Paramount embraces Lossless audio...finally!!

[ganthc]

http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/news/...D_DVD_Menu/796

Looks like Paramount has finally caved and is going to offer lossless tracks on their upcoming releases. It even mentions that they will use PCM. This is good news to me, as I have been avoiding buying Paramount movies because of their lack of support for high-res audio.

[snipsnapsappy]

YAYAYAYAYYAYAYYAYAYAYAYAYYAY!!!!!!

Three Cheers!



WE won!!!!

[ganthc]

And there you see the power of the early adopter, I guess. I might just buy Next and Blades of Glory just to reward Paramount for making this great decision. First, to go high res on their audio, and second, for actually making the bd version aurally equivalent to the hd-dvd version.

[Derb]

Good stuff.

Double-dips for MI trilogy!

[dugpa]

Too bad they didn't do this in time for Dreamgirls.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by dugpa

Too bad they didn't do this in time for Dreamgirls.

But they will in time for Transformers!

[snipsnapsappy]

MMMMmMMMMM Transformers, Lossless

[Wurms]

FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I actually just wrote Paramount Home Entertainment an email 2 weeks ago about not having lossless audio You can all thank me if you want, lol.

I haven't bought a single Paramount release because of this, now they need to re-release a bunch of titles!!! MI:3 in lossless

I be buying NEXT to show support I guess

[Ruined]

The question is, will the sound actually get any better on HD DVD with its DD+ 1.5mbps tracks? Blu-Ray will likely get a boost since Paramount was only doing 640kbps DD with them.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&&#post9839736

Originally Posted by Kris Deering

Thanks for the info! I've heard from a couple of industry types that DD+ at 1.5 is just about transparent so it would be interesting to hear your opinion since you actually do this stuff.

Originally Posted by FilmMixer, professional film mixer

Most people that I talk to think that anything abouve 1.2mbps is transparent for all practical purposes... I would tend to agree, and I took a lot of flack some months ago saying I would rather have a high rate lossy codec at 24bit than a downconverted 16 bit PCM/Lossless.

Also, the tech from RnBFilms prefers high bit resolution/high bitrate lossy to lower bit resolution lossless.

So the question is - better sound, or better marketing?

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by Ruined

So the question is - better sound, or better marketing?

In the case of hd-dvd versus blu-ray, I'd say neither.

[snipsnapsappy]

Ruined,

We have went over this many, many times. I, along with countless others (including professional reviewers), find that PCM and Dolby TrueHD give a better sound experience than DD+.

So no, it is not simple marketing or hype, no matter what some experiment you read says. I always have wondered if that experiment was done using trained ears or simply J6P people picked at random. Because to trained ears, uncompressed is considerably better.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by snipsnapsappy

MMMMmMMMMM Transformers, Lossless

Indeed, but that is produced by non other than Mr. Spielberg so.... you know..

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by snipsnapsappy

So no, it is not simple marketing or hype, no matter what some experiment you read says. I always have wondered if that experiment was done using trained ears or simply J6P people picked at random. Because to trained ears, uncompressed is considerably better.

You would think people (as quoted in my original post) who have access to both the original master and the compressed result would count as having "trained ears," people who get paid to do this and work with soundtracks for a living - trained ears even moreso than a professional reviewer. After all, as we saw with Sleepy Hollow we've seen professional reviewers contradict each other on the same soundtrack

Also, its worthwhile to mention that some people pay $1000 for a 6ft pair of speaker cable, and feel that it sounds millions of times better than a 12-gauge 6ft pair of standard speaker wire. Do they count as "trained ears," especially when those differences are often rendered minimal by a blind A/B comparison? Moogle did one of these tests himselves and to his surprise found he couldn't tell any difference between 128kbps AAC and 320kbps AAC. I'd wager no one on this forum could tell the difference between 192kbps VBR WMA9 and 1.4mbps uncompressed PCM.

Its too bad you live in CA otherwise I'd be glad to demonstrate the power of the mind with a blind A/B comparison

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Its too bad you live in CA otherwise I'd be glad to demonstrate the power of the mind with a blind A/B comparison

I'd be willing to have you test my ears. I'll even promise to be completely sober during said test. Of course, afterwards, you would have to supply beer. You know, gotta keep it real man.

[snipsnapsappy]

Then maybe I am gifted, because I can tell the difference between bit rates through different mediums such as SACD and CD and PCM/TrueHD and DD. it is not simply quality, but also the amount of sound. There are simply sounds taken out of a lot of tracks that are not in the lower encodes.

Also, I do not know what that Sleepy Hollow reviewer was smoking, maybe he got the tracks wrong when he was testing, or maybe he just switched for one scene and could not find much difference. But the DD+ track has almost no surround activity: no ambience, no discrete sounds, nothing. While the DTS track is extremely active with both ambient and discrete sounds.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

I'd be willing to have you test my ears. I'll even promise to be completely sober during said test. Of course, afterwards, you would have to supply beer. You know, gotta keep it real man.

Okay, and to be fair we'll do it on your equipment since that is what you are used to listening.

Throw out some artists that you enjoy and I'll see what I got.

[SilentBob]

Originally Posted by Derb

Indeed, but that is produced by non other than Mr. Spielberg so.... you know..

Mr. Bay has already confirmed that a SD-DVD (available as either a single or 2-disc edition) and both High Def discs are in the works Said this on his personal Blog with his dog Bonecrusher and him in photo

[Derb]

Originally Posted by SilentBob

Mr. Bay has already confirmed that a SD-DVD (available as either a single or 2-disc edition) and both High Def discs are in the works Said this on his personal Blog with his dog Bonecrusher and him in photo

Sweet.

The HD trailer does look immaculate.. actually looks just as good as them Pirates BDs. Paramount should include lossless when they release this title. This is what lossless was designed for!

[ganthc]

Hmm, it appears that "Blades of Glory" will only have a lossless track on Blu-ray. Hd-dvd will have the standard dd+ audio track.

[Derb]

Oh I'm sure the HD DVD will have the Dolby TrueHD 5.1 track as well. Paramount is still new to HD packaging. If I'm wrong, score one for BD & next time, ganthc, please post an entire new thread about this as I'm sure Ruined would of if the tables were turned.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Derb

Oh I'm sure the HD DVD will have the Dolby TrueHD 5.1 track as well. Paramount is still new to HD packaging. If I'm wrong, score one for BD & next time, ganthc, please post an entire new thread about this as I'm sure Ruined would of if the tables were turned.

The "tables have been turned" since Paramount started releasing in highdef - the HD DVD version of virtually every Paramount highdef title in the past always had higher bitrate audio. In this case, I would say these are likely the final specs as lossless audio is a new thing to Paramount so it may be inconsistent at first.

Also, I've heard rumblings that "Face/Off" will not have lossless audio on either release. However, the Star Trek releases will apparently have TrueHD.

Since Paramount uses DD+ @ 1.5mbps which mixers and other insiders have claimed is perceptually lossless at that bitrate, it doesn't matter much to me as in the end both should sound the same despite the encoding (in a double blind listening test, of course). If it was DD640kbps, then it would be more of a big deal IMO; the lossless gives this specific BD disc the marketing edge over DD+1.5mbps, though I'm not convinced it gives it any audible fidelity edge.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Since Paramount uses DD+ @ 1.5mbps which mixers and other insiders have claimed is perceptually lossless at that bitrate, it doesn't matter much to me as in the end both should sound the same despite the encoding (in a double blind listening test, of course). If it was DD640kbps, then it would be more of a big deal IMO; the lossless gives this specific BD disc the marketing edge over DD+1.5mbps, though I'm not convinced it gives it any audible fidelity edge.

I see your point, however a lossless nor a 1.5Mbps track of a vintage film/Tv Show really doesn't add anything more audibly compared to the same vintage film/Tv Show mixed at 640kbps.. at least I haven't noticed anything better unless the track was actually re-mastered ala Terminator. If were talkin' newer films, I'd have to say yes a lossless track does add more umph to the soundtrack over 640 & 1.5.. Some tracks have lots of ambient effects which can't be heard as well/good as lossless. Than there are some which sound identical mainly because the feature doesn't offer anything which could be clearly heard over one another. (Premonition) The lossy is just fine for these types of tracks. I bet all pre 2000 flicks sound identical wether its 640 or 1.5 & I'd bet all pre 1990 flicks would also sound identical wether its 640, 1.5, or lossless. Anything post 1990 should sound better lossless

IMO

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by snipsnapsappy

We have went over this many, many times. I, along with countless others (including professional reviewers), find that PCM and Dolby TrueHD give a better sound experience than DD+.

That's fine, but that's personal preference and therefore subjective. Ruined is focusing on objective analysis, which is a different animal.

I haven't had much experience with any of the new audio formats but I did prefer the Dolby TrueHD audio on Batman Begins to the DD+ audio on the same HD DVD release. Does this then mean Dolby TrueHD is "better"? Not necessarily since I'm not sure if the DD+ audio track on Batman Begins maximized the potential of DD+.

[quoet]Because to trained ears, uncompressed is considerably better.[/quote]And this is the kind of thing Ruined's comments are addressing. Your ears aren't "trained" just as mine aren't just as "Moe's" aren't. There are some "trained" ears that will notice a considerable difference and some, I imagine, that won't.

Peace...

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Ruined

The question is, will the sound actually get any better on HD DVD with its DD+ 1.5mbps tracks?

Well, I would say that's certainly ONE of many questions that could be asked. Another is, will this change in policy add or remove value from future Paramount high-def movie releases?

Personally, I think this is a great move since it offers the consumer some variety.

EDIT: What I don't get is why not use Dolby TrueHD or PCM on both formats?

Peace...

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by tomdkat

Well, I would say that's certainly ONE of many questions that could be asked. Another is, will this change in policy add or remove value from future Paramount high-def movie releases?

Personally, I think this is a great move since it offers the consumer some variety.

EDIT: What I don't get is why not use Dolby TrueHD or PCM on both formats?

Peace...

Well, perhaps space, but that wouldn't explain the lack of THD on hd-dvd.