Why is WB *STILL* releasing BDs with LOSSY Audio?

[doctorD]

The thing I find interesting about their releases is there are times where it may be a toss up as to what a release will have. It does appear that all movies are getting lossless, but as mentioned some tv shows or movie animations that deserve lossless are getting lossy. Star Trek The Clone Wars Season 1 deserved a lossless track, but got lossy...where the movie version of The Clone Wars got lossless Superman/Batman: Public Enemies was another title that deserved lossless but instead got lossy where Green Lantern First Flight got a lossless track(s).

It is what it is, but I do feel the OP's frustration and hope in the near future that Warners will just start releasing everything with at least one lossless track.

[fatediesel]

I'm pretty sure no Warner TV show has ever gotten lossless, which would explain why the Clone Wars movie got lossless while the TV show didn't. I don't understand why Warner refuses to use lossless on TV shows when it would help shows like Clone Wars, Chuck, Smallville, and Fringe which have a lot of action.

[doctorD]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

I'm pretty sure no Warner TV show has ever gotten lossless, which would explain why the Clone Wars movie got lossless while the TV show didn't. I don't understand why Warner refuses to use lossless on TV shows when it would help shows like Clone Wars, Chuck, Smallville, and Fringe which have a lot of action.

Agreed! But the Superman/Batman: Public Enemies movie only getting lossy is puzzling.

[Motown Luv]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

So if the track was 640kbps monoral, would you still complain about it being lossy? I can't imagine anyone being able to tell the difference between that and a lossless track on Peanuts...

Agreed

[Rik1138]

Originally Posted by kefrank

Just to play devil's advocate, how do you know it's no harder and no more expensive? If a DD track already exists for a catalog title and a lossless one does not, surely it's somewhat harder and more expensive, even if only slightly.

As mentioned below, the studios don't store audio in Dolby format, the audio is placed on the master tape with the video. When the video is captured for compression, and the audio is (well, can be) automatically captured as PCM at the same time.

At this point, you can do one of three things:
1- Just drop the PCM on the Blu-ray disc. This is the cheapest, easiest thing to do. You don't have to convert the audio at all, you just drop it in the project.
2- Encode it lossy. You have to drop the PCM audio into the Dolby (in this case) encoder, select 'AC3', set your bitrate and encode it. Now you have to drop the AC3 file into the project.
3- Encode it lossless. Same software used in option 2, you just click a different button. Technically, it's one step faster since you don't have select the bitrate (but it does take longer to encode, but that wouldn't be a factor in whether or not you use it).

If you want cheap/easy, just do step 1. If you are going to bother proceeding to step 2, why not just do it lossless? I just completed a disc with an SD resolution _OLD_ transfer of an episode of a 1960s TV show. The real episodes are HD with 7.1 audio, etc, but this old version just had a mono track. I encoded it DTS-HD MA. Why? Why not? There was space on the disc, and I had to encode it as something anyway (or just leave it PCM)...

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

It's as hard as pressing a button to have that LPCM master encoded in TrueHD or DTS-HD. It's even easier just to do stereo or mono LPCM on the BD... which is an option that's 100% legitimate.

I definitely agree here. Unless space is an issue (which it really never should be, compared to the size of a Blu-ray disc, even lossless audio isn't all that big), there's absolutely no reason for a studio to not use a lossless audio format. If that's just 'their policy', it's stupid. There's no cost savings, no work savings, no extra licensing fees, nothing. There's not one reason anyone can give for NOT using lossless (with the possible exception of an already encoded audio file really being the only format the audio still exists in, but I doubt that apply to any feature (TV or movie) from any major studio...)

BTW, I assume Peanuts are mono or 2-channel mono... What bitrate did they encode at? Hopefully they at least used something higher than 192...

Rik

[Rblu-Dblu]

cause theyre d-bags.

[Rik1138]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

I'm pretty sure no Warner TV show has ever gotten lossless, which would explain why the Clone Wars movie got lossless while the TV show didn't. I don't understand why Warner refuses to use lossless on TV shows when it would help shows like Clone Wars, Chuck, Smallville, and Fringe which have a lot of action.

Wait, Clone Wars Season 1 isn't lossless? Okay now, that's just f**king stupid... I guess I can scratch that off my list of titles to buy, just on principle. I don't need it that bad, but I was probably going to pick it up eventually. Saves me money I guess... Star Trek TOS gets a 7.1 remaster in DTS-HD MA audio, and a brand new _STAR WARS_ doesn't get lossless at all???

I'm surprised Lucasfilm allowed that...

Rik

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

I'm pretty sure no Warner TV show has ever gotten lossless

Sole exception.

In all fairness, I believe that was Cartoon Network's decision (ala HBO/BBC) and not WB's.

~Alan

[wallendo]

Originally Posted by Rik1138

...
BTW, I assume Peanuts are mono or 2-channel mono... What bitrate did they encode at? Hopefully they at least used something higher than 192...

Rik

Actually they used the old DVD 192 kbs encode.

As far as the "Peanuts" haters, the show has an excellent musical track which would benefit from a high quality audio track. I don't understand some people's ideas that only loud explosions benefit from lossless sound. I find it quite the opposite. Loud explosions are just loud explosions, but music should be of the highest available quality.

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by Rik1138

Wait, Clone Wars Season 1 isn't lossless? Okay now, that's just f**king stupid... I guess I can scratch that off my list of titles to buy, just on principle. I don't need it that bad, but I was probably going to pick it up eventually. Saves me money I guess... Star Trek TOS gets a 7.1 remaster in DTS-HD MA audio, and a brand new _STAR WARS_ doesn't get lossless at all???

I'm surprised Lucasfilm allowed that...
Rik

+1

Marek

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

I thought that this was supposed to be a practice that the studio promised to stop. Now we get BDs of classic Peanuts and Dr. Suess cartoons with crappy lossy Dolby Digital?

it's ludicrous. There is plenty of space on these discs for TrueHD or HD-MA. Aren't folks upset? Or do they not care when vintage animation material doesn't get lossless treatment?

Just like all films deserve OAR and proper film transfers and lack of EE and DNR, so do all films deserve lossless audio. Even optical mono tracks from the 1920s sound better in lossless than they do in lossy. There's no reason not to provide it, especially from a studio that has PROMISED to do provide lossless on all titles.

we are on same side David,
I can't believe we HAVE SUCH TOPIC NOW in late 2009

I was very disspointed with lossy one on Star Wars Clone Wars series

Marek

[Hep]

It's been discussed that a lossless PCM track could have been implemented as easily, or even easier, than a DD track. If that is the case, and it does sound reasonable, then this smells of weak policy, laziness or incompetence (all of which seems to be the same thing in this case) .

The only other option I can fathom, is that the policy is built around a (flawed) assumption that they will further profit from an eventual double dip.

I don't know how much better a lossless track would sound, but I do know that it would sound better, even by a margin. The magnitude shouldn't even be a factor in the decision. If cost isn't in the equation, then it's all about producing a quality product and treating your customers with respect; with the statements accompanying the recent Oz release, it has become apparent that the film side of the house seems to have gotten the message - but Warner's image continues to be ground into the dirt by weak corporate vision. Truly disappointing, and if I was at the helm of this ship, I would be shaking the riggings to drive the rats overboard.

[ghebert]

I for one hope that Warner is looking at threads like this...putting a lossy audio track on Blu-Ray is as infuriating as when dvd's came with non-anamorphic releases.

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by wallendo

Actually they used the old DVD 192 kbs encode.

As far as the "Peanuts" haters, the show has an excellent musical track which would benefit from a high quality audio track. I don't understand some people's ideas that only loud explosions benefit from lossless sound. I find it quite the opposite. Loud explosions are just loud explosions, but music should be of the highest available quality.

It is even worse than imagined. I have the Charlie Brown soundtrack on hybrid SACD, and it smokes the lossy presentation by Warner. The idea it could not benefit from a lossless soundtrack is misguided.

Originally Posted by Hep

The only other option I can fathom, is that the policy is built around a (flawed) assumption that they will further profit from an eventual double dip.

That is what I would assume also, but frankly the titles WB is choosing to release in lossy have almost no double-dip potential except the Peanuts titles. There is no chance at seeing the tv shows released again with lossless soundtracks.

[Rik1138]

Originally Posted by wallendo

Actually they used the old DVD 192 kbs encode.

Is the video 1080i on the Blu-ray? If it's 1080p, it should be a 23.976 framerate, the DVDs would be 29.97... They wouldn't be able to just use the existing audio from the DVD, it wouldn't match. (1080i could be the same frame rate as DVD, but if this was from an original film of some kind, it wouldn't be interlaced.)

Either way, a new HD master was made, with audio. The audio can be captured at the same time as the video for compression, and then encoded. There really is no reason to try to use existing encoded audio for Blu-ray.

Rik

[martymc80s]

I'm absolutely in support David's original post and of bringing out PCM or lossless-only releases.

A for instance:

I love my copy of Superman The Movie, but it is such a missed opportunity to have a lossy audio track.

As an engineer who regularly has to deliver final sound mixes, I'm astounded daily by how people "in" the industry either don't know the difference between lossy and lossless or don't care.

The difference between a 640kbps DD track and even a basic 16-bit PCM audio track is night and day.

But like MP3s vs CDs - how many people really really care?

[Hep]

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

That is what I would assume also, but frankly the titles WB is choosing to release in lossy have almost no double-dip potential except the Peanuts titles. There is no chance at seeing the tv shows released again with lossless soundtracks.

Ya, that's why I think greed is the least likely reason they're going with lossy on TV.

[PRO-630HD]

Actually if you have bahearing the extra clarity from the lossless track could really benefit you.

[DIY_HD]

While it sounds like we are all singing the same song, this issue is not a technical one. It's an economic one. Studios produce what consumers want. As it was said at the beginning of this thread, "vote with your wallet."

If you were a movie studio and all the BDs with lossless tracks sold like hotcakes while the lossy ones gathered dust on the shelves, what would you produce? Honestly?

[Infrared Sight]

I saw those at Target and was pissed because they had lossy audio. Ever since I stopped buying hd dvds, I have not made one purchase that didn't include a lossless track. I want pure high def blu-ray disc. That means 1080 picture and lossless audio. Period. There have been multiple titles I would have right now if it wasn't for lossy audio. For shame, and WB, you will never get my money unless it is pure high def blu-ray disc.