Blu-ray and HD DVD Star Rating Breakdown

[GoldenRedux]

Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard

I haven't ignored the higher bandwidth, I haven't seen any evidence if both use the highest posible bandwidth that there will be any discernible difference using the same codecs, or different codecs for that matter.

How many titles have you seen on either format? What size television do you have and what is your viewing distance? Bandwidth, BTW, doesn't just affect the picture quality (which it certainly can) but also the audio quality and how many and what sorts of audio audio programs you can fit on a disc without adversely affecting picture quality.

HD DVD 30Mb/s total for audio and video combined

Blu-ray 48Mb/s for audio and video with up to 40Mb/s allowed for video alone.

I didn't believe Blu-ray was vaporware, I only used that example in response to your claim anything that HD DVD doesn't have on the market yet is vaporware.

I never mentioned anything about market. You're reading into my posts.

The quadruple layered discs may or may not be valid

You keep arguing about TL51 discs that aren't even in the spec and then say that the 200GB disc 'may or may not be valid' when they have already been physically demonstrated and are actually in the white paper for Blu-ray?

Has Panasonic provided the firmware updates for the first generation player to allow the advanced audio codecs?

It is coming this month, but you said 'capable of', which it clearly is. It's worth pointing out that the Toshiba A1 when it first shipped only decoded 2-channel Dolby TrueHD, which is pretty much useless, until a firmware update months later, and none of the HD DVD players currently decode any of the new DTS codecs at all.

Has Sony provided the same for the PS3?

The PS3 decoded Dolby TrueHD right out of the box and is set to be firmware upgraded to decode DTS-HD MA.

It's also worth pointing out that, because of the 'meaningless' superior bandwidth, Blu-ray titles are able to use uncompressed PCM (all the way up to 8 channels of 192/24, if need be) soundtracks, so the advanced audio codecs have not been needed as much. There are more lossy compressed soundtracks on HD DVD than on Blu-ray.

since Blu-ray hasn't used the higher bandwidth or greater capacity to any significant noticeable difference to this point.

In your opinion, but not in mine.

[Chris Gerhard]

Originally Posted by GoldenRedux

How many titles have you seen on either format? What size television do you have and what is your viewing distance? Bandwidth, BTW, doesn't just affect the picture quality (which it certainly can) but also the audio quality and how many and what sorts of audio audio programs you can fit on a disc without adversely affecting picture quality.

HD DVD 30Mb/s total for audio and video combined

Blu-ray 48Mb/s for audio and video with up to 40Mb/s allowed for video alone.


I never mentioned anything about market. You're reading into my posts.

You keep arguing about TL51 discs that aren't even in the spec and then say that the 200GB disc 'may or may not be valid' when they have already been physically demonstrated and are actually in the white paper for Blu-ray?

It is coming this month, but you said 'capable of', which it clearly is. It's worth pointing out that the Toshiba A1 when it first shipped only decoded 2-channel Dolby TrueHD, which is pretty much useless, until a firmware update months later, and none of the HD DVD players currently decode any of the new DTS codecs at all.

The PS3 decoded Dolby TrueHD right out of the box and is set to be firmware upgraded to decode DTS-HD MA.

It's also worth pointing out that, because of the 'meaningless' superior bandwidth, Blu-ray titles are able to use uncompressed PCM (all the way up to 8 channels of 192/24, if need be) soundtracks, so the advanced audio codecs have not been needed as much. There are more lossy compressed soundtracks on HD DVD than on Blu-ray.


In your opinion, but not in mine.

I stated meaningless, meaning meaningless to the format war and meaningless to me. I haven't seen any Blu-ray discs that use greater capacity and greater bandwidth than would be available on HD DVD. Can you point me to one that wouldn't have been possible on HD DVD with the math that proves it?

I have only seen about a dozen Blu-ray discs and fewer HD DVD discs using a 720p LCD projector with 100" screen, I also own a 1080i CRT, Sony KV-30XBR910. I will wait for the proof that the best Blu-ray will look better than the best HD DVD, but I doubt you are claiming the difference will be a factor in the format war. If you think the technical differences between these two great formats will matter in the format war, I say you are dreaming. It would be fun to get a thorough objective review of the same movie on HD DVD using the maximum bitrate allocated to video and only one lossless audio codec compared to Blu-ray doing the same. I don't buy having mulitple lossless audio tracks is important, I know it isn't to me and doubt it is to a significant market. I think Dolby TrueHD or lossless PCM should be used, DTS-HD MA is too late with too little, including nothing to distinguish DTS from other codecs. Whether or not DTS-HD is worth using for the bandwidth savings, I don't know, but I doubt it.

Chris

[Scorxpion]

Hello Again CHRIS,

A real example is IDENTITY and ROCKY Balboa and movies That Have Higher bandwith MPEG2 titles are Done by sony latley one of them is volver and Layer Cake

The question you keep asking and arguing us with it ,,,yes BD its better than HD-DVD why?

i will tell you why:

Have a look on Identity ,Do you think IDENTITY can be done on HD_DVD with the same technical specs Including TWO PCM Surround sound which is better than DOLBYTHD and extras and different subtitles +A higher bandwith for PQ arrive sometimes to 40mbs and average range is 30 to 35

Sure it is impossible on HD-DVD and dont try to convince me other way.

Yes just i would like you to visit Hometheaterspot and search for this specific titles to conclude what i mean and why BD is far better than HD-DVD

After that if we have a quadruple 45 or 51 GB which still an immagination and hopefully can see light a day before HD-DVD loose this war on the other hand we have 100GB and 200 GB one done by panasonic and the other one done by TDK.

SO as a result we are owning the strong format which is BD.About DTS you are guessing and dreaming too just wait till we have a receiver that can decode DTSHD master audio and we will see if its better or not.Because if DTSHD is useless i dont think so FOX keep upgrading their BD with it.

[Shadowself]

Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard

I stated meaningless, meaning meaningless to the format war and meaningless to me. I haven't seen any Blu-ray discs that use greater capacity and greater bandwidth than would be available on HD DVD. Can you point me to one that wouldn't have been possible on HD DVD with the math that proves it?

You have to look no further than Benes' great work in his bit rate thread.

There are several there that use more than 30GB (even using VC-1 and AVC).

There are several there that use an average of over 25 Mbps (which means peaks are most certainly over 30Mbps) (even using VC-1 and AVC).

All anyone has to do is open their eyes and look. The evidence is plain for all to see.

[Chris Gerhard]

On second thought, the two lossless audio tracks might be nice since my girlfriend doesn't like subtitles, although I would always choose a lossless audio track with subtitles, she might prefer dubbed. The greater capacity could mean something to me, but nothing to the format war now that I think further about it. She is important to me. Maybe time will show MPEG-2 using higher bitrates and requiring greater capacity looks better than AVC-1, who knows? All I have seen so far and all of the reviews I have read make me still believe the technical differences mean nothing to the market and nothing to the format war. AVC-1 with one Dolby TrueHD soundtrack given the 30 Mbps limit and I doubt anybody anywhere can tell the difference between the two formats. I understand having multiple lossless soundtracks would be problematic now for HD DVD so I concede that difference is important. Of course I could take the position I don't want to watch the stupid dubbed version and want a format that can't have both and favor HD DVD, but I won't.

Chris

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard

On second thought, the two lossless audio tracks might be nice since my girlfriend doesn't like subtitles, although I would always choose a lossless audio track with subtitles, she might prefer dubbed. The greater capacity could mean something to me, but nothing to the format war now that I think further about it. She is important to me. Maybe time will show MPEG-2 using higher bitrates and requiring greater capacity looks better than AVC-1, who knows? All I have seen so far and all of the reviews I have read make me still believe the technical differences mean nothing to the market and nothing to the format war. AVC-1 with one Dolby TrueHD soundtrack given the 30 Mbps limit and I doubt anybody anywhere can tell the difference between the two formats. I understand having multiple lossless soundtracks would be problematic now for HD DVD so I concede that difference is important. Of course I could take the position I don't want to watch the stupid dubbed version and want a format that can't have both and favor HD DVD, but I won't.

Chris

Wow, imagine if there was such a codec as AVC-1, we wouldn't have MS crapping all over AVSF!

[Chris Gerhard]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

Wow, imagine if there was such a codec as AVC-1, we wouldn't have MS crapping all over AVSF!

I assume you mean "never" was such a codec. I like the codec and think a great job was done with it and I assume you mean that Amir guy crapping all over? I like him too but I want Blu-ray to survive and HD DVD to go bye bye and for Blu-ray to use AVC-1 when it is the best option.

Chris

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard

I assume you mean "never" was such a codec. I like the codec and think a great job was done with it and I assume you mean that Amir guy crapping all over? I like him too but I want Blu-ray to survive and HD DVD to go bye bye and for Blu-ray to use AVC-1 when it is the best option.

Chris

Well AVC-1 would be the mythical blend of AVC and VC-1, AVC is championed by Panasonic Hollywood and Sony amongst others, while VC-1 is MS through and through.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard

On second thought, the two lossless audio tracks might be nice since my girlfriend doesn't like subtitles, although I would always choose a lossless audio track with subtitles, she might prefer dubbed. The greater capacity could mean something to me, but nothing to the format war now that I think further about it. She is important to me. Maybe time will show MPEG-2 using higher bitrates and requiring greater capacity looks better than AVC-1, who knows? All I have seen so far and all of the reviews I have read make me still believe the technical differences mean nothing to the market and nothing to the format war. AVC-1 with one Dolby TrueHD soundtrack given the 30 Mbps limit and I doubt anybody anywhere can tell the difference between the two formats. I understand having multiple lossless soundtracks would be problematic now for HD DVD so I concede that difference is important. Of course I could take the position I don't want to watch the stupid dubbed version and want a format that can't have both and favor HD DVD, but I won't.

We simply can't know about the benefit of the higher bandwidth on PQ until we have a sizeable collection of titles:

(a) Available on BOTH formats
(b) Optimized for each format

So far only Paramount titles can be considered. And as far as I can tell they have reviewed at least as good on Blu-ray as HD DVD. With some examples of reviewers PREFERING the MPEG-2 encodings for Blu-ray.

The differences won't be blindly obvious. It will be a scene here and scene there. And since these are foremost a videophile format that people hope will become mass adopted (which I very much doubt), these subtle differences ARE important for those adopting now.

As you point out the audio issue is the major issue:

- Multiple lossless tracks
- Lossless on most releases
- General audio issues with HD DVD players and Xbox

I think it can be agreed that Blu-ray is kicking HD DVD's ass audio-wise.

Gary

[GoldenRedux]

Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard

I stated meaningless, meaning meaningless to the format war and meaningless to me. I haven't seen any Blu-ray discs that use greater capacity and greater bandwidth than would be available on HD DVD. Can you point me to one that wouldn't have been possible on HD DVD with the math that proves it?

I have only seen about a dozen Blu-ray discs and fewer HD DVD discs using a 720p LCD projector with 100" screen, I also own a 1080i CRT, Sony KV-30XBR910. I will wait for the proof that the best Blu-ray will look better than the best HD DVD, but I doubt you are claiming the difference will be a factor in the format war. If you think the technical differences between these two great formats will matter in the format war, I say you are dreaming. It would be fun to get a thorough objective review of the same movie on HD DVD using the maximum bitrate allocated to video and only one lossless audio codec compared to Blu-ray doing the same. I don't buy having mulitple lossless audio tracks is important, I know it isn't to me and doubt it is to a significant market. I think Dolby TrueHD or lossless PCM should be used, DTS-HD MA is too late with too little, including nothing to distinguish DTS from other codecs. Whether or not DTS-HD is worth using for the bandwidth savings, I don't know, but I doubt it.

Chris

Everyone else has done a great job pointing you to the titles and showing you the maths, so I just want to add a couple of comments. First off, you're correct that I'm not claiming technical merits will be a determining factor in this format war, but they are a determining factor amongst we video and technophiles, for sure. I don't think you can disagree with that, can you?

Multiple lossless audio tracks: it's not important to me, but it is surely important to the studios, and the ability to support this sort of thing without damaging picture quality is where Blu-ray has a clear advantage over HD DVD. I really don't see how anyone could argue otherwise. I'm with you, I don't need a lossless dubbed audio track either, but the studio may feel the need to put it on there for certain markets. Just take a look at the Identity release that has already been mentioned. It's important to remember also that, when speaking about bandwidth and audio, it's not just the main audio soundtrack we're talking about here, but any additional audio commentaries, etc. all of that adds to the total mux-rate and takes up bandwidth.

I agree with you about using Dolby TrueHD and uncompressed PCM when it comes to movie soundtracks. DTS screwed up by changing the specs too much and arriving too late in the game. I don't really see any advantage to using DTS-HD MA over TrueHD, unless maybe it uses less bandwidth (does anyone know if it does?). The only use I see for DTS-HD MA is possibly for music-only Blu-ray releases as it can do 192/24 all the way up to 8 channels, which I believe TrueHD cannot - someone correct me if I'm wrong, please.

[dobyblue]

As far as I know DTS-HD MA can only do 24/96 up to 7.1 and is limited to 5.1 for 24/192.

www.dtsonline.com

DTS-HD Master Audio is capable of delivering audio that is a bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. DTS-HD Master Audio delivers audio at super high variable bit rates -24.5 mega-bits per second (Mbps) on Blu-ray discs and 18.0 Mbps on HD-DVD - that are significantly higher than standard DVDs . This bit stream is so "fast" and the transfer rate is so "high" that it can deliver the Holy Grail of audio: 7.1 audio channels at 96k sampling frequency/24 bit depths that are identical to the original. With DTS-HD Master Audio, you will be able to experience movies and music, exactly as the artist intended: clear, pure, and uncompromised.

[GoldenRedux]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

As far as I know DTS-HD MA can only do 24/96 up to 7.1 and is limited to 5.1 for 24/192.

www.dtsonline.com

Thanks for that info.