Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Netflix are shaving more bits from their service and I believe that means full HD at 1.5-2Mbps.

When I started viewing UHD content on Netflix it was 16 Mbps, then it became 15.25 Mbps, in more recent times it became 11.35 Mbps and now some are down to 8.86 Mbps.

I posted quite sometime back that streamers wanted smaller file sizes, not larger.

There is nothing obsolete about our collections, now or ten years from now. We have access to them probably for the rest of our lives.

Very true, my CD's from 1983 still play fine. I have friends with Edison's that still work fine.

DVD has some great releases that never make it to streaming or Blu-ray.

Recently acquired The Keep on DVD in OAR. Looked quite good played on the Oppo 203. Have not tried on the Sony.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by bhampton

This is something that Alchav21 brings up again and again and honestly I don’t think he understands that his network connection can be over qualified but the streaming services offer very low quality encodes because they have to cater to all levels of network connections.

Last night I check the speed of a Netflix show I was watching and it showed 8.66 Mbps. Stopped the show, went to the Netflix network server test and it reported 233.76 Mbps (have 300 Mbps ISP service).

Streaming providers have to pay by the amount data they transport and the storage of that data. So they are going to be pushing for ever smaller file sizes.

[bhampton]

I will revisit my Emma Peel complete collection on DVD.

I don’t watch a lot of DVDs but I still have great things on DVD.

[Wendell R. Breland]

There is a continuous stream of titles that have been remastered for disc with many having done a ≥ 4K scan of the camera negative. Has any title received such treatment that was intended for a streaming only release?

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Free upgrades that can sometimes get downgraded to full HD for no apparent reason. Very common I read, even on this forum.

It's not that common, and if it happens, it's only temporary (usually because they change something, like adding Atmos sound). But even the HD ist still far better than a DVD. I'm really puzzled why anyone in an enthusiast forum would buy a DVD if the movie is available in HD on disc or digitally, but to each their own I guess.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

It's not that common, and if it happens, it's only temporary (usually because they change something, like adding Atmos sound). But even the HD ist still far better than a DVD. I'm really puzzled why anyone in an enthusiast forum would buy a DVD if the movie is available in HD on disc or digitally, but to each their own I guess.

Apparently there are times the dvd is done better than the Blu

Of course, some stuff never gets better than DVD release. Like The Times of Harvey Milk which is a favorite film of mine that hasn’t been upgraded yet AFAIK. (Just found out Criterion did a Blu )

Some stuff still remains only available on laserdisc. Like if you wanted an official not edited version of Star Wars.

I noticed ghost in the shell stand alone complex seems to be better on DVD than Blu Ray but I have to read more about what the apparent problems with the Blu version are and decide which version I want.

DVDs sometimes had lossless PCM Tracks. Lossless audio from movies is something steaming lacks completely. That’s one good reason to seek a disc version.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Last night I check the speed of a Netflix show I was watching and it showed 8.66 Mbps. Stopped the show, went to the Netflix network server test and it reported 233.76 Mbps (have 300 Mbps ISP service).

Streaming providers have to pay by the amount data they transport and the storage of that data. So they are going to be pushing for ever smaller file sizes.

You guys keep going back to the same argument, "More Bits is More Better," but it's not about Bits anymore. Here is an Article from Dennis Burger Home Theater last Dec 2019:

"So, don't yell at Andrew when he mentions using Vudu to review a TV. Don't yell at Jerry when he tells you he sold his Oppo (especially when there are so many other valid things to yell at him about). And don't yell at me when I tell you that discs, as good as they've been to this hobby for decades, are teetering right on the edge of being a relic of the past, or, at best, a collector's item. We're not trying to insult anyone. We're not "settling for good enough." We're simply trying to make the future a bit less of a bitter pill to swallow for those of you in the back row who hold up your "Streaming Sux!" signs every time we mention Netflix in passing. We're trying to keep you in this hobby and turn you onto some of the amazing home cinema demo material you're refusing to embrace.

Streaming is the future of home cinema, full stop. Hell, in many ways it's already the glorious now of home cinema. All we ask is that if you rage against it, at least use valid arguments. And sorry to say, but "less bits" is not a valid argument anymore."

https://hometheaterreview.com/home-c...future-is-now/

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

It's not that common, and if it happens, it's only temporary (usually because they change something, like adding Atmos sound). But even the HD ist still far better than a DVD. I'm really puzzled why anyone in an enthusiast forum would buy a DVD if the movie is available in HD on disc or digitally, but to each their own I guess.

It shouldn’t be happening at all though. It’s like me buying a UHD disc and only being able to watch Blu-ray quality when I load it up.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

It shouldn’t be happening at all though. It’s like me buying a UHD disc and only being able to watch Blu-ray quality when I load it up.

Small price to pay for the 3-figure number of free 4K upgrades I received ...

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys keep going back to the same argument, "More Bits is More Better," but it's not about Bits anymore. Here is an Article from Dennis Burger Home Theater last Dec 2019:

"So, don't yell at Andrew when he mentions using Vudu to review a TV. Don't yell at Jerry when he tells you he sold his Oppo (especially when there are so many other valid things to yell at him about). And don't yell at me when I tell you that discs, as good as they've been to this hobby for decades, are teetering right on the edge of being a relic of the past, or, at best, a collector's item. We're not trying to insult anyone. We're not "settling for good enough." We're simply trying to make the future a bit less of a bitter pill to swallow for those of you in the back row who hold up your "Streaming Sux!" signs every time we mention Netflix in passing. We're trying to keep you in this hobby and turn you onto some of the amazing home cinema demo material you're refusing to embrace.

Streaming is the future of home cinema, full stop. Hell, in many ways it's already the glorious now of home cinema. All we ask is that if you rage against it, at least use valid arguments. And sorry to say, but "less bits" is not a valid argument anymore."

https://hometheaterreview.com/home-c...future-is-now/

How does any of that fluff suggest less bits (or lower bit rate) isn’t a bad thing?

Take a raw photo and stuff it into a small JPEG and see for yourself.

There is no such thing as something for nothing. If lossy compression is used then loss is the result.

How much of this really evades your understanding?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys keep going back to the same argument, "More Bits is More Better," but it's not about Bits anymore. Here is an Article from Dennis Burger Home Theater last Dec 2019:

"So, don't yell at Andrew when he mentions using Vudu to review a TV. Don't yell at Jerry when he tells you he sold his Oppo (especially when there are so many other valid things to yell at him about). And don't yell at me when I tell you that discs, as good as they've been to this hobby for decades, are teetering right on the edge of being a relic of the past, or, at best, a collector's item. We're not trying to insult anyone. We're not "settling for good enough." We're simply trying to make the future a bit less of a bitter pill to swallow for those of you in the back row who hold up your "Streaming Sux!" signs every time we mention Netflix in passing. We're trying to keep you in this hobby and turn you onto some of the amazing home cinema demo material you're refusing to embrace.

Streaming is the future of home cinema, full stop. Hell, in many ways it's already the glorious now of home cinema. All we ask is that if you rage against it, at least use valid arguments. And sorry to say, but "less bits" is not a valid argument anymore."

https://hometheaterreview.com/home-c...future-is-now/

What a burger!

That article is laughable imo. If it was in printed form, I would wipe my ass with it.

Most of us are reasonably intelligent people. We don’t need to be ‘convinced’ about anything relating to our HT. a (imo) click bait article from some random is not going to change that.

HT to me means to replicate the cinema experience at home. It’s that simple. Your Netflix and Disney+ can’t do that. Streaming will ALWAYS be playing catch up. Second best, runner up, Silver medal, beaten at the post, pipped at the death, second rate.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by bhampton

DVDs sometimes had lossless PCM Tracks.

This one doesn't, and the iTunes version has Atmos sound.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Small price to pay for the 3-figure number of free 4K upgrades I received ...

I think I have about 1200 iTunes movies. They really are the only good option for digital movies apart from movies anywhere.

I would rather have the disc every time though. I’m in the process of getting things from my “going digital” phase on disc now.

I don’t trust iTunes. There’s no telling what will happen with that library in time.

They could change terms of service to something I don’t or can’t agree with.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by bhampton

Every one of them available with better sound.

Every single one.

Subjective. iTunes Atmos tracks in particular sound excellent. I doubt you'd hear the difference in a double blind test (although of course you will now insist you would).

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Subjective. iTunes Atmos tracks in particular sound excellent. I doubt you'd hear the difference in a double blind test (although of course you will now insist you would).

I sometimes visit San Fran. We may be able..... assuming you have all the needed gear.

I have all the needed stuff here.... I could get someone to help me set it up.

I have Blu Ray copy of Dark Side of the Moon and can tell every time that from a cd or lossy version, easy.

I was very impressed with the Atmos from Ghost in the Shell and I noticed it’s also gone 4K in my iTunes so I could compare those.

I have compared the 4K iTunes copy of The Shallows to my UHD and it’s a large difference in both picture and sound. Steaming is second rate for now.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by bhampton

I sometimes visit San Fran. We may be able..... assuming you have all the needed gear.

I recently upgraded my trusty Yamaha AVR with an Atmos-capable model, and added presence speakers in my projector room. The effect is honestly much better than I expected. iTunes also bumped the bitrate for these tracks significantly. This is not your grandmother's 192kbps Netflix audio.

[bhampton]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

I recently upgraded my trusty Yamaha AVR with an Atmos-capable model, and added presence speakers in my projector room. The effect is honestly much better than I expected.

You’re in for a treat if you pick up lossless Atmos soundtracks

https://www.avsforum.com/threads/los...atmos.3061254/

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by bhampton

How does any of that fluff suggest less bits (or lower bit rate) isn’t a bad thing?

Take a raw photo and stuff it into a small JPEG and see for yourself.

There is no such thing as something for nothing. If lossy compression is used then loss is the result.

How much of this really evades your understanding?

ALL of it evades his understanding. He is one of those that believes that if you say something often enough and loud enough that it becomes true.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Subjective. iTunes Atmos tracks in particular sound excellent. I doubt you'd hear the difference in a double blind test (although of course you will now insist you would).

If it was a double blind test and he claimed to have heard a difference he would not know its source, so how would his alleged bias advance his argument?

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by alchav21

You guys keep going back to the same argument, "More Bits is More Better," but it's not about Bits anymore. Here is an Article from Dennis Burger Home Theater last Dec 2019:

"So, don't yell at Andrew when he mentions using Vudu to review a TV. Don't yell at Jerry when he tells you he sold his Oppo (especially when there are so many other valid things to yell at him about). And don't yell at me when I tell you that discs, as good as they've been to this hobby for decades, are teetering right on the edge of being a relic of the past, or, at best, a collector's item. We're not trying to insult anyone. We're not "settling for good enough." We're simply trying to make the future a bit less of a bitter pill to swallow for those of you in the back row who hold up your "Streaming Sux!" signs every time we mention Netflix in passing. We're trying to keep you in this hobby and turn you onto some of the amazing home cinema demo material you're refusing to embrace.

Streaming is the future of home cinema, full stop. Hell, in many ways it's already the glorious now of home cinema. All we ask is that if you rage against it, at least use valid arguments. And sorry to say, but "less bits" is not a valid argument anymore."

https://hometheaterreview.com/home-c...future-is-now/

He also states the following in the very same article:

"To be clear, though: we acknowledge the potential downsides of streaming as the dominant form of movie distribution in the home. We recognize that even with streaming services where you ostensibly own a film, like Vudu, it's not quite the same as owning a disc you can hold in your hands, and the collectibility element is huge for some home cinephiles. That's totally valid. We also recognize that not all of our readers have a sufficient internet connection to enjoy streaming at its best, and we're super worried about you folks getting left behind as the marketplace evolves. Hell, we're worried that you're already getting screwed out of some amazing AV experiences. We acknowledge that quality of presentation can vary widely between the different streaming providers. And yes, we also recognize that movies come and go on most streaming services, which makes subscription-based VOD a less-than-consistent way to access the films you love the most. Finally, we acknowledge that as more and more subscription-based services vie for your $6.99 or $9.99 or $15.99 a month, Peak Subscription Saturation is becoming more and more of a thing."

No one is arguing that there are no benefits to streaming. I do it myself. But if I'm going to pay money to "own" a movie then disc is the only viable option in my mind. And he states several of the other disadvantages of streaming in the paragraph quoted above.

When we had our Gig fiber installed in the new house we were getting less than 100mbps speeds and the internet would just cut out several times a day. It took a week for the tech to come back out and resolve the issues. But in that week we would be watching something via streaming and it would freeze and skip or stop altogether. So I threw in a disc and we had no problems.

If a movie has a 4k master made but is not released on disc then I just have to hope it is available on one of my streaming services because I refuse to pay to "own" a streaming movie. Whatever the best quality disc that's available is what my money will be spent on.

But we've been over this a hundred times. Just because something is "the future" doesn't make it better than what came before. The near future appears to offer further social isolation, deaths from pandemics and worsening natural disasters. Are you going to tout the joys of that future as well? Just because things change doesn't always mean they change for the better.