Can anyone explain why we get skimped on audio? - Blu-ray Forum

Garconis · 05-25-2007, 01:45 PM

It seems Warner and Paramount always skimp on the audio for Blu-ray. HD-DVD usually always gets the better track. Why? We have more than enough room to fit the better audio. It doesn't make sense to make a whole different track (a worse one at that) for Blu-ray....

JTK · 05-25-2007, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garconis

It seems Warner and Paramount always skimp on the audio for Blu-ray. HD-DVD usually always gets the better track. Why? We have more than enough room to fit the better audio. It doesn't make sense to make a whole different track (a worse one at that) for Blu-ray....

Probably a bias towards HD-DVD of some sort.

bluflu · 05-25-2007, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garconis

It seems Warner and Paramount always skimp on the audio for Blu-ray. HD-DVD usually always gets the better track. Why? We have more than enough room to fit the better audio. It doesn't make sense to make a whole different track (a worse one at that) for Blu-ray....

Good question. I think it's really because Warner and Paramount don't want Blu-ray to run away with the race. Look at The Departed. Also, keep in mind Warner and Paramount were originally exclusive to HD DVD so in a way I guess they feel Blu-ray has to be thankful for any crap they may dish out. Though in my opinion the differences aren't usually as substantial as we sometimes make them appear.

GoldenRedux · 05-25-2007, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JTK

Probably a bias towards HD-DVD of some sort.

Well, in the case of Warner I would agree, but not so with Paramount. I do not believe they offer lossless audio on either format, do they? Perhaps their HD DVD releases offer DD+, but it is no fault of theirs that DD+ cannot be offered on Blu-ray for anything less than 7.1. FWIW, DD 640k on BD and DD+ at 640k on HD DVD are the same.

GoldenRedux · 05-25-2007, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluflu

Good question. I think it's really because Warner and Paramount don't want Blu-ray to run away with the race. Look at The Departed. Also, keep in mind Warner and Paramount were originally exclusive to HD DVD so in a way I guess they feel Blu-ray has to be thankful for any crap they may dish out. Though in my opinion the differences aren't usually as substantial as we sometimes make them appear.

Again, don't lump Paramount in with Warner. Paramount does not give us rubbish, low bit-rate VC-1 encodings ported over from HD DVD. Every Paramount release has had the transfer encoded and tweaked specifically for Blu-ray. I'm not sure about the audio though. Do Paramount offer lossless on HD DVD? I don't think they do, but I could be wrong.

KingDeezie · 05-25-2007, 04:02 PM

Actually, the reasons behind this at one point were logical...

The major difference when Bluray came out from HD-DVD was standardization. When the first Bluray players came out, they were not mandated to be able to decode Dolby TrueHD, even though the format supported it. Also, at first, the only discs that were readily available where 25GB discs.

So, for Warner, who was lazy and wanted the most for the littlest amount of work, it became mastering the HD-DVD copy and then just transferring it over to Bluray. The problem with that was that not all of the players out at the time had support for TrueHD. So, Warner decided to play it safe and only put standard DD tracks on there because all of the players supported that format. Also, since Warner only had access to 25 GB discs, putting a PCM audio track on the disc might have taken more work then Warner wanted to put out. Thus a lot of warner releases are still weak in the audio department. However major releases where they are getting the 50 GB discs such as The Departed, 300, Letters, Flags, and Blood Diamond are seeing loseless audio tracks on them...

Paramount I don't think is favoring one side or the other, although I could be wrong. I think up to this point, we haven't seen a loseless audio codec on any Paramount release. What they have been releasing on their movies is DD+. The problem with DD+ for Bluray is that is an optional audio codec, and the players that do support it only output a bit rate of about 1.7 MBS. HD-DVD players, which HD-DVD mandates DD+ as a supported codec, can output DD+ at 3 MBS. Thus, as a compressed lossy format, Bluray chose not to include DD+ as a mandatory format. So until paramount starts releasing loseless audio on either format, we will see slightly better audio on HD-DVD from them because of what format they are choosing to support.

jermwhl · 05-25-2007, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingDeezie

Paramount I don't think is favoring one side or the other, although I could be wrong.

I agree, paramount hasn't exactly stood out, either good or bad, they have just been sitting back kind of laying low I guess. Warner seems to be drawing headlines and attention to itself. In more negative ways it seems to me. I have no scuff with paramount....at this point.

DrinkMore · 05-25-2007, 04:31 PM

Actually, if people want to get real technical and follow suite with everyone else in the world -

Warner can be sued for giving us a crap product and not doing what they should be doing. Would be nice to initiate a lawsuit just to show that the public is tired of being fed scraps and their BS needs to stop.

GoldenRedux · 05-25-2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrinkMore

Actually, if people want to get real technical and follow suite with everyone else in the world -

Warner can be sued for giving us a crap product and not doing what they should be doing. Would be nice to initiate a lawsuit just to show that the public is tired of being fed scraps and their BS needs to stop.

What exactly would you sue them for?

Eve6insideandout · 05-25-2007, 05:07 PM

Now a days we can sue for anything, just as long as we get the point accrossed that we are sick of not putting out the best!

GoldenRedux · 05-25-2007, 07:28 PM

Moved thread to General Discussion

DrinkMore · 05-25-2007, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoldenRedux

What exactly would you sue them for?

Negligence.

"The failure to use reasonable care. The doing of something which a reasonably prudent person would not do, or the failure to do something which a reasonably prudent person would do under like circumstances. A departure from what an ordinary reasonable member of the community would do in the same community."

This is all hypothetical. With more research, I could build a case.

Zaphod · 05-25-2007, 07:56 PM

From what I understand, HD-DVD, as part of the spec, must include DolbyTrueHD.

Edit: Whoops, never mind, the players are required to decode, my bad...

Rob Tomlin · 05-25-2007, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrinkMore

Negligence.

"The failure to use reasonable care. The doing of something which a reasonably prudent person would not do, or the failure to do something which a reasonably prudent person would do under like circumstances. A departure from what an ordinary reasonable member of the community would do in the same community."

This is all hypothetical. With more research, I could build a case.

You are showing a lot of ignorance here. Negligence is not applicable here in any way, shape, or form. Period.

GoldenRedux · 05-25-2007, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zaphod

From what I understand, HD-DVD, as part of the spec, must include DolbyTrueHD.

Edit: Whoops, never mind, the players are required to decode, my bad...

The players are only required to decode TrueHD 2.0, which is pretty much useless, IMO.

DrinkMore · 05-25-2007, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin

You are showing a lot of ignorance here. Negligence is not applicable here in any way, shape, or form. Period.

Yes, I know. Yet there is always someone ^ ^ ^ ^ that takes it seriously.

It was a joke - lighten up

MFS3Kiryu · 05-25-2007, 10:24 PM

Not getting a lossless PCM track on The Fountain was really heartbreaking.

Rob Tomlin · 05-25-2007, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrinkMore

Yes, I know. Yet there is always someone ^ ^ ^ ^ that takes it seriously.

It was a joke - lighten up

Well, when you quote the definition of negligence, it just didn't come across as a joke. Sorry.

Scorxpion · 05-26-2007, 11:31 AM

Dolby Digital Plus and Dolby Digital 640kbps on BD are identical no difference at all ..So Paramount and Dreamworks still doing a nice JOB for BD equally to HD-DVD but i prefer PCM soundtrack 1st rate all the way without any challenge.

For warner this is another case and i agree with every statement said by my fellows on Warner BD

Garconis · 05-29-2007, 01:01 PM

Yet again, on Norbit:

"Paramount provides a Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 surround track at 1.5mbps for this HD DVD release, a nice improvement over the 640kbps Dolby Digital track on the Blu-ray. Granted, 'Norbit's generally bland sound design doesn't particularly benefit from the upgrade, but added bits are added bits."

05-25-2007, 01:45 PM	#1
Garconis Active Member Member since:Jan 2007 Location:NY Home Theater Gallery:1 Blu-ray collection:126 Blu-ray reviews:7 Trading Score:18	Can anyone explain why we get skimped on audio? It seems Warner and Paramount always skimp on the audio for Blu-ray. HD-DVD usually always gets the better track. Why? We have more than enough room to fit the better audio. It doesn't make sense to make a whole different track (a worse one at that) for Blu-ray....

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
Can someone please explain this to me...	Receivers	pacificvibes	2	01-15-2009 10:09 PM
Explain to me how this is done	General Chat	JimShaw	9	10-27-2008 04:55 PM
Explain Lossless Audio	Newbie Discussion	Wheelman1970	13	11-21-2007 01:28 PM
PLEASE explain Audio Codec Decoding !!!	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	JimPullan	3	11-01-2007 11:04 AM
Can someone explain this to me?	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	AlexKx	6	12-10-2006 01:16 AM

05-25-2007, 04:02 PM	#6
KingDeezie Active Member Member since:Mar 2007	Actually, the reasons behind this at one point were logical... The major difference when Bluray came out from HD-DVD was standardization. When the first Bluray players came out, they were not mandated to be able to decode Dolby TrueHD, even though the format supported it. Also, at first, the only discs that were readily available where 25GB discs. So, for Warner, who was lazy and wanted the most for the littlest amount of work, it became mastering the HD-DVD copy and then just transferring it over to Bluray. The problem with that was that not all of the players out at the time had support for TrueHD. So, Warner decided to play it safe and only put standard DD tracks on there because all of the players supported that format. Also, since Warner only had access to 25 GB discs, putting a PCM audio track on the disc might have taken more work then Warner wanted to put out. Thus a lot of warner releases are still weak in the audio department. However major releases where they are getting the 50 GB discs such as The Departed, 300, Letters, Flags, and Blood Diamond are seeing loseless audio tracks on them... Paramount I don't think is favoring one side or the other, although I could be wrong. I think up to this point, we haven't seen a loseless audio codec on any Paramount release. What they have been releasing on their movies is DD+. The problem with DD+ for Bluray is that is an optional audio codec, and the players that do support it only output a bit rate of about 1.7 MBS. HD-DVD players, which HD-DVD mandates DD+ as a supported codec, can output DD+ at 3 MBS. Thus, as a compressed lossy format, Bluray chose not to include DD+ as a mandatory format. So until paramount starts releasing loseless audio on either format, we will see slightly better audio on HD-DVD from them because of what format they are choosing to support.

05-25-2007, 04:31 PM	#8
DrinkMore Banned Member since:Apr 2007 Location:That's What She Said! Blu-ray collection:140 Blu-ray reviews:7 Trading Score:3	Actually, if people want to get real technical and follow suite with everyone else in the world - Warner can be sued for giving us a crap product and not doing what they should be doing. Would be nice to initiate a lawsuit just to show that the public is tired of being fed scraps and their BS needs to stop.

05-25-2007, 05:07 PM	#10
Eve6insideandout Power Member Member since:Mar 2007 Trading Score:491	Now a days we can sue for anything, just as long as we get the point accrossed that we are sick of not putting out the best!

05-25-2007, 07:28 PM	#11
GoldenRedux Power Member Member since:Sep 2006 Blu-ray reviews:1	Moved thread to General Discussion

05-25-2007, 07:56 PM	#13
Zaphod Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Apr 2007 Location:A small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse. Blu-ray collection:350 Trading Score:4	From what I understand, HD-DVD, as part of the spec, must include DolbyTrueHD. Edit: Whoops, never mind, the players are required to decode, my bad...

05-25-2007, 10:24 PM	#17
MFS3Kiryu Active Member Member since:Dec 2006	Not getting a lossless PCM track on The Fountain was really heartbreaking.

05-26-2007, 11:31 AM	#19
Scorxpion Blu-ray Guru Member since:Dec 2006 Location:Middle East,Lebanon Blu-ray collection:57	Dolby Digital Plus and Dolby Digital 640kbps on BD are identical no difference at all ..So Paramount and Dreamworks still doing a nice JOB for BD equally to HD-DVD but i prefer PCM soundtrack 1st rate all the way without any challenge. For warner this is another case and i agree with every statement said by my fellows on Warner BD

05-29-2007, 01:01 PM	#20
Garconis Active Member Member since:Jan 2007 Location:NY Home Theater Gallery:1 Blu-ray collection:126 Blu-ray reviews:7 Trading Score:18	Yet again, on Norbit: "Paramount provides a Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 surround track at 1.5mbps for this HD DVD release, a nice improvement over the 640kbps Dolby Digital track on the Blu-ray. Granted, 'Norbit's generally bland sound design doesn't particularly benefit from the upgrade, but added bits are added bits."

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals