New HD-DVD Disc is 51 gb's -- Surpassng BlueRay

Just another thought on why people will continue buying CDs for a while... CDs generally have more fidelity than the highly-compressed MP3 files.
 
Terry_Lasater said:
Just another thought on why people will continue buying CDs for a while... CDs generally have more fidelity than the highly-compressed MP3 files.
Click to expand...

A voice of reason!

MP3s are VERY low grade compressed audio. CDs (and DVD-As) use uncompressed PCM. When storage of any real capacity was an issue, I can see why MP3s became popular, but all that it takes is a single listen through a high resolution playback system to understand why highly compressed audio is vastly inferior to uncompressed audio.

It amuses me that on a forum that supports the pursuit of high quality images, people would shun the concept that, for many, high performance audio is also important.

Purchasing the highest quality source material will always be important for a segment of the consumer market despite some percentage opting for the more available yet inferior options. McDonald's and fine dining have existed side-by-side for decades, I suspect that the same will be true of I-Tune's and optical disc based source material.
 
Nobody is shunning that! That's why we don't care for HDV, for example -- it uses similar compression in its audio.

We, as filmmakers, gear heads, content producers, etc -- we always want the highest quality. What this thread is saying is that the consumer, by and large, doesn't seem to care. I mean, here's an example: how many times have you walked into a hotel and seen a 16x9 plasma or LCD TV there in the lobby -- and they're showing STRETCHED 4x3 on it?!? I've gone to people's houses where they have a big fancy projection HDTV, and they're showing stretched 4x3 on it, and they either don't see that there's anything wrong with it, or they don't care because they'd rather see an image distorted by 33% (!) than see "black bars."

We advocate the highest standards for acquisition. What we're saying is that higher quality will not imbue overnight success for rapid adoption of a consumer format. Consumers have always shown a preference for convenience over quality. If something changes quality, and only quality, the public doesn't seem to care: witness LaserDisc, Digital Compact Cassette, SACD, DVD-Audio -- all massive flops. But when something revolutionizes convenience, we jump all over it -- like MP3, iTunes, DVD (no rewinding, jumping to chapters, etc). If it's more convenient *and* better quality, then that's a double bonus (like with DVD). But if it's more convenient and *worse* quality, that doesn't stop it (again, witness MP3).
 
No reason why electronic acquisition of music can't move to PCM, either. Besides, how many times did we hear that between CD and vinyl, vinyl "sounded better"?
 
Brandon Rice said:
Dude, it's just like Sony's "memory stick" lol. They get hammered all the time by experts saying it's ridiculous that they have to have their OWN kind of memory stick... this is kind of how I feel about Blu-Ray as well... but I must say, I think discs will be obsolite very soon, as broadband and downloading increases.
Click to expand...

Well no its not. Blue ray is backed by many other manufactures as well, including content providers. I would truly prefer to see Blue ray win, only because WE benefit from it. think of a 25$ disc that can back up 180 minutes of DVCpro100 footage. imagine that? shooting 3 hours to P2, and dumping them directly through your computer to HD and burning a 200Gig BRdisc to give to your client. you hand them a 25$ BR disc. Or hell, backup to 2 or three BR discs, just in case. 200 gigs on three discs is a HELL of alot cheaper than buying 3 seperate 200gig hardrives.

Think about it from the standpoint of making a living and alllllll your allegiances change.

Also about the High quality/Convenicne thing, i serisouly cannot tell the difference between MP3 and Vinyl. it all kinda sounds the same to me. Really good headphones, and an Ipod, Im happy. I understand for the sake of Production, super high quality is neccesary because of all the format transfer the audio has to go though, but for the end product, ehh. I am listening to Mozart on my ipod, through my Stereo, sounds great to me.

(PS Dont EVER hire me to do audio.... I will ruin your production)
 
Last edited:
that is a really really good point, I never thought of that.

The only thing is that when will BR be utilizing multiple layers, b/c as of right now BR has the ability to use 50GB, but only use 25 of that.
 
they will get around to it soon enough. I am a big BR supporter because it uses, NEW technology that has rom to grow. Not just "supercharged" old technology. HDdvd, still uses the Wide Red laser. Blue ray uses the new UV/Blue laser that is much thinner, and can pack more on the Disc surface more efficinetly. Imagine the day when they "supercharge" Blue ray. dont be surprised if you see, 500, 600 gigs on a DVD sized disc. ( across multiple layers of course)

Also, imagine, XDcam capability then!!! you practially record for like 3 days in HDV like 18mbps compression.... or 8 hours of VERY high quality XDCAMHD. lol
 
Really, i read somehwere that it was the current DVD technology, just spaced closer together. That being said, perhaps teh current dvd technology, is blue laser as well?
 
Current DVD technology is red laser. HD-DVD uses the same manufacturing plants and facilities as current DVD, so manufacturers can start stamping out HD-DVD discs very quickly, very cheaply. Blu-Ray requires new manufacturing, so million-dollar investments on the part of replicators before they can start manufacturing Blu-Ray discs.
 
Took my wife to the biggest AV dealer in town and asked if they had any HD-DVD took a while before the seller could find one (wrong side of the atlantic...)

There they showed it on a 24inch LCD display and Superman returns was played. Sure it looked good, but so did the Lord of the ring (SD)DVD on the tv beside it. Frankley it was so small differnece I could hardly se it.

Of course if I would bring it up on my projector at 100inch I would se the differnece much more clearly. My wife couldnt see anything different and was almost angry at me because how I got that strange idea to spend money on another format when we have DVD.

So my conclusions

My old 32inch widescreen produce better image with a DVD than a avarage LCD with HD-DVD/Blueray.

You really need a big TV to have any uses for HD

The avarage viewer doesnt care. And they dont want to replace their DVD collection.


Many that buy HD movies (like PS3 owners) will only buy a few and then they gonna think that it aint gonna give them anything special on their avarage TV. So Im not sure the avarage will spend so much on their HD collection.


The HD-DVD camp can really take a strong leap forward if they release dual sided DVD with HD on one side and SD on the other. And Im not talking about a few but every DVD from now on should be dual. Then people will have a huge HDTV collection without thinking about it. Then suddenly they relaise that they can get better pictures just buy replacing their ordinary DVD some day.
 
Its already in production, search for combodisc. The only problem is that they charge to much for the combodisc.

And as I se it they really must relaese combodisc. I have more TVs in my home and im not gonna buy a HD DVD in every room. So when i buy a HD film i want to be able to se it in every room. Not only in my home theater.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top