Uncompressed vs. Lossless Audio, Z style

[Durentis]

Originally Posted by saprano

I knew uncompressed sound was better, but can someone explain to me how is video better uncompressed?.

As much as I hate to quote Microsoft (/cry) there's a decent explanation here.

I just skimmed through this but it has some pretty pictures and more information on video compression effects.

Really though, my point was not that the current PQ is bad, but that allowed to grow into more space can only make it even better. We have uncompressed audio now (if you ignore the fact that recording at any sample rate is still a compression of live audio) and uncompressed video (same caveat) will surely come in the future. But I see no reason not to push the media we have available now and PCM just doesn't push as hard as lossless compressed audio.

And thanks for that S&V Mag link, btw.

Originally Posted by Ben

I can't believe this PCM argument is still taking place.

Maybe because the web is a sea of (often buried) (mis)information and it's a complicated topic to begin with.

Originally Posted by Ben

You might be of the opinion that PCM is inherently wasteful where space is concerned, but so-far, it hasn't been a problem for either Sony or Disney to include PCM as well as TrueHD on the same disc while still delivering superior PQ.

Very true. Indeed the picture quality is incredible. My point simply rests squarely on 'superior PQ'. Do you stop increasing picture quality as soon as you surpass all competing formats and consider it good enough? All I meant to show was that using lossless compressed audio sacrifices nothing and allows room for slightly better than simply superior PQ.

Originally Posted by Ben

Take a look at the latest HD DVD release, Battlestar Galactica. It actually has a TrueHD track (a rarity on HD DVD) and the consequences of that track being included are startling with abyssymal bit-starved PQ and a laughable 384 kbps Dolby Digital track.

Which illustrates only that with less space, video takes a hit. Maybe it won't be as perceptible on Blu-ray given the already incredible PQ, but more space for video can do nothing but improve it.

Originally Posted by Ben

When the technology is limited, as is the case with HD DVD, then this kind of argument holds water. HD DVD just doesn't have the bandwidth or space to handle lossless and reference PQ at the same time. This keeps being proven again and again...

This argument was never about putting one storage media over the other or showing where HD DVD fails. In fact, my point is storage media independent. It began merely as a response to Saprano's interpretation of the posted article and my opinion on what audio format is best. Unfortunately, my comments started becoming misinterpreted and irrelevant format war arguments crept in.

Given that Saprano (the OP) has learned something, I'd say the topic was well worth creating and my posts well worth the effort and firing squad.