Oh noes teh sky is falling!

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Good point, however a car with higher/more horsepower does not always get to 60mph faster than one with less. There are different factors involved

That's because gear ratios, weight of the vehicle, tires, and torque matter just as much as horsepower.

However, in audio reproduction, having lossless audio is like going 0-60 in literally no time. It's perfection, because you hear everything as it was originally recorded (even if the mix is poorly prioritized or has poor dynamic range as some movies exhibit). Comparing that to car racing is silly because the matter of lossy vs. lossless audio is so much less complex than the realities of car racing.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by Taikero

That's because gear ratios, weight of the vehicle, tires, and torque matter just as much as horsepower.

However, in audio reproduction, having lossless audio is like going 0-60 in literally no time. It's perfection, because you hear everything as it was originally recorded (even if the mix is poorly prioritized or has poor dynamic range as some movies exhibit). Comparing that to car racing is silly because the matter of lossy vs. lossless audio is so much less complex than the realities of car racing.

Marketing spin. Dts was always "higher" bit rates than Dolby digital and nobody could tell the diff. All of a sudden master Audio comes around...

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Marketing spin. Dts was always "higher" bit rates than Dolby digital and nobody could tell the diff. All of a sudden master Audio comes around...

that's comparing apples to oranges. DTS 1.5 mpbs vs 750kbps WAS obvious. comparing it to DD is not the same since they used difference compression methods

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Marketing spin. Dts was always "higher" bit rates than Dolby digital and nobody could tell the diff. All of a sudden master Audio comes around...

I have heard the difference in theaters when their source audio is bad. Low end gets garbled, high end shrieks, voices get muddy, the whole thing is a mess and it takes you out of the experience.

Compare that to quality source audio, where voices don't get lost, high pitched noises don't bring pain to your ears, and the bass actually makes a true sound instead of simply a noisy thud.

It's okay if you personally can't hear the difference, but there are people who have above average hearing and they pick up on things others don't.

[blonde_devil]

folks, most people couldn't care less about bit rate, DTS sound vs Dolby, etc. you can't use tech to explain why bluray hasn't taken off because most people are just not that high tech.

bluray has taken off as much as the industry wants it to and allows it to. when you have 2 formats that are so similar(dvd and bluray), you need something to get the average person do move from one to the other and they just haven't given that with blurays. sure, people love the extra clarity and better sound but that is a bonus for a lot. until they really start making bluray the prefered choice - releasing barebones dvds, tons of exclusive bluray extras, etc - bluray isn't going to become the dominant format.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by wormraper

that's comparing apples to oranges. DTS 1.5 mpbs vs 750kbps WAS obvious. comparing it to DD is not the same since they used difference compression methods

I don't see why you wouldn't? They have always been compared and cinemas used to advertise the theatres of offering each. People had the choice and then were offered the choice on ld and DVD as well. They are often compared and they should be

[Taikero]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

folks, most people couldn't care less about bit rate, DTS sound vs Dolby, etc. you can't use tech to explain why bluray hasn't taken off because most people are just not that high tech.

bluray has taken off as much as the industry wants it to and allows it to. when you have 2 formats that are so similar(dvd and bluray), you need something to get the average person do move from one to the other and they just haven't given that with blurays. sure, people love the extra clarity and better sound but that is a bonus for a lot. until they really start making bluray the prefered choice - releasing barebones dvds, tons of exclusive bluray extras, etc - bluray isn't going to become the dominant format.

This is essentially what I said on page 20: https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=399

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

I don't see why you wouldn't? They have always been compared and cinemas used to advertise the theatres of offering each. People had the choice and then were offered the choice on ld and DVD as well. They are often compared and they should be

you were DIRECTLY comparing bitrates between the two codecs... that can't be done, only the output. 750kbps DTS was actually SLIGHTLY inferior to 448kbps DD.... BECAUSE they used different compression algorithms and DTS was less efficient in it's compression.... comparing bitrates in the same codec family is perfectly acceptable, but comparing bitrates across the two codecs is meaningless. comparing the end RESULTS across the two is how it should be done.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

Higher bit rates are meaningless, it is a total scam. Dolby digital for cinemas is fixed at 320 , it is the standard. Master audio can have as much as they want but you are not going to tell the difference

Have you ever experienced listening to lossless audio? Regardless of its bitrate, the sound is going to be as good as the quality of your audio equipment, and speakers.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by wormraper

you were DIRECTLY comparing bitrates between the two codecs... that can't be done, only the output. 750kbps DTS was actually SLIGHTLY inferior to 448kbps DD.... BECAUSE they used different compression algorithms and DTS was less efficient in it's compression.... comparing bitrates in the same codec family is perfectly acceptable, but comparing bitrates across the two codecs is meaningless. comparing the end RESULTS across the two is how it should be done.

And a regular customer is not going to be able to tell any difference.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by blonde_devil

folks, most people couldn't care less about bit rate, DTS sound vs Dolby, etc. you can't use tech to explain why bluray hasn't taken off because most people are just not that high tech.

bluray has taken off as much as the industry wants it to and allows it to. when you have 2 formats that are so similar(dvd and bluray), you need something to get the average person do move from one to the other and they just haven't given that with blurays. sure, people love the extra clarity and better sound but that is a bonus for a lot. until they really start making bluray the prefered choice - releasing barebones dvds, tons of exclusive bluray extras, etc - bluray isn't going to become the dominant format.

Well said.

[KRW1]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

My superb home cinema makes no difference to any of you....you just think it might

I could care less what many of you are running.

You're the one making bold statements about what other people can and can't hear and telling them you have superior hearing and, by extension, intellect. You can't do that without something to back it up, or you're just disrespecting people for no absolutely reason other than your own personal amusement.

I realise that you're probably a troll, and this is just a waste of words, but if I were you, I would give some serious thought to my motivation.

[wormraper]

Originally Posted by KRW1

You're the one making bold statements about what other people can and can't hear and telling them you have superior hearing and, by extension, intellect. You can't do that without something to back it up, or you're just disrespecting people for no absolutely reason other than your own personal amusement.

I realise that you're probably a troll, and this is just a waste of words, but if I were you, I would give some serious thought to my motivation.

exactly

[Cevolution]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

And a regular customer is not going to be able to tell any difference.

It matters not, it is a moot point to make on this website ,and you don't need to come on here and to say these things everyday like a broken record. Like I said a few posts back, what you are doing here is the same as me become a member of a fishing forum, where even though I like fishing I don't have much interest in investing a lot of money into it, and then proceeding to tell those who enjoy and are heavily invested in the hobby that most people don't care about expensive fishing gear, and how the majority are happy with $20 rods and tackle. Do you understand how stupid and pathetic it is to even bother doing something like that? These companies who make high quality home theatre gear (speakers, receivers etc) obviously sell enough product to stay in business. If they are not selling these products to average consumers because they don't care like you say, then average Joes like you are irrelevant, insignificant, a spec of dust, and you and your opinion simply doesn't matter, to them, to us, because you are never going to buy their products in the 1st place. The fact is there are differences (and I know average people who are not interested in this hobby who can hear and see the differences between dvd PQ/lossy audio, and itunes downloads etc compared to blu-ray), just because average consumers supposedly can't see or hear these differences means nothing, because the target market of these products is not average consumers.

[pagemaster]

Originally Posted by KRW1

You're the one making bold statements about what other people can and can't hear and telling them you have superior hearing and, by extension, intellect. You can't do that without something to back it up, or you're just disrespecting people for no absolutely reason other than your own personal amusement.

I realise that you're probably a troll, and this is just a waste of words, but if I were you, I would give some serious thought to my motivation.

I stand by my clAim that most people cannot tell the difference. I also believe most do not care. Now for picture quality, most people do care. Most people can tell the diff between DVD and blu ray.

[crazyBLUE]

Originally Posted by pagemaster

My superb home cinema makes no difference to any of you....you just think it might

I could care less what many of you are running.

This should say it all

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by crazyBLUE

This should say it all

Yes it does

[chachaseeds]

Bluray wasn't a repeat of DVD because:

1.) DVD offered both convenience and much improved PQ/AQ over VHS. Bluray only offers much improved PQ/AQ, and at first bluray players and discs were far more expensive than DVD setups. Bluray also required people to upgrade to HDTVs.

2.) Streaming, although it isn't the choice of movie collectors and other A/V purists, appeals much to the masses (who, as others have said, don't give a crap about the quality differences) because it provides instant gratification. Streaming was not widely used at all when DVD replaced VHS.

[Steedeel]

Just enjoy your blurays. Never mind streaming, it's for the sheep. Trust your eyes, trust your ears and love your movies.

[chachaseeds]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Just enjoy your blurays. Never mind streaming, it's for the sheep. Trust your eyes, trust your ears and love your movies.

Well said