Ears means CES. I'll be there and am sure this will provide much amusement. Anyway, looks like both formats will produce Hi Def DVDs. Blu rays will be more expensive. ( Meaning the actual DVDs) the players will start at 1000 when first introduced.
The CEO of Netflix was interviewed on Charlie Rose 2 nights ago or so. He thinks it will take three years for enough titles and equipment to be out to make a real change in the mass market.
I think the same and will happily buy new stuff when Receievers can decode Hi Res audio content, Plamas can display true 1080P, and HDMI conects actually work without problems from reliable DVD players. |
The Wall Street Journal agrees with you. They are stating that because blu-ray has a larger storage capacity just as VHS had more tape over Betamax that Blu_ray will "win the .war"
I disagree with that reasoning for sure. But I just dont see many folks running out to spend 1000 bucks on an HD DVD player before 1080P displays are even available. And I am lookin forward to seeing the cost of a blu ray Hi Def DVD disk. I do see Netflix has agreed to carry both- ( obviously they are putting the squeeze on the financially disadvantaged blockbuster) |
In principle I agree with you Mr F-Lamb. I also think dvd-A and SACD represent a somewhat evolutionary step in certain realms of recorded audio--but it still hasnt panned out and many stores have sent the unsold stuff back never again to stock DVD-A and SACD. Lets see what happens here-- |
Actually there are several manufacturers of HD-DVD players besides Toshiba and the deinterlacing will be worked out by the end of the year as a new crop of true 1080P input capable displays become available.
AS far as High rez audio- I was at both dolby and DTS demos and got that cool dts test disc as a freebie. There really isnt any difference between hi res audio and what we have now. No one that I sat with at CES- not one person-claimed to hear any difference. The advertising for the new hi rez audio formats is for "lossless audio transfer so you can hear it just like the audio engineers.'
Cool. The problem is that even with current DVD audio tracks, the fulldata rate capabilities are not being reached in most instances; simply put, there isn't anything to lose in most sound tracks.
Finally, a receiver has to be able to fully decode the new audio codec. SO put your hands up--Whose got one? Answer- just about no one. |
Alrighty- How can you hear a difference when the receivers and firmware to decode the new audio codec don't even exist yet? And double bit rate dig-vhs isnt even the same thing. You appear to be commenting on something you have never heard. To be clear, if you havent heard DTS-HD and DOlby-HD-, which DTS and Dolby set up themselves by the way at CES, you can't really comment with any validity now can you? Also, lets look at this; what I am saying is that in most DVD sound tracks, the bit rate limits are NOT reached- increasing that rate with a lossless potential- the claim of DTS and Dolby HD is meaningless if the current limits aren't even reached. I have the DTS -HD demo disk for 2006- it sounds great- just like their "non-HD" demo from last year- over my 5.1 non-HD audio receiver- just like everyone elses out there. Again, there aren't really any receivers out there that are set up to decode the new hi rez audio codec- Some of the 2007 denons are set up to handle the firmware, and probably their 2006 stuff as well, when it becomes available.
All HD players will be able to output 1080P by then end of the year, hopefully at the same time the HDMI chipset standards get set and displays can accept a true 1080P signal. Rihgt now, its all a big discussion with no content out there and a complete lack of agreed upon standards and available technology.
Ears- better go back to the forum and round up some better ammo! hehe. |
In addition, I just finished the extended version of Return of the King- All 4 hours of it. The audio is awesome- the increase in bit rate isnt going to offer that much more.
Also, for any format war to be meaningful, people are going to have to buy the players-- and at 1000-1800 dollars a pop- not included the increased cost of the Blu Ray discs themselves--dont hold your breath. |
Well I read your rant. I am not talkin about PS3. Analog gear wont be useful as the copy protection will necessitate HDMI which as you know carries both audio and video signal. New firmware will be required on audio receivers in order to decode hi def audio correctly. Analog can of course carry anything but 1080P is basically HDMI 1.3 due to copywrite protection and the audio is going to be carried with that.
In order to hear "full rez audio" you will need the updated firmware as part of the decoding processon ANY hi def audio capable receiver. Now you are suggesting that someone would use an HDMI out for video and still be able to use 8 analog outs for 7.1 audio. First, I am not sure that that will be possible, but second--nobody is gonna do that. People want touse their HDMI connect only and maybe a coax dig or optical just like today. very few people are gonna buy 7 analog connections and fiddle with that and most do not have receivers that accept all of that analog input for each separate audio channel. SACD and DVD-A have essentially failed by the way--so thats not a very good example.
Also, it really isnt game over. The PS3, just like the XBOX is by no means a slam dunk quality player for movies. If that was the case then why make any other players at all? I'm not really concerned about who is winnig, only that the HDMI chip specs, 1080P content, 1080P displays, and 1080P players are far from being on the same page at this point. I mean nothing is avaialable or set, and its all really expensive. Very few people will spend the bucks on all of the technology pieces to make this work.
How were the audio demos at CES flawed? Please tell me. I mean NOBODY could hear any difference. The demos were run by DTS and dolby in their own set ups. They were great. But not better.
Reload! |
Well lets try it again...
1. Its not about a BD vs HD-DVD competition--the market will settle that.
2. Actually I didnt see any analog outputs being used in the hi def demos at CES. What I saw was HDMI interconnects.
3. Almost nobody has a 7.1 surround system in their homes. Some do. But very few. 5.1 is what is prevalent in HT set ups and all of those HTIBs sold every day at the big box retailers.
4. I like analog myself. But very few folks are going to buy and hook up 7 analog connections, a sub pre-out, and an HDMI as well. How silly. Also, there is discussion as to whether analog audio will be available when HDMI is in use at the same time. Moreover, almost NO ONE has analog channel inputs on the receivers for speakers. They are out there but very few.
5. Therefore, in the big picture, unfortunately, analog audio outputs have no relevance at all. Its gonna be HDMI whether we like it or not.
6. The only way Hi Def DVD, for audio and video, eclipse todays offerings is if; 1. You own a true native 1080P display. 2. You own a true 1080P player. 3. You have HD-DVDs/BD by purchase or rental. 4. You have the correct HDMI chipset in your player and display. 5. And you have an HDMI interconnect. 6. And you have a firmware updated receiver. Cost?- At a minimum--6500 bucks.
7. Right now, the availability to set that up is non-existent. No content and no hardware. But it will come on board bit by bit over the year I am sure. And it will be, price-wise- out of reach for 99% of the consumer population of the United States.
8. Nobody can hear any difference between the new audio formats and the old ones, the reason is that there is no loss of data in most DVDs today becuase the current technical limits are sufficient to carry the audio engineers creations as mixed. Simply put, the new audio codec doesnt add much if anything in most films/movies. |
AS far as the latest news though, the real deal is that while both PS3 and XBOX will be financially successful, the future of hi def DVD by anybody is in doubt at this point. There are many factors required for either format to be successful, and right now, as mentioned by other posters on this thread, many of us here who are audiophiles are simply going to wait it out; same with the videophiles to a large extent. Even moreso actually because the video part of this is very easy to define as far as specs etc. No one is going to buy a blu ray DVD for the audio alone. Lets face it.
AS far as analog outputs, most of us have analog reference two channel rigs and something else for HT; Most HT receivers used by sheer numbers DO NOT have separate audio channel analog inputs; its usually a digital coax, optical, or HDMI input for HT. SO analog 7.1 which you were first pushing, and then analog 5.1, isn't really of any significance. It wont help either format succeed. And yes, I know that the Arcam 300 for instance has analog inputs. And other brands we use here as well- but its still a significant minority.
AS far as the demos at CES- DTS knows what they are doing. The demo was great! But not any holy grail of audio. Dolby had one of their top engineers there who actually designs the Dolby processing process- their room was too small to take full advantage of their new 14.1 ( yes) demo-- but again- hi rez audio demo was good but not any different than a good 5.1 soundtrack that we have now.
One of my friends is a sound engineer in Los Angeles and did some of the soundtracks for movies like " Hot Chicks" and "Scooby Doo" including and especially the music. What I am saying is that the concept of "lossless audio" so we can hear just as the audio engienners intended" assumes that we aren't hearing something now due to some technical limitation that will be removed with the new audio codec. But right now we are hearing everything intended to be heard because the technical limits we now have are not even being reached in the vast majority of soundtracks. So having a faster/greater bitrate and other technical improvements don't give an audible result.
As far as audiogon and audio improvements, I am one of those two channel reference set up analog tube gear guys that thinks that LPs sound a lot better than CDs and isnt particularly wowed by digital technology and processing. I dont like equipment getting in the way of my music and I prefer not to notice it at all. Audio on HD-DVD and Blu Ray is simply processed creativity--but is far from reference analog audio for me at this point. |
I reread your post;
1. CES- I saw ALL of the Blue Ray demos- including PS3, the blu ray feature pack on what they will do with all of that disk space, and 2 other demos as well. One for the player and one for a presentation of technology. The only stuff that looked any good to me, as far as drastic improvement video wise- was from hard drive loops or small LCD computer monitors.
2. The DTS demo room had tremendous equipment and was demoing their full audio hi rez. It sounded great. The DOlby room was smaller but also sophisticated in what and how they demoed. You werent there and really arent in any position to offer valid input at all. The people setting up those rooms I guarantee you know what they are doing.
3. AS far as your comments on linear lossless audio without DTS and DOlby-- well- you are basically on drugs I presume. DTS and Dolby are responsible for the audio processing technology on Hi Definition DVDs in Hollywood. We will have menus and pick one or the other or probably good ole DTS or Dolby 5.1 and 2 channel just like now. The linear lossless option is such a non-player in this that I am suprised you are bringing that up. And there is talk of copy protecting the audio just like the video so that use of analog connects will not be able to transmit the full rez audio signal. Whether that will be true or not.. I dont know. I also have heard that some players may not allow simultaneous audio via HDMI and other audio outputs. I am guessing this wont be true.
Anyway, I think your post is interesting to read but off the mark abit. AS far as players, we can now see that the hardware side isnt really ready for releases anytime soon as far as optimal hdmi 1.3 chipsets, audio, 1080P source and a host of other facts. Lots of talk and lots of uncertainty. |
Hehe. Sorry about that obvious exclusion. |
Hi Ears. Actually my posts are on the money with up to date facts and actually, you arent refuting anything I am saying; I am hopeful YOU are getting up to speed.
You can hear Hi Rez audio by the folks that are creating it- DTS-HD and Dolby-HD are the adopted formats. They are the companies that gave the demos. AS well as Blu Ray which I also heard.
For the technical reasons I have explained, there isnt any benefit in most cases to the technical advancements that Dolby-HD offers, because current limits in bitrate transfer arent being reached as is. In most cases, there isnt anything to gain, and nothing is being lost. According to your post- dialog for instance is supposed to sound better with Hi res audio- HUH?? Does that really make sense to you? Dialog is like 70% of the audio info in HT. Its gonna sound the same current DVD soundtracks vs next generation. THE SAME. ANd frankly, pretty much everything else is too. Sound is just SPL against an eardrum. A 16 HZ note through a super sub isnt going to sound better becuase of Hi Rez-- our ears cant discern any difference. Think about it!
I certainly care about advancements in audio and video-- but I am laying out the reality as well based on firsthand experience, which I don't think you have any of!
I have no idea what you mean by gimmicky SACD and DVD-A recordings by the way.
AS far as more info available over the past 30 days, you are right but its mostly about video. I am not aware of any changes in audio codec info? What specifically are you referring to? |
The other comment that I have is regarding use of analog outputs for audio. The disk will still have encoded audio signal on it. The DVD player will have to have the firmware to decode the audio information in the player itself before sending the lossless audio signal out the analog outputs. I am not sure that any player can do that. I will wait and see. |
You forgot 8-track tapes. And Reel-to-Reel. |
