It's Over! Blu-Ray Officially Wins!

[ChadTower]

Additionally, the increase of HD content on cable and satellite provides something that DVD didn't have when it was competing with VHS: a direct example of how you COULD/SHOULD be seeing your movies.  When you can watch Law & Order in full HD glory, but your copy of Beowulf looks grainy, you'll want to find a way to fix that.

I completely disagree with that.  When you were watching your noisy VHS copy of Ghostbusters your direct example of DVD video quality was watching the same movie on HBO.  DVD video isn't any better, for most players and most TVs during the adoption period, than standard cable or DirecTV, while at the same time being a substantial improvement over a VHS rental tape.  Even progressive scan didn't really improve all that much and I don't know many people even now who know or care about it.

[MaximRecoil]

Now that HD-DVD is gone, how long before Blu-ray is dead? The average consumer has just now made the switch fully to DVD and has a good collection going.

The difference from VHS to DVD was amazing. The difference from DVD to Blu-ray? Not enough for the average person. Also the idea of buying a new TV just to watch a certain format turns most people off.

I'll stick with DVD for years to come, and so will most everyone else.

Doubtful; full adoption of DVD took a heck of a long time too, but it eventually happened, and VHS had a longer foothold than DVD did.  Also, the myth that VHS-> DVD was a greater jump than DVD-> BluRay (or HD-DVD) is bunk.  The resolution increase from DVD (480p) to HD content (1080p) is greater than VHS (230 lines) to DVD (480). 

You're not taking into account diminishing returns. Also, the jump from VHS to DVD covered more ground than simply a boost in resolution. VHS was an analog format recorded and played back in the composite domain, while DVD is a digital format which offers much higher quality connections (RGB and component) and also potential progressive playback (VHS is natively interlaced).

VHS looked pretty bad while DVD looks pretty good, especially when used to its full potential (DVD-9, high bitrate, quality hardware MPEG-2 encoder, anamorphic, etc.)

Going from "pretty bad" to "pretty good" tends to be perceived as a bigger jump than going from "pretty good" to "better".

And of course, on a standard TV, DVD is already overkill, so HD content won't look any better.

On a PC monitor, I can set my screen resolution (22" Mitsubishi Diamondtron CRT) to 1024x768 and watch a good anamorphic DVD encode and be perfectly satisfied. I can then move the resolution up to 1280x1024 and watch a 720p movie and it is a little sharper and clearer, but not a big deal. I can turn the screen resolution to 1920x1440 and watch 1080p material, and with this size monitor, it is not a significant improvement over 720p.

I actually like the grain in a DVD. It reminds me of how film looks in a theater.

But where HD content shines is with really large displays, but most people don't have those due to cost and/or lack of space.

[AtomSmasher]

DVD's also introduced 5.1 surround sound, which was one of my motivating factors when I upgraded to dvd's.  Yes they now have 7.1, but for the average sized room 5.1 is all that is actually needed.

[ChadTower]

DVD isn't quite the straight stereo to full surround leap people say.  Pro Logic worked on VHS pretty well for people who had the appropriate setup (also required for 5.1).

Look at it this way - Pro Logic II is still in current use.  The Wii uses it.

[AtomSmasher]

DVD isn't quite the straight stereo to full surround leap people say.  Pro Logic worked on VHS pretty well for people who had the appropriate setup (also required for 5.1).

Look at it this way - Pro Logic II is still in current use.  The Wii uses it.

I never knew VHS had 5.1.  I don't ever remember seeing a vcr with more then just a left and right audio connection.

*edit* just looked it up and see that Pro Logic was more like a 4.0 setup (left, right, center, and rear (both rear speakers were same channel)), but still interesting that they had some sort of surround sound on VHS.

[ChadTower]

I never knew VHS had 5.1.  I don't ever remember seeing a vcr with more then just a left and right audio connection.

VHS didn't have 5.1.  Pro Logic works on r/l stereo connections and is decoded by the receiver - and ignored by anything else.

[boykster]

Additionally, the increase of HD content on cable and satellite provides something that DVD didn't have when it was competing with VHS: a direct example of how you COULD/SHOULD be seeing your movies.  When you can watch Law & Order in full HD glory, but your copy of Beowulf looks grainy, you'll want to find a way to fix that.

I completely disagree with that.  When you were watching your noisy VHS copy of Ghostbusters your direct example of DVD video quality was watching the same movie on HBO.  DVD video isn't any better, for most players and most TVs during the adoption period, than standard cable or DirecTV, while at the same time being a substantial improvement over a VHS rental tape.  Even progressive scan didn't really improve all that much and I don't know many people even now who know or care about it.

HBO's programming is in no way analagous to DVD quality.  MAYBE current digital cable or DirectTV feeds of the premium channels are now nearing DVD quality, but 5-10 years ago when the battle for DVD market foothold was taking place, absolutely no way.

Also, don't discount the HUGE adoption of flatpanel HD sets now that you can walk into any tier retailer in the country and buy one for a reasonable price.  The demand for HD content in the broadcast world has been driving the competition between cable / satellite / and now the fibre camps, do you really expect a consumer to gladly continue to buy/rent movies in lower quality than what they can view on their regular tv feeds?

I'm not expecting a rapid adoption, heck it took nearly 10 years for DVD - a clearly superior product over VHS - to take the crown as the prevalent video format.  I AM taking into consideration "diminishing returns" when I evaluate this.  If DVD quality is "good enough" then according to Chad non-HD HBO is "good enough" - but that doesn't match up with the monumental increase in HD subscribership with cable and satellite providers.  I dont' see DirecTV advertising that they have hundreds of channels that are "good enough" and you don't need all that fancy schmancy HD stuff

And anyone that tells you that the original ProLogic scheme is "as good as" a true discreet 5.1 or 7.1 solution has never heard a good discreet multi-channel audio setup.  And DPL II and DPL IIx are TOTALLY different than the old matrix used in the original DPL....

[boykster]

Oh, and for the record, I do not currently own either HD-DVD or BluRay software or hardware.  I'm exploring the use of my HTPC's for playback of the content, but the software isn't mature enough to reliably support it.

[ChadTower]

HBO's programming is in no way analagous to DVD quality.  MAYBE current digital cable or DirectTV feeds of the premium channels are now nearing DVD quality, but 5-10 years ago when the battle for DVD market foothold was taking place, absolutely no way.

Okay, if we throw out cable, we can't throw out DirecTV and Dish.  I have had DirecTV a long time - the standard signal quality hasn't changed much over the years.  On the premium channels 10 years ago it was pretty damn close to DVD quality video if not the same.  If anything I'd say the video quality on the SD channels is worse now than it was 7-8 years ago.

And anyone that tells you that the original ProLogic scheme is "as good as" a true discreet 5.1 or 7.1 solution has never heard a good discreet multi-channel audio setup.  And DPL II and DPL IIx are TOTALLY different than the old matrix used in the original DPL....

Who said "as good as"?  All I did was mention it as a bridge.  People keep saying "VHS to 5.1 audio is the key" as if there was nothing in between.  That's just not true.  There were better technologies available on VHS than two channel sound.

[Samstag]

DVD isn't quite the straight stereo to full surround leap people say.  Pro Logic worked on VHS pretty well for people who had the appropriate setup (also required for 5.1).

Look at it this way - Pro Logic II is still in current use.  The Wii uses it.

I never knew VHS had 5.1.  I don't ever remember seeing a vcr with more then just a left and right audio connection.

*edit* just looked it up and see that Pro Logic was more like a 4.0 setup (left, right, center, and rear (both rear speakers were same channel)), but still interesting that they had some sort of surround sound on VHS.

I was watching movies on VHS in real 5.1 in 1991 using a Pro Logic receiver to decode.  The rears were seperate channels.

[bfauska]

I was watching movies on VHS in real 5.1 in 1991 using a Pro Logic receiver to decode.  The rears were seperate channels.

NOPE.

Front Left+Center+Front Right+2 Mono Rears (same sounds 2 speakers)= 4 channels of audio not 5 or 5.1

Pro-Logic usually had a subwoofer out also, but it wasn't a discrete channel, it wasn't even matrixed into the signal, it was done with a crossover only.

5.1 = Front Left, Center, Front Right, Surround Left, Surround Right, and Sub. 5 discrete full frequency channels and 1 low frequency channel.

[boykster]

I wonder how many discussions just like this one (but probably IRL and on BBS's not web forums) were had as DVD technology was introduced.  I'm sure there are STILL diehard VHS zealots who refuse to succumb to the digitization of their beloved movies....

I have a big feeling that the clout of discount merchandisers (walmart) will play a HUGE role in the timeframe for BD adoption.  If for every 100 flatpanel HD displays that wallyworld sells they sell ONE BD player, they'll sell an awful lot of BD players.....

[ChadTower]

NOPE.

Front Left+Center+Front Right+2 Mono Rears (same sounds 2 speakers)= 4 channels of audio not 5 or 5.1

PL2 has 5 full channels plus a sub.  I can't remember if I've seen any VHS with PL2, though it is certainly possible as it comes from a two channel source just like PL1.

[hyiu]

want to chip in my $0..02 cents of personal opinion...

I do think VCR to DVD is a bigger leap than
DVD to Blue-Ray...

VCR to DVD....

after a few yrs... the VCR (like audio tape) will degrade...
especially if you watch it over and over again...

DVD, if you are careful, I have CDs and DVDs that I have watched / listened MANY times.... over years,  and they are like new...  to me, this is very important...

I have a 110 inch projector at home... and I have HD channels on cable.
So, I can see clearly that 1080i IS BETTER than DVD...
(I did spend $200 to get an upscan dvd player...)
and I'm sure 1080p will be a bit more better....

but right now, if I want a movie... I can simply get it in DVD... (better yet... burn it....)
and if I want better quality... burn it in dual layer....
while it will be better in blue ray, I can't really justify the cost....

so, until all dust settles, blue ray players, discs, burner and empty discs prices comes down...
I simply cannot see myself adding blue ray equipments...
(also, until blue ray disc collection grows much larger.....)

I do have 1 friend who already has a collection of dvd...
and he's now starting to collect blue ray....
but that's really quite rare.....

to give a reference, over half my family / friends have a 40+ inch TV set....
most of those big sets are flat ones....
yet most of them, for now, are satisfy with dvd....
only 1 getting blue ray...

most normal people are just not videophiles....
even if they have a big flat screen...

as for 5.1, 7.1..... never mind.... video is even easier to define....
you see the line... the line is sharp and crisp and clear.... color is vivid...
we can basically come to a good understanding of what is a good picture....

but as for 5.1, 7.1.... for normal use... as long as it has subwoofer for movie explosions, and loud enough when needed... and some sound effect.... people would think that is good setup already....

just ask 10 people out there to give you a good audio brand.... and my guess is at least 7 will tell you Bose.... and you know they basically know nothing much about audio...

[boykster]

considering that this is a forum dedicated to old arcade machines, the pushback against a new technology isn't suprising.   

DVD quality is good, but HD is spectacular.  I can barely stand to watch SD content in my theater anymore, I seek out HD as much as possible.  I can DEFINATELY appreciate the difference between DVD and HD-DVD/BluRay quality on even a 42" plasma, let alone in my theater, and my projector is only 720p. I haven't even touched the high-bitrate multi-channel audio....

[somunny]

DVD's also introduced 5.1 surround sound, which was one of my motivating factors when I upgraded to dvd's. 

Actually, laser discs had 5.1 audio a couple of years before the launch of the DVD format.

[ahofle]

DVD quality is good, but HD is spectacular.

Depends on the transfer.  I've seen some pretty mediocre HD DVD and Blu Ray movies (looked like DVD to me).  I wonder if Blu Ray will be just like DVD in its first years -- a bunch of really ---smurfy--- movie transfers.

[boykster]

DVD quality is good, but HD is spectacular.

Depends on the transfer.  I've seen some pretty mediocre HD DVD and Blu Ray movies (looked like DVD to me).

True.  A bad transfer will be bad no matter the media.

A good example of a GOOD transfer to compare is Transformers; it has a very nice clean DVD transfer, but the HD-DVD transfer is head and shoulders above the DVD transfer in quality.  That is one of the movies I have used as a test with one of my HTPCs so I have firsthand comparison.  DVD upscaled to 720p vs HD-DVD content output @ 720p (same video card, same PC).  The clarity and level of detail in the HD-DVD content is not only "kind of" better than the DVD, but it's considerably better.  So much so, that my wife, who really could care less about "videophile" type stuff said "wow, this looks way better than the DVD".

[AtomSmasher]

DVD's also introduced 5.1 surround sound, which was one of my motivating factors when I upgraded to dvd's. 

Actually, laser discs had 5.1 audio a couple of years before the launch of the DVD format.

Then introduced was the wrong word, but laser disc was never a leading format and we're comparing the transition of dvd to bluray and vhs to dvd, so I feel my point is still valid.  I still remember the first time I bought my 5.1 receiver and speakers and thinking how much more I enjoyed the movies.  Actually hearing helicopters or gun shots going from one corner to another (the first movie I fired up after hooking up the system was Predator ) had a bigger impact on me then the superior visuals because I had a crappy 19'' tv, but a kickass audio system.  I don't see the upgrade in the audio department from dvd to bluray being even close to the difference from vhs to dvd.  I'm sure I'll upgrade to blueray in a few years, but I'm in no hurry to do so.

[MaximRecoil]

NOPE.

Front Left+Center+Front Right+2 Mono Rears (same sounds 2 speakers)= 4 channels of audio not 5 or 5.1

PL2 has 5 full channels plus a sub.  I can't remember if I've seen any VHS with PL2, though it is certainly possible as it comes from a two channel source just like PL1.

Dolby Pro Logic and Pro Logic II are not on the media itself, but rather, they are the decoding technology. They both work with stereo audio (2 channels), which is what is found on VHS (there was never more than 2 channels of audio on a VHS tape).

The stereo signal is encoded in a particular way that is intended to work with DPL, by using phase-shift techniques.  The encoding is generally known as simply "Dolby Surround". Your DPL hardware then decodes that to a 4.0 signal (center, right, left, mono rear). You can add a subwoofer by using either a crossover or allowing the natural rolloff frequency of the subwoofer to do the crossover work. This is the same way subwoofers are typically implemented in home or car stereo setups, and it works very well if done correctly.

DPLII came out somewhat recently (2000 or so) and is more versatile and improved compared to DPL. First, DPLII encoders create 6 discrete channels (5.1) from the stereo source, plus, it can do that with standard stereo sources that were not encoded with DPL or DPLII in mind, such as a typical audio CD. There are also phase shift matrices for the stereo source that are intended to be used specifically with DPLII for better results.

So if you have a VHS movie that is simply normal stereo, or "Dolby Surround" that was originally encoded with standard DPL hardware in mind, you can use it with DPLII hardware and get 5.1 sound.

However, with DPLII used with a standard stereo source, the 6 channels it creates will be directed to each speaker as the DPLII hardware sees fit, so it is not as ideal as true 5.1 encoded soundtracks, which direct the channels as the movie-makers see fit.

So it goes like this:

Dolby Pro Logic works with "Dolby Surround" encoded stereo tracks. Has no affect on ordinary stereo tracks. End result is 4.0 surround directed as the movie-makers saw fit, albeit with less precision than they may have liked.

Dolby Pro Logic II works with standard stereo tracks, "Dolby Surround" stereo tracks, and stereo tracks that were encoded with DPLII-specific matrices. End result is 5.1 directed as the movie-makers saw fit (more precision with the DPLII-specific matrices than with DPL-specific matrices; though still better than what DPL decoders can do with DPL-specific matrices). In the case of what it does with standard stereo tracks, it just "makes stuff up" so to speak, but its "judgment" is generally pretty good.

 

[ChadTower]

Dolby Pro Logic and Pro Logic II are not on the media itself

Dolby Pro Logic II works with standard stereo tracks, "Dolby Surround" stereo tracks, and stereo tracks that were encoded with DPLII-specific matrices.

So it works with encoded tracks that aren't on the media?

That's not how Dolby says it works. 

But I know you.  I'm not going to debate it with you.  In fact, now that you're in, I'm out.   

[patrickl]

Dolby Pro Logic and Pro Logic II are not on the media itself, but rather, they are the decoding technology.

...

The stereo signal is encoded in a particular way that is intended to work with DPL

I think he means the same as you are saying. It's not a distinct channel on the media, but it's encoded into the 2 channels available on the media.

[MaximRecoil]

Dolby Pro Logic and Pro Logic II are not on the media itself

Dolby Pro Logic II works with standard stereo tracks, "Dolby Surround" stereo tracks, and stereo tracks that were encoded with DPLII-specific matrices.

So it works with encoded tracks that aren't on the media?

No, that's not what I said. Dolby Pro Logic and Pro Logic II are decoders. Decoders are not on the media, they are hardware devices. The stereo tracks on the media that are intended to work with Dolby Pro Logic hardware are usually referred to as "Dolby Surround". Both DLP and DPLII can decode "Dolby Surround" stereo tracks, and DLPII takes it one step further by being about to create 5.1 audio from ordinary stereo tracks with no special "surround" encoding at all (like an audio CD or a cassette tape).

I commented because you said something about not knowing whether VHS ever had Dolby Pro Logic II or not; which doesn't make sense. It is kind of like asking if audio CD's ever had digital-to-analog converters.

[shardian]

Pro Logic II is only the "decoding hardware" that interprets the signal. Most movies and TV shows I watch are...cough...in Divx format. My receiver does a HELL of a job with the stereo audio in making it feel like discrete surround sound. I won't get the true "bullets over my head" feeling of 5.1 or 7.1, but the receiver still takes the 2 channel stereo and makes it nice to the point I don't miss full 5.1 .

Pro Logic back in the day did work well with VHS, but of course you had to have a Hi-Fi stereo VCR. I remembre when my neighbor got a surround receiver. The first movie we watched was The Ghost and the Darkness. That was a defining audio experience since surround wasn't even widely used in movie theaters yet.

And I also agree with others here that the audio capabilities of DVD were the major point for me. I still watch most of my stuff on the trust 19" TV. I have a projector, but very rarely use it because we are quite satisfied with the super sharp CRT picture on the 19".