HD DVD vs. Blu-ray: Who won?

[busta]

I've been living under a rock for the past year (well, in the Australian outback, but similar concept), so have neglected to follow any news regarding the evolution of home cinema.

So what's the deal? I have 3 HD DVD I purchased a year or so ago and have never been able to watch. Will I ever be able to watch them, or should I bury them in a time capsule, next to the one of beta max tapes my dad buried a couple of decades ago?

[Zod]

You can probably find an HD-DVD player on ebay. Some computer drives will play them too.

Blu-Ray won by the way.

I can't see the format lasting though with online delivery becoming more popular.

[telecat]

Zod said:

You can probably find an HD-DVD player on ebay. Some computer drives will play them too.

Blu-Ray won by the way.

I can't see the format lasting though with online delivery becoming more popular.

Online delivery will get more popular but most will still prefer a disc based solution for the moment. Most Online systems need connections and subscriptions and I personally won't go subscription.

[JustinP1]

telecat said:

Zod said:

You can probably find an HD-DVD player on ebay. Some computer drives will play them too.

Blu-Ray won by the way.

I can't see the format lasting though with online delivery becoming more popular.

Online delivery will get more popular but most will still prefer a disc based solution for the moment. Most Online systems need connections and subscriptions and I personally won't go subscription.

Online delivery won't be a viable mainstream option for a decade. Until then, Blu-Ray is king. Indeed it still will be until for some reason it is obsolete with the majority of the market.

About 30% of the country gets less than 2 meg a second download, so delivery is a long way off unless for a niche market.

Blu-Ray will likely be the last video format until it all goes delivery though. Blu-Ray picture is only actually fully realised by a small percentage of the population, and the higher definition audio needs literally tens of thousands of pounds of gear to notice any difference between that and DVD audio.

Unless we are going to see a new format with the 4K format and a whole raft of 4K capable TVs - which again is a decade away - there is simply no reason for another physical format, and no way it could take hold.

[Legend83]

JustinP1 said:

the higher definition audio needs literally tens of thousands of pounds of gear to notice any difference between that and DVD audio.

O/T

By that comment am I led to believe I would be wasting my money buying a HD A/V receiver to put sound out via my PS3 bluray player?

Edited by Legend83 on Friday 4th September 13:31

[Frankeh]

Subscription is the future of films.
DVD's, Bluray, it's all going to lose to online based subscription services eventually.
I can't bloody wait. I've wanted a movie subscription service for years. They have music ones.

[OldSkoolRS]

Legend83 said:

JustinP1 said:

the higher definition audio needs literally tens of thousands of pounds of gear to notice any difference between that and DVD audio.

O/T

By that comment am I led to believe I would be wasting my money buying a HD A/V receiver to put sound out via my PS3 bluray player?

Edited by Legend83 on Friday 4th September 13:31

It's been hotly debated over on the AVForums, but I found than with a 'reasonable' setup (Denon 2808, Arcam power amp, PMC DB1+ speakers and a Monolith sub) that there is a difference between the standard Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks and the PCM/DTS MA/Dolby HD soundtracks where a disc has the options. What I can't say for certain is if they are mixed any different which may also account for the difference.

Also, using a PS3 would output PCM which some older amps can accept via HDMI and then you get into the realms of is the DTS MA (or whatever) converted to PCM in the PS3 any worse/better than the bitstream DTS MA decoded in the amp (which is probably an even smaller difference to what I spoke of above), as a PS3 can't output the bitstream AFAIK.

I also prefer to use BluRay discs...unless you can download 25gb each time you want to watch a good quality film then it won't really be high definition, or rather it will technically have the resolution, but it will be overcompressed like a low res MP3 compared to lossless.

Edited by OldSkoolRS on Friday 4th September 13:41

[Scraggles]

Frankeh said:

Subscription is the future of films.
DVD's, Bluray, it's all going to lose to online based subscription services eventually.
I can't bloody wait. I've wanted a movie subscription service for years. They have music ones.

it's called bit torrent

[Mr_Yogi]

OldSkoolRS said:

...as a PS3 can't output the bitstream AFAIK.

The new PS3 Slim can Bitstream HD Audio

[Frankeh]

Scraggles said:

Frankeh said:

Subscription is the future of films.
DVD's, Bluray, it's all going to lose to online based subscription services eventually.
I can't bloody wait. I've wanted a movie subscription service for years. They have music ones.

it's called bit torrent

I use bittorrent most of the time. But I feel bad. I would pay 15-20 quid a month for legal bittorrent.

[Scraggles]

faced with a 4 year wait at times and the get to have it on sky where you have paid for the service, but are expected to put up with adverts every 10 mins, or d/l the file to watch when I want to watch it and in one uninterrupted session is bliss

[JustinP1]

OldSkoolRS said:

Legend83 said:

JustinP1 said:

the higher definition audio needs literally tens of thousands of pounds of gear to notice any difference between that and DVD audio.

O/T

By that comment am I led to believe I would be wasting my money buying a HD A/V receiver to put sound out via my PS3 bluray player?

Edited by Legend83 on Friday 4th September 13:31

It's been hotly debated over on the AVForums, but I found than with a 'reasonable' setup (Denon 2808, Arcam power amp, PMC DB1+ speakers and a Monolith sub) that there is a difference between the standard Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks and the PCM/DTS MA/Dolby HD soundtracks where a disc has the options. What I can't say for certain is if they are mixed any different which may also account for the difference.

Also, using a PS3 would output PCM which some older amps can accept via HDMI and then you get into the realms of is the DTS MA (or whatever) converted to PCM in the PS3 any worse/better than the bitstream DTS MA decoded in the amp (which is probably an even smaller difference to what I spoke of above), as a PS3 can't output the bitstream AFAIK.

I also prefer to use BluRay discs...unless you can download 25gb each time you want to watch a good quality film then it won't really be high definition, or rather it will technically have the resolution, but it will be overcompressed like a low res MP3 compared to lossless.

Edited by OldSkoolRS on Friday 4th September 13:41

You are right, they are mixed differently, just in the same way a standard DTS stream will sound different to the DD counterpart.

This is a classic case of 'The Emperors New Clothes' and self-justification. Not a dig at you, it just happens a lot in hi-fi.

I have read quite an in depth article by one of the audiophile magasines who sent two in house experts to both Dolby and DTS to hear the difference between the formats. What they were surprised about was that at first they *couldn't hear the difference between the standard and the HD versions of each format*. When they did more and more detailed testing, I remember I think one of the guys could hear it but even then, the difference was tiny. Remember that this test was in both Dolby and DTS money no object listening rooms...

When you think about it, that is not surprising. When DD and DTS were at the specification stage, the major specification was that despite the format technically being compressed data, that it should be inperceptible from the original uncompressed source. And it does that very well.

So why did they bother upgrading it in Blu-Ray? Because with a huge amount of capacity on the disc, they just can. And it sells Blu-Ray discs.


However, if your front room has £30k of speakers like the Dolby listening rooms, and that would justify the tiny difference, then go ahead and change your AV amp just for that, but it is not an effective way of getting a 'better' sound even on a system like that.

As a side note, I am lucky enough to have my 'work' system at home, and it is a very high end system - and by that I mean the front speakers are the same ones as they use for tracking at Skywalker Sound. So if anyone is going to hear the difference is is going to be someone with kit like mine - but I am certainly not 'upgrading' just to accept a new format which has so little 'real world' effect.


But... if someone else likes wearing the 'Emperors New Clothes', don't let me stop you feeling that warm hi-fi buzz of a nice new purchase...

[Asterix]

OldSkoolRS said:

Legend83 said:

JustinP1 said:

the higher definition audio needs literally tens of thousands of pounds of gear to notice any difference between that and DVD audio.

O/T

By that comment am I led to believe I would be wasting my money buying a HD A/V receiver to put sound out via my PS3 bluray player?

Edited by Legend83 on Friday 4th September 13:31

It's been hotly debated over on the AVForums, but I found than with a 'reasonable' setup (Denon 2808, Arcam power amp, PMC DB1+ speakers and a Monolith sub) that there is a difference between the standard Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks and the PCM/DTS MA/Dolby HD soundtracks where a disc has the options. What I can't say for certain is if they are mixed any different which may also account for the difference.

Edited by OldSkoolRS on Friday 4th September 13:41

My set up was around GBP 3.5k and the audio is significantly improved on HD Blue Ray soundtracks. In fact, while the picture is obviously better, it was the audio that really made the impression.

[2something]

Blu-ray won, but HD DVD has come up with quite a smart twist ...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20...

[JustinP1]

Asterix said:

OldSkoolRS said:

Legend83 said:

JustinP1 said:

the higher definition audio needs literally tens of thousands of pounds of gear to notice any difference between that and DVD audio.

O/T

By that comment am I led to believe I would be wasting my money buying a HD A/V receiver to put sound out via my PS3 bluray player?

Edited by Legend83 on Friday 4th September 13:31

It's been hotly debated over on the AVForums, but I found than with a 'reasonable' setup (Denon 2808, Arcam power amp, PMC DB1+ speakers and a Monolith sub) that there is a difference between the standard Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks and the PCM/DTS MA/Dolby HD soundtracks where a disc has the options. What I can't say for certain is if they are mixed any different which may also account for the difference.

Edited by OldSkoolRS on Friday 4th September 13:41

My set up was around GBP 3.5k and the audio is significantly improved on HD Blue Ray soundtracks. In fact, while the picture is obviously better, it was the audio that really made the impression.

Have you done a test between the same audio stream firstly at full HD and then at 'standard' or maximum bitrate 'old' DD or DTS?

On the same source, with the same mix, if you can tell the difference in a blind test between a blu-ray soundtrack at max bitrate 'standard' DD or DTS and the HD counterpart then you have truly excellent ears - on an 'ultimate' system.

On £3.5k of gear I would suggest the vast majority of pros (if not all) couldn't reliably tell the difference.

[hairyben]

JustinP1 said:

I have read quite an in depth article by one of the audiophile magasines who sent two in house experts to both Dolby and DTS to hear the difference between the formats. What they were surprised about was that at first they *couldn't hear the difference between the standard and the HD versions of each format*. When they did more and more detailed testing, I remember I think one of the guys could hear it but even then, the difference was tiny. Remember that this test was in both Dolby and DTS money no object listening rooms...

I think your experts (sic) should find a job they're good at.

Even with my compromised/temporary set up, in which blu-rays are played via PC which outputs analogue sound to the cinema amp, I can hear the improvement. Granted I've done no back-to-back listening, but I'm pretty sure I'm not imagining it- I've played a couple of BD's and thought the sound seems a bit lacking, only to look at the box and see that it's only carrying a DD soundtrack. I daresay there's a few BD's floating about where they've just inflated DD/DTS to full res sound and not bothered remastering, just like they've upscaled picture in some instances, so the difference would be pretty weak there.

[JustinP1]

hairyben said:

JustinP1 said:

I have read quite an in depth article by one of the audiophile magasines who sent two in house experts to both Dolby and DTS to hear the difference between the formats. What they were surprised about was that at first they *couldn't hear the difference between the standard and the HD versions of each format*. When they did more and more detailed testing, I remember I think one of the guys could hear it but even then, the difference was tiny. Remember that this test was in both Dolby and DTS money no object listening rooms...

I think your experts (sic) should find a job they're good at.

Even with my compromised/temporary set up, in which blu-rays are played via PC which outputs analogue sound to the cinema amp, I can hear the improvement. Granted I've done no back-to-back listening, but I'm pretty sure I'm not imagining it- I've played a couple of BD's and thought the sound seems a bit lacking, only to look at the box and see that it's only carrying a DD soundtrack. I daresay there's a few BD's floating about where they've just inflated DD/DTS to full res sound and not bothered remastering, just like they've upscaled picture in some instances, so the difference would be pretty weak there.

OK, so you admit that you have NEVER done a back to back test, but you simply just 'know'.

Congratulations, you are part of a perpetuating industry thriving off numbers and the Emperor's New Clothes.

And so confident are you with your totally untested opinion, you suggest that your guess is right over those who have spent time actually doing a real test at both Dolby and DTS labs.

Of course, your PC based setup with a cheapy analogue snake must be far superior to the Dolby testing rooms, and your golden ears will totally outclass those of a professional....?


Do a real, proper test then come back.

[OldSkoolRS]

I'm going to reconnect the coax output of my BluRay player and assign it to a spare input on my Denon amp. This way I'll be able to change from HD sound output over HDMI and decoded in my amp or the 'compressed' DD/DTS version output via the coax. Then I'll be able to flick between the two sound formats yet using the same 'mix'. At least I can deceide for myself if I feel it's an audible difference or really the Emporer's new clothes. I have an SPL meter so I'l also be able to level match the two inputs on my amp.

However, this 'test' will probably be only for my own interest as whether I can hear difference or not there will be detractors on each side.

[JustinP1]

OldSkoolRS said:

I'm going to reconnect the coax output of my BluRay player and assign it to a spare input on my Denon amp. This way I'll be able to change from HD sound output over HDMI and decoded in my amp or the 'compressed' DD/DTS version output via the coax. Then I'll be able to flick between the two sound formats yet using the same 'mix'. At least I can deceide for myself if I feel it's an audible difference or really the Emporer's new clothes. I have an SPL meter so I'l also be able to level match the two inputs on my amp.

However, this 'test' will probably be only for my own interest as whether I can hear difference or not there will be detractors on each side.

Good good!


If anyone is interested, here is the report I read. By all accounts they were doing a fair blind test:

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby_TrueHD_DTS-MA...

Edited by JustinP1 on Sunday 6th September 18:07

[DavidY]

Justin's point is certainly valid and even more applicable to those with quality 'old school' processors.

I have done the following back to back

BluRay Player into

a) Onkyo Processor in DTS-MA then into my amps and speakers
b) Onkyo Processor in max bit rate DTS then into my amps and speakers
c) Meridian Processor in max bit rate DTS then into my amps and speakers

In my and my wife's opinion the Meridian option wiped the floor with both the Onkyo solutions (the Meridian was both more enjoyable and more realistic), and yes I could hear a difference between the Onkyo DTS-MA v Max Bit Rate DTS.

Therefore if you have a 'quality' old school system you have little to gain from going to newer processor.

I certainly dont offer that I have got golden ears, but I have got some very signioficant amplication and speakers downstream, that will certainly show up any differences.

davidy