|
Universal unveils audio plans for Blu-ray
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 1 May, 2008
Coming up on their deadline to become a Blu-ray only production house, Universal has unveiled its plans for the audio it intends to use on the format. Ever since their defection from the HD-DVD camp, they've been working on a way to maximize the 50Gb worth of space available to them on BD-50 discs.
When working for the HD-DVD group, Universal had slapped together some audio configurations ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
windsong
Member
1 product review
|
1. May 2008 @ 14:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
Um..where the hell is Jurassic Park?! No one gives a $hit about the farkin Mummy series.
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
domie
Member
|
1. May 2008 @ 14:52 |
Link to this message
|
|
and they do give a $hit about Jurassic park Trilogy ?
damn ! There are more twelve year olds in here than I thought ! - Time for a paedophile alert Police scan of the Afterdawn forums to make it safer for them :P
|
|
goodswipe
Suspended permanently
|
1. May 2008 @ 15:01 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by domie:
and they do give a $hit about Jurassic park Trilogy ?
damn ! There are more twelve year olds in here than I thought ! - Time for a paedophile alert Police scan of the Afterdawn forums to make it safer for them :P
LOL...
JP part one was alright, after that they kinda went down hill. That little kid always did annoy me though. They should have thrown his @ss to the dinosaurs.
That's Dino DNA..
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. May 2008 @ 15:03
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
1. May 2008 @ 15:10 |
Link to this message
|
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. May 2008 @ 15:11
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
1. May 2008 @ 15:20 |
Link to this message
|
Although Close Encounters of the Third Kind has already been released on BluRay, Spielberg is notorious for taking his time when releasing his films on a new format. Remember the Indy trilogy on DVD? Everything has to be done right and evrything has to be pre-approved by him.
Of all the Spielberg films, I'd prefer Saving Private Ryan, Jaws, and Empire of the Sun ahead of the Jurassic and Indy trilogies.
On topic though, this announcement from Universal is excellent. I actually wouldn't mind replacing some of my Universal HD DVD's that have DD+ if they're re-released with DTS HD-MA.
Now give us the Unrated Extended Edition of American Gangster with DTS HD-MA.
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
1. May 2008 @ 15:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by nobrainer:
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
I disagree with the DTS or the True HD. Not all films require lossless audio.
Example: An old catlog title like Casablanca (1942) or The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) - both released on HD DVD - do not require lossless audio since the originals were in mono. Low-key modern dramas or comedies where it's mostly dialogue (like The 40-Year Old Virgin and Michael Clayton) will also not benefit from a lossless soundtrack.
Action/adventure titles are different. Films like Independence Day, I Robot, and AVP:Requiem (all of which have DTS HD-MA) will benefit from lossless.
|
Junior Member
1 product review
|
1. May 2008 @ 20:34 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by nobrainer:
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
I disagree with the DTS or the True HD. Not all films require lossless audio.
Example: An old catlog title like Casablanca (1942) or The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) - both released on HD DVD - do not require lossless audio since the originals were in mono. Low-key modern dramas or comedies where it's mostly dialogue (like The 40-Year Old Virgin and Michael Clayton) will also not benefit from a lossless soundtrack.
Action/adventure titles are different. Films like Independence Day, I Robot, and AVP:Requiem (all of which have DTS HD-MA) will benefit from lossless.
well put! i have always thought that films with special effects deserve more quality than romantic comedies.
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
1. May 2008 @ 22:30 |
Link to this message
|
And how many people will even notice the difference? Most peoples hearing is 20% down by age 30.
Just more BS from the studios who can't come up with anything actually worth watching any more. The last great film I saw was Van Helsing... since then just low production value spinoffs and remakes..
And then there are the releases of old goop like Casablanca.. grainy original film stock, mono clipped hissy soundtrack..... may as well watch it on a 25 year old vhs machine.
Sorry Universal.. you don't make films worth watching.. I can't even be bothered pirating them any more. Go on... go BR only by the end of the year. I'm sure total worldwide disk sales of a couple hundred thousand will really impress the shareholders.... I will enjoy watching you fizzle out within 12 months.. idiots.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. May 2008 @ 22:32
|
Junior Member
|
1. May 2008 @ 23:29 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by varnull:
And how many people will even notice the difference? Most peoples hearing is 20% down by age 30.
Just more BS from the studios who can't come up with anything actually worth watching any more. The last great film I saw was Van Helsing... since then just low production value spinoffs and remakes..
And then there are the releases of old goop like Casablanca.. grainy original film stock, mono clipped hissy soundtrack..... may as well watch it on a 25 year old vhs machine.
Sorry Universal.. you don't make films worth watching.. I can't even be bothered pirating them any more. Go on... go BR only by the end of the year. I'm sure total worldwide disk sales of a couple hundred thousand will really impress the shareholders.... I will enjoy watching you fizzle out within 12 months.. idiots.
ok let's go back to vcr i can't see the difernce . ...... ....., get a decent system and u'll catch up the idea
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 1. May 2008 @ 23:31
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
1. May 2008 @ 23:31 |
Link to this message
|
Panasonic PT-AE3000 1080p Projector//Carada 110" Criterion High Contrast Grey 16:9 Screen//Oppo BDP-83SE//Toshiba HD-XA2
Classe SSP800 Processor//Classe CA-5200 5 Channel Amplifier//Classe CA-2200 2 Channel Amplifier
Bowers & Wilkins 802D L-R/HTM 1D Center/SCMS Surrounds/JL Audio Fathom f113 x 2
|
|
dblbogey7
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. May 2008 @ 00:04 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by eatsushi:
On topic though, this announcement from Universal is excellent. I actually wouldn't mind replacing some of my Universal HD DVD's that have DD+ if they're re-released with DTS HD-MA.
Now give us the Unrated Extended Edition of American Gangster with DTS HD-MA.
For those of us with the equipment (and the ears) to notice the difference, this is indeed excellent news.
...and +1 on American Gangster Unrated Extended Edition with DTS HD Master Audio.
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
2. May 2008 @ 05:21 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by eatsushi:
Originally posted by nobrainer:
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
I disagree with the DTS or the True HD. Not all films require lossless audio.
Example: An old catlog title like Casablanca (1942) or The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) - both released on HD DVD - do not require lossless audio since the originals were in mono. Low-key modern dramas or comedies where it's mostly dialogue (like The 40-Year Old Virgin and Michael Clayton) will also not benefit from a lossless soundtrack.
Action/adventure titles are different. Films like Independence Day, I Robot, and AVP:Requiem (all of which have DTS HD-MA) will benefit from lossless.
so really old films that were shot in technicolor and in mono sound benefit the consumer from the blu-ray rehash how exactly then?
why not purchase it on dvd for £4 instead of lining the studios pockets by purchasing the £20 blu-ray, with media that is now in the public domain! BTW public domain = free and legal to download.
another fine example of the rip off corporations using a new medium to inflate prices because its new it most be better and obviously costs more regardless of the fact that the films being re-released can now be reduced in cost because they have already recouped their costs and made their profit for the studios.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. May 2008 @ 05:27
|
|
ghoti
Newbie
|
2. May 2008 @ 05:55 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by eatsushi:
Originally posted by nobrainer:
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
I disagree with the DTS or the True HD. Not all films require lossless audio.
Example: An old catlog title like Casablanca (1942) or The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) - both released on HD DVD - do not require lossless audio since the originals were in mono. Low-key modern
dramas or comedies where it's mostly dialogue (like The 40-Year Old Virgin and Michael Clayton) will also not benefit from a lossless soundtrack.
Action/adventure titles are different. Films like Independence Day, I Robot, and AVP:Requiem (all of which have DTS HD-MA) will benefit from lossless.
so really old films that were shot in technicolor and in mono sound benefit the consumer from the blu-ray rehash how exactly then?
why not purchase it on dvd for £4 instead of lining the studios pockets by purchasing the £20 blu-ray, with media that is now in the public domain! BTW public domain = free and legal to download.
another fine example of the rip off corporations using a new medium to inflate prices because its new it most be better and obviously costs more regardless of the fact that the films being re-released can now be reduced in cost because they have already recouped their costs and made their profit for the studios.
Film is equivalent to about 4K resolution. So why so you think it would look better compressed down to 720, like it is on a DVD?
Also just because the audio is mono doesn?t mean you won't notice a difference in sound quality.
Compression is the enemy.
|
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
2. May 2008 @ 07:25 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by nobrainer:
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
Define what you mean by MPEG4? You do know there is many ways the name "MPEG4" can be used, don't you?
MPEG4 part2 (SP/ASP): Is a video stream format utilising h263 quantization, eg: DivX, Xvid etc.
MPEG4 part 10 (AVC): Is a video stream format utilising h264 quantization. AVC is the acronym for Advanced Video Codec. This is one of the three mandatory video codecs that Blu-ray/HD-DVD players support (I am guessing this is the format you are referring to).
MPEG4 part 3 (AAC): This is the audio sibling to AVC. AAC is the acronym for Advanced Audio Codec. A common extension for this format is M4A.
MPEG4 part 14 (mp4): Is a container format that supports multiple audio tracks and subtitles etc. This container supports a variety of video and audio streams, some of those being... Video: MPEG4 SP/ASP, AVC, MPEG2. Audio: AAC, MP3, MP2 etc.
On that note, what is wrong with VC-1? In my opinion VC-1 seems to offer comparable quality to AVC (h264). Whilst I agree that MPEG2 video is not as efficient as these newer formats. I personally stay away from MPEG2 encoded Blu-ray discs.
I'm sorry to bring this up again but I can never forget the discussion we had about DivX HD on stand alone players and you tryed to say that I don't know what I am talking about. I have been encoding/authoring etc. Audio/Video media for many years now... And your experience is?... Well, you don't need to say as it clearly shows. :-P
Also, what is DTS TrueHD? Did you mean Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD or both?
Originally posted by ghoti:
Film is equivalent to about 4K resolution. So why so you think it would look better compressed down to 720, like it is on a DVD?
Also just because the audio is mono doesn?t mean you won't notice a difference in sound quality.
Compression is the enemy.
Actually NTSC DVD's have 480 lines of resolution. It's a common misunderstanding as it's the horizontal resolution that is 720... SD (DVD): 720 x 480, HD (720p): 1280 x 720, Full HD (1080p): 1920 x 1080.
However, yes I agree. With the marvels of remastering using the technology available today, an old classic film can certainly be given a new lease of life.
eatsushi's point on the audio was referring to the fact that an older film originally recorded in mono doesn't really need a lossless track (Dolby TrueHD/DTS-HD). Sure the audio could be remastered and simulate a surround sound environment, but for this a regular Dolby Digital or DTS audio track would suffice.
PS: LOL!@error5... I didn't think much of Van Helsing either.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. May 2008 @ 08:20
|
|
juankerr
Member
|
2. May 2008 @ 07:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by nobrainer:
so really old films that were shot in technicolor and in mono sound benefit the consumer from the blu-ray rehash how exactly then?
Even old films find new life when released in 1080p.
Let's take the HD DVD release of Casablanca for example:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/498/casablanca.html
Picture Quality: 5/5 stars
Quote:
This HD DVD release of 'Casablanca' follows a painstaking, grade-A remaster standard def DVD reissue back in 2003. The results were glorious then, and they are glorious now -- this is the way we dream our favorite classics will look when they come to home video. It is also a transfer so superior that even if I could find anything to remotely nitpick about, it would be pretty useless.
'Casablanca' is presented in 1080p/VC-1 video and appropriately pillarboxed to the film's original theatrical aspect ratio of 1.33:1. The black and white image is wonderful. The source material has been meticulously cleaned up, and good luck finding a speck of dirt, dropouts or inconsistencies in contrast or black levels. The film has a nice, deep and rich look, with excellent smoothness across the entire grayscale. Sharpness is perhaps slightly "soft" by today's standards, but terrific for a film from 1942. I continue to marvel at how deep and detailed this film looks. Fine textures throughout are clearly visible -- I could make out indentations on the spine of a book, or see slight creases in the clean whites of Humphrey Bogart's tuxedo. I am also grateful Warner didn't over-tweak this one -- whites never bloom and at no point is the image overly contrasted in an effort to make the film look "newer" or "glossier." Instead, 'Casablanca' maintains a very natural, film-like look throughout. Without a doubt this is the finest black and white transfer I've seen on high-def, period, and up there with the best remasters ever created for the home theater environment.
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:12 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by nobrainer:
so really old films that were shot in technicolor and in mono sound benefit the consumer from the blu-ray rehash how exactly then?
Even old films find new life when released in 1080p.
Let's take the HD DVD release of Casablanca for example:
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/498/casablanca.html
Picture Quality: 5/5 stars
Quote:
This HD DVD release of 'Casablanca' follows a painstaking, grade-A remaster standard def DVD reissue back in 2003. The results were glorious then, and they are glorious now -- this is the way we dream our favorite classics will look when they come to home video. It is also a transfer so superior that even if I could find anything to remotely nitpick about, it would be pretty useless.
'Casablanca' is presented in 1080p/VC-1 video and appropriately pillarboxed to the film's original theatrical aspect ratio of 1.33:1. The black and white image is wonderful. The source material has been meticulously cleaned up, and good luck finding a speck of dirt, dropouts or inconsistencies in contrast or black levels. The film has a nice, deep and rich look, with excellent smoothness across the entire grayscale. Sharpness is perhaps slightly "soft" by today's standards, but terrific for a film from 1942. I continue to marvel at how deep and detailed this film looks. Fine textures throughout are clearly visible -- I could make out indentations on the spine of a book, or see slight creases in the clean whites of Humphrey Bogart's tuxedo. I am also grateful Warner didn't over-tweak this one -- whites never bloom and at no point is the image overly contrasted in an effort to make the film look "newer" or "glossier." Instead, 'Casablanca' maintains a very natural, film-like look throughout. Without a doubt this is the finest black and white transfer I've seen on high-def, period, and up there with the best remasters ever created for the home theater environment.
ah Casablanca would that be another film that is in the public domain and is FREE to download?
|
|
juankerr
Member
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:25 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:34 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by juankerr:
Originally posted by nobrainer:
ah Casablanca would that be another film that is in the public domain and is FREE to download?
I believe it's still distributed by Warner Bros.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034583/companycredits
As a question what was copywrite law in 1942 and how long did the copywrite last for?
|
|
ghoti
Newbie
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:36 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by nobrainer:
all video on blu-ray should be mpge4 with dts true HD audio, otherwise whats the point.
Define what you mean by MPEG4? You do know there is many ways the name "MPEG4" can be used, don't you?
MPEG4 part2 (SP/ASP): Is a video stream format utilising h263 quantization, eg: DivX, Xvid etc.
MPEG4 part 10 (AVC): Is a video stream format utilising h264 quantization. AVC is the acronym for Advanced Video Codec. This is one of the three mandatory video codecs that Blu-ray/HD-DVD players support (I am guessing this is the format you are referring to).
MPEG4 part 3 (AAC): This is the audio sibling to AVC. AAC is the acronym for Advanced Audio Codec. A common extension for this format is M4A.
MPEG4 part 14 (mp4): Is a container format that supports multiple audio tracks and subtitles etc. This container supports a variety of video and audio streams, some of those being... Video: MPEG4 SP/ASP, AVC, MPEG2. Audio: AAC, MP3, MP2 etc.
On that note, what is wrong with VC-1? In my opinion VC-1 seems to offer comparable quality to AVC (h264). Whilst I agree that MPEG2 video is not as efficient as these newer formats. I personally stay away from MPEG2 encoded Blu-ray discs.
I'm sorry to bring this up again but I can never forget the discussion we had about DivX HD on stand alone players and you tryed to say that I don't know what I am talking about. I have been encoding/authoring etc. Audio/Video media for many years now... And your experience is?... Well, you don't need to say as it clearly shows. :-P
Also, what is DTS TrueHD? Did you mean Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD or both?
Originally posted by ghoti:
Film is equivalent to about 4K resolution. So why so you think it would look better compressed down to 720, like it is on a DVD?
Also just because the audio is mono doesn?t mean you won't notice a difference in sound quality.
Compression is the enemy.
Actually NTSC DVD's have 480 lines of resolution. It's a common misunderstanding as it's the horizontal resolution that is 720... SD (DVD): 720 x 480, HD (720p): 1280 x 720, Full HD (1080p): 1920 x 1080.
However, yes I agree. With the marvels of remastering using the technology available today, an old classic film can certainly be given a new lease of life.
eatsushi's point on the audio was referring to the fact that an older film originally recorded in mono doesn't really need a lossless track (Dolby TrueHD/DTS-HD). Sure the audio could be remastered and simulate a surround sound environment, but for this a regular Dolby Digital or DTS audio track would suffice.
PS: LOL!@error5... I didn't think much of Van Helsing either.
Yeah your right about it being 480. I should proof read my own post.
but what does lossless audio have to do with surround sound?
To me its compression vs. no compression.
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:41 |
Link to this message
|
@ ghoti
any form of compression is bad as it is reducing quality somehow, UK DAB is a great example of this as the new improved digital service is worse quality than current FM radio.
instead of a virtual sound like prologic 2.1 ect, each channel has its own sound stream.
lossless = no compression.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. May 2008 @ 08:45
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:46 |
Link to this message
|
|
Doesn't matter... They have extended it to 75 years and want 95 to cover the early comedies and silents which are still circulating. Anything made from 1933 on is copyright, though that increases by 1 year as we travel through time.
Hey losers.. I'm as entitled to my opinion of a film as anybody else. Sucky films? Transformers is the biggest pile of crap I have even seen, closely followed by that useless Spiderman3 whatever mess it was.
The great films are coming from European makers, but you yanks wouldn't know about those would you? World Series...... hahahahaha
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
2. May 2008 @ 08:57 |
Link to this message
|
Van Helsing reviews from rottentomatoes:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/van_helsing/?critic=creamcrop
Quote:
This moronic abomination is not a movie. It's just a noisy, nasty and repulsive video game-slash- theme-park haunted-house ride designed to appeal to the offspring of warlocks and trolls.
Rex Reed
New York Observer
This is what happens when you spend pots of money on special effects but don't give a fig about storytelling.
Stephanie Zacharek
Salon.com
Van Helsing is one excruciatingly loud set piece of CGI hooey after another, and when a character or a plot twist does manage to make you laugh, you're not sure whether it's camp or ineptitude. Ty Burr
Boston Globe
Painful to read but these pretty much sum up the sentiments of most critics.
Originally posted by varnull:
Hey losers.. I'm as entitled to my opinion of a film as anybody else.
Far be it from you to criticize others' tastes then.
Panasonic PT-AE3000 1080p Projector//Carada 110" Criterion High Contrast Grey 16:9 Screen//Oppo BDP-83SE//Toshiba HD-XA2
Classe SSP800 Processor//Classe CA-5200 5 Channel Amplifier//Classe CA-2200 2 Channel Amplifier
Bowers & Wilkins 802D L-R/HTM 1D Center/SCMS Surrounds/JL Audio Fathom f113 x 2
|
|
juankerr
Member
|
2. May 2008 @ 09:11 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by error5:
Van Helsing reviews from rottentomatoes:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/van_helsing/?critic=creamcrop
Quote:
This moronic abomination is not a movie. It's just a noisy, nasty and repulsive video game-slash- theme-park haunted-house ride designed to appeal to the offspring of warlocks and trolls.
Rex Reed
New York Observer
This is what happens when you spend pots of money on special effects but don't give a fig about storytelling.
Stephanie Zacharek
Salon.com
Van Helsing is one excruciatingly loud set piece of CGI hooey after another, and when a character or a plot twist does manage to make you laugh, you're not sure whether it's camp or ineptitude. Ty Burr
Boston Globe
Painful to read but these pretty much sum up the sentiments of most critics.
Originally posted by varnull:
Hey losers.. I'm as entitled to my opinion of a film as anybody else.
Far be it from you to criticize others' tastes then.
Exactly. I thought van Helsing and Transformers were cut from the very same mold - 99% CGI effects and 1% story and plot.
Although Transformers was more tolerable...
...mainly due to Megan Fox. (Right, goodswipe?)
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/transformers_the_movie/
Transformers:
T Meter critics score = 57%
Top critics score = 68%
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. May 2008 @ 09:22
|
|
eatsushi
Senior Member
3 product reviews
|
2. May 2008 @ 10:49 |
Link to this message
|
The other good thing about DTS-HD MA for those without HDMI or advanced codec receivers - you can still take advantage of the Core DTS soundtrack which is at an impressive 1.5Mbps thru optical or digital coax.
Originally posted by juankerr:
Even old films find new life when released in 1080p.
Let's take the HD DVD release of Casablanca for example:
Exactly right. Casablanca looked pristine and very impressive on my 1080p front projector setup. The HD DVD release really brought it back to life.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
nobrainer
Suspended permanently
|
2. May 2008 @ 10:52 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by eatsushi:
The other good thing about DTS-HD MA for those without HDMI or advanced codec receivers - you can still take advantage of the Core DTS soundtrack which is at an impressive 1.5Mbps thru optical or digital coax.
that's tru, but as soon as the ict (Image Constraint Token) is switched on around 2010 we will lose that ability.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 2. May 2008 @ 10:53
|
