Blu-ray, in General

[Cinesimilitude]

I watched scenes from RV, Robocop, and Ultraviolet on blu-ray last week at best buy on a system worth well over 20,000, and it was a 1080p tv, so If "technically superior" is supposed to have lots of jagged lines and digitization in the image, then I don't know what this world is coming to. It sounded damn good, but the image had what seemed to be constant moire. It just looked so digital and almost pixelated.

I can say by personal experience that HD-DVD is the better format for home entertainment.

Invunche, have you seen demos of both products? I believe you and anyone not affiliated with blu-ray woud agree with me on this.

[The Invunche]

I watched scenes from RV, Robocop, and Ultraviolet on blu-ray last week at best buy on a system worth well over 20,000, and it was a 1080p tv, so If "technically superior" is supposed to have lots of jagged lines and digitization in the image, then I don't know what this world is coming to. It sounded damn good, but the image had what seemed to be constant moire. It just looked so digital and almost pixelated.

What you have seen has nothing to do with the techincally quality of the BluRay format, but the surprisingly low quality of the initial BluRay products. Don't confuse the two.

Both formats support the same audio and video codecs. The big difference is the larger capacity of the BluRay discs which will allow for higher bitrates.

Invunche, have you seen demos of both products?

No, I haven't seen any of them and why would I need to?

[Antoine Doinel]

It's interesting how these gaming consoles are a real factor in this war.

I think the gaming systems as "factors" in the format war is being highly overstated.

The HD-DVD/Blu-Ray battle is only just beginning and there will be no clear winner for at least a solid year, if not longer. People buying PS3 and XBox 360 systems are largely buying them as gaming systems, not as part of a home theater unit. Moreover, the comparison is unfair as the 360 is already on the market, whereas the PS3 will be in limited quantities worldwide until mid-2007. Like the PS2 it will slowly catch fire over 12 months from its roll out as the price goes down, the gamers line up to buy it. Sure people are buying the add on to their current 360, but maybe that's because the standalone HD-DVD player is out of their reach cost wise?

For the average consumer, there is only one factor that will determine the ultimate winner: COST. Sadly, the average Joe won't care about which one has a better bit rate or can hold more GB. They just want to know which one will hurt their wallet less.

It took at least 18 months for DVD players and movies to come into the realm of affordable. Moreover, we look back on those first DVD movies as being laughably poor, nowhere near harnessing the potential of visual and sonic clarity of the new format.

Frankly, I don't understand the huge rush to go out and buy either of these machines (BluRay or DVD players that is) or early releases. I think both sides are rushing to the marketplace and won't have any of the kinks worked out or fully utilize the format in creative and exciting ways until late 2007 or mid 2008.

[The Invunche]

Frankly, I don't understand the huge rush to go out and buy either of these machines (BluRay or DVD players that is) or early releases. I think both sides are rushing to the marketplace and won't have any of the kinks worked out or fully utilize the format in creative and exciting ways until late 2007 or mid 2008.

Couldn't agree more. Also, notice how people who have bought one of the formats are very quick to pronounce the competing one dead.

[Nothing]

Well, we can only HOPE that Blu-Ray will die, given Sony's insane tactics, somehow managing to get a UK court ruling last week against a HK company stopping them from exporting PS3 consoles to Europe! How is this even possible + whatever happened to free trade?!

If this goes on then, next thing we know, Amazon, etc, will be forced to stop exporting DVD and Blu-Ray software outside the US... They've already been forced to stop exporting most console and computer software to Europe - a BAD precedent.

[porquenegar]

As a owner of a Toshiba HD-A1 HD DVD player, I can tell you that it is a very very good machine. When it was all said and done, I paid less than $380 shipped for it and at that price it is worth it to me just as an upscaling SD DVD player. The HD DVDs capability is a nice bonus! lol.

I only wish it played my non-R1 SD DVDs.

[Abulafia]

Sounds like VHS versus Beta all over again. ](*,)

p.s God I love these emoticons \:D/

[Cinesimilitude]

VHS vs Sony's Beta tape (a TECHNICALLY better format, but more expensive.)

Winner: VHS

VHS vs Laserdisc (a WAY better format in every sense of the word, but far too expensive)

Winner: VHS

Sony's UMD? flop.

Let's not forget D-VHS and Sony's SACD... ugh...

HD-DVD vs Sony's Blu-Ray(Again, a TECHNICALLY better format)

Sony's products (both technically and creatively) are either shit, or too expensive. And with Laserdisc, even though it had a good run, it was adopted by very few people. I think blu-ray may stick around in that capacity, but that eventually most studios will choose the same side, and I'm calling this with all that's happened so far... HD-DVD for the win.

[Nothing]

SACD I like, though. I think this particular failure has more to do with the cloth ears of the consumer than anything else

[The Invunche]

SACD I like, though. I think this particular failure has more to do with the cloth ears of the consumer than anything else

Don't forget that the competing format DVD Audio helped muddle things.

[scotty]

From the Associated Press:

TOKYO — Sony's profit plunged 94 percent for the July-September quarter as a global battery recall and red ink in its video-game business hurt the Japanese electronics and entertainment company.

Sony Corp.'s group net profit for the fiscal second quarter totaled 1.7 billion yen ($14 million), dwindling from 28.5 billion yen the same period the previous year, the Tokyo-based manufacturer said Thursday.

An extra cost of 51 billion yen ($429 million) related to a global recall of 9.6 million Sony laptop batteries was a major factor behind the sharp drop in profit.

Almost every major laptop maker in the world, including Dell Inc., Apple Computer Inc. and Lenovo, has announced recalls of Sony lithium-ion batteries that could overheat and burst into flames.

The recall - which has tarnished Sony's brand image as a longtime maker of icon products such as the Walkman portable player and PlayStation video game machine - offset the lift Sony's books got from an 8 percent rise in July-September sales to 1.85 trillion yen ($15.6 billion) from 1.7 trillion yen a year earlier.

Sony reported a 43.5 billion yen ($366 million) operating loss in its gaming division because of charges related to the preparation for the next-generation PlayStation 3 console, set to go on sale in the U.S. and Japan next month.

Sony said last month the machine's launch in Europe will be delayed until March next year because of mass production problems in a video technology called Blu-ray disk that the machine supports.

The company has also reduced the price in Japan for the much hyped PS3 by about 20 percent in an effort to win buyers - a move that's likely to reduce sales revenue because initial shipments are expected to be limited and sell out.

Sony kept unchanged Thursday its plan to ship 6 million PS3 machines in the fiscal year through March 2007. Research and development costs for the PS3 eroded profitability in the game unit, the company said in a statement.

Sony trimmed its fiscal 2006 shipment target for its lagging PlayStation Portable handheld machines to 9 million from the initial 12 million machines. Sony shipped 14 million PSP machines in fiscal 2005.

[Napoleon]

This week Sony completed another PR disaster by closing down Lik-Sang, a much loved hardware/software importer.

This action indicates that the PS3 (imo still the best chance blue ray has) will be region-free. Or maybe not.

[Cinesimilitude]

Hahaha. I didn't even know about the battery recall when I wrote that their products were shit. I love it.

there's a special offer on toshibas promotional hd-dvd site for 3 free hd-dvds for anyone who buys a player after 11/1/06.

[Ted Todorov]

SACD I like, though. I think this particular failure has more to do with the cloth ears of the consumer than anything else

Don't forget that the competing format DVD Audio helped muddle things.

I addition to the format war, SACD died for the following reasons:

1) Copy protection -- no amount of added sound quality could compensate for inability to rip to iPod/computer, play on a computer or copy a SACD. Nor the fact that your SACD player is forbidden from outputting sound via optical digital, so you are forced to run SIX expensive analog cables in the place of one cheap, tiny digital one.

2) Greed -- the record companies could simply have stopped releasing CDs and switched to dual layer SACDs for the same price. The format would have won by default. But, no -- either the prices were outrageous, or they released SACD layer only discs (for an equally outrageous price). Sony itself was the worst offender in the single layer dept.

The failure of SACD has NOTHING to do with cloth ears on the part of the consumers, and everything to do with DEEP stupidity on the part of the recording industry.

[unclehulot]

1) Copy protection -- no amount of added sound quality could compensate for inability to rip to iPod/computer, play on a computer or copy a SACD. Nor the fact that your SACD player is forbidden from outputting sound via optical digital, so you are forced to run SIX expensive analog cables in the place of one cheap, tiny digital one.

2) Greed -- the record companies could simply have stopped releasing CDs and switched to dual layer SACDs for the same price. The format would have won by default. But, no -- either the prices were outrageous, or they released SACD layer only discs (for an equally outrageous price). Sony itself was the worst offender in the single layer dept.

The failure of SACD has NOTHING to do with cloth ears on the part of the consumers, and everything to do with DEEP stupidity on the part of the recording industry.

Agreed, although I think Sony has outpaced the industry as a whole in terms of stupidity by a factor of 10.

What copy protection are you talking about? There is NONE on SACD!! I've never had a single problem ripping the red book layer of a single SACD to MP3 format, or playing said discs on my computers. Are you talking about single layer SACDs with no red book layer? Anyhow, what benefits can be derived from compressing the SACD layer to some lossy format?.....didn't you buy the SACD to hear on decent equipment? Perhaps this is an issue with iPODs or iTUNES? Perhaps a mp3 player with less proprietary (crappy), restrictive software to deal with is the answer.

The problem I nearly had (and many DID have) with Sony's copy protected CDs (not SACDs) (with rootkit installed, etc.) was the single worst copy guard experience any of us have had to deal with, period.

I'm not a fan of the 6 analog cables either, but I'd sure as heck not expect a "cheap" digital cable to give me what I'm looking for either. Most of my SACDs are 2 channel only, so you can just about get by with 2 good cables. If you want to take advantage of something like the RCA Living Stereo 3 channel mixes, you have to worry about matching your center channel.....that's going to cost more than a few cables, but sure, it's pretty damned idiotic restricting things in this way. Now they're at it again, with HD-DVD players that down-rez content if you use component video cables! Sheesh!

Well, the Sony single layers were early in the game, before hybrids were developed, which doesn't excuse their pathetic later complete lack of effort to support the format, but the discs ARE more expensive to produce, if not by a whole hell of a lot. Do you really think the industry will spend one extra red cent on a subsidy of a format, if the vast majority of consumers don't care, or are confused in to thinking they can't play hybrids on their regular old cd player? Sony also has charged restrictive premiums on the equipment and licensing rights for other companies that might have turned the tide somewhat, and they continue to do so......for this may Sony rot in hell!

Personally, I find that SACD fills the niche market formerly taken by labels like DCC, Mobile Fidelity and Analogue Productions. They were already charging a premium for their red book CDs, so I don't mind paying a bit more for a disc that really benefits from the careful mastering work (not that I make a regular practice of dropping $25 for one of these releases!). Don't forget some of the efforts from major labels skimped and used PCM domain mastering tools in producing their supposed remasters for SACD, which really diminishes the advantages of the format. It's always an uphill battle to get these major labels to do things right, no matter what format we're talking about, but I think you can justify the $150 to by an Oppo or Pioneer Universal player if you are a fan of the classic RCA Living Stereo stuff.....those SACDs are tremendous, and they're sold for the price of a regular mid-priced cd!

[Nothing]

Running the 6 analog cables is easy. analog cables are cheap, it is a myth that you need monster cable to get good sound. nor are most SACDs particularly expensive. of course, you would expect to pay a small premium initially for a superior-quality format.

with regards to switching to dual-layer discs for the majority of releases, this sounds like a wonderful plan. but what would the costs have been for the record companies? how do SACD manufacturing costs compare to CD manufacturing costs? How many plants exist that are capable of SACD production? Also, with many recordings, especially back catalogue, valuable studio time would have to be expended before you had an SACD-resolution master. And then you have the period from the early 80s - late 90s where many studios were using low-resolution digital equipment that limits the original masters to CD res. Therefore, isn't expecting every CD to suddenly become an SACD overnight just wishful thinking? Especially given that consumers were showing very limited interest in the format.

If cloth ears have nothing to do with it, how do you explain internet music sales?

unclehulot's comments about licensing premiums sounds about right, though, sigh...

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Nor the fact that your SACD player is forbidden from outputting sound via optical digital, so you are forced to run SIX expensive analog cables in the place of one cheap, tiny digital one.

Not quite true. SACD prevents high-res audio from being transmitted via optical or digital coax. The CD layer can be output over these connections, though it's not possible if the SACD has no CD layer.

Sony's i-Link (also used by Pioneer) and Denon's Denonlink allow high-res audio over a single firewire cable, but you need the player and the amp to have the appropriate connections.

Obviously Sony's executives value control of product over consumer friendliness. The only way this will ever change is if consumers vote with their money.

Also, SACD is not dead. It is only a niche market, mainly classical and jazz, but there are still steadily 60-70 new titles per month.

[Ted Todorov]

What copy protection are you talking about? There is NONE on SACD!! I've never had a single problem ripping the red book layer of a single SACD to MP3 format, or playing said discs on my computers. Are you talking about single layer SACDs with no red book layer? Anyhow, what benefits can be derived from compressing the SACD layer to some lossy format?.....didn't you buy the SACD to hear on decent equipment? Perhaps this is an issue with iPODs or iTUNES? Perhaps a mp3 player with less proprietary (crappy), restrictive software to deal with is the answer...

OK, there is much to answer here, but let me clear up this one: yes, I am talking about the SACD layer. I am simply talking about an existing freedom -- say the ability to burn a copy of a CD for a friend, or burn to take to a dangerous for media environment (like a house with small children or a party). Yes I realize you can still burn the Redbook layer if it exists.

This is simply a lost freedom, that in my mind was more important for many people than sound quality, thus SACD staying a niche format.

So far as ripping CDs or dual layer SACDs, no I have never had any problem doing so on Macintosh/iTunes/iPods. There is nothing proprietary about iTunes when it comes to ripping your own media. And so far as copy protected CDs and rootkits, I am yet to encounter one where my Mac doesn't simply ignore the copy protection -- those of you with PCs -- so sorry

So far as the added expense for releasing dual layer SACDs in the place of CDs -- the reward for the RIAA would have been many people re-buying CDs they already own as SACDs. They did do it with the ABKCO Stones SACDs so it the expense can't be prohibitive -- and the reward could have been great.

Yes, I am aware that there are some "permitted" digital methods for sending SACD to the receiver, but in my case, even though I have an expensive Denon SACD player and Denon receiver, they don't support Denonlink. On the other hand EVERY non piece-of-complete-junk supports optical digital. Even if the analog cables were FREE, the relative inconvenience and snake nest behind the equipment is reason enough for MANY people to ignore SACD.

[Nothing]

> This is simply a lost freedom, that in my mind was more important for many people than sound quality

Since the vast majority of SACDs are dual layer, I just don't see the problem here. CD layer for ease of use, SACD layer to listen in 192khz on your dedicated hardware... Also, if SACD ever became more widespread, you would doubtless see computer drives and software emerge that could be used to rip the contents.

With regards to re-releases - of course it makes sense with the Stones, Dylan, jazz and classical milestones, etc, that consumers can be rellied upon to repurchase. But this is a long way from extending the format to every CD in production! Really, that's just not feasible...

...but anyway, if you believe ripping mp3s and having a few extra cables at the back of your hi-fi are bigger issues than the sound quality, I guess that brings us full circle...

[Cinesimilitude]

HD-DVD and Blu-Ray thread guys, sorry I even brought up SACD. let's get back on topic.

[Ted Todorov]

...but anyway, if you believe ripping mp3s and having a few extra cables at the back of your hi-fi are bigger issues than the sound quality, I guess that brings us full circle...

If I believed such a thing, I wouldn't have a SACD player (with the requisite snakepit of cables). Which I do -- snakepit and all. I am not talking about myself -- I am explaining why SACD & DVD-Audio are doomed to either remain tiny niche products or die altogether.

And ultimately Blu-ray & HD-DVD risk the exact same fate as SACD, for the exact same reasons:

1) Format war.
2) Loss of existing freedom: additional copy protection vs. DVD (the broken copy protection of DVDs is being used for non - piracy purposes: removing region coding and other restrictions like forced subtitles; setting up HTPCs and playing "DVDs" from hard drives). Insistence on HDMI, which while not creating snakepits cases major compatibility problems.
3) Greed -- the new formats are being used as an excuse to jack up software prices.

[Nothing]

The reason why HD (in whatever form) will eventually take over is because joe public is more sensitive to picture quality than audio quality, especially as displays improve.

[Nothing]

well ok, let's say they buy into the concept more. 'bigger picture' is easier to understand.

[Antoine Doinel]

You're right in one sense about HD-DVD. But -Ive not seen this personally - evidently the chain store granted the privilege of having the Panny BluRay display gear which they're doing on a very good (and properly calibrated) Panny 65 inch 1080p display, looks like shit. The reason of course the crap Mpeg2 encoded BluRay discs.

It's a bold to assume that the staff at a chain store would even know how to calibrate HD-DVD or Blu-Ray properly. In my experience, staff at chain entertainment stores know absolutely nothing about the products they are selling, let alone how to set them up properly.

For me, it's going to be at least a year before I even think about going down the Blu-Ray or HD-DVD road. There are a LOT of kinks it seems they are going to be working on both the hardware and software side. It's also going to be a lot of research and reading reviews before I plunk down any money for these. And to judge either format now seems presumptuous at best.

[Schkura]

For me, it's going to be at least a year before I even think about going down the Blu-Ray or HD-DVD road. There are a LOT of kinks it seems they are going to be working on both the hardware and software side. It's also going to be a lot of research and reading reviews before I plunk down any money for these. And to judge either format now seems presumptuous at best.

I second those emotions. The company I work for is giving me a PS3 to fuck around with for a while so I'll get to see some Blu-Ray offerings and I'll share my thoughts on them, but this next format wave will probably be the last I ride for some time. I'd prefer it if most of the glitches were worked out first. Luckily for me (sort of), most of the films I'll want to pick up will not be available in the new formats for quite a while anyway.