"Are you stupid or something?" question of the night...

[Sehnzeleid]

Well, I know this is probably an idiotic question, but do BD players send the decoded steam of the next gen audio codecs they support via their multi-channel analog outs? Or only HDMI?

For example, does the Panasonic send "real" decoded DTS-HD and the Sony BDP-S1 send "real", decoded TrueHD via their respective analog outs?

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

Well, I know this is probably an idiotic question, but do BD players send the decoded steam of the next gen audio codecs they support via their multi-channel analog outs? Or only HDMI?

For example, does the Panasonic send "real" decoded DTS-HD and the Sony BDP-S1 send "real", decoded TrueHD via their respective analog outs?

Yes, assuming they decode them. Like, for instance, no player can currently decode DTS-HDMA so the only thing sent via analog outs/hdmi pcm is a decoded DTS-HD 1,5mbps core signal. And, likewise, the Samsung BD-P1200 cannot decode TrueHD, so it will only send a decoded Dolby Digital core signal through the analog outs/hdmi pcm.

[dugpa]

It depends on the player, but if it has a decoder for it, it sends the real signal to the analog outs. As Ruined pointed out, no player (of either format) decodes DTS-MA, they just extract the lossy DTS core. But as far as TrueHD goes, the Sony BDP-S1 does send the decoded TrueHD signal to the analog outs. At least that's what the firmware update says, I don't actually have any BD discs with TrueHD to test that theory with. But reports online say it's so.
Of course, everyone's favorite BD toy, the PS3, has no analog outs, so it's a moot point there.

[Sehnzeleid]

Thanks guys!

I just wanted to make sure, I heard a rumor BD players only allowed TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, and PCM via HDMI.

Just in case I decide to buy a 1.1 Profile player in the future...

My plan is to wait until 1.1 BD players arrive, hopefully by the holidays, and see if BD offers any seasonal deals on them. Actually hoping the Samsung BDP-2400 meets the spec. Then I'll probably switch to A1 to coaxial and hook up the analogs to the BD player since it seems BD is more in tune with lossless or uncompressed audio options. Then next year sometime, hopefully Outlaw will announce plans for a new HDMI 1.3 equipped processor and I can finally move into using HDMI for audio. Of course, I'll still be a strong supporter of HD DVD.

I'm pretty much going to forget player on-board decoding for DTS-HD Master Audio, seems like Dolby TrueHD and PCM are at the forefront by a considerable margin. DTS really seems to have dropped the ball again in terms of real, widespread adoption of their new codecs, first with DVD and now with the next generation. I think if Fox came back and dropped MA on their BDs for TrueHD or PCM, next gen DTS on either format might be effectively killed or at least mortally wounded for years.

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

I just wanted to make sure, I heard a rumor BD players only allowed TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, and PCM via HDMI..

Well, it depends on which BD player it is of course. Not all have all features

My plan is to wait until 1.1 BD players arrive, hopefully by the holidays, and see if BD offers any seasonal deals on them.

I'm sure since this holiday season is going to be do or die for both formats, hd-dvd for sure, they they both will be all but giving players away to increase market share.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

Just in case I decide to buy a 1.1 Profile player in the future...

My plan is to wait until 1.1 BD players arrive, hopefully by the holidays, and see if BD offers any seasonal deals on them.

Curious if this is the reason for Sony trying to dumb the 60GB model.. Will the 80GB already have 1.1?

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Derb

Curious if this is the reason for Sony trying to dumb the 60GB model.. Will the 80GB already have 1.1?

Actually the reason is to help stem the losses they're having. They can increase the harddive by 20gb, which as most probably costs them $2 more. Then they sell it at $100 more than what they dropped the discontinued 60GB model for and make a more money. It's win win for Sony. They can say instead of dropping the price they're giving you more features for the money. You used to only get 60 GB for your $599, but now you get 20GB more, woohoo!

[snipsnapsappy]

Although no one has heard DTS-HDMA in their HT yet. I can say that we are all very curious about its capabilities. Considering how DTS at 1.5 Mbps can sound extremely different than DD+ at 1.5 Mbps (a la Sleepy Hollow, etc...), one has to wonder how good DTS-HDMA can sound.

Also, the lossy core extracted from FOX discs is still incredible. I have been nothing short of blown away by the sound on every FOX disc even at the extracted level.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by snipsnapsappy

Considering how DTS at 1.5 Mbps can sound extremely different than DD+ at 1.5 Mbps (a la Sleepy Hollow, etc...)

Hmm...

Originally Posted by Hidefdigest on Sleepy Hollow DD+ vs DTS

I find that standard DTS tracks suffer a bit in comparison to Dolby Digital-Plus, and that's the case here. The Dolby Digital-Plus track boasts better frequency response, with nicer-sounding midrange and cleaner highs. Low bass is solid on both, though I felt it was a bit more powerful on the Dolby track when it comes to consistent and repetitive sounds, such as the stampeding of horse hooves and the percussive moments of Danny Elfman's score.

Originally Posted by DVDTalk on Sleepy Hollow DD+ vs DTS

I was surprisingly disappointed with the DD+ track, which sounds lifeless and dull. The DTS option has a lot more body to the sound. Even so, I found it a little too bombastic, with dialogue mixed low and many details muddled in the middle of the audio spectrum. The movie's sound mix makes only sparse use of surround activity, primarily balanced in the front soundstage. Bass gets a fair workout during the trampling of horse hooves, but not as much as you'd hope during the big scary scenes. It's plenty loud to be sure, but lacks the clarity and finesse of the best soundtracks.

Same disc, two completely different opinions on the same soundtracks. One has to wonder how much of it is just mental.

one has to wonder how good DTS-HDMA can sound

If it is true to the claim of being mathematically lossless, it should sound the same as TrueHD and PCM. One point of difficulty is that TrueHD is a 100% lossless stream start to finish, while DTS starts with a lossy stream and has to do audio-surgery, "patching" it with the MA packet to get a lossless track in the end. The former just seems less messy, which is why it also likely takes up a lot less power to compute (and the reason so few devices actually decode DTS-HDMA at this moment).

[Sehnzeleid]

Here's another stupid question:

Are BDs really "scratch resistant" or is this claim more of an exaggeration?

Also soundtrack aside, I never understood the flames thrown Sleepy Hollow's way over the transfer...

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

Are BDs really "scratch resistant" or is this claim more of an exaggeration?

It's an exaggeration. The only discs I usually ever have problems with are rentals from Netflix, and I have about the same problems with scratched discs of each format studdering.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

Here's another stupid question:

Are BDs really "scratch resistant" or is this claim more of an exaggeration?

I messed with The Terminator BD with a ball point pen, thrown it around like a frisbee, notta scratch.

This was before I had a BD player & had no intentions of getting one.

It is possible (of course) to scratch a BD disc but it takes more effort than you might think.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

Here's another stupid question:

Are BDs really "scratch resistant" or is this claim more of an exaggeration?

Also soundtrack aside, I never understood the flames thrown Sleepy Hollow's way over the transfer...

I haven't noticed scratches on my Netflix rentals for bd's. There have been scratches on the hd-dvd discs, but it hasn't affected playback. Aesthetically, the protective layer does really help against scratches. You'd really have to make an effort to scratch it.

As for "Sleepy Hollow", there was a huge layer of unnecessary and non-theater-like film grain on the film. You get used to it after awhile, but it really was annoying how pervasive it was. Remove the grain or even just use half of it, and the film would really shine with the detail it has under that grain. But that's really the only negative thing about it.

[Sehnzeleid]

On my two Fox BDs, I noticed this:

Kingdom of Heaven: MPEG-2 @ 24MBPS - 194 minutes

The Transporter: MPEG-2 @ 18MBPS - 92 Minutes

Couldn't the bitrate on The Transporter be WAY higher?

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

On my two Fox BDs, I noticed this:

Kingdom of Heaven: MPEG-2 @ 24MBPS - 194 minutes

The Transporter: MPEG-2 @ 18MBPS - 92 Minutes

Couldn't the bitrate on The Transporter be WAY higher?

No, because Transporter is on a BD25 while KOH is BD50. And Transporter probably would have gotten better results at that bitrate if VC-1 or AVC was used.