Hey,
I'm into technology and want to help clarify some points about the audio limits of the PS3.
A random comment about something I expect from a coming chipset revision set off a chain of replies.
If possible could you move those replies to this thread.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=47038&page=2
Then we will resume discussion audio solutions in regards to Sony and the PS3.
I spent a weekend in January email Onkyo about the TX-SR605 advising them to announce/make a simpler bundle version of HT-SP908 system, without the DVD player and Ipod dock. Pointing out that the audio codec solution they provide would require an HD video optical media player that would already support DVD as well. So their DVD player doesn't add value since the pre-requist has already fullfilled that credit in order to need the other part of their solution.
Long story short.
Little over a month later Sony is announcing lower priced audio receivers that support both audio formats.
http://www.news.com/8300-10784_3-7.html?keyword=DTS-HD+Master+Audio
They also included a Blu-ray player that did the same.
Something I also predicted last year was that Blu-ray would win because HD-DVD was created when the Video argument was 720p vs 1080i, so HD-DVD didn't target enough bandwidth support for 1080p @ 60Hz & Uncompressed 7.1 audio. Seems like no one else noticed that Blu-ray offers about 65% more data per layer and 55% more bandwidth to deal with 1080p@60hz media. Specifically supported by the fact that Sony has been selling 1080p@60hz camcorders for
Then in January when Blu-ray looked to be taking the crown I revisited these points with a dedicated thread. And wrote the following.
During this time in January I was feeling very certain of my claims & emailed HorizonSemi.com marketing staff.
Now the predictions and arguments I made about Blu-ray are 45 Days later manifesting.
Sony is announcing players supporting the 1080p @ 60Hz specification for the first time ever.
And has, "+ Bitstream output for Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio"
Sony HD Solutions http://www.news.com/8300-10784_3-7.html?keyword=DTS-HD+Master+Audio
Blu-ray 2.0 http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9808376-1.html#profile2.0
For the record what I was predicting/hoping for was in the other thread was an upgrade to PS3 firmware allowing DTS-HD Master Audio to be decoded and output as 7.1 Linear PCM audio. Not bitstream output, which is typically limited by the audio chipset including codec support. But I am now also hopeful about a chipset revision allowing native pass through of the 7.1 DTS and 7.1 DD audio codecs.
To be honest Linear Pulse Code Modulation should sound near perfect in translation and lower the cost to Audio owners who's Receivers don't support the latest HD audio specifications.
I hope Onkyo is taking note.
As Sony's latest receiver offering costs about half what the TX-SR605 did.
Until the Blu-ray 2.0 Specification is finalized in hopefully October 2008,
The PS3 is a very good solution in regards to excellent price and its upgradeable design.
A new smaller/lower power/less expensive Blu-Ray laser is also in the pipeline for April 2008.
So the prices of dedicated Blu-ray players should drop sometime after that point.
I still prefer my 4.1 audio setup (not a typo.)
But should I go big, the system would have to support seven point one.
The audio positioning of 5.1 never really made me feel immersed.
I was always actively aware of the positioning, instead of surrounded by sound.
It's like I hate when stereo completely lacks and audio track in the other ear.
Sound should be present in both, just balanced (blended) differently, not completely seperated.
Yes that has more to do with studio mastering than the positioning limits,
but somehow 5.1 never really satisfied my desire to be in the sound stage.
It is a ring of sound, not spots for sound.
I'm into technology and want to help clarify some points about the audio limits of the PS3.
A random comment about something I expect from a coming chipset revision set off a chain of replies.
If possible could you move those replies to this thread.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=47038&page=2
Then we will resume discussion audio solutions in regards to Sony and the PS3.
I spent a weekend in January email Onkyo about the TX-SR605 advising them to announce/make a simpler bundle version of HT-SP908 system, without the DVD player and Ipod dock. Pointing out that the audio codec solution they provide would require an HD video optical media player that would already support DVD as well. So their DVD player doesn't add value since the pre-requist has already fullfilled that credit in order to need the other part of their solution.
Long story short.
Little over a month later Sony is announcing lower priced audio receivers that support both audio formats.
http://www.news.com/8300-10784_3-7.html?keyword=DTS-HD+Master+Audio
They also included a Blu-ray player that did the same.
Something I also predicted last year was that Blu-ray would win because HD-DVD was created when the Video argument was 720p vs 1080i, so HD-DVD didn't target enough bandwidth support for 1080p @ 60Hz & Uncompressed 7.1 audio. Seems like no one else noticed that Blu-ray offers about 65% more data per layer and 55% more bandwidth to deal with 1080p@60hz media. Specifically supported by the fact that Sony has been selling 1080p@60hz camcorders for
Then in January when Blu-ray looked to be taking the crown I revisited these points with a dedicated thread. And wrote the following.
I will prove HD-DVD was not designed with 1080p@60Hz HDTV in mind.
First we need a measure to compare with, so I looked for 1080i Broadcasts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_television
"Each Digital TV channel is permitted to be broadcast at a data rate up to 19 megabits per second, or 2.375 megabytes per second."
What will fit that is 1080i + Lite 5 Channel audio + Subtitles is 19Mbits.
Double it for 1080p + 7ch HD Dolby/DTS audio + Subtitles = About 38Mbits.
Audio+Video+Subtitles: Comparison
Blu-ray (48.0 Mbit/sec) > 38Mbits/sec
HD-DVD (30.24 Mbit/sec) < 38Mbits/sec
HD-DVD can not do 1080p @ 60Hz without lossy quality or lower detail.
It might be possible for HD-DVD using Lossless-Stereo and No Subtitle audio channels.
Let us revisit 1080p as a Raw image.
The display is 1920 × 1080 or about 2.07 million pixels.
If we look at pixels (picture elements) we have three colors each pixel.
Assign 8bits (1 Byte) per color for 24bit Color OR (18bit + 6bit Lumen).
That is 3 Bytes per pixel OR 6.21MBytes per frame = 49.68MBits
Yes. I already stated most movies are indeed 24fps with few exceptions.
And that it is smarter to store movies at 24FPS and DownScale or Interlace.
My point is that the 24fps is not the only 1080p format in existence.
You watch Sports, X-Games, Nature films, Documentaries. 60FPS rocks!
Try watching fast action at 24FPS and you miss a lot of details.
A Professional boxer throws a punch in 1/30th of a second.
Watching a fight @ 24FPS you literally miss the man extending his arm.
What kind of sports fan wants to miss the Winning Knock Out Punch?
Or miss the winning Super Bowl catch? The NASCAR spinning through the air?
How much more intense is action when it happens both Quickly and Crisply??
If 24FPS were cream why would we struggle with 720p vs 1080i?
We could just broadcast at 1080p and 24FPS and live that way, right?
Instead broadcaster in the UK and elsewhere are looking at AVC 1080p@60.
Plus, 1080p HDTV is moving towards refresh rates of up to 120fps.
Wouldn't it be nice to watch action run at least 48fps, 60fps, or 72fps?
As for the compression. Yes you can fit whatever you need to fit.
Compress it to whatever the level you want and it is totally possible.
I have a 1080p Blu-ray copy of 'Peprika' H.264 and AC3 5.1ch = < 3GB file.
But if you want lossless 1080p video compression with multiple HD audio tracks that changes everything! If it were always so small why is every single HD-DVD movie released two layers? When according to you it could so easily fit one 15GB layer??
Why are all of the most recently Blu-ray movies 50GB instead of 25GB??
http://www.blu-raystats.com/index.php?OrderBy=Date
Why did Michael Bay throw a fit over not being on Blu-ray?
Could it be that Directors love having space to spoil their work?
Isn't his 2002 four-disc Director's Cut of 'Pearl Harbor' evidence of why?
The Matrix's 10 DVD9 set?? The Lord of The Rings 12 DVD9 Trilogy Set??
http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/dvd/2007-10-22-transformers-bay_N.htm
Sure if you need to obey limits HD-DVD has more than enough space.
But what about the absolute purist who spends on premium quality audio?
If a Director wants to go over the top and spoil you, "Why-Limit-Them?"
During this time in January I was feeling very certain of my claims & emailed HorizonSemi.com marketing staff.
I saw these links:
http://jdj.sys-con.com/read/436931.htm
http://www.horizonsemi.com/dvd_7220.html
http://www.horizonsemi.com/contact.html
It seems like an excellent product.
Especially impressed if it can achieve 1080p 60Hz with the VC-1 codec.
I had recently written on how 1080p@60Hz was the future spec to be added to HD players.
In sports such as boxing, a professional fighter throws a punch in 1/30 of a second.
With the current 1080p@24 spec movies or sports documentaries will miss important moments.
Can you imagine literally missing the winning punch of a title bout?
When they first created the video spec’s we were debating 720p vs 1080i.
Now it is financially possible for the general public to purchase 1080p TVs.
Blu-ray allowed roughly 60% more space and bandwidth than HD-DVD to do this.
And in another year or so after the Oct 2.0 spec likely add a 1080p@60hz option.
But the reason I write to you now is about cost.
Once someone has paid for and is using your support and tools,
How much will the required chipsets or Hz7220 on its own cost?
How many units are in a lot or tray?
And in what quantity are they being sold?
Say in a lot of 10,000 units for Hz7220, what is the individual processor cost to buyers?
Again I am merely writing about this and not an actual buyer.
I understand that will time the price might lower as volume reduces costs.
Now the predictions and arguments I made about Blu-ray are 45 Days later manifesting.
Sony is announcing players supporting the 1080p @ 60Hz specification for the first time ever.
And has, "+ Bitstream output for Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio"
Sony HD Solutions http://www.news.com/8300-10784_3-7.html?keyword=DTS-HD+Master+Audio
Blu-ray 2.0 http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9808376-1.html#profile2.0
For the record what I was predicting/hoping for was in the other thread was an upgrade to PS3 firmware allowing DTS-HD Master Audio to be decoded and output as 7.1 Linear PCM audio. Not bitstream output, which is typically limited by the audio chipset including codec support. But I am now also hopeful about a chipset revision allowing native pass through of the 7.1 DTS and 7.1 DD audio codecs.
To be honest Linear Pulse Code Modulation should sound near perfect in translation and lower the cost to Audio owners who's Receivers don't support the latest HD audio specifications.
I hope Onkyo is taking note.
As Sony's latest receiver offering costs about half what the TX-SR605 did.
Until the Blu-ray 2.0 Specification is finalized in hopefully October 2008,
The PS3 is a very good solution in regards to excellent price and its upgradeable design.
A new smaller/lower power/less expensive Blu-Ray laser is also in the pipeline for April 2008.
So the prices of dedicated Blu-ray players should drop sometime after that point.
I still prefer my 4.1 audio setup (not a typo.)
But should I go big, the system would have to support seven point one.
The audio positioning of 5.1 never really made me feel immersed.
I was always actively aware of the positioning, instead of surrounded by sound.
It's like I hate when stereo completely lacks and audio track in the other ear.
Sound should be present in both, just balanced (blended) differently, not completely seperated.
Yes that has more to do with studio mastering than the positioning limits,
but somehow 5.1 never really satisfied my desire to be in the sound stage.
It is a ring of sound, not spots for sound.
Last edited by a moderator: