Tom & Jerry: Golden Collection, Volume One (1940-1948) re-issued

[BouCoupDinkyDau]

Originally Posted by gregmasciola

Exactly. I never liked how some studios would edit or not include certain material for these reasons. All they have to do is have some message at the beginning saying that the material is a product of its time and doesn't reflect the current opinions of the studio (kind of like what they do when commentaries are included).

+1

[dr_vasanth]

My wife loves it and we have a child on the way..I guess I am parting with some of my hard-earned money for this comic duo's arrival on blu..

[Daigoro]

cant wait for this release. i pre-ordered as soon as i heard about it.

edit:

i was just reading through the wikipedia article on T&J and i started thinking back to what episodes ive seen in the past and how they were edited since ive been watching toons on TV since the early 70's.

im sure ive seen most or all of the original Hanna Barbera films multiple times, in various states. since ive seen them almost exclusivly on TV (im sure ive seen a few in the theater, but infrequently), so that means ive seen them almost all in pan & scan.

i know ive seen original episodes with the proper Mammy Two Shoes art and voice. i dont remember ever hearing the irish voice dub that i read about. im pretty sure ive seen edited version with the white teen in place of two shoes as well.

ive seen tons of episodes with black face gags. this of course includes lots of old Popeye and WB films, as well as Our Gang, Three Stooges etc. im sure a lot of these episodes arent shown at all any more. black face gags were still shown in lots of older TV shows that re-aired when i was growing up.

with this collection coming out (if it is fully restored and unedited) im sure there will be lots of stuff ive never seen before. mostly because of pan and scan, but it seems like there must be episodes that i have only seen edited for content in one way or another.

im really looking forward to seeing these fully restored and unedited, especially in their proper aspect ratio.

for the record i like the later Deitch (so odd) and the Chuck Jones eps as well. but the originals are the best. films truly from the golden age of animation.

[kashif]

Just Pre-Ordered.

[McCrutchy]

No! No, no, no, no, NO!

According to the just-released back cover, there will be no lossless audio on this release. Just lossy Dolby Digital tracks. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad we have the original mono tracks, but we needed them in DTS-HD Master Audio (as expected now from WB) NOT lossy Dolby Digital!



WHY IS THERE ALWAYS SOMETHING WRONG?!?!?

Seriously, who made that decision? After all the apparent time and effort that went into the video, now we get short-changed on the audio.

All I can say is: Cue Peter Finch:

Network- I'm Mad as Hell

[miniroll32]

It was most likely down to the capacity of the discs, and the production costs of the product. Don't forget - this Volume contains 2-Discs and 37 shorts spread across them. If we use a rough average of 8-minutes per episode, that comes out at 296-minutes, or for example 160-minutes on one disc and 136-minutes on the other. That means that both discs contain over 2-hours of footage, and unless W.B wanted to compromise on the bit-rate of the video, they've have settled for a non-lossy soundtrack to fit all the content on the discs.

Even the upcoming 'Ben Hur' and 'Lawrence of Arabia' Blu-ray presentations will be split across 2-discs, and then an additional disc just for extras! So its a compromise they have to make

Given the fidelity of optical tracks pre-1952 is so poor anyway, it is highly unlikely you'll notice a difference. Whats more, the future Volumes may offer lossless soundtracks when the medium called for better sound quality (magnetic tape).

[DVDFreaker]

I can not wait for this!

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

Given the fidelity of optical tracks pre-1952 is so poor anyway, it is highly unlikely you'll notice a difference. Whats more, the future Volumes may offer lossless soundtracks when the medium called for better sound quality (magnetic tape).

Nope. You can hear the difference even with source material that's low-fi to begin with. Neither presentation will sound like a "great" recording, but the lossy compressed track will sound less open than the lossless... even when it's a bad recording to begin with.

The *really bad* soundtracks to some of the 1950s Simbad blu-rays are a good case in point... the lossless presentation is almost shockingly better than the lossy in terms of openness and naturalness... and these recordings are pretty low-fi to begin with. And that's comparing to a 640 kbps DD core stream!

dave

[miniroll32]

Either way, it won't impact the overall quality of this release. Its everything we've wished for

[Donat96]

Damn you Warner Bros.!

[#Darren]

This audio compromise doesn't bother me personally. I am thrilled with WB for having the balls to release these uncut.

[McCrutchy]

People are missing the point here--Warner remastered and restored these cartoons, and I assume that included their audio tracks. It's only at the disc authoring stage that they compressed that lossless original audio to Dolby Digital. Exactly why they chose to do so is a mystery--it's certainly NOT because of the amount of content on the discs, since this is mono audio, after all--the whole point of this release was to display these cartoons in all their high definition glory, and now we only get half of that experience! Compressing the audio to DD begins to defeat the purpose of presenting these cartoons on BD in the first place.

And another thing: This isn't difficult to do: The standard for Blu-ray video is 1080 resolution, and the standard for Blu-ray audio is lossless audio. If there wasn't a difference between the two, lossless audio wouldn't be part of the BD specifications in the first place. It makes me angry that people are willing to accept this and move on. Warner could have also encoded the cartoons at 720p to fit them all on one BD-50, but then everybody would be pissed off. It's a double standard.

I really hope this is just a typo on the back cover.

[Donat96]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

People are missing the point here--Warner remastered and restored these cartoons, and I assume that included their audio tracks. It's only at the disc authoring stage that they compressed that lossless original audio to Dolby Digital. Exactly why they chose to do so is a mystery--it's certainly NOT because of the amount of content on the discs, since this is mono audio, after all--the whole point of this release was to display these cartoons in all their high definition glory, and now we only get half of that experience! Compressing the audio to DD begins to defeat the purpose of presenting these cartoons on BD in the first place.

And another thing: This isn't difficult to do: The standard for Blu-ray video is 1080 resolution, and the standard for Blu-ray audio is lossless audio. If there wasn't a difference between the two, lossless audio wouldn't be part of the BD specifications in the first place. It makes me angry that people are willing to accept this and move on. Warner could have also encoded the cartoons at 720p to fit them all on one BD-50, but then everybody would be pissed off. It's a double standard.

I really hope this is just a typo on the back cover.

My thoughts exactly. I bought into an HD format expecting HD video and HD audio. I hate it when studios expect us to have to compromise to save them money.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

Either way, it won't impact the overall quality of this release. Its everything we've wished for

Yes it does. It would indeed sound noticeably better with full lossless. Even 1930's/40's movies from optical tracks sound better in lossless.

Now, I think what you and others who don't seemed bothered are trying to say is that the lack of lossless audio won't stop you personally from buying, and you personally don't feel that the drop is audio fidelity is significant enough to get in your way of enjoying the blu-ray. That's fine. But that's not the same thing as suggesting that WB did the best job they could have, or should have.

Even if someone isn't bothered by DNR, it doesn't mean that the studio shouldn't have have done better.

Even if someone isn't bothered by HF filtering to aid compression, it doesn't mean the studio shouldn't have done better.

Even if someone isn't bothered by EE, it doesn't mean the studio shouldn't have done better.

Even if someone isn't bothered by audio-noise reduction that strips out all the highs in the soundtrack, it doesn't mean the studio shouldn't have done better.

Even if someone isn't bothered by lack of lossless, is doesn't mean that the studio shouldn't have done better.

Even if someone isn't bothered by lack of OAR, it doesn't mean that the studio shouldn't have done better.

These are basic principles that every member of Blu-ray.com should agree on. These aren't points of debate... they are the principles of hi-fidelity that we should all support, and urge the studio to support as well.

It doesn't mean every member has to boycott buying every title that falls short of mastering perfection, but it doesn't mean that we should say "it's good enough" to justify our purchase... just purchase it, enjoy it, and continue to urge the studios to do better at the same time.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by Imrahil2001

I've never watched a Tom and Jerry and thought, "Man, I need this in lossless." I have, however, thought, "This would look great in HD."

I'm happy with the compromise.

So what about the millions of people who never thought "wow this would look great in HD" and think that SD is "good enough" for Tom and Jerry? They far outnumber you. Yet would you consider this a point to vote on as though it's ok to compromise the BD quality just because lots of people wouldn't really care? Is 720P good enough? It would take up less space, so why are we asking WB to use a full 1080? They could fit even more cartoons per disc in 720p and the source material isn't exactly pixar so why care about 1080p?

Or, by principle, would you consider it WB's job to utilize the BD format to its fullest despite the fact that they'd be able to make just as much $$ with a compromised picture that's not full HD?

[JessBox]

As for me, I don't see anything bad in not having HD audio for this set. I won't be upset even if they release cartoons non-remastered. The only reason I want the set is that it's supposed to contain original uncut shorts, and video is of quality not worse than it was made in. I'm not hung to standards. Moreover, I'm really glad to have Mono instead, because usually sound up-level conversion makes sound unusually worse for those being used to hearing natural sound instead of computerized one. Trying to follow modern standards it misses the essence. The collection is shipped as Collector's. And that's the thing that actually must be true. I want the cartoon what it used to be without intelligent thoughts such as political correctness that might come to minds of intelligent persons. Having the highest of the highest qualities can never be reached and as such is such a stupid thing. Tomorrow they will release "purple-ray" discs, you gonna buy it once again?

I'm not a crumbly any far, but excessive concern drives people crazy...

P.S. When chasing lossless what are you going to lose in sound that was originally made in mono?

[Ugly Pig]

Originally Posted by miniroll32

That means that both discs contain over 2-hours of footage, and unless W.B wanted to compromise on the bit-rate of the video, they've have settled for a non-lossy soundtrack to fit all the content on the discs.

I'm sorry, but that's bull. A running time of two or three hours with lossless audio is not at all a problem for a Blu-Ray disc. Far from it.

[Donat96]

Originally Posted by JessBox

As for me, I don't see anything bad in not having HD audio for this set. I won't be upset even if they release cartoons non-remastered. The only reason I want the set is that it's supposed to contain original uncut shorts, and video is of quality not worse than it was made in. I'm not hung to standards. Moreover, I'm really glad to have Mono instead, because usually sound up-level conversion makes sound unusually worse for those being used to hearing natural sound instead of computerized one. Trying to follow modern standards it misses the essence. The collection is shipped as Collector's. And that's the thing that actually must be true. I want the cartoon what it used to be without intelligent thoughts such as political correctness that might come to minds of intelligent persons. Having the highest of the highest qualities can never be reached and as such is such a stupid thing. Tomorrow they will release "purple-ray" discs, you gonna buy it once again?

I'm not a crumbly any far, but excessive concern drives people crazy...

P.S. When chasing lossless what are you going to lose in sound that was originally made in mono?

We are not asking for the shorts to be converted to surround sound. We just want to hear them exactly how the studio's master sounds.

Hell, I'm not even demanding it. I will still buy the set. But it frustrates me how Warner messes up a potentially great release by not having High-definition audio.

[miniroll32]

Almost everyone who is buying this 'Tom and Jerry Golden Collection' will have only watched these cartoons on their Televisions - including broadcasts and years of dreadful releases on home media. Whether the audio is lossless or not, the fact that it has for the first time been restored and un-cut will present it in the best way that people have, for most instances, ever heard it. The only time people have heard it 'lossless' is in the theatres, or private screenings.

As a previous member commented, Tom and Jerry isn't the kind of product that requires 'lossless audio' to be perfection, and all for the above reasons. The visual restoration will by far exceed what most have been used to anyway, which is the biggest treat.

Just think positive and stop getting in a huff over, what is essentially, the principle of not having lossless audio, rather than the final effect. This product should be incredible!

[kashif]

Originally Posted by Bad Boy Dazza

This audio compromise doesn't bother me personally. I am thrilled with WB for having the balls to release these uncut.

Originally Posted by miniroll32

Almost everyone who is buying this 'Tom and Jerry Golden Collection' will have only watched these cartoons on their Televisions - including broadcasts and years of dreadful releases on home media. Whether the audio is lossless or not, the fact that it has for the first time been restored and un-cut will present it in the best way that people have, for most instances, ever heard it. The only time people have heard it 'lossless' is in the theatres, or private screenings.

As a previous member commented, Tom and Jerry isn't the kind of product that requires 'lossless audio' to be perfection, and all for the above reasons. The visual restoration will by far exceed what most have been used to anyway, which is the biggest treat.

Just think positive and stop getting in a huff over, what is essentially, the principle of not having lossless audio, rather than the final effect. This product should be incredible!

Cant agree more.