrix it on ur own. I think my reciever automaktically matrixes it on it's own. I have it on the "straight" setting which means it is outputing the sound from what the source truly is. This whole thing comes down to what reciever you have and what settings you have it on. Each reciever is different and has it's own capibilites. I think DTS-HDMA has proven itself superior over Dolby-TruHD because it can do a lot more than TruHD.

I believe some posters are confusing the commercial ‘ theater experience’ with the home ‘theater experience’. In my view the home experience is far superior to the commercial experience.
In the commercial venue, you are dealing with variables such as seating location and theater acoustics.
With the home theater you are able to adjust speaker levels automatically with AVRs equipped with Audissey or another auto system that balances and equalizes your speakers. So you’re in the “sweet spot” at home and probably not in the commercial theater.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-10171321-47.html

With DTS-HD MA, the sound engineer is creating a Studio Master of a sound image designed for your home theater. With automatic speaker mapping by the decoder in you player or AVR, your speaker layout is ‘sensed’ via your high speed HDMI connection and the audio is delivered to your speakers, whether you have a 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 arrangement, in an image replicating the studio image.

With LOTR BD, you have a DTS-HD MA 6.1 ‘studio image’. This mix is made of tens of thousands of audio stems which are mixed down to the final master. One stem might be the bellow of a walrus, one of the many sounds heard from the cave troll in FOTR or the sound of a cheese grater twirled over someone’s head which is one of many sounds used to create the sounds of arrows at Helm’s Deep (it was used to impart the twirling sound of the arrow as is flew through the air.)

It may help to understand it better if you think of the sound coming from your front left, front right and center speakers when you listen to someone walking across the sound stage. The same thing is happening with your surround and back surround speaker(s.) The sound in the back channels is not ‘derived’ from the side channels. It is a separate channel created by the sound engineer at the studio.
If you can’t decode DTS-HD MA, then adding post processing (Prologic PLIIx and others) makes sense. But, if you don’t have to, don’t do it. Your shortchanging yourself big time.

"Be All That You Can Be" and "Hear All That You Can Hear"

[BStecke]

After going back and forth, I think I've decided to hold off for the Extended Editions. I know I'll want to get them when they come out, and I can live with my EE DVD's until then. Maybe see a better release of FOTR, if the problem isn't source related. I know I'll be tempted every time I see it on the shelf!

[dborgill]

Dunno if anyone posted the clip from Peter Jackson's interview regarding the Blu-Ray release. Classic:

Lastly, his opinion on the not-so-positive fan reaction to the recently released Theatrical BluRay version seems to jibe with the majority of the fans. “I agree with the fans”, he says. “I was heavily involved in the DVD process when the films were being released through New Line, but now that Warner Brothers has taken control over the releasing of the films, they just tell me what they’re doing and don’t involve me in the process. [With New Line,] the one thing we never did with the fans was make them feel cheated. Back in the original release, we always put extra material in, extra documentaries — a lot of added value. I so totally understand why the fans would be upset; I don’t disagree with them.”

[phansson]

Here are the emails back from Oppo, on the 6.1 issue with my system. I still am waiting for another response from Integra. They wanted me to send the discs to them for testing.

Patrick,

X-Men Last Stand is a full DTS-HD Master Audio 6.1 soundtrack. Lord of the Rings is a DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 EX Matrix soundtrack which requieres NEO:6 processing to add the additional Surround Back channel. If the receiver can't do both the decoding of DTS-HD Master and EX matrixing, then you will not get 6.1 channels.

The DSP in the Integra DTC-9.8 is the same as used in the Onkyo TX-SR605. We have tested the Onkyo TX-SR605 with Lord of the Rings with several players from Panasonic, Samsung, Sony, and LG and the Onkyo TX-SR605 only shows 5.1 from Lord of the Rings. When connected to a Yamaha RX-V3800 we have the same results. When we finally connect it to a Denon 3808CI, we get the proper 6.1 channels. The front panel shows DTS-HD MSTR EX on the receiver.

Patrick,

As long as the HDMI is set to Bit Stream the player is sending the raw data to your receiver for processing. What your receiver does with the signal is then up to the DSP capabilities.

The OSD of our player based on how many audio tracks are decoded from the stream and does not include the audio tracks created with Dolby Digital ES or DTS EX processing. If HDMI audio is set to LPCM output, the player can only output 5.1ch LPCM since the output is from the decoder (which does not support Dolby Digital ES or DTS EX decoding).

Lord of the Rings uses a DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 with an ES Matrix for the Surround Back Channel. It is possible that the receiver can't handle the additional EX matrixing. We have seen this on lower end Onkyo and Yamaha receivers.

Best Regards,

[jonmoz]

raygendreau.

I know what you are saying about your reciever not adding any post processing to the Lotr Dts master audio 6.1 es matrix track.

ie "if you don't have to don't do it.Your shortchanging yourself bigtime"

But i can't agree with this as no matter how many ways you put it the 6.1 es matrix track is still in effect a 5.1 track,that even though an extra channel has been added it's still created using the existing sound from the rear left and right speakers,this is not any different from letting your reciever create the extra channel via it's own processing.

Also on the post processing issue what about people like myself who have Thx Ultra 2 recievers,as Thx have gone to great lengths to make soundtracks that are designed for movie theatres that have the correct acoustics to sound right in peoples homes,even on the Lionsgate 7.1 Master audio tracks i still apply the Thx ultra 2 setting on my reciever as it sounds better.

People spend quite a lot of money for these Thx recievers and i doubt they do this not to use the Thx processing.

But your comments have made me think so tomorrow i will conduct a little experiment by taking my Ps3 out of my livingroom and connecting it up to my Onkyo Tx-sr875 reciever via Hdmi set to Lpcm,and i will compare this to my Pioneer Bdp-09fd connected to the reciever via Hdmi on it's usual bitstream mode.I can then compare the 6.1 track unprocessed to the 5.1 track with Thx Ultra processing applied,i will post the results.

[jonmoz]

raygendrau

I can't see why the difference between the matrix and discrete versions of the Dts 6.1 es are not relevant to this debate.

But lets look at this from another angle,when the Lotr was first shown in theatres and on it's initial release the soundtrack was a Dolby digital 5.1 ex audio track.

So when this track is updated by Dts for the Blu-ray version to a Dts master audio 6.1 es matrix there is only so much you can do,i mean you can't make the audio track more than what it is ie 5.1 ex track.

All the mixing in the world will not change the fact that you are working with a 5.1 ex source,and this is why Dts have made the Blu-ray audio matrix and not discrete,as you can't make a 5.1 source into a genuine 6.1 source without borrowing sound from the existing 5.1 channels.

Or to put it another way if you have one pint of liquid you can't make it two pints without adding to or diluting in some way.

I know mixing studios can do amazing things with older soundtracks these days and Blade runner is a great example of this,i mean they can take a mono source and convert it into 5.1 if they wish but it will never replicate a recording initialy made in 5.1,o.k i know a mono to 5.1 is far more of a stretch than 5.1 to 6.1 but the principle is still the same.

[raygendreau]

Originally Posted by jonmoz

raygendrau

I can't see why the difference between the matrix and discrete versions of the Dts 6.1 es are not relevant to this debate.

But lets look at this from another angle,when the Lotr was first shown in theatres and on it's initial release the soundtrack was a Dolby digital 5.1 ex audio track.

So when this track is updated by Dts for the Blu-ray version to a Dts master audio 6.1 es matrix there is only so much you can do,i mean you can't make the audio track more than what it is ie 5.1 ex track.

All the mixing in the world will not change the fact that you are working with a 5.1 ex source,and this is why Dts have made the Blu-ray audio matrix and not discrete,as you can't make a 5.1 source into a genuine 6.1 source without borrowing sound from the existing 5.1 channels.

Or to put it another way if you have one pint of liquid you can't make it two pints without adding to or diluting in some way.

I know mixing studios can do amazing things with older soundtracks these days and Blade runner is a great example of this,i mean they can take a mono source and convert it into 5.1 if they wish but it will never replicate a recording initialy made in 5.1,o.k i know a mono to 5.1 is far more of a stretch than 5.1 to 6.1 but the principle is still the same.

The sound track on the LOTR DVDs is Dolby Digital EX 5.1 Surround Sound.

"Dolby Digital Surround EX
The Cinema Version of "Dolby Digital EX" is called Dolby Digital Surround Ex and works the same way. Dolby Digital Surround EX was co-developed by Dolby and Lucasfilm THX in time for the release in May 1999 of Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace. It provides an economical and backwards-compatible means for 5.1 soundtracks to carry a sixth, center back surround channel for improved localization of effects. The extra surround channel is matrix encoded onto the discrete Left Surround and Right Surround channels of the 5.1 mix, much like the front center channel on Dolby Surround encoded stereo soundtracks. The result can be played without loss of information on standard 5.1 systems, or played in 6.1 or 7.1 on systems equipped with Surround EX decoding and additional speakers. Dolby Digital Surround EX has since been used for the Star Wars prequels on the DVD versions and also the remastered original Star Wars trilogy. A number of DVDs have Dolby Digital Surround EX audio option." (Wikipedia)

There is a separate 6th channel in the Dolby process explained above. The information in that 6th channel is included in the information for the left and right surround so you don't lose it when you play it on a 5.1 system. If you have a 6.1 or 7.1 speaker layout, that separate 6th channel information is 'unbundled' from the surround audio streams and directed to the back channel(s). It is not the same as a 'faux' channel derived from the left and right surround audio which happens when you used post processing like Prologic PLIIx on a Dolby 5.1 soundtrack (not EX) which does not contain the 6th channel information.

In fact, they screwed up on the Fellowship of the Ring DVD. Even though it was advertised as being Dolby Digital Surround EX it was only a 5.1 soundtrack. An excerpt from Hollywood News interview with Michael Pelerin:

"With the audio, this is interesting – what people don’t know is that Mike Brunsmann at Warner called me and said, hey, we found a discrepancy in the audio of Fellowship, and Two Towers and Return of the King. Whereas Two Towers and Return of the King were EX encoded, Fellowship was just 5.1 with no EX encoding at all. That told me something was wrong, because all three films had been originally encoded in EX. It also made me remember that back in the DVD days the audio soundtrack to Fellowship was inconsistent with the audio soundtrack for Two Towers and Return of the King on the DVDs. The group that was doing the encoding for Fellowship actually remixed the film from original stems and created a new mix, but not a Peter Jackson-approved mix. The audio track was flattened out and it was kicked up a few [decibels] compared to the other two films, and there were some consumers who wrote in and said hey – what’s with this mix? What most people don’t know is that the audio track on the DVD of the theatrical edition of Fellowship was a very different than the mix Peter and his team originally created for the film in theaters. So when I got this call from Warner Brothers, I said I can guarantee you’ve still got that dodgy, inconsistent mix that was never corrected. So I put Amy White at Warner Brothers in touch with Wingnut Films, and Wingnut had copies of the original theatrical mixes, and what we were able to do was [get] Chris Boyes and Michael Semanick, two of the guys who mixed the original films to actually go back and supervise a new near-field mix of Fellowship to bring it in line with Two Towers and Return of the King.

This is something that has never been told to the public or anything and no one’s ever known about it, but they were able to go back and fix the mix and bring it in line so that it actually replicates the theatrical experience and matches the two other films. That was a pretty cool thing that has been waiting to be addressed for a pretty long time now" (Hollywoodnews.com April 9 2010)

So, there were 6.1 channels then and there are 6.1 channels now, not 5.1

The added advantage contributed by the new DTS-HD MA studio master mix is the much higher variable bitrate (3 to 6 Mbps) vs the fixed 448 Kbps for the Dolby Digital 5.1 EX.

So, rather than "Or to put it another way if you have one pint of liquid you can't make it two pints without adding to or diluting in some way" to quote you,, what we are doing is taking a gallon of liquid and putting it into to gallon container rather than trying to pour that gallon into a pint bottle. We had the gallon to begin with, we just didn't have the container to put it in. With DTS-HD MA and Blu-ray we do.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

So, there were 6.1 channels then and there are 6.1 channels now, not 5.1.

To be clear:

• 6.1 tracks utilize 7 channels, 5.1 tracks utilize 6 channels. In a matrixed mix, sound may come out of 7 speakers, but it is derived from 6 discrete channels.
  
  
• 6 channels = 5.1, the addition of a matrixed 7th channel = 5.1 ES Matrix. To be a 6.1 discrete track, a mix must have unique sound elements in all 7 channels, not just sound elements that have been culled from the 5th and 6th channels.
  
  
• 5.1 ES Matrix tracks produce sound from 7 speakers, but that sound is actually derived from 6 discrete channels.

Some of the forum members you are debating are literally experts in their respective fields. I understand your desire to learn, and I understand it can be difficult to tell who is an expert and who is an average joe sometimes, but folks like PeterTHX know exactly what they're talking about, and their insight should be valued accordingly.

Sorry if my post seems cold or rude -- it isn't my intended tone at all. But please understand that the nature of the 'LotR' tracks is not up for debate. It has been confirmed, verified, and confirmed again by a number of sources --including myself -- who have the necessary equipment to do so.

Thanks as always for posting, asking questions, and keeping your tone measured and civil. Believe me, it's appreciated. But, at this point, this ongoing discussion should be occurring in a more appropriate thread. I would take this chat elsewhere, post a link and invitation to the new thread you create, and invite anyone in this thread who wants to follow this specific discussion to join you there. I think the only reason this subject has survived as long as it has in this thread is because 'LotR' is being mentioned again and again. For the most part though, I think resident Ringers just want to get back to talking about the films and their Blu-ray debut, not the ins and outs of lossless audio

Again, no offense intended -- your questions and points are welcome -- they're just distracting the majority of filmfans in this particular thread from the discussions it was designed to house.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by raygendreau

With automatic speaker mapping by the decoder in you player or AVR, your speaker layout is ‘sensed’ via your high speed HDMI connection and the audio is delivered to your speakers, whether you have a 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 arrangement, in an image replicating the studio image.

Whoa. That's not what happens with DTS-HD 7.1 Speaker Remapping. How does the decoder know where your speaker are located? Speaker remapping doesn't actually do anything at the moment (except to trigger unwanted 5.1 downmixes with some DTS-HD decoders).

If you can’t decode DTS-HD MA, then adding post processing (Prologic PLIIx and others) makes sense. But, if you don’t have to, don’t do it. Your shortchanging yourself big time.

The ability to decode dts-MA is unrelated to matrix processing of 5.1 sources. A fully functional dts-MA decoder will leave your rear speakers silent when the source is 5.1. The only way to get audio to the rears is with a DSP such as PLIIx.

EDIT: Apologies. I do not wish to contribute to sidetracking this thread. I merely want to correct a couple of rather egregious claims about audio processing.

[JOHN MFN D.]

Man. I miss the good old days when this was a LOTR thread.

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by JOHN MFN D.

Man. I miss the good old days when this was a LOTR thread.

Stop me if you've heard this one. An elf, a dwarf and an ancient Maiar walk into the Prancing Pony...

Originally Posted by BIslander

Apologies. I do not wish to contribute to sidetracking this thread. I merely want to correct a couple of rather egregious claims about audio processing.

No worries, your intentions were clear and noble. I'm glad the discussion is occurring, it's just time it earned its own thread in one of our audio forums. Thanks for contributing to it though!

[JOHN MFN D.]

I'm dying to hear the punch-line Ken!

[Ken Brown]

Originally Posted by JOHN MFN D.

I'm dying to hear the punch-line Ken!

That's as far as I got with it