We hate to up the pundit wars, but
we aren't the ones that released the same titles on both Blu-ray and HD DVD -- Warner Home Video did. Thanks to them though, the two high-def camps can now size up their formats mano-a-mano via
Training Day,
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, and
Rumor Has It. HighDefDigest took the
1080i Toshiba HD-A1 HD DVD player along with the
noisy 1080p Samsung BDP-1000 Blu-ray player and hooked 'em up to their HP Pavilion reference HDTV via HDMI. All three titles suffered from similar issues of extra noise on the Blu-ray side, and appeared just a tad darker then their HD DVD counterparts. An issue with cropping also popped up that we highly doubt anyone would notice unless they too have both players side by side, but the reviewers noticed less of a picture on all three Blu-ray titles even though they shared the same advertised aspect ratios as the HD DVDs. This brings up the question however, if this cropping is caused by the Blu-ray format, three bad Blu-ray masters, or the Samsung player? We are willing to bet on the latter most of the three, but we won't be able to find out until
Pioneer or
Panasonic releases their first Blu-ray players somtime in the next few months. No matter how you spin it, the HD DVD fanboys have something to celebrate as they walked away from this first scuffle without so much as a bloody nose.
posted August 5th 2006 10:28AM
I sure hope that HD DVD rocks this generation.
It's been said a thousand times (at least) but I think that regardless of the ability of either disc (storage, speed, etc) that HD DVD has the better name and based on that and that alone, it will probably appeal more to the average consumer. HD is like a buzz word and they'll see HD TV, HD Cable boxes, HD cables and then they'll see BluRay and HD DVDs.. the choice there seems pretty obvious, to me at least.
its been mentioned before, but the encoding on the two formats wasn't the same. The Blu-ray disc used an inferior encoding, even though it is capable of using the same one as the hd-dvd. Not a fair comparison.
Differences in standard-def DVD players are so vast that it's impossible to do an apples-to-apples comparison on different brands. The differences that were noted in the test can't be attributed to the format unless differences in the player were controlled for. Perhaps it would make more sense to play the DVDs on a computer... if such a thing is even possible today.
Then again, since there are so few HD-DVD and Blu-ray players available, it might be good scientific methodology to consider the player as an integral part of the picture quality. After all, it's not like you can just walk into a Best Buy and take your pick.
As far as saying apples to apples or "It's the player not the DVD" doesn't matter in the end if they are having a hard time with the encoding and it causing a problem in the end product and it is obvious, consumers will by the other product. Even if there is potential to fix it. Another cliche to sum this up would be "Your first impression may be your last" Sure they could fix the picture and the noise but the impression has been made and it will stick. I personally think HD is a little darker than I'd like but the clarity and lack of issues has put it ahead of the game.
I was reading that this wasn't an apples to apples comparision as the HD was burned using the new VC-1 codec and they burned the BR using MPEG2 - not an apples to apples comparison. Also the BR player used in the test has some known issues. I'm not a BR fanboy - nor an HD DVD fanboy - I think it will be a LONG time before the dust settles (if ever) and we'll probably have to get hybrid players if we want to watch movies from both studios in HD any time soon.
I think the test is a good thing but they should have been CLEAR it WAS NOT an apples to apples comparison.
I could compare a tape to tape copy and a tape to CD copy of a song but use such extreme compression that the CD doesn't sound as good as the tape - it just isn't an apples to apples comparison.
Regarding the comment about encoding formats. Yes, Warner could have mastered both of these with the VC-1 codec. However, since the dual layer 50GB blu-ray discs that every fan boy has been going on since three years ago DON'T EXIST YET, the Blu-Ray copy would still have to be more compressed or would have to drop extras, audio tracks, etc.
HD-DVD is still delivering exactly what they promised and Sony/BD-camp are still making excuses on why their "Higher Definition than HD" format isn't delivering the goods.
There are HD-DVD fanboys?
DRM is a big no-go for me. Yesterday, I couldn't even burn my dads DRM protected MP3 music because I used another computer!
Therefore, I say HD-DVD is the better option. And next to that, I also hate the name "Blu-Ray", since everybody will probarly spell it wrong, thus making it very hard to google.
Why do people always assume that HD-DVD doesn't have DRM. IT does. Both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray have AACS. The only difference is that Blu-Ray has an additional copy protection scheme on top of that. Still, it's like saying I can't stand pickles. Well one pickle is fine just don't make me eat two!!
Also, you can't DRM MP3's. Once they're DRM'd they'd be something else. MP3's are inherently unencrypted. WMA or downloaded iTunes tracks are encrypted but neither one of these uses the MP3 compression format (WMA uses MS's and Apple uses AAC).
Last but not least... WB was initially a HD DVD-only proponent but later buckled and announced they would be producing Blue-Ray software too. Since they really wanted HD DVD to be the one that succeeds, there is no telling what intentional downgrading they may have done while mastering the Blue-Ray content.
HDDVD support a fair use scheme, blu ray does not, which is no suprise because blu ray is backed by the biggest DRM king of the all Sony
Sony is a propietary DRM luvin no regard for consumers company
HDDVD has a more fair DRM scheme
HDDVD is cheaper to manufacture
HDDVD came out best on all 3 of these reviews
HDDVD is closer to orginal DVD manufacturing
Blu-Ray is atrac, minidisc and beta all rolled into a shiny new package
screw sony
BD supports fair use also... Also BD-9 is essentially a DVD format, so it's cheap there too. Also BD-50 ARE AVAILABLE IN STORES RIGHT NOW, for the BD-Writers. Stop spreading fud.
And also, the conversations are bordering stupidity. If you have the EXACT SAME CODEC. The format being read from is not important, it's the video chip.
All I have to say is: GO HD-DVD!!!
They'll definately come out on top!
lol. man i look back at this comment and laugh. in your face fucker. BLU-RAY winsssss!!!hahahhahahahahahahahahah!
i dont get the whole hybrid test.
if i have a hybrid, i'll buy HD DVDs cause theyre cheaper.
so why even bother with blu ray?
For all those talking about encoding, I read in Sound and Vision that Sony was going to use MPEG-2 to encode their movies as it produces an even higher quality image. The only real difference is that the newer codecs are more efficient and can compress at a higher rate, while retaining the same quality. Which kind of makes sense why HD-DVD movies use the newer codecs, as their discs have less space.
So, the codecs really don't matter in terms of video quality, and Sony even says: "Sony claimed that their high-bit rate MPEG-2 encoding produces more artifact-free video than the others, at least for now."
Read the whole article here Blu-Ray fanboys: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1414
with the exception atrac, Beta and minidisc were awesome. Just poor marketing. Beta was way better then vhs and it is still being used today by tv studios and the like. Minidisc, personally, was unbelievable. It never skipped, sounded great, didn't scratch, was recordable (its what I used to bootleg concerts), and was, in my eyes, years ahead of CD technology. Too bad it didn't get a fair shot.
I do have to say that Im on the fence about which is better. HD-DVD is winning in the reviews, but I saw a blu-ray demo at best buy, and I have to say, it looked great. I think since it is so new, that the next players to be released will even things out, if not, tip the scales in BR's favor. More storage = more content = happier consumers. Its kinda like the 360 vs ps3 (not trying to start a whole new topic here but.. ), developers are already saying that some games will be on at least 4 dvd's...Im looking right at you Halo3. Who really wants all those damn dics? I know when I get a standard dvd movie now that has a bonus disc, I always think "Great! I love bonus material and extras...too bad its not all on one disc.
And in regard the mp3 drm thing, like that other guy said, you're obviously not talking about mp3's. Go back and check because you can do whatever you want with an MP3 all day long. You must be talking about aac or something of the like.
this fellow using beta vs vhs as an example, really knows nothing about that situation, ask any
tv engineer at any tv studio which was the better
system for home use, VHS, the beta system in use
at the studio's was a different system to the home
version, as for HD VS BLUERAY,no valid comparison
can be made at this point in time, until all factors are even,
@Geqxon
...Therefore, I say HD-DVD is the better option. And next to that, I also hate the name "Blu-Ray", since everybody will probarly spell it wrong, thus making it very hard to google....
Especially you. Probably.
I don't know why anyone cares about optical formats anymore? With the price of flash memory and USB hard drives falling, why even bother with these formats? And with the Telco's providing Fiber Optic connections you'll probably be able to watch all these movies On Demand. I know I don't want my house looking like a Blockbuster video store.
And usually when I buy a DVD I may only watch it once and then it sits there collecting dust.
As far as the extra space, do people think they're going to get even better behind the scene stuff? The bonus features on most DVDs are useless and unexciting.
These tests are completely meaningless!
First off, they used two entirely different players! Of course there will be differences in quality! No two DVD players from different brands look alike (believe me, I've tested many) and the quality of decoders can vary quite a bit between players. They will need to use a universal player what handles both HD-DVD and Blu-ray, then this test would mean something. This would reduce almost all of the variables and would have been a more scientific approach and result in a more conclusive outcome.
Don't judge each format by this poorly executed experiment. Each has its merits. Technologically, Blu-ray is far more advanced than HD-DVD, but that's not enough for it to become the format of choice. Also, Blu-ray can hold much more content than HD-DVD and thus support far higher bitrates. But Blu-ray may just become another rich man's toy (like SACD and vacuum tube amplifiers). The fact of the matter is, the biggest factor of all would be content, which is why VHS killed Betamax (a far superior format). Let the consumer decide. The format war is only beginning.
This is less of a review of the format then a review of the players. Basially the Toshiba player is better then the Samsungs. The formats should look the same in terms of quality considering they use the same codec (mpeg2, mpeg4 H.264, VC1)
The problem that I see with HD-DVD is that it doesn't have support from several of the big studios including Disney, Fox, and obviously Sony Pictures.
While HD-DVD has Universal as an exclusive (Fast & Furious, You Me Dupree, Miami Vice) The Blu-ray camp has the better studios. . .
So no Pirates of the Caribbean, Pixar movies, Mickey-Mouse, Spider Man, Matrix, Star Wars, X-Men, Talledega Nights, etc etc on HD-DVD.
"...Sony/BD-camp are still making excuses on why their "Higher Definition than HD" format isn't delivering the goods."
That's exactly what I want is a half-assed piece of equipement that sets me back a grand just so I can replace it with their newer version a year later that is supposed to work properly.
"i dont get the whole hybrid test.
if i have a hybrid, i'll buy HD DVDs cause theyre cheaper.
so why even bother with blu ray?"
Two main reasons that I can think of:
A. So you can jump in now and protect your investment down the road regardless of what format "wins."
B. Have more choice since some movies are only available on HD and some only on blu ray.
None of your arguments change the fact that as of right now, and probably for awhile yet, HD DVD is simply better than Blu-Ray. Blame the player, blame the codec, blame whatever. No, it isn't fair. But if someone was going out to the store to get the best quality, you'd tell them HD DVD is hands-down the best, especially considering the price tags.
HD-DVD whooped Blu-Ray and that's all there is to it. Seems like a bunch of you are in denial.
Tim, it's pointless to say that HD DVD is better right now. You can come up with as many facts and figures as you'd like, but I or someone else can come right back with our own.
Nobody has been "whooped" yet. So no one is in denial.
And Geqxon,
"Therefore, I say HD-DVD is the better option. And next to that, I also hate the name "Blu-Ray", since everybody will probarly spell it wrong, thus making it very hard to google."
Wow. Just wow. How can you make such a comment and not want to shoot yourself? Just asking. Don't want to start a flame war or anything, but wow.
I was kinda gunning for Blu-ray for a while but honestly I think I prefer the whole HDDVD mentality. The HDDVD discs that are out right now come with more stuff at the same or higher quality. And the player on the market is half the price. All it really needs is the content.
I also haven't been impressed with what I've seen of Blu-ray at the electronic stores with their samsung demos. It looks no where near as good as HD broadcasts. I have yet to see HDDVD first hand.
PreGHz, the consensus is that HD-DVD titles currently look better than Blu-Ray, and HD-DVD is way cheaper. I dont know what other facts I'd need to conclude which one is the better format right now.
Maybe it'll change in a few months, I wouldn't be suprised. But that's not what I'm talking about.
The Sony and Blu-ray fanboy-ism is just amazing. Could you imagine if it was the other way around? Blu-ray first titles and players were superior then HD-DVD. They would consider HD-DVD dead and buried.
The hype machine about non-existent dual layer Blu-ray titles BLOWS my mind. THEY DON’T EXIST YET!! Get it people. The MPG2 coded is archaic for this application too. It was not designed for this high bandwidth transfer and images.
I hate Sony and all they stand for – I love reading about this.
HD-DVD looks better with a player that costs half the price. It's a done deal for me.
A couple points of clarification for the masses.
1. For those of you saying its not an apples to apple comparison because BD is using MPEG2 and HD-DVD is using VC1 that is the entire point. Sony has chosen to use an older codec that has less quality than VC1.
2. BD has more capcity than HD-DVD, this is true for raw data. How ever when you look at the file sizes on the disk its a wash. Let me explain. Since VC1 compression is greater than MPEG2 the 30gb HD-DVD can actually contain the same amount of data as BD-50.
3. Studio support. This argument is totally subjective. In none of the arguments did anyone mention New Line Cinema. Any guess who they are supporting? HD-DVD thats right. Lord of the Rings anyone? (http://www.newline.com/press/2004/1129_dvdformat.shtml)
4. PRICE! For years this has helped decide the eventual format winner. VHS vs BetaMax. MiniDisc vs. CD. Laserdisc vs. DVD. UMD vs. ??? well that one was just plain stupid and no one wanted to pay more for that format. Is anyone else seeing a strange pattern here? Sony pushed most of those formats unsuccessfully. When the average joe consumer walks into their local BigBoxMart they are going to look at the prices of HDDVD players and BD players and HDDVD is going to win. The same goes for the movies. they are going to see a $30 title on BD and a $25 title on HDDVD and choose with their wallet.
It was not Sony's choice to have content encoded in MPEG2, it is the choice of the movie studio. Sony has nothing to do with this, they were a big player in the production of BD, that's it. Blu-Ray supports every codec that HD DVD supports, it's all the choice of the movie studio. The reason people bring Sony into the picture is simply because they want the PS3 to fail.
Does the BR player take as long as the Toshiba HD player to boot up and ID the disc? I have the Toshiba player and it's HORRIBLE. It takes several minutes to boot up and actually start playing a HD-DVD disc. Hopefully this is improved on future models.
You can't really compare the picture quaility, and say that HD DVD looks better. Isn't that what this article states? It's all subjective right now.
The VC1 codec allows for higher compression rates. Not necessarily better quality. Depends on the skill of the person encoding.
People talk about HD DVD discs being cheaper, but that's only true until volume production starts. When that happens, I highly doubt that there will still be a 5USD gap between the formats. Mass production will cut current costs significantly.
Also, you say that the HD DVD players are cheaper than Blu Ray players right now. True, but would you want to spend so much money right for for first gen tech?
I'll wait a few months. Then I'll buy my 500USD Blu Ray player. That also happens to play PS3/PS2/PS1 games. And surf the net. And act as a media center.
That'll be right around the time where Blu Ray production ramps up.
Sure you could buy a Kia, but why not shell out the extra grand to buy a Toyota. It has a proven track record and better satisfaction rating. Both cars get you to the supermarket, but sometimes cheaper isn't always better.
I'm sorry to fight an older comment, but.
mcepat, many theatres and professional sound technicions prefer the flexibility of minidisc, since the CHEAP players can edit the discs on the fly. Now the good ones, can edit on the fly, record on the fly, have precise playback, and have track titling for less confusion. Really, if you sink some money into it, they are godly great. Although, if you just mean it was a disaster for the everyday consumer, then I agree...
Guruboy - you are wrong. It is 100% Sony's choice for their own catalog. They are cheap and do not want to pay VC1 royalities. Read this article - it's excellent.
http://www.hometheaterblog.com/hometheater/2006/07/joe_kane_on_blu.html#more
I love Minidiscs. Still have my Sony N707. I use it along with my current DAP interchangebly.
Don't think I'm a Blu Ray fanboy. I'm just playing devil's advocate because I strongly dislike people calling winners before the dust is even close to settling.
Another debacle for Sony.Blu-Ray will become the Beta of the 21`st century.Root-Kits,use of non-standard formats...way to go Sony ! I hope Boo-Hoo ray dies a quick death.
PreGhz said:
"Tim, it's pointless to say that HD DVD is better right now. You can come up with as many facts and figures as you'd like, but I or someone else can come right back with our own"
Why is it pointless??? If you want the best looking movies at home right now, you have to buy HD-DVD. If you wait, things might change, but if you want the best right now, it's HD-DVD, so it's not pointless to compare the only two players available.
You also said:
"Also, you say that the HD DVD players are cheaper than Blu Ray players right now. True, but would you want to spend so much money right for for first gen tech?"
For $450 (Amazon, amongst other places), you can get the BEST looking audio/video quality available to the home market. For a lot of people, that's not very much money, so why WOULDN'T you want to spend that for the best picture available? And let's assume that HD-DVD does die -- who cares? The player upscales STANDARD DVDs making them look better than 99% of the other DVD players out in the market, and if the format disappears, the player will still upscale for me (and let's face it, regular DVDs will be around for a long time).
If you have a crappy TV, then yeah both players are stupid. Buf you've spent $1500-$2000 for a TV, what's another $450 to get the best video out of that TV?
Dasgooch: you comparisons are weak.
"Laserdisc vs. DVD" seriously, what are you talking about? Laserdisc was around way before DVD, there was never a format war between the two.
"Minidisc vs. CD" equally weak comparison
Which HD DVD player are you talking about, Fezmid?
Also, upscaling doesn't work. If the source is a Honda, you can't make it into a Ferrari. Sure you can slap a body kit on it, some engine mods, but you'll still have a Honda. A hacked up Honda.
DVDs will be phased out as soon as possible, once the next formats get rooted in.
@SwiftBlue
No I agree with you on minidisc features etc, I was merely stating from a consumer point of view, Sony has a history of going aganst the grain and shoving formats down people's throats which never really take off (at least not in US, I know that minidisc is very popular in Japan)
They always have to play it there way or the highway and just recently opened there music players to different formats but as a example still make you use there crappy software to manage the music and do transfers.
Sony does not care about consumers with regards to format and if they had there way the Blu Ray would have a rootkit
Also, upscaling doesn't work ===> Okay, stop. Just stop typing. Upscaling does work; If you don't think so, then you are doing something wrong.
The Toshiba HD-DVD player is one of the best DVD upscalers on the market right now. So that's an added benefit of getting the Toshiba. 500 bucks for a great DVD player isn't that much, let alone an HD-DVD player.
PreGHz:
The Toshiba HD-A1:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000E1PTGK/sr=8-1/qid=1154806461/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-7146743-8231806?ie=UTF8
It's currently $446 if you use your Amazon Visa card, $460 otherwise.
And as for upscaling -- you obviously have never seen it in action if you don't think it works. Go to the AVSforum.com and read up on it. I've had an upconverting player for a year (the Panasonic S77, and now the Toshiba HD-A1) and the upscaling is definately better. If you don't think it can work, then you must not know much about video processing, as there are several companies that make upscaling devices that work great. DVDO.com is one company that makes high-end stuff.
Read up on it, you might be surprised.
wow, rosewood std..
An excellent writeup on the current Blu-Ray / HD-DVD comparison, by guys who really know their stuff:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/blu-ray_2.htm
They did side-by-side comparisons on properly calibrated 720p DLP projectors. HD-DVD for the win.
Really, all Sony and the Blu-Ray camp have going for them is their film libraries. Their technology is NOT superior, and for some reason costs twice as much (currently, for lower performance).
I should have clarified, I apologize.
What I meant to say is that you get a better end result, but it's not HD DVD. One can upscale all one wants, but in the end, that's no match for next-gen formats. I understand that upscaling DVDs and such would help the transition as that function would sweeten the pot for those looking at a HD DVD player.
But it also keeps from moving on to the newer formats, as it allows people to linger on DVDs.
But for the original argument, I stand by my comment. I feel that first generation tech, especially admittedly faulty tech (i.e. the reviewed Samsung), cannot be a good gauge for the upcoming battle that's gonna be waged. HD DVD was first out of the gate, but the bulk of the hardware/support for either format won't really be out for a few months. No true comparison, nor winner, can be called this early in the game.
Maybe HD DVD will win, more power to them. Maybe Blu Ray will win. But I still say that it's pointless to declare leaders with first gen tech.
Let's wait a few months, then we can revisit this.
Well, while you're sitting on the fence waiting to see what happens, I'm enjoying HD glory on my 720p front projector.
I actually have a HD projector. A Sharp XV-Z20000. I'll admit though that I have a crap screen. Gonna order some screen goo soon, as it's not feasible for me to install a screen.
I am sitting on the fences, but that doesn't mean that I'm not enjoying my movie experience now.