The wording of the Endgadget piece clearly suggests otherwise, tho there is no particular reason to think they are better infomed on the matter than anyone else.
Endgadget said:
51gb HD-dvd discs approved for production
- Thread starter AlphaWolf
- Start date
The wording of the Endgadget piece clearly suggests otherwise, tho there is no particular reason to think they are better infomed on the matter than anyone else.
It's because Endgadget has no idea what they are talking about, just read up about it on AVS.
I'll link to what I'm talking about for the lazy:
Last edited by a moderator:
But DD and DTS are lossy. Done well it may not be discernable and PCM lossless tracks in themselves don't guarantee high bit-rate audio, but my point stands.
Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio are lossless compressions btw.
I know, which is why I didn't say they are.
Take the Transformers HD-DVD - no lossless audio on it (PCM, TrueHD or DTS HD MA), apparently due to space. Hence more space for these formats would be nice.
I've heard (no idea if it's true or not) it actually had to due with the max bitrate HD DVD supports a second (which is 36 mbps for both audio and video combined). DD+ is a constant 3 mbps whereas TrueHD can reach up to 18 mbps. Apparently the AVC encoding Transformers used had a rather high bitrate (and left little for audio).
Although you could argue TL is also raising (I think to 1.5x read speed, can anyone verify?) the read speed (all HD DVD drivers support read speeds of 2x or 72 mbps, but the old standard for HD DVD movies was 1x or 36 mpbs) and thus increasing the total bitrate past 36 mbps (which might have allowed for Transformers to use both its AVC encoding and TrueHD).
We were talking about advantages of lossless audio. There still are none.
Moving the goalposts to talk about the advantage in size isn't going to change that.
@willardjuice: I doubt the reason for not including lossless was bandwidth. True, TrueHD is specced for up to 18 mbps, but it won't reach that high unless the source goes that high. There are plenty of common options below 96KHz/24bit 7.1 channel (the max) that could be compressed losslessly. For the bandwidth reason you mention, we probably won't see this on demanding releases with current discs. On the other hand, if they had to drop down to, say, 24-bit, 48KHz, 5.1 (max 6.9mbps) or 16-bit, 48KHz, 5.1 (max 4.6mbps) for space reasons, then we're into the territory where DD+ @ 3mbps from a higher quality source might sound better to most, even though it's lossy. Choices, choices.
As for increasing bandwidth: They can't rely on raising the linear velocity if they are to maintain guaranteed backwards compatibility. However, the increased data density of 17GB layers will increase the available total bandwidth to 41mbps.
I haven't moved the goalposts. This conversation was always about space - how more would enable more HD-DVD releases to have lossless audio - which you were disparaging about as not being necessary. The fact is DD and DTS are lossy compression methods so having more space for uncompressed or lossless audio is a good thing - regardless of your personal opinion that it doesn't matter.
There are no advantages to it compared to TrueHD. When balancing sound quality, video quality and features on discs. there will always be tradeoffs. This is no less true for Blu-ray where there are discs for which the uncompressed track is of lower quality than the corresponding (losslessly) compressed track on HD DVD.
The best of both worlds would of course be lot's of space and mandatory lossless compression, but as it stands you get either one of the two. Of course having more space is better than having less space (and this thread is HD DVD possibly gaining parity in that regard) but for them to want to waste that on uncompressed audio is ludicrous.
You still haven't come up with a single good reason for why uncompressed sound would be preferable "to audiophiles".
Perhaps it wasn't, I was just offering what I "heard". :smile:
But to be quite honest, I use wavpack (lossless) for my audio files on my computer, not because of the audio quality, but because I can then later convert them to any format I want (ie: I have an Ipod so I made an extra copy of my files in AAC @ ~255 kbps VRB). I can't tell the difference between the lossless and lossy files. For HD DVD/Blu-ray I wonder if lossless is really a necessity. I mean it's not like people are going to be converting the audio streams into other formats. I'm leaning toward the belief that DD+ @ 3mbps is just as good as lossless for playback purposes. Maybe not, who knows. I thought the DD+ audio stream in Transformers was more than fine though, hardly worth complaining about. But I really wish there was some way to directly compare the two (like an ABX listening test).
That's a fair point, that soundtarck has been cited as an example of what a good DD+ track should be like. Maybe Lossless just makes things easier for studio's who don't want to put the effort in
I see, I was being quick and initially meant uncompressed PCM compared to lossy compression such as DD+/DTS. I should have been more specific and included lossless compression in with PCM.
Just a side question, does that mean we will be seeing 34GB DL discs now?
Sorry for responding to an old post, but I can bring some new light to this situation, having just bought a PS3, some B-r titles, and an HDTV at Best Buy (in the Twin Cities) yesterday. Things have seemingly reversed. B-r now occupies 2/3 the shelf space with HD-DVD taking up the other 1/3 of HD disk shelf space.
I do have both HD-DVD player and BR-DVD player: Life is too short for me and while I don't mate every TV I have with two players, but extra $200~300 (Heck, a decent TV costs 10 times more than that) was definitely worth it for me at this point. I mean, I think it's even stupid to stick to one format to an extent where one would rather buy a DVD (just because the title isn't available to her/his format of choice) or wait forever (i.e. with no date given).
And this is my OPINION, but I also think the player price argument is pretty absurd. (Such as, "In order to penetrate mass market the player price should be <$100", etc.) I mean, without give-away's or BOGOs, average price of newly realeased title is like $30 for HD contents and $20 for SD conents. Surely $400~$500 isn't in a 'impulse' category, but now that the player prices are more reasonable $250 level, it won't be too long before the money spent on discs surpasses the money spent on players. Besides, each camp gives away at least 5 free discs - that alone is almost $100 worth. Player prices aren't that high at all, IMO. Also remember the price of TVs. For people who buy $2,000~$3,000 TVs, $200~300 player isn't a big deal at all. (except maybe for folks who own 5+ TVs)
I can't understand folks who support one format over the other with such enthusiasm if what they really care is movie itself. All it takes is to hop on one of those deals, and after free movies, sales, and what not - all it cost to have the other format is pretty small. (I even dare to say that in US, with all those BOGO sales one can often find Blu-Ray/HD-DVD discs even cheaper than SD DVDs)
For myself it have been fantastic 2~3 months. With 50+ Blu-Ray titles and 30+ HD-DVD titles, I feel like the money spent on a $400 PS3 and $300 A-30 has already been well justified. Believe it or not, after a simple math - the average price of a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD disc comes out about $10 per piece. All the while not wasting $20 on a SD DVD!!
To my mind at this point in time, there can be only four groups of people who are supporting their preferred format semi-religiously:
1. BDA and HD-DVD Forum (including MS) - obviously
2. Content providers - again, obviously
3. People w/ their own judgement, agenda, or more likely bias stemmed from (mis)information or personal experience (A lot of them are actually not a true movie-viewers, IMO, but rather.. something else entirely)
4. People who own more than 5+ HDTVs.
By my own reasoning, only the group 4's concern over this format war can be justified. Of course even that can be overcomed by smart planning, but I assume that isn't JSP's expertise.. Most online arguments seem to take place among group 3, and I suggest you guys open your mind a bit and check out what kind of deals are available on the other side of fence. You will be quite surprised. Chances are you will get the movies that you wanted (and them some) and the player for not too much more/less than what you would have spent on those movies had those been available to your format. And not to pick on a certain group of people or anything, please stop this "Less is better than more" "Less is enough" nonsense. For god's sake, this is a tech forum - not a consumer report. Now that HD-DVD can match the disc capacity hopefully I won't have to hear such nonsense any more.
And this is my OPINION, but I also think the player price argument is pretty absurd. (Such as, "In order to penetrate mass market the player price should be <$100", etc.) I mean, without give-away's or BOGOs, average price of newly realeased title is like $30 for HD contents and $20 for SD conents. Surely $400~$500 isn't in a 'impulse' category, but now that the player prices are more reasonable $250 level, it won't be too long before the money spent on discs surpasses the money spent on players. Besides, each camp gives away at least 5 free discs - that alone is almost $100 worth. Player prices aren't that high at all, IMO. Also remember the price of TVs. For people who buy $2,000~$3,000 TVs, $200~300 player isn't a big deal at all. (except maybe for folks who own 5+ TVs)
I can't understand folks who support one format over the other with such enthusiasm if what they really care is movie itself. All it takes is to hop on one of those deals, and after free movies, sales, and what not - all it cost to have the other format is pretty small. (I even dare to say that in US, with all those BOGO sales one can often find Blu-Ray/HD-DVD discs even cheaper than SD DVDs)
For myself it have been fantastic 2~3 months. With 50+ Blu-Ray titles and 30+ HD-DVD titles, I feel like the money spent on a $400 PS3 and $300 A-30 has already been well justified. Believe it or not, after a simple math - the average price of a Blu-Ray/HD-DVD disc comes out about $10 per piece. All the while not wasting $20 on a SD DVD!!
To my mind at this point in time, there can be only four groups of people who are supporting their preferred format semi-religiously:
1. BDA and HD-DVD Forum (including MS) - obviously
2. Content providers - again, obviously
3. People w/ their own judgement, agenda, or more likely bias stemmed from (mis)information or personal experience (A lot of them are actually not a true movie-viewers, IMO, but rather.. something else entirely)
4. People who own more than 5+ HDTVs.
By my own reasoning, only the group 4's concern over this format war can be justified. Of course even that can be overcomed by smart planning, but I assume that isn't JSP's expertise.. Most online arguments seem to take place among group 3, and I suggest you guys open your mind a bit and check out what kind of deals are available on the other side of fence. You will be quite surprised. Chances are you will get the movies that you wanted (and them some) and the player for not too much more/less than what you would have spent on those movies had those been available to your format. And not to pick on a certain group of people or anything, please stop this "Less is better than more" "Less is enough" nonsense. For god's sake, this is a tech forum - not a consumer report. Now that HD-DVD can match the disc capacity hopefully I won't have to hear such nonsense any more.
quest55720
Regular
If HD-DVd can hang on this year by the time it is over dual format players will be affordable to those early adoptors who have both formats. Also if and when one side dies the purple people will be able to buy up a whole library of hd-media dirt cheap. It is not like moving from vhs to dvd were the entire library is outdated. At worst I have an extra player in each entertainment center. Since I don't need a dvd player or VCR anymore it frees up plenty of space to have 2 hd players. The way I see it if one side loses I win because hd-media is still very expensive and a shot to buy a ton of movies at clearance sounds good to me. It will be the people who wait and will end up paying 19.99 for older movies on the winning format will be the loser IMO. When I am picking up older titles in the clearance bin at 4.99 or less. Hell with the writers strike I need some entertainment. Also thanks to the war people are getting the discs much cheaper than MSRP thanks to bogos ect. Lots of people are averaging less than 15 dollars per HD movie.
The way I see it if this war ends soon and with it bogos and cost reductions of players it will only hurt the consumer.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
