BLU-RAY NEWS TAGGED "JOSHUA ZYBER"Receive Blu-ray News via RSS

HD Advisor 35 Up

Fri Nov 06, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

Restoring Older Movies

Q: I recently bought the Blu-ray for one of my favorite monster movies, 'Gojira'. I'd seen the original Japanese version on DVD and really loved it, so I was excited when I saw the movie at Best Buy for $12.99 and I snatched it up. Now, I understand the damage the original print suffered during post production, but it looked like the new transfer wasn't much of an improvement at all. I'm glad I bought it, because I didn't have a copy before, but it doesn't look like a lot was done to the new -- if it was new -- print. My question is if a movie with as much damage as 'Gojira' can be cleaned up for a Blu-ray release, or would it just be cost prohibitive to do a restoration of a film with this much original damage? Or was Classic Media just lazy and greedy in releasing this transfer?

A: The answer is most likely some combination of all those options. Unfortunately, the film elements for many older movies, especially foreign movies of a certain age, were often not stored or treated as well as they should have been. Any damage those elements have suffered over the years may be permanently ingrained into the movie. A full-blown restoration would require the rights-holders to compile the best bits and pieces from the camera negative and surviving prints to assemble a copy with the least amount of damage. Photochemical processes and digital clean-up may then be performed to correct any imperfections.

This is typically a time-consuming and expensive process. How far the studio is willing to go with this is usually determined by what resources they have at their disposal and how high their sales expectations may be. For example, a major studio like Warner Bros. can afford to pull out all the stops for a sure-fire seller like 'The Wizard of Oz'. However, a smaller studio like Classic Media may not necessarily be guaranteed that a perfect restoration of 'Gojira' would ever recoup their investment. As such, they try to make the best with what they've got.

Further, Classic Media is just the license holder for 'Gojira' in the United States. They do not own the film elements. Those are hold by the original production studio, Toho Co., Ltd. Classic Media is forced to work with whatever quality of source that Toho provides them. In most cases like this, the original foreign studio strikes the video master and simply gives it to the American licensee, who will author it onto a disc with English menus and subtitles. The licensee may not have any control over the film-to-video transfer at all.

Squeaking Noise from TV Speakers

Q: I have a bit of an issue with my home theater set up. I have a Samsung LN-46A650 television, a Sony STR-DG720 receiver, a Sony BPD-S560 Blu-ray player, and a Philips DVP5960 Region-Free up-converting DVD Player for my main hookups. My issue is that whenever I switch components on my receiver (i.e. Blu-ray to DVD player), my television's speakers let out a loud intermittent squeak every few seconds. The problem fixes itself once I have a disc playing or I shut my receiver off and then turn it back on. I have tried switching inputs on the TV and receiver and also trying different HDMI cables and there is no change. Is this an issue with my TV or my receiver?

A: I'm going to assume that you have everything connected by HDMI. It also sounds like you have your disc players connected first to the receiver, and then out from the receiver to the TV (which is generally the best option). Does your TV have a setting that will disable audio on the HDMI input? Does this still happen if you mute the volume on your receiver before switching from one source to another?

When all else fails, your best bet is the process of elimination. Disconnect everything and then reconnect one component at a time until you discover exactly what combination of elements is causing the issue.

Projector Zooming

Q: I've been thinking about buying a projector for my home-theater, but I have a doubt that really concerns me. How do I know what the projection area will be? In others words, how big will my screen be? As far as I know, there is a rule for projectors that, once the distance between the projector and the screen has been determined, one could not adjust the size of the projection, because the picture would get correctly focused on screen. How can I know if, for example, putting my projector 15 feet away from the screen, will I get a 50', 60' or 90' screen?

A: Most modern home theater projectors have separate zoom and focus controls. Once you've mounted the projector, you can zoom to make the image larger or smaller. The lens should allow you to dial in proper focus at any size within the zoom range.

In order to determine how large an image you can project, you need to know the projector's throw range and zoom ratio. Most manufacturers provide projection calculators on their web sites. If you can't find that, try looking up the model at Projector Central. Using the projection calculator, you can enter your distance from screen and determine how large an image you will project at any zoom setting.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Speaker Feedback

Q: I recently re-did my family room into a multi-purpose media room, and I've come across an issue that I cannot seem to solve. When I am listening to anything, be it audio or film, when I am adjusting the volume I get feedback. I have an Onkyo TX-SR 875 and when adjusting the volume I get a "bump" sound through the sub-woofer, on every .5 increment. So imagine the volume rapidly increasing or decreasing, there is a rapid thump. Now I'm not sure if this is worth mentioning, but I ran dedicated power (20 amp circuit) for the Onkyo thinking that I would not get issues like this, but alas it was not to be. All cables were custom made and buzzed to ensure there would be no shorts in the cables. My speaker system consists of Athena Technologies (an API Company) S3 and P3 Series of speakers. Not sure if you are familiar with these speakers but they are modular. The S3 and P3 can be attached (via Ni-Cad railings) and run in full range, or be separated and run as, well, separates. Which means that I am running 2 subs. Now the Onkyo only having the one sub output makes me wonder if splitting it may in fact be the issue. I have tried bypassing cables, running the cables away from line voltage cables, I just cannot solve this and I hope you will be able to offer a solution.

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


HD Advisor on 34th Street

Fri Oct 30, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

THX Optimizer Revisited

Q: I saw your post about THX Optimizer and wanted to clear up a popular misconception. The THX Optimizer settings are not unique to the discs that they are featured on. Optimizer patterns are set to SMPTE industry standards for color, black levels, etc. So, you don't have to tweak your TV when using Optimizer on different discs. Where did this rumor start? The Optimizer patterns are often used in the DVD/BD mastering process, traveling with the content throughout the production chain allowing mastering/QC houses to evaluate levels of specific discs/content. Somehow this message was lost in translation, prompting some reviewers to claim Optimizer is for calibrating specific discs, which it is not. Let me know if this helps. We are happy to answer any questions.
THX Ltd.

A: This may be THX Ltd.'s current approach to the THX Optimizer tool. If so, please accept my apologies for the confusion.

However, respectfully, I can tell you exactly where this "rumor" started. It started from THX's own documentation. I see that the Optimizer page on the currently active official THX web site has been revamped. Using the power of the internet, we can take a look at the same site as it appeared in December of 2006. Doing so, I find that the Optimizer page states the following (emphasis mine):

"THX Optimizer consists of a series of tests that make it easier to fine-tune the audio and video performance of a home theater system. But best of all is that the signals used are equal to the final reference levels set during the mastering of each individual release. Thus, the system's performance can be tailored to each specific movie. As a result, the movie is seen as the director intended. "

This reads pretty clearly to me that Optimizer was intended to be used on each and every movie, and may result in different calibration requirements each time.

If THX has changed its approach to how the Optimizer tool works, or if that original language was simply worded misleadingly, I am glad to hear that this is no longer the case. As I mentioned in my previous article, I feel that calibration should be a set-it-and-forget-it activity performed only periodically as needed by the aging characteristics of the user's hardware. A good calibration disc will allow a viewer to find the display's best settings for all discs he or she watches.

Dolby TrueHD on 'Akira' Revisited

Q: In reference to your article about the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack on the 'Akira' Blu-ray, I have a similar question. I have a first generation Playstation 3, which is connected via HDMI 1.3 to a Pioneer Elite VSX-03TXH. The PS3 displays the output signal as being 192 kHz, but the receiver reports the signal at 96 kHz. The PS3 is set to output all signals (from 192 kHz down), and the receiver is able to handle Dolby TrueHD at 192 kHz, according to the manufacturer's specifications. Is it possible that this just an inaccurate display from the receiver since the track is decoded by the PS3? Also, is there a difference in quality between the two kHz rates? Any insight and advice is greatly appreciated.

A: My best guess is this is either just a display error on your receiver, or some sort of HDMI handshaking problem between the two units that's causing your receiver to downsample the audio to 96 kHz. I can understand that being frustrating. However, in reality, the difference between 96 kHz and 192 kHz is largely beyond the ability of human ears to detect. Most movie soundtracks are mastered at 48 kHz, and research has shown that higher sampling rates have diminishing returns, with 96 kHz being pretty much the upper limit. The 'Akira' disc authors chose to use the maximum sampling rate available on the format primarily just so that they could say they did for marketing purposes.

So, when you watch the movie, if you don't hear anything wrong with the soundtrack, I wouldn't worry about it.

Dolby TrueHD vs. DTS-HD Master Audio Revisited

Q: There has been a debate concerning the issue of what's the better lossless audio codec: Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio. Most professionals claim that one isn't better than the other, that both are lossless soundtracks exactly how the source material was made. Despite this claim, the debate has raged with comparisons of discs that have these soundtracks. However, the problem is that it's like comparing apples to oranges. (Like comparing 'Iron Man' to 'The Incredible Hulk'.) The problem with this is that soundtracks aren't created equally, so you can't really discern any quality difference dealing with the codec, only the soundtrack. However, we do have a movie that includes both codecs on the disc: 'Top Gun'. I gave it a listen and without a doubt, I liked the DTS track over the TrueHD track. The DTS track was more immersive and fuller than the TrueHD track. Now how is this possible if both codecs are supposed to be accurate representations of the source?

A: As I've mentioned in previous columns, both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio are lossless compression codecs. They work similarly to a ZIP file. What you put into them is compressed, and then reconstructed exactly the same when you open the file. Because both are lossless, assuming all other factors are equal, there will be no quality differences regardless of which of these codecs you use. Lossless is lossless. No loss.

'Top Gun' is an interesting, but ultimately misleading, test case. Although the disc contains two copies of the movie's soundtrack, one in Dolby TrueHD format and one in DTS-HD Master Audio format, it turns out that the two tracks are actually not the same sound mix. If you take a look at the disc case (or your receiver's input display), you'll notice that the Dolby TrueHD option is a 5.1 audio track, while the DTS-HD Master Audio option is 6.1 track. Before releasing the movie on Blu-ray, Paramount had the movie's soundtrack remixed into 6.1 configuration for the DTS track. But they left the Dolby TrueHD track as the older 5.1 mix.

As a result, this is really another apples-to-oranges comparison. In addition to the extra rear channel, there's no telling what other aspects of the sound mix the studio may have tweaked. Because the two codecs were each fed different sources, naturally the end results are also different.

I have a couple more points to make here. First, please note that the Dolby and DTS companies have different philosophies in regard to the usage of Dialog Normalization. Dolby uses it, and DTS usually doesn't. Dialnorm sets the overall volume level of the soundtrack. (However, contrary to popular misconception, it does not in any way change the sound mix or boost the dialogue channel in relation to the rest of the audio.) Because of this, DTS tracks are almost always set louder than Dolby tracks by default. That doesn't make them "better" than Dolby tracks, just louder. I advise you to volume match the two with a sound level meter before attempting any comparisons. Even a small difference in volume can radically affect a listener's perception of audio quality.

Secondly, it's worth noting that 'Top Gun' played in theaters originally with either Dolby Stereo (in the 35mm release prints) or 70mm 6-track audio. In 1986, there was no such thing as the 5.1 configuration as we now know it. Both the 5.1 and 6.1 soundtracks on the Blu-ray are remixes that have been tweaked and enhanced for home video. While both TrueHD And DTS-HD Master Audio will both losslessly represent the studio masters fed into them, those masters are not exactly 100% faithful to the way the movie was originally mixed back in 1986. As such, even if you do find differences between the 5.1 and 6.1 options, those differences do not necessarily mean that one is "better" than the other, just different. "Better" is subjective in this case.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Blu-ray Players with Netflix Streaming

Q: Simple question: What's the best Blu-ray player that also offers Netflix streaming?

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


HD Advisor 31st

Fri Oct 09, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

Is Film "HD"?

Q: I recently went to the one-showing-only theatrical re-release of 'The Wizard Of Oz' in HD. I noticed during the introduction, they said it was, "For the first time ever in HD." Then, "It will look as good as it did on opening night." I recall other questions on this site about how the original film stock has a much higher potential resolution than even 1080p, and that even 1080p is a downgrade from the original film. So, if that is the case, hasn't it always been "HD"? (I realize for this showing, it was shown from a digital source.) Would it be correct to say all movies viewed in theaters are HD? And will we eventually see movies in theaters shown from film be advertised as HD?

A: In many respects, this is really a matter of semantics. Technically, "high definition" is a video term that refers to the resolution of a video signal. Film is a photochemical medium that does not have lines of resolution or pixels. Therefore, it is not accurate to refer to film as "HD," even if that film (like 35mm or 65mm) has more equivalent detail than high definition video does.

On the other hand, digital projection is a video format and can be called "HD." That recent screening of 'Oz' was projected from HD digital video.

Does that mean that you'll never see a film screening advertised as "HD"? Probably not. When it comes to marketing and advertising, technical accuracy rarely comes into play. I've seen 35mm still camera film marketed as "High Definition." I've even seen eyeglasses labeled that way. "HD" is a buzzword that everyone wants to use these days. But just because something is branded like that doesn't mean that the term is being used correctly.

Lossless 7.1 Soundtracks from Older Blu-ray/HD DVD Players

Q: Toshiba HD-A1, HD-A2, HD-A30, HD-XA1, and Sony BDP-S1. Those models don't support DTS-HD Master Audio format. What happen if I play DTS-HD MA 7.1 movies on these players when connected via HDMI to a receiver that supports lossless audio with 7.1 speakers setup? Will it come out as DTS 5.1 core only or DTS-ES 6.1?

A: As you noted, all of those Toshiba HD DVD players referenced, as well as the first-generation Sony Blu-ray player, do not support lossless audio. When you play a disc with a DTS-HD Master Audio soundtrack, the players will only be able to decode and output the standard DTS core, not the MA extension.

So your question is whether that DTS core will be 5.1 channels or 6.1, if the MA track is 7.1? (Standard DTS does not offer 7.1 format.) For example, 'Pan's Labyrinth' (Blu-ray | HD DVD) has DTS-HD MA 7.1 audio on either format. From my understanding, the core of a DTS-HD MA track works the same as regular DTS on DVD. The track can be either 5.1 or 6.1 depending on how the studio authors it. If I had to guess, I'd assume that most are probably authored in 5.1 format, with the added channels included in the MA extension.

Connecting Old Video Sources to an HDTV

Q: I am trying to connect my Laserdisc player to my new LED Samsung HDTV. However, the TV only has one input set for the old-fashioned RCA (yellow, red, and white). I also have a region-free DVD player as well that I need to connect to that. Is there an adaptor out there that's HDMI on one end of the cable and the old-fashioned Yellow/Red/White on the other end?

A: If I'm reading you correctly, your TV has extra HDMI inputs that you're not currently using, and you'd like to plug old analog video equipment into those. What you're asking for would require a device that can digitize the analog signal from a Composite video cable, as well as analog audio, and output them all over HDMI. This is possible, but impractical and probably needlessly expensive for a standalone device.

Do you have an A/V receiver with HDMI connections? If so, most modern receivers will do what you're asking. You can plug all of your video sources into the receiver first. Then the receiver will digitize the analog signals, and output everything over a single HDMI connection. You can switch between which sources you want to output over that HDMI connection at the receiver.

Failing that, you may just want to try a simple analog RCA A/V switcher. These can be purchased rather cheaply, and will allow you to plug multiple devices into a single TV input.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

How to Recognize a Bootleg Blu-ray?

Q: How can you tell a burned Blu-ray from an authentic one? With such high-tech and sophisticated printers today, I figure someone could easily print a high quality label for the front of the disc to make the burned copy look legitimate. Is there any other way to distinguish a bootleg Blu-ray from an authentic Blu-ray?

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


30 Days of HD Advisor

Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

PS3 Audio Decoding Revisited

JZ: In a previous column, I wrote that there shouldn't be any difference between decoding Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio in a disc player versus bitstreaming them to an A/V receiver. This led to several follow-up questions from readers, which I will attempt to address together.

Q: I know you must be exhausted with questions about PS3 audio decoding. Let me throw one thought your way. The PS3 doesn’t give a Dialog Normalization flag value for Dolby codecs. This can make life difficult and confusing for enthusiasts who are trying to do soundtrack comparisons, or listen at a common volume. That is why I keep at least one player in bitstream mode.

Q: I'm pretty sure that I read most if not all your posts on the Playstation 3 and bitstreaming, but I notice a huge difference in sound volume with HD audio. I have a Toshiba HD-A35 player and I don't hear drop off in sound volume. Can you help me out?

Q: From recent readings, I saw that the PS3 Slim can pass through Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio via bitstream so an external amp can decode them. I have an old-school brick of a shiny black PS3 that doesn't have this functionality, but this does the decoding of the HD audio on-board, yes? So with decoding taking place at the PS3, is there any real benefit in me upgrading my amp to take advantage of the HD signals, or is the same information already being passed to my current amp?

A: I feel this merits clarifying my previous comments. In essence, the decoding of a lossless compression codec such as Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio should be a straightforward process. You should get identical results whether you perform the decoding in a disc player (such as the PS3) or in an A/V receiver. However, after the decoding is complete, an A/V receiver may offer additional processing that the disc player does not. For example, most Dolby soundtracks are flagged with a Dialogue Normalization value. If the disc player doesn't read the DialNorm flag when decoding, your audio may exit the player louder or softer in volume via decoded PCM than it might via bitstream transmission.

Note that Dialogue Normalization does not alter the quality or fidelity of a soundtrack. All DialNorm does is set a default starting volume for a soundtrack, similar to raising or lowering the volume control on your receiver. This is explained in more depth in my earlier Uncompressed vs. Lossless Audio article. A change in volume is not the same thing as a change in quality. A louder soundtrack is not automatically a better soundtrack. If the DialNorm flag is ignored, you may want to adjust your receiver's volume control a few notches to bring the soundtrack in line with other movies you've watched, but the content of the track will be unchanged. Although some users may find this a minor nuisance, I don't feel that it merits buying all new hardware for.

On the other hand, many A/V receivers can apply ProLogic IIx processing (which will expand a 5.1 soundtrack to 7.1 channels) to a bitstreamed audio signal but not a raw multi-channel PCM signal. The same problem may apply to other optional post-processing functions such as Cinema EQ. In a worst case scenario, some receivers may not be able to perform bass management or speaker level controls. If these are something you'd like or need to use, hardware that will send a bitstreamed audio signal may be beneficial.

Disc Incompatibility Issues / Firmware Updates

Q: Recently I rented a copy of 'Crank 2' through Netflix. When I tried to play it in my Samsung BDP-1500, the movie wouldn't play. I took the disc and played it on the PS3, and it worked perfectly. Will I have to change my player to play the newer movies, or did I just have bad luck?

A: Unfortunately, disc compatibility issues like this continue to crop up on new releases due to the complexity of Blu-ray's ever-changing encryption and BD-Java programming. Just recently, I found that 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' wouldn't play on two out of my three Blu-ray players.

In most cases, issues like this can be resolved by your Blu-ray player's manufacturer through a firmware update. The first thing you should do is check the current firmware on your player, and then visit the manufacturers' web site to see if there is a more recent firmware. Firmware files can usually be burned to a CD, loaded onto a USB drive, or updated via Ethernet connection. Follow the instructions that the manufacturer provides. If your firmware is up-to-date and the disc still won't play, email the manufacturer a description of the problem (providing the UPC of the disc helps) and ask if they have a solution ready.

Upconverted Standard-Def Content on Blu-ray

Q: 'Star Trek: The Original Series - Season 2' includes a 'Deep Space Nine' episode that I understand is a 1080p upconversion from a 480i master. My concern is that Paramount is testing to see if people will accept this for 'Star Trek: The Next Generation' Blu-ray releases. Let's face it, to scan the original film footage, re-edit, and create new special effects takes time and money. Do you think this is likely?

A: Personally, I don't think there's cause to fear here. That 'Deep Space Nine' episode you reference was included as a bonus feature. It was never intended to be the primary content on the disc.

I discussed the problems with remastering TV series such as 'Star Trek: The Next Generation' and 'Deep Space Nine' for high definition in an earlier column. Because these shows were post-produced on SD video, their final masters currently exist only in standard definition form. To remaster them, the original film elements would need to be re-edited from scratch. It can be done, but as you note, will probably be time-consuming and expensive.

I doubt that Paramount or CBS Home Entertainment have an agenda to release complete season sets of 'TNG' or 'DS9' on Blu-ray in upconverted form. There would be little to no benefit in that for anyone. More likely, the shows will simply not be released on Blu-ray until such time as a full-blown reconstruction and remastering can be performed.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Surge Protector Recommendations

Q: I recently purchased a 46" Samsung LCD HDTV. Upon purchase, the salesperson strongly encouraged me to buy a high-tech surge protector. He told me a horror story about a man who purchased a new TV, and it was "destroyed" by a power surge from a storm. I did not buy the surge protector that was over $100.00. I am currently using a standard $15.00 surge protector that I purchased from Wal-Mart. Is there a legitimate concern in not having a surge protector specialized for HDTVs?

JZ: I highly recommend investing in a good surge protector. However, I don't believe that you necessarily need to buy an expensive (read: overpriced) model sold in the home theater section of the store. On the other hand, a cheap unit may not offer enough protection for your expensive gear. I'll leave this to our other readers to recommend some good, reasonably-priced models.

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


HD Advisor 29

Fri Sep 25, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

Digital Editing in Filmmaking

Q: I know that the transition from old-fashioned film editing to digital editing took a while and occurred towards the late '80s/early '90s. Are there any movies from the early stages of digital editing that could have been scanned for editing at a resolution lower than 1080p, thus making the master less than Blu-ray quality?

A: Digital editing, in itself, doesn't necessarily have any effect on the final image quality of the movie. In its simplest form, the process works like this: After a director shoots his movie on 35mm film, the raw footage will be scanned to create digital files that can be fed into a digital editing workstation (such as Avid or its competitors). The resolution or picture quality of those files isn't really important. The movie's editors will then work their magic. Once complete, the workstation produces a list of frame numbers and time codes, which is then given to a Negative Cutter, who will conform the original 35mm film negative into the movie's final cut. No video is ever output from the editing workstation itself. The final assembly, color timing, etc. are all performed in the photochemical realm, just as they have been for over a century of filmmaking.

That's assuming that this is a traditional film production chain, which is what would have been in place during those early days of digital editing that you describe (and is still quite commonly used today). However, the introduction of a Digital Intermediate stage complicates matters. When a DI is used, color timing and final assembly are performed digitally, and then the product is output back onto film. In this instance, you're correct that the quality of the digital scan and processing will limit the quality of the final motion picture image.

Digital Intermediates did not become commonly used in the film industry until the beginning of this decade. 'Amelie' and 'O Brother, Where Are Thou?' were two of the first films to have all post-production performed in the digital realm. (Previously, some movies may have utilized a DI for selected scenes, but not the entire feature.) While those early DIs may not have been quite up to modern standards, the film still would have been scanned at least at 2k resolution, which is slightly higher than Blu-ray offers and has superior color quality. At least theoretically, those movies should still be fit for eventual Blu-ray transfers.

Watching 'The Dark Knight' on a 2.35:1 Screen

Q: I'm planning to install a 2.35:1 wide screen in my basement. Right now, I'm using 16:9 screen. How can I adjust the screen when I'm watching 'The Dark Knight' on Blu-ray after I install the 2.35:1 screen? The movie switches back and forth between IMAX scenes and regular wide screen. I'm planning to upgrade my projector and will get an anamorphic lens for it.

A: I touched on this issue in my 2.35:1 Constant Image Height Tutorial a few months ago. When 'The Dark Knight' was photographed, director Christopher Nolan knew that only the IMAX theatrical prints would have a shifting aspect ratio. The standard 35mm prints seen in the majority of theaters were projected at a constant 2.35:1 aspect ratio. In order to accommodate this, Nolan framed the IMAX footage loosely enough that it would function at either ratio. Both versions of the movie are valid.

Aspect ratio differences in 'The Dark Knight'. Yellow lines represent the 2.35:1 framing.

When it comes to home video, only the Blu-ray edition of the movie attempts to mimic the IMAX effect. The regular DVD is letterboxed throughout.

If using a projector with anamorphic lens attachment, I recommend simply zooming the movie to fill your 2.35:1 screen. Although you'll lose some picture off the top and bottom during the IMAX scenes, you won't be missing anything critical. An argument can be made that you're still complying with the director's intent -- just that it's his intent for the 35mm prints rather than the IMAX prints. I've watched 'The Dark Knight' Blu-ray this way, and it's a perfectly satisfying experience.

PAL Content on Blu-ray

Q: I'd like to know why store bought foreign editions (particularly from Canada) of Blu-rays will play the movie but not the special features. I have a Sony BSP-S350 and the two movies I have from Canada are 'All the Boys Love Mandy Lane' and 'Black Sheep'. Is there a way to get them to work?

A: You may have bought those two discs in Canada, but 'Black Sheep' and 'All the Boys Love Mandy Lane' are both UK video releases that must have been imported to that country.

While the discs may not be region coded and the movies themselves are both encoded in the same 1080p24 format used here in North America, the bonus features on those discs are encoded in standard-def PAL format. Your Blu-ray player does not support PAL. Unfortunately, there's nothing you can do about this, short of buying a different Blu-ray player that is compatible with PAL (and can convert the 50 Hz frame rate to 60 Hz, preferably). The OPPO BDP-83 would be a good candidate, if it's really that important to you.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Blu-ray Playback on a PC

Q: I was wondering if you could help me with my configuration. I am currently using Arcsoft Total Media Theater to play Blu-rays on my PC. I have Logitech Z-5500 speakers that are connected using both a Toslink cable and the standard analog speaker connections. I have been using the Toslink to get DTS and Dolby Digital sound from my Blu-rays, and the sound is fantastic. But when I was reading your column called Blu-ray and HD DVD Audio Explained, I noticed that Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA can be decoded by the player and sent out using multi-channel analog, while Toslink cables can't support the bandwidth for them. Should I continue getting DTS/DD sound using the Toslink and letting my Z-5500 receiver decode the signals, or can TMT decode the signals and give me the full sound quality through the analog connections? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

JZ: Unfortunately, at this time, I still don't have Blu-ray playback on my own PC. Perhaps one of our readers more familiar with this configuration can chime in?

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


HD Advisor Flashback

Fri Sep 11, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Our HD Advisor is taking a much-needed vacation this week. During his absence, rather than run a new Q&A, we're digging back into the archives. Way back. All the way back to this week in September, 1985. Picture the scene with us, if you will. It was a time painted in neon colors and propelled to the electronic beat of a synthesizer soundtrack. A time when a man could look his most masculine wearing a pink T-shirt under a white designer suit and loafers without socks. A time when it simply wasn't possible to own enough Swatches.

It was also a time when High Definition was still the stuff of science fiction. Nonetheless, people needed advice with their TVs. So hop in your DeLorean, gun it to 88 mph, and take a trip back in time with us for this special Flashback Edition of the "TV Advisor."



Answers by Joshua Zyber

Betamax vs. VHS

Q: Dear TV Advisor, I'm sure you get asked this all the time, but which is better, VHS or Beta? I know it will be totally rad being able to watch movies at home whenever I want, but the machines are so expensive. I can't afford to spend $500 a piece on both of them. Which format has better quality, and which do you think will win the format war?

A: In terms of picture quality, Betamax has an advantage over VHS. Beta tapes have slightly higher resolution (250 lines vs. 240) and less crosstalk. However, VHS tapes can record longer. When it comes to pre-recorded movies, that's shouldn't be too big of a deal. But if you plan to record a lot of TV shows yourself, VHS is probably the better option.

At this point in time, VHS has a dominant lead over Betamax in sales. Sony is a stubborn company, so I'm sure Beta will stick it out for a while longer anyway, but in most likelihood VHS will eventually win the format war.

With that said, if you're really looking for the best picture quality, you should look into laserdisc players. LDs have much higher resolution than either tape format (425 lines). On the downside, laserdisc players can't record. Also, due to their limited capacity of 1 hour per side maximum in CLV format or 30 minutes per side in CAV, most movies need to be broken up to at least 2 or 3 sides. Flipping and swapping discs can be an inconvenience, but it's worth it for the improved picture.

Antenna Input on TV

Q: TV Advisor, I really want to buy a VHS machine, but the back of my TV only has connections for its antenna. Could I still hook up the VHS, or do I need to buy a fancier new TV first?

A: The standard A/V output for most VCRs is the coaxial connection. That's the cable with the spiky end and the screw-on connector. If you head over to your local Radio Shack, you should be able to find an adaptor that will allow you to connect a coaxial cable to your TV's antenna inputs. It shouldn't cost more than a dollar or two.

"Letterbox" Bars

Q: I just bought a copy of 'Manhattan' on laserdisc. I think it's defective. It has weird gray bars covering parts of the picture. I exchanged it at Tower Records for another copy, but still have the same problem. What's going on here? Why can't I see the whole movie? Is my LD player broken?

A: There's nothing wrong with your player or the disc. It turns out that the 'Manhattan' laserdisc is one of the first movies to be released in a new format called "letterbox." They call it that because it kind of looks like you're watching TV through a narrow mail slot.

Apparently, Woody Allen himself requested this. You see, when you go to a movie theater, the screen there is much wider than your TV. The movies are photographed to fit that wide screen. When most movies come to TV or video later, they're put through a process called "pan and scan" where essentially the sides of the picture are cut off so that the middle will fit your TV screen. Sometimes you lose a lot of picture this way, up to half.

The "letterbox" format attempts to compensate for this by shrinking the size of the wide movie image until the whole thing fits on your screen. Of course, that will leave empty space above and below the picture. That's what the bars are. You're actually not losing any picture on the top and bottom; you're getting more on the sides, but the picture has to be smaller.

"Letterbox" may take some getting used to. Give it a try and see if you can learn to ignore the bars. Personally, I think it was a mistake for the people who transferred 'Manhattan' to make the bars gray. I think that's a little distracting. I hope that future movies in the "letterbox" format use black bars instead.

How to Get a CED out of the Case?

Q: I recently picked up a SelectaVision player at a yard sale. I know the format was discontinued recently, but the player was so cheap I couldn't resist. I figure I can collect some inexpensive movies for now while I save up for one of those cassette tape machines. The seller even threw in a few free movies. Here's my problem: I can't figure out how to get the movies out of those darn plastic cases, or how to put them in the player. Help!

A: Actually, you're not supposed to take the CED disc out of its plastic caddy yourself. You insert the whole caddy into the machine. The player will remove the disc, and then you can extract the caddy. When it's time to take out the disc, put the caddy back in the player.

Digital Audio on Laserdisc

Q: I thought laserdisc players could also play CDs? My rich friend has a CD player and likes to rub it in everybody's face. He gave me a Thompson Twins CD for my birthday, even though he knows my family doesn't have that kind of money to buy a CD player. That's like $800! Do you know how many Swatches I could buy for that? Anyway, my school recently got a Pioneer laserdisc player (model LD-V4000). I thought I could listen to the CD on that, but I tried it and it didn't work.

A: In order to play a CD, you'll need a laserdisc player with digital audio capability. CDs are a digital audio format. Unfortunately, not all LD players have that ability.

When the laserdisc format was first created, it only supported analog audio. Digital audio is a recent development. Many movies released on the format these days contain both analog and digital versions of the soundtrack.

With the Pioneer brand, you can tell whether a player supports digital audio by its model number. Digital models will begin with a "CLD" prefix, which indicates that they're CD/LD combi players.

The LD-V4000 is an industrial model sold to corporations and schools. Sadly, the industrial models still do not support digital audio.

Homework Assignment: You Be the TV Advisor

The TV Advisor knows many things, but he doesn't know everything. Some questions that the TV Advisor receives are best answered by our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please send your response in a letter to TV Advisor Headquarters. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Cable TV Remote Control Boxes

Q: We recently had cable TV installed. I can't believe how many channels there are to watch. We have over 30! And the picture is so much less wavy or snowy than it was with our antenna. We just have one problem: when our kids run around the house, they keep tripping over the remote control's cord. I'm afraid they're going to break it. The cable company says they don't make a cordless version. Do you have any tips for what to do with the remote control box so that it's still convenient to change the channel, but not always in the way?

That will conclude our Flashback column. The HD Advisor will be back to his normal schedule with brand new questions and answers next week. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page. In the meantime, keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


27 HD Advisors

Fri Sep 04, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

PS3 Slim

Q: I am wondering if any improvements have been made to the PS3 Slim model as a Blu-Ray player? Specifically, I would like to know if it has the same quality DVD upconversion. Is it still unable to send out HD audio codecs so they can be decoded by a receiver instead of forcing them to be decoded by the PS3 itself? How does the power consumption compare to other players on the market? Or are there any other changes I did not mention?

A: At this moment, initial specs about the PS3 Slim are still incomplete and unconfirmed. What we know so far is that the console's power consumption will be cut by 34% in comparison to the original PS3, and that it will no longer allow the installation of an alternate Operating System. (Sorry, Linux fans.) However, current indications are that the Slim will finally be able to transmit the native codec bitstreams for Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio, which the original PS3 can't do. (The original will decode internally to PCM, though.)

As far as DVD upconversion goes, I wouldn't expect any differences. The programming for features like that is handled by FPGAs in the console. Unlike the bitstream issue (which was handicapped by the HDMI chip in the original model), there's no hardware limitation preventing the PS3 from having superior upconversion. If Sony were to develop a better algorithm, the company could load it into the both versions of the PS3 with a firmware upgrade.

DTS Decoding

Q: I have an older receiver that only decodes Dolby Digital 5.1. From LD to DVD to HD DVD, I was never concerned about the lack of DTS. That has all changed with Blu-ray. About half of my discs are DTS only, leaving me with a stereo or a 2.0 surround track at best. Is there any type of processor or pre-amp you could recommend so that I could achieve 5.1 on all of my Blu-ray discs? I hate to get rid of a receiver that is otherwise working fine.

A: If your existing receiver has 5.1 or 7.1 analog inputs, I would recommend buying a Blu-ray player that offers internal decoding of DTS-HD Master Audio and has multi-channel analog outputs. By pairing those two pieces of equipment together, you can do all the decoding in the player, and just use the receiver for amplification. Not only would you get 5.1, but you'd even get full lossless quality to boot. The recently-reviewed OPPO BDP-83 would be a good fit, for example.

If your receiver doesn't have multi-channel analog inputs, there's not much you can do short of buying a new receiver. These days, dedicated processors and pre-amps are mainly marketed to the high-end audiophile crowd and are quite expensive. Besides which, you'd need some way to connect such a unit to the receiver, and for that you'd need multi-channel analog inputs anyway.

Blu-ray Storage Capacity

Q: I'm a fan of '24', but have a question about the Blu-ray box set of Season 7. I'm somewhat confused about the number of discs in the box set and the storage capacity of Blu-ray. The box set has 6 discs, so I would assume there are 4 episodes per disc. That's great for standard DVD, but if Blu-ray can hold 5 times the data of standard DVD, surely they could fit more episodes on each disc. At least 6, I'm guessing. Is it a price thing? I'm guessing the more discs are in a box set the more the studio can charge for it.

A: With any digital optical disc format, there is no set limit to the number of minutes of content you can fit into any allotted space. The two factors do not have a linear correlation. It all comes down to how much you compress the video signal. If you really wanted to, you could squeeze an entire TV season of 20+ hour-long drama episodes on a single DVD disc. Of course, with that amount of compression, the picture would be virtually unwatchable.

On DVD, the rule of thumb has been that 4 hour-long episodes (which come to just under 3 hours total after you remove commercials) are a good fit for a single (dual-layer) disc. Maybe 5, depending on how cleanly the video compresses. More than that, and you run into problems with distracting compression artifacts.

It turns out that Blu-ray works out nearly the same. While it's true that Blu-ray has much greater storage capacity than DVD, you must keep in mind that high definition video also eats up much more of that capacity, especially when you pair it up with lossless audio.

Of course, marketing also plays a role. A larger number of discs in the box set is generally perceived as a greater value. Consumers often feel that they're getting more when they buy a 7-disc set, even if the same amount of content could theoretically fit onto fewer discs. The trick for studios is finding the right balance between their marketing needs and the format's technical requirements for optimal quality.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Speaker Recommendations

Q: Are high-end speakers like Definitive's Mythos ST Supertower loudspeakers with built-in subwoofers comparable to sound quality to loudspeakers with a standalone subwoofer unit? I'm trying to make a decision to buy nice floor standing speakers, and thought that I could save a bit of money by buying a loudspeaker with a built-in sub.

JZ: My own home theater is confined to a smaller viewing space, so I have always leaned toward smaller speakers with a separate subwoofer. As far as raw audio quality is concerned, I'll let some of our audiophile readers sound off on this one in the forums.

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


The 26th HD Advisor

Fri Aug 28, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

HD Movies from Sources Other than Blu-ray

Q: As you are aware, a number of movies that have been broadcast in high definition on television have never been released on either high-def home video format (HD DVD or Blu-ray). Is it fair to assume that since these films have been mastered for high-def TV broadcast transmission that it is only a matter of time before they are indeed released on Blu-ray, or is that a faulty assumption? Perhaps there is no correlation at all between broadcast rights and high-def home video rights. In a similar vein, is it fair to assume that all HD DVD movies will inevitably be released on Blu-ray? If so, why are so many studios holding off doing so? Could it be that HD DVD sales for certain titles were underwhelming, so they don't see any financial incentive to also do a Blu-ray release, or are there other reasons for the delays?

A: All of the major movie studios have been mastering their movies in high definition for over a decade now. Those HD masters serve multiple purposes. They can be used for Blu-ray, or downconverted for DVD, or licensed out for TV broadcast and other sources (VUDU, Netflix downloads, etc.).

In general, there isn't much correlation between broadcast rights and home video rights. The fact that a movie has appeared in high definition on cable doesn't guarantee that a Blu-ray is forthcoming. A lot of the movies broadcast in high definition are sourced from older and dated masters. The studio may choose to hold off on releasing a Blu-ray until a new master can be struck. Or they may just have gotten a good broadcast licensing rate for a specific movie, but don't believe that a Blu-ray would be as profitable.

I expect that all the movies released on HD DVD will eventually be released on Blu-ray. However, similar conditions apply. Universal in particular was notorious for cranking out catalog titles on HD DVD that had very old and problematic video transfers just to get product out on the market. They've been more selective about which titles make it to Blu-ray. A lot of those missing movies deserve to be remastered first.

Also, as you speculated, the studios may hesitate to release poor-selling HD DVD titles on Blu-ray until they feel the market is more amenable, such as during an anniversary for that movie, or to coincide with the release of an upcoming sequel/remake.

Timelines and Other Gimmicks

Q: Why is it that some manufacturers don't seem to understand the importance of a clean, uncluttered image? Some action sequences or still frames can be so beautiful I'd like to look at them a little longer. Especially on Blu-ray. But only on Blu-ray can you find a thing like an unremovable 'timeline' when you want to watch a sequence frame-by-frame or you simply want to enjoy a still frame. I have nothing against timelines and other gimmicks, but please: optional/removable. Or is it me having the wrong equipment, a Panasonic DMP-BD35? Is there a player available that can override these forced 'timelines' and give me back my uncluttered image?

A: For what it's worth, I happen to agree with you. I also find timeline meters and other graphics or icons that clutter the screen when the movie is paused annoying. I would prefer if studios made those functions optional.

Unfortunately, no Blu-ray players can override these features unless the studio specifically authors the disc to make them defeatable. The Blu-ray format has a protected video path that prevents a player from altering anything the studio wishes to appear on screen.

Why Both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio?

Q: Regarding the two lossless audio formats (Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio), you have mentioned a while ago that all three formats are bit-for-bit identical to their studio masters and result in equivalent audio quality. I understand why studios have dropped the use of linear PCM audio track, but what's the point in maintaining Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA? At the end, the studio has to choose only one of the two audio formats. So if they are identical...

A: If you're asking why a studio would choose to include both Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio on the same disc, that is very rarely done. Off the top of my head, I can only think of 'Close Encounters' and 'Top Gun'. You're right, there's really no need for that. Assuming all other factors involving the sound mix are equal, the two lossless compression codecs will deliver identical results. (To add to the confusion, the two soundtracks on 'Top Gun' are actually sourced from separate mixes.)

If you're asking why there's any competition between Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio in general, that's a little more complicated. Although both audio formats are lossless, they achieve their results through different means. Dolby TrueHD is a more efficient codec and requires less space. However, it's not backwards compatible with older A/V receivers, and will require that a standard lossy Dolby Digital track also be authored on the disc.

Meanwhile, DTS-HD Master Audio is stored in a core + extension configuration, which means that it is backwards compatible with older receivers. If a viewer's hardware doesn't support the lossless extension, the player will only read the lossy DTS core. Therefore, there's no need to include a separate lossy track, because the lossy track is already part of the signal.

DTS-HD is also advantageous for viewers who can't make use of the full lossless extension. The lossy DTS core is usually the higher bit-rate 1.5 Mb/s version of standard DTS, which is arguably higher in fidelity than the 640 kb/s standard Dolby Digital option.

A studio's choice between Dolby or DTS will come down to which model they prefer. Of course, business being business, behind-the-scenes deals and incentives may also play a part in the competition.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too.

This week, the Homework assignment is literally a homework assignment!

Digital Cinematography

Q: I am writing a school paper on the emerging technology of digital cameras used in motion picture production. What percentage of movies/television series are shot digitally?

JZ: For theatrical features, the percentage shot on digital video is still quite small, only a handful of movies a year. The numbers are almost certainly higher for television, but digital video is still far from ubiquitous there either. The majority of primetime dramas are still shot on film, for example. Part of the reason for the slow transition is that existing production pipelines are focused on film. It's easier and less expensive for a movie or TV show to use an existing post-production chain rather than to invest in the development of a new HD video pipeline. The other major factor is that many of the creative talent still prefer the look of film to the look of video.

In either case, I don't have the exact figures. Can one of our other readers help out? Perhaps someone working in the industry is reading this.

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


HD Advisor in the 25th Century

Fri Aug 21, 2009 at 03:30 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

HDMI 1.3

Q: I was thinking about upgrading from an HDMI 1.1 output Blu-ray player to one with a HDMI 1.3 output. I have a new 58-inch plasma that has an HDMI 1.3 input and supports Deep Color and x.v.Color. I have heard that an upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3 HDMI will eliminate gradation banding among other things. Not sure if that is true. Will I be able to notice any difference in quality by up grading or is it unnecessary?

A: On the video side of things, HDMI 1.3 has minimal advantages over earlier versions of HDMI when it comes to Blu-ray playback. HDMI 1.3 offers compatibility with the Deep Color and x.v.Color formats, but these are not in use on Blu-ray. Blu-ray video is still encoded in only 8-bit color. Any version of HDMI is fully capable of transmitting Blu-ray video at its highest quality.

There are some Blu-ray players that offer the ability to upsample the color channel to a higher bit-depth, which may slightly reduce the appearance of banding artifacts. If your plasma is Deep Color or x.v.Color compatible, it probably offers a similar feature internally anyway. You don't necessarily need to perform that action in the Blu-ray player. In any case, this is not likely to be offer a dramatic improvement in picture quality. Any change will be subtle.

HDMI 1.3's main advantages are on the audio side of things. You need an HDMI 1.3 connection to transmit the raw digital bitstreams for any of the high-res audio formats available on Blu-ray to a receiver. However, if your Blu-ray player is capable of decoding those formats internally, it can transmit them as PCM in full quality over any version of HDMI.

Keep in mind that in order to use HDMI 1.3, every piece of equipment in your signal chain must be compatible. If you route your video from the Blu-ray player to an A/V receiver and then to the TV, each one of those components must support HDMI 1.3.

See my earlier Is HDMI 1.3 Really Necessary? column for more information.

Backwards Compatibility of HD Audio

Q: Am I correct to assume that HD audio formats are backwards compatible, so that if your receiver couldn't support them, then you would still hear a Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS version of the soundtrack? If this is true, then why would they even offer the older formats as an option on a disc, or worse yet, make them the default track?

A: I covered this a while back in my Blu-ray Audio Explained article. Be sure to check that out for the full run-down.

The highest-quality audio from Blu-ray comes in three main formats: lossless Dolby TrueHD, lossless DTS-HD Master Audio, or uncompressed PCM. All are bit-for-bit identical to the their studio masters, and equivalent in quality to one another.

Technically, Dolby TrueHD is not backwards compatible with older forms of Dolby surround sound. However, every disc with a TrueHD track is also required to have a backup track in standard Dolby Digital format. On some discs, this is selectable from the main menus. On others, it's hidden. If your equipment is not compatible with TrueHD, the player will automatically fall back to the lossy Dolby Digital option. Warner Home Video is the only major studio that has ever authored their Blu-ray discs to default to the lossy Dolby Digital track even if the equipment could support TrueHD. There was never any need for that. It was a poor design decision, and the studio has recently stopped doing it.

DTS-HD Master Audio works a little differently. This format is designed in what's known as a "core + extension" configuration. At the heart of every Master Audio track is a standard lossy DTS "core." The parts that make the track lossless are contained in the extension. If your equipment isn't compatible with the full Master Audio format, your player will disregard the extension and only read the core.

PCM Audio can be transmitted in 5.1 format over HDMI, or converted to analog and output over multi-channel analog connections. If your receiver lacks either of those input types, and you're forced to use a Coaxial or Toslink S/PDIF connection, the PCM track will be downmixed to 2-channels. S/PDIF only has enough bandwidth for 2 channels of PCM. As a result, discs with PCM 5.1 should be authored to include a standard Dolby Digital or DTS backup track as well. In at least one instance ('Kung Fu Hustle'), the studio made a stupid decision to only include the original Cantonese language soundtrack in PCM 5.1 form, while the Dolby Digital 5.1 track was for the English dub only. Therefore, viewers reliant on S/PDIF were forced to choose between a 2-channel rendition of the original language or the dub in 5.1.

Is BD-Live Worth Upgrading For?

Q: I got a Magnavox basic Blu-ray player for Christmas that does not have any online capabilities for upgrades. I think the picture quality is excellent but do I need to buy a Blu-ray player with upgrade capabilities now? Should I just wait a couple of years? Are the new updates really worth it?

A: The internet connection on a Blu-ray player is useful primarily for two things: downloading firmware updates or connecting to BD-Live for web-enabled bonus features.

If you don't have an internet connection on the player, most manufacturers will make their firmware updates available for computer download from their web sites, where you can burn them to a CD or load them to a USB drive. There's little need to worry about having an internet connection on the player for this.

As for BD-Live, that's a decision you'll have to make for yourself. To be frank, few Blu-ray discs have yet made very compelling use of the BD-Live features. There are a few neat things here or there (I enjoyed the dynamicHD features on 'Star Trek: The Original Series'), but little that I would personally go out of my way for. Perhaps more interesting things will come along in the future.

Of course, your mileage may vary. I invite our other readers to post about their favorite BD-Live features in the forum thread linked below.

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Soundbar Recommendations

Q: Any recommendations for a decent soundbar around $300 or less? This is going in a room where I can't have full-blown surround sound, but want something at least a little better than the TV speakers.

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.


24 Hour HD Advisor People

Fri Aug 14, 2009 at 03:00 PM ET
Tags: HD Advisor, Joshua Zyber (all tags)

Editor's Note: Each Friday, High-Def Digest's own HD Advisor will answer a new round of questions from our readers. If you have home theater questions you need answered, send an email to HDanswers@gmail.com.

If you've already sent a question and don't see it answered yet, please be patient as we work our way through them. To browse through previously answered questions, visit the main HD Advisor page.



Answers by Joshua Zyber

HD Audio Through Analog Outputs

Q: In your Connecting a Blu-ray Player to a Standard-Def TV article, you mentioned that the gentleman could play HD audio via his 5.1 analog outputs from his player. Really? I thought I had read from several places that it isn't HD when played this way. That in order to get the true HD audio, you must use HDMI. So my 5 year-old AVR will play HD audio then as long as my player converts it to LPCM?

A: A movie soundtrack has to go through several stages from the compression codec authored on the disc until sound hits your ears. First, the Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD Master Audio codec must be decoded to uncompressed PCM form. That PCM must then be converted to analog. Finally, the analog must be amplified out to your speakers. Those first two stages (the decoding and D-to-A conversion) can be performed either in the disc player or your A/V receiver. The amplification step almost always takes place at the receiver or other external amp (except in certain Home-Theater-in-a-Box systems that combine the disc player and amp into one unit).

So long as the Blu-ray player has internal decoders on board for the full TrueHD or Master Audio codecs, and offers multi-channel analog outputs, you will be able to get lossless quality from the analog connections.

With that being said, is "lossless" audio output as analog from your player the same as lossless audio output as digital? Not necessarily.

The process of decoding to PCM is pretty straightforward. In my experience, it shouldn't matter whether that happens in the disc player or in the receiver. However, digital-to-analog conversion is more complicated. The quality of the DAC components will play a significant role in determining your final sound quality. So, even if you already own a Blu-ray player with the full decoding suite and multi-channel analog outputs, you may still find it advantageous to upgrade to a new HDMI-capable receiver with superior DACs.

The "lossless" nature of the digital compression codec only guarantees that there will be no degradation of sound quality from the original master for as long as the signal is compressed or decoded. As soon as it's converted to analog, your sound quality will vary depending on the hardware being used. Lossless audio converted to analog in your receiver may (or may not) be superior to lossless audio converted to analog in your disc player, by the same logic that a high-end A/V receiver may do a better job of this than an entry-level model, even though they both support "lossless" audio.

HDMI Handshaking Issues

Q: I have a Playstation 3 hooked up via HDMI to my receiver (Sony STR-DG910). My receiver outputs to a Sony KDL-40V2500 Bravia. Each time when I turn on my Playstation 3, after a couple minutes the screen goes black for about a second and then the screen and sound come back. Also on the screen is the TV information like the display setting (1080p), the video input label, and time, etc. It's as if I had just turned the TV on. This only happens once but it happens every time I turn on my PS3 without fail. This has happened ever since I hooked the PS3 up to the TV.

A: It sounds to me like you're having an HDMI handshaking problem. When you connect two devices by HDMI, each must "handshake" with the other at startup to confirm compatibility and encryption protocols. This process is compounded if you route the signal through an intermediary device like an A/V receiver. In that scenario, your Blu-ray player must handshake with the receiver, and then the receiver must handshake with the HDTV. If the handshake breaks down at any point, you lose the picture and sound.

What's likely happening here is that one of your devices initially confirms the handshake, and then loses it for a second and must re-establish a new handshake. During that time, your TV loses sync with the signal and must start over as if you'd just turned it on. Unfortunately, this sort of thing is pretty common in the world of HDMI.

As an experiment, you should try connecting your PS3 directly to the TV. Does the same thing happen? If not, then the problem is with your receiver. There are a couple of potential solutions to this, but none are ideal.

You can buy an HDMI splitter that will direct one cable from your PS3 straight to the TV for video and another to the receiver for audio. But those are expensive and often even more glitchy than what you're dealing with now. Alternately, you can buy the Component Video adaptor for the PS3 and send that to your TV for video while using HDMI for audio.

In either case, the solution is probably more of an inconvenience than the problem. You may just have to deal with it. But at least you'll know what causes this.

Why Do Some Blu-rays Not Get Reviewed on This Site?

Q: Before I purchase any Blu-ray disc, I check to see if your site has reviewed the disc. I have actually been swayed to reconsider based on the ratings you have given some BDs. That being said, I have noticed you have not reviewed (or at least posted) many Criterion Collection Blu-rays or newer catalog works like 'Raging Bull' or 'Dumb and Dumber'. I was wondering what priority is given for reviews. For instance, is it really more important that you publish a 'Dragon Ball Z' review before reviewing 'The Third Man' (for which I am still waiting patiently)? I know the time and the effort it must take to review discs, but (and I can only speak for myself) I would much rather see a review and be swayed on an analysis of 'Bottle Rocket' than the Canadian import of 'Good Will Hunting'.

A: We at High-Def Digest make a best-efforts attempt to review every Blu-ray disc we can. However, we receive the majority of discs that we review as screener copies sent by the home video studios. Some studios have been better about sending screeners than others. Criterion, for example, did not send us many screeners of their early Blu-ray releases, though they have gotten better with more recent releases. Some studios are more likely to send us day-and-date releases than catalog titles. And some studios hardly send us anything at all.

If we don't receive a screener for a particular title, there are occasions when a reviewer may opt to purchase that disc on his own if he feels a compelling desire to review it. Unfortunately, that reviewer must pay for the expense out of his own pocket. High-Def Digest is a small operation and we simply don't have the budget (much less the time) to purchase every title that isn't sent to us.

By necessity, our priority will always be to review titles for which we receive screeners first. In any given week, there will always be plenty of those to keep us busy. It simply wouldn't be fair to the studios that do make the effort to send us screeners if we pushed those titles aside in favor of other studios that don't. (There may occasionally be exceptions if a title is considered of high interest to both the readers and the staff.)

Of those discs that we do receive, we try our best to prioritize titles that we think will hold the most interest to our readers. However, the interests of the staff who actually have to watch the movie and spend hours reviewing it will also play a role. The amount of content on a title is also a factor. As a result, a multi-film box set with 80 hours of bonus features may have to be set aside while the reviewer completes a few simpler titles first.

Finally, I would just ask all readers to consider that their own specific interests may or may not reflect those of the greater readership as a whole. Although you may not care for 'Dragon Ball Z', you'd probably be surprised at how many people do.

The long and short of it is that we at High-Def Digest will continue to do our best to review as many Blu-ray titles as we can. Unfortunately, some discs may slip through the cracks. We can try to rectify that as best as we're able, as soon as we're able, but the pressure of keeping up with incoming waves of newer releases usually takes up most of our time.

(A note to readers: This question was sent in before our official review of 'The Third Man' was published.)

Homework Assignment: You Be the Advisor

Some questions that the HD Advisor receives are best answered with a consensus of opinions from our readers. If you can help to answer the following question, please post your response in our forum thread linked at the end of this article. Your advice and opinions matter too!

Smaller HDTV Recommendations

Q: I need to replace the TV in my living room. I currently have a 25" 4:3 standard-def set. By my calculation, a 32" 16:9 HDTV should give me approximately the same 4:3 image size, with additional width. I don't want to go much smaller than 32", because I don't want to give up the current 4:3 image size. My wife still watches a lot of SD programming in the living room, and will be upset if she has to watch 'Next Top Model' any smaller than she does now!

The problem is that this TV must fit into a cabinet that's exactly 31" wide. Because most HDTVs have their speakers on the sides of the screen, all of the 32" diagonal models I've looked at have been more than 31" wide. One in particular I looked at was 31.2" wide. Unfortunately, I have no leeway here. It just won't fit. Can anyone suggest a model with an (approximately) 32" screen that is 31" or less wide? 1080p would be preferred, even though I realize that there probably isn't a whole lot of visible difference between 720p and 1080p at these sizes.

Check back soon for another round of answers. Keep those questions coming.

Joshua Zyber's opinions are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of this site, its owners or employees.

See what people are saying about this story in our forums area, or check out other recent discussions.



MORE BLU-RAY NEWS TAGGED "JOSHUA ZYBER":

» High-Def Digest home page