Commentary from the Insiders Thread

[tmax]

Originally Posted by MatrixS2000

Let your ears be the judge. DD+ does not compare to PCM to my ears.

In-fact that's one of the features I love and find exciting about Bluray - Uncompressed PCM.

[Blu-Light]

Originally Posted by Talkstr8t

Not sure if this has ever been discussed here, but has anyone seen the "important notes" on the Toshiba HD DVD press release? Hilarious! (Italics added)

Sig worthy.

[WickyWoo]

I think TrueHD 2.0 is mandatory on the players. I don't think that it's taken seriously.

Or that so many of their other mandatory features have barely been used up until the same point where Blu is launching them too

[Blu-Light]

I should point out that we have NEVER had a problem playing back any content on our PS/3.

[Brain Sturgeon]

Long time lurker. First time poster.

What finally brought me out of my cave to post was this quote:

Originally Posted by David Vaughn

Not to defend Paramount, but just because a mix is TrueHD, doesn't mean it will be "better" than DD+ at 1.5 Mbps. There have been a lot of 1.5 Mbps tracks that sound every bit as good as TrueHD mixes.

I have to question the sanity and hearing of anybody, including an audio engineer, who would claim that lossy audio is every bit (no pun intended) as good as lossless audio (PCM, TrueHD, DTS-HD MA). You have got to be out of your gourd to believe that. I would challenge anyone to compare lossy versus lossless audio on any reasonably good audio system and not note a significant difference in the depth of bass, soundstaging, transparency, and the envelopment of the sound field. The difference is absolutely profound. I liken it to the difference between PCM on CD and MLP on DVDA (on which TrueHD is based) or DSD on SACD, assuming all are well done. There is absolutely no comparison.

This is the absolute reason why we, as audiophiles and home theatre enthusiasts, must choose blu-ray over HD-DVD. High bit rate video is important, but just as important is high definition audio. I think we would all agree that great audio (score and effects) is a [I]HUGE[/I} part of the theatre experience, and I would bet that a good number of us spend more on our audio systems than our displays (disclosure; my display cost 7k, my audio rig around 70k). The reason why we drop such huge coin and spend time tweaking our audio rigs (speaker placement, room treatments, Room EQ, line conditioners, etc, etc) is because the soundtrack of a movie is what gets those hairs standing up on the back of your neck, gets that feeling of dread in your chest, and occasionally yanks a tear from your eye when something big happens in the movie accompanied by that amazing sound.

From what the limited history has shown, blu-ray will likely be the only format with consistent lossless audio, due to the space and bandwidth restrictions of HD-DVD. Therefore, anybody calling themselves a theatre enthusiast or audiophile really only has one choice of format: blu-ray.

If you choose to think that lossy audio is just as good as lossless in reproducing the original studio soundtrack; man, you are really fooling yourselves and buying HD DVD's propaganda.

Lossless > lossy. End of story. I would be shocked if there were an audio engineer in the world that would tell you different.

[kowhite]

Originally Posted by Brain Sturgeon

Lossless > lossy. End of story. I would be shocked if there were an audio engineer in the world that would tell you different.

I'm sure there are...though, they probably work for Microsoft.

[Iceman_II]

Originally Posted by Blu-Light

I should point out that we have NEVER had a problem playing back any content on our PS/3.

Never say Never.... My copy of "Chronos" had issues with a PS3 firmware update... but the publisher stepped up and replaced the ones with issues.

Thats the difference, the blu side fixes the problem, while red just publishes a disclaimer

[jason_grumpy]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

If there is a single person out there that tests the limits and needs PCM it's Michael Bay

And that's exactly what it ends up being. Intentional or not this is the cornerstone of FUD. IF IF IF IF IF. Unless there's some reason to think, and 25 years of optical disc replication says there isn't, that there is some inherent flaw in the entire design, which millions of movies and games hitting the racks have proven there isn't, you're simply spinning negative scenarios for the purpose of instilling doubt. So either you're FUDing, or more likely the people you're talking to are.

Remember the job or a reporter is analysis. Not stenography.

I'm starting to feel the same way with this Wicky. I'm still waiting for an answer on the 46GB claim being simply a math issue between gigabytes or gibibytes. I can see that post was conveniently ignored. It would be amusing if the yield rate problem these particular companies is/was because they are trying to make discs that are over spec and not any flaw in the design. After all, even NASA lost a lander because metric conversion problems.

[WickyWoo]

The point I'm trying to make is that spinning future scenarios that aren't based on precident or some massive piece of damning evidence is approaching FUD

The 46GB thing very well may be a real issue, and it's seperate. Since pretty much all the lines are coming from the same manufacturer, I don't think it's a measurement problem.

[Teazle]

It's a matter of fact that a DD+ lossy compressed soundtrack is not as good as its uncompressed master. It's equally a fact that it doesn't _sound_ as good, provided this is meant in an objective sense. Even if the audio engineer believes it sounds as good as the master this only means: he personally can't tell the difference; they sound as good to him.

I suppose one could try to argue that many people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the compressed and uncompressed versions. But that will frequently turn out to be wrong. On many BDs you can A/B a compressed with an uncompressed track and the difference is obvious. Every person is his/her own authority on this.

Still, sometimes people say the compressed version is "good enough". When it comes to justifying the absence of the uncompressed audio, out come the vague phrases such as "transparent to the master", "it can handle the mix", "it's adequate" etc. These imprecise terms have small value when we have a technical vocabulary for distinguishing the ways in which compressed audio isn't as good as the uncompressed master: lower bitrate, reduced dynamic range ... Apologists for compressed audio should not try to hide behind a deliberately vague account of the situation. Instead it would be better to say bluntly that people need not aspire to hear anything better. Some people won't like it, but at least the argument won't merely turn on a nebulous choice of words.

I have We Were Soldiers on BD and heard the DTS version (haven't heard the DD) both times I watched it. The sound is excellent. Should have been PCM though.

[Rob Tomlin]

Originally Posted by Brain Sturgeon

Long time lurker. First time poster.

What finally brought me out of my cave to post was this quote:



I have to question the sanity and hearing of anybody, including an audio engineer, who would claim that lossy audio is every bit (no pun intended) as good as lossless audio (PCM, TrueHD, DTS-HD MA). You have got to be out of your gourd to believe that. I would challenge anyone to compare lossy versus lossless audio on any reasonably good audio system and not note a significant difference in the depth of bass, soundstaging, transparency, and the envelopment of the sound field. The difference is absolutely profound. I liken it to the difference between PCM on CD and MLP on DVDA (on which TrueHD is based) or DSD on SACD, assuming all are well done. There is absolutely no comparison.

This is the absolute reason why we, as audiophiles and home theatre enthusiasts, must choose blu-ray over HD-DVD. High bit rate video is important, but just as important is high definition audio. I think we would all agree that great audio (score and effects) is a [I]HUGE[/I} part of the theatre experience, and I would bet that a good number of us spend more on our audio systems than our displays (disclosure; my display cost 7k, my audio rig around 70k). The reason why we drop such huge coin and spend time tweaking our audio rigs (speaker placement, room treatments, Room EQ, line conditioners, etc, etc) is because the soundtrack of a movie is what gets those hairs standing up on the back of your neck, gets that feeling of dread in your chest, and occasionally yanks a tear from your eye when something big happens in the movie accompanied by that amazing sound.

From what the limited history has shown, blu-ray will likely be the only format with consistent lossless audio, due to the space and bandwidth restrictions of HD-DVD. Therefore, anybody calling themselves a theatre enthusiast or audiophile really only has one choice of format: blu-ray.

If you choose to think that lossy audio is just as good as lossless in reproducing the original studio soundtrack; man, you are really fooling yourselves and buying HD DVD's propaganda.

Lossless > lossy. End of story. I would be shocked if there were an audio engineer in the world that would tell you different.

Well, thats a hell of a great first post!

[LeoneFan]

Originally Posted by Blu-Light

I should point out that we have NEVER had a problem playing back any content on our PS/3.

I don't know if you were being sarcastic but I personally have never had even the slightest hickup on either of my PS3's. They have worked perfectly with BDs since I got them.

[MovieTime]

Originally Posted by Blu-Light

I should point out that we have NEVER had a problem playing back any content on our PS/3.

Can't say the same for my first PS3 it died very early...Good news is Sony had my replacement in less than 10 days.

[hoser]

Originally Posted by mattym

its smoke and mirrors to deflect attention from combo naffness and to try and justify paramounts 'desicion' to back the other side. Paid and Max both are in a position to know the numbers, and both deny it, meanwhile no figures for combo coasters are forthcoming, coincidence? i dont think so...

Gotta agree.
Remember Paramount's statement...something to the effect: "HD-DUD is better technology."
A**man is just fishing for something to spin-up and give meat to Paramount's BS.

[hoser]

I believe Wicky, Jason, and Brain Sturgeon (welcome BTW) have put Mr. Vaughn's uhhh....whatever you want to call it, to the side of the road.

NEXT!

[Wet1]

Originally Posted by Blu-Light

Sig worthy.

You forgot to add this part:

Some features subject to delayed availability.

The red flu on AVS should love that sig.!

[patrick99]

TL 51 is "science fiction."

[Hussla]

Originally Posted by Rob Tomlin

My Toshiba A1 HD-DVD player still locks up on me.

When we got the Toshiba A2, its called something different in Australia E10 if I remember correctly!

It was locking up often, usually after leaving it on playing a disc over night!

I hear people go on how these were great quality units, my experience was too the contrary. Up-scaling was poor compared to the PS3, the load times were abhorrent, the remote control was tacky and the general build quality of the unit was questionable.

It came bundled with Apollo 13 which was an absolutely HORRIBLE looking HD transfer, but then again I think the quality had something to do with the pathetic overpriced Toshiba 47" 1080i Regza LCD.

As one may gather, im not a big fan of Toshiba CE, here in Australia i've found their product quality somewhat lacking, I use to work for a major retailer and I would never buy a Toshiba CE product (except for their laptops)

Poxy unreliable DVD players, overpriced ugly and mediocre LCD tv's, unreliable and unstable set top boxes and PVRs.

Originally Posted by MovieTime

Can't say the same for my first PS3 it died very early...Good news is Sony had my replacement in less than 10 days.

That's rare, the build quality of the PS3 is far superior to the 360 (i'm been REALLLY nice to the 360 :P, the build quality is really s*!t)

I went through the sales and returns list for the 360, numerous returned for red rings, scratching discs etc.

I bought one returned it within a week, was getting red rings the first time I switched it on and don't even get me started on the noise. I'll wait till the 65nm versions hit.

I have my Ps3 near my bed and can BARELY hear it when it's on (although i've heard some other people say theirs are noisy)

But as for returns, last time I checked NONE had been returned for faults.

[MatrixS2000]

Originally Posted by patrick99

TL 51 is "science fiction."

"It will also not play on any current player."

[Hussla]

Originally Posted by MatrixS2000

"It will also not play on any current player."

Damn you! don't quote facts, the cult of Amir may get offended.....oh wait this is not AVS!

But yes there's no straight answer, some say a firmware upgrade, others said it already will and others say that it flat out wont

Mind you that discussion is irrelevant because according the Commie-Red crowd all Profile 1.1 discs are totally incompatible with Profile 1.0 players, doesn't matter if its true or not!