Why are we still fighting over who's going to sell more than the other format? It just seems pointless seeing that the war has been over for about ~3 weeks now.
The question I have is why is Fox the only Studio that makes great Audio and Re-masters of all their movies? I don't get why Disney and Sony (even on new releases) use PCM all the time. What's the excuse? Are they just lazy and Fox actually wants to give the consumer the VERY BEST video and sound?I'll take DTS-HD anyday, I just wish other studios would do what Fox does. At least I can expect Band of Brothers with DTS-HD. Right, Paramount, Dreamworks, HBO, and Mr. Spielberg? Make it happen all ready, I'm tired of waiting not only for that series, but a whole mess of movies.
The sound track on Hitman and the one from No Coutry for Old Men are both losless and both 48Hz/24bit.
If anything Fox is making most listen to old School DTS, because there are so few DTS-HD MA supported setups out there. While the PCM, is the EXACT same quality and works on every player.
I can tell you their DTS is not old DTS. I have the Panasonic BD30K and an Onyko TX-SR875 hooked up to JBL speakers. You can tell the considerable difference between PCM and DTS-HD (TrueHD as well). I have an HD DVD (Faceoff/Paramount played on an A35) that has 6.1 old DTS and you can tell the difference between that DTS and DTS-HD. I don't want my reciever to have to convert the uncompress audio to another format.
Also Hitman is "English DTS-HD Lossless Master Audio" No Country for Old Men is "English Uncompressed PCM 5.1 Surround"
I understand the idea that, yes they are both 48Hz/24bit, but its the format itself. There is a difference between Uncompressed and DTS-HD/TrueHD with the right reciever. It just bothers me that Blu-ray has been touting this 7.1 surround sound, yet where is it? I'm hooked on HD movies I just want the very best, because this is suppose to take over for DVD. I want more of a difference then just uncompressed audio 5.1 slaped onto a 1080p movie.
I know that DTS-HD MA is much better than DTS. What I meant was that most don't have a setup that supports DTS-HD MA, and since these movies don't also include PCM, they are stuck with the core DTS in the DTS-HD stream.
As for DTS-HD MA vs PCM, they are both losless, so as long as they are the same number of channels and the same sample rate etc. There is no reason why they shouldn't sound absolutely identical.
In fact the only real reason to use DTS-HD MA or TrueHD over PCM, is to save space.
Either way, I understand your desire to use the features of the hardware you've already bought.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kiwi616 @ Mar 10th 2008 10:42AM
Can't wait till we see the little asterisk next to HD-DVD saying that this doesn't include previous release of anything anymore!
Mr. E @ Mar 10th 2008 11:00AM
Nielsen number post, January 2009
HD DVD 0* vs. Blu-ray 752
* HD DVD total does not include 410 titles that were previously available.
Larry @ Mar 10th 2008 3:40PM
HD-DVD has been outselling Blu-Ray on Amazon.com and Amazon.de for the last week.
After a peak 3 weeks ago, Blu-Ray sales are falling.
So what's this 90%+ market share bull?
Killer @ Mar 10th 2008 5:01PM
Why are we still fighting over who's going to sell more than the other format? It just seems pointless seeing that the war has been over for about ~3 weeks now.
The question I have is why is Fox the only Studio that makes great Audio and Re-masters of all their movies? I don't get why Disney and Sony (even on new releases) use PCM all the time. What's the excuse? Are they just lazy and Fox actually wants to give the consumer the VERY BEST video and sound?I'll take DTS-HD anyday, I just wish other studios would do what Fox does. At least I can expect Band of Brothers with DTS-HD. Right, Paramount, Dreamworks, HBO, and Mr. Spielberg? Make it happen all ready, I'm tired of waiting not only for that series, but a whole mess of movies.
Ben @ Mar 10th 2008 5:04PM
Killer,
What are you talking about?
The sound track on Hitman and the one from No Coutry for Old Men are both losless and both 48Hz/24bit.
If anything Fox is making most listen to old School DTS, because there are so few DTS-HD MA supported setups out there. While the PCM, is the EXACT same quality and works on every player.
Killer @ Mar 10th 2008 7:24PM
@Ben
I can tell you their DTS is not old DTS. I have the Panasonic BD30K and an Onyko TX-SR875 hooked up to JBL speakers. You can tell the considerable difference between PCM and DTS-HD (TrueHD as well). I have an HD DVD (Faceoff/Paramount played on an A35) that has 6.1 old DTS and you can tell the difference between that DTS and DTS-HD. I don't want my reciever to have to convert the uncompress audio to another format.
Also Hitman is "English DTS-HD Lossless Master Audio"
No Country for Old Men is "English Uncompressed PCM 5.1 Surround"
I understand the idea that, yes they are both 48Hz/24bit, but its the format itself. There is a difference between Uncompressed and DTS-HD/TrueHD with the right reciever. It just bothers me that Blu-ray has been touting this 7.1 surround sound, yet where is it? I'm hooked on HD movies I just want the very best, because this is suppose to take over for DVD. I want more of a difference then just uncompressed audio 5.1 slaped onto a 1080p movie.
Ben @ Mar 10th 2008 7:28PM
I know that DTS-HD MA is much better than DTS. What I meant was that most don't have a setup that supports DTS-HD MA, and since these movies don't also include PCM, they are stuck with the core DTS in the DTS-HD stream.
As for DTS-HD MA vs PCM, they are both losless, so as long as they are the same number of channels and the same sample rate etc. There is no reason why they shouldn't sound absolutely identical.
In fact the only real reason to use DTS-HD MA or TrueHD over PCM, is to save space.
Either way, I understand your desire to use the features of the hardware you've already bought.