HD-DVD Tour

[djoxygen]

(I searched for an existing thread, but couldn't find one. Apologies and let me know if there is one - I'll repost over there.)

Anywho...

Thought you all might like a report on Toshiba's HD-DVD demonstration tour. I went to the Minnetonka, MN Ultimate Electronics last night (Wed, 22/Mar) out of morbid curiousity (haha). I would have rated my interest in purchasing a dedicated HD-DVD player at somewhere around 10% before last night. I'd say that seeing the thing in person and getting to ask some questions of the Toshiba rep roughly doubled that.

The first thing that went through my head was "Wow!". Since full-length movies aren't available yet (and keep getting pushed back a few weeks at a time) they had a loop of trailers that had been remastered at (according to the rep) about 20 Mbps (of the 30+ Mbps available) in MPEG-4. Some of the trailers of interest: Constantine, Serenity, Batman Begins, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. (Of no interest: Dukes of Hazard) So before opening my yap, I decided to take in a round or two of the loop.

Resolution is incredible. Since the first players are only doing 1080i, the Toshiba RP set (72MX195 ?) was de-interlacing to 1080p. The picture was better than any movie theater outside of Imax. There was one split-second clip in Charlie that I could see the subtlest bit of banding in the grey-blue of the sky (admittedly the toughest material for MPEG compression). Other than that, I couldn't catch any compression artifacts. (Since it was a quick-cut trailers, it was admittedly tough to study any clip for long.)

For comparison they had the same player (the $800 HD-XA1 - more on the differences between players in a minute) playing a copy of the Chicken Little DVD. For DVDs, the picture is up-converted to 1080i. I didn't ask what scaler they were using, but the combination of that circuit and the de-interlacing in the TV convincingly bested any up-converting DVD player and TV combination I have ever seen. Even so, there was no comparison between the up-converted DVD and the HD-DVD. True high-bandwidth HD is something to behold!

My first question was about 1080p - the rep threw out the old line that HDMI won't do 1080p yet. I called him on it, and he backed down, admitting that the current HDMI spec did indeed support 1080p and that he didn't know when Toshiba would be doing a 1080p player. I also asked if the HDMI was passing mulit-channel audio. "Yes," was the answer. Next I asked about the recently much-buzzed-about analog down-converting. Mr. Rep replied that the hardware doesn't limit it - the component outputs will do a full 1080i, just like the HDMI. However there is a software flag that the studios can set to throttle the component outs to 480p. (Caveat emptor! - I think we need to demand that HD-DVD reviewers test for and include information on this, especially if the studios decide not to label the packaging appropriately.)

(Side note on this: I realized this morning (and therefore didn't get to ask the rep about it) that if you are using an older set with no digital input, you could end up in a situation where a DVD copy of a movie could be up-converted to 1080i while the HD-DVD copy of the same movie would be down-converted to 480p. How lame is that ?!?!?)

I promised to elaborate on the differences between the first two players from Toshiba. According to the rep they are identical in specifications and performance. The only differences you get for your extra $300 are a beefier chassis (vibration damping, extruded aluminum), RS-232 control, a fancier backlit remote, and a gimmicky motorized door.

Now for my editorial...

If you have a digital-capable TV and haven't already purchased an up-converting DVD player, I would probably recommend you at least consider the lower-end model. For an extra $250-ish over the price of the DVD player you might have bought, you get an impressive up-converting DVD player plus the HD-DVD capability. This would make the pain of switching horses in a year (adding a PS3 or dedicated Blu-Ray player, or replacing with a dual-format combo player) a lot easier to bear.

If you have piles of money, a Crestron automated home theater, and the compelling neurosis to have every new toy on the market, you are an ideal candidate for the $800 box.

For most people, especially those who already have an up-converting DVD player and HD cable/satellite with premium movie channels in HD, it seems the wiser course at this time to at the least wait a few months until there's more software and a clearer picture of when the combo players will hit and how much they'll cost.

Since Sony is only one major studio short of having the overwhelming majority of movie catalogs at least promised for Blu-Ray (v. 60%-ish for HD-DVD right now) I am still leaning that direction myself. But I don't think there can be any blanket recommendation at this point to either accept or reject either format. As I detailed above, I believe the answer will be different for each enthusiast's situation.

 

[jkenas]

component vs HDMI up-convert

I wish i would have read this thread before posting a new one, it answers most of the questions in my thread.... , but I wasn't even considering an actual HD DVD player. i just missed the tour here in MI too

$500 is a hefty sum for a DVD player though, (paid this much when DVD first came out, can't afford this bull market stuff anymore like when I was single)

 

[mfabien]

The difference between the HD-A1 and HD-XA1 players concerns mostly the audio:

HD-A1 has DACs for DD Plus and DTS-HD lossless audio but limited to stereo when analog cables to a/v are used.

HD-XA1 in addition, has speaker configuration and bass management plus the 5.1 analog outputs.

If you are a DVD-A user to get high resolution audio, you may want lossless audio. Others satisfied with DD and DTS 5.1 will be happy with HD-A1.

Saw a demonstration of the HD-XA1 last Friday. I was told that the Video bitrate can go as high as 34 Mbps (this compares with the highest single event I tracked in HD, in February, which was 18.267 Mbps).

The Montreal demo included scenes where the right side was in standard DVD and the left side in HD DVD. Here's on of the pictures I took but understand it does not do justice. HD DVD has an outstanding picture quality.

 

[Johnd]

The Montreal demo included scenes where the right side was in standard DVD and the left side in HD DVD. Here's on of the pictures I took but understand it does not do justice. HD DVD has an outstanding picture quality.

Nice post mfabien. I may get hd w/ a new projector in a couple of years. I was born a skeptic though. I read your disclaimer, but was the standard dvd truly displayed at it's best, say on a Denon 5910 displayed with at least an Infocus 777? I submit that would be a fair comparison of standard vs. hd. Either way, hd will eventually take storm, prices will come down, a majority of movies will be recorded in hd format, and I will be sold. Cheers.

 

[Audioholics]

the rep threw out the old line that HDMI won't do 1080p yet. I called him on it, and he backed down, admitting that the current HDMI spec did indeed support 1080p and that he didn't know when Toshiba would be doing a 1080p player.

I love you - thanks for not letting them get away with that.

mfabien - great pictoral example of the differences.

 

[mfabien]

Johnd,

Don't know how Toshiba got the 2 DVD formats in the same picture to start with.

All I can say is this:

HD is better than standard DVD under all conditions.

HD DVD is better than broadcasted HD (OTA, Satellite or cable).

As much as DVD 480i is tons better than any digital broadcasted SD, the same is true of HD DVD vs HD. Reason in both cases, the Video bitrate of DVD unmatched by broadcasting.

Broadcasted SD is transmitted between 3 and 5 Mbps, whereas DVD can be between 6 and 9 Mbps. (When providers say that digital TV is DVD quality, they are misrepresenting the facts. There simply is too much compression in the QAMs and TPs).

Broadcasted HD is transmitted between 10 Mbps (FOXHD from Buffalo) and 18.267 Mbps (Global HD from Toronto) but HD DVD is 34 Mbps.

The Toshiba demo picture was from a LCD displaying the 1080i data in 720p. Saw another demo in the Toshiba hotel room using a new 50" Plasma again displaying 1080i data in 720p. Would be quite an experience to see this demo on a 1080p display or even on my CRT RPTV in 1080i!

 

[Johnd]

HD is better than standard DVD under all conditions.

Understood and agreed with all that you wrote above. At the risk of appearing pugnacious, I would add "under identical circumstances" to your statement above, so as to make the comparison more fair. I am without doubt that a DVD display could be made to look better than a HD display. And so the reverse is true. Just as djoxygen quoted a misrepresentation by a sales rep, so sometimes these shows do not display the best possible scenario of the lesser breed; in this case, irrefutably DVD.

My point is intended for those who those of us who may be tempted to replace their high quality players and displays as soon as hd is made available, as well as for those who can obtain a phenomenal DVD player and high quality display for a fraction of the price of the "latest, greatest" HD player and 1080p projector. I do not mean to argue with your points of recording or transmission capacity; there simply is none.

There is no doubt that either HD or BR is here to stay, and from early appearances, it seems that HD is taking the lead. I will certainly jump on the bandwagon, probably after they've worked out the bugs, and prices come down (2 years?). DVD is pretty much at it's pinnacle of development, and the picture obtained from a $500.00 player and a $2,000.00 to $4,000.00 display can be inspiring. When the majority of movies are recorded in HD (or BR), that is when I'll jump onboard. Either way, your points and side by side comparison is well received (despite the admitted less-than-perfect jpeg), and it is an exciting time for both the audiophile and videophile. Thanks for the info, I'll stay tuned.

 

[djoxygen]

Broadcasted HD is transmitted between 10 Mbps (FOXHD from Buffalo) and 18.267 Mbps (Global HD from Toronto) but HD DVD is 34 Mbps.

Just to make sure we're clear on this. HD-DVD *can be* 34 Mbps. It is up to those doing the compression and authoring to determine how much of that 34Mbps is used for video angle 1, how much for video angle 2, how much for audio stream 1, audio stream 2, etc... And there's no requirement to use all 34Mbps available.

Just like the HD broadcasters, HD cable/satellite feeds (and DVD producers, too - not all the available 9Mbps is necessarily used in a DVD either), the producers of HD-DVD and Blu-Ray content may opt for more compression instead of higher bit-rate/quality.

 

[Duffinator]

Next I asked about the recently much-buzzed-about analog down-converting. Mr. Rep replied that the hardware doesn't limit it - the component outputs will do a full 1080i, just like the HDMI. However there is a software flag that the studios can set to throttle the component outs to 480p. (Caveat emptor! - I think we need to demand that HD-DVD reviewers test for and include information on this, especially if the studios decide not to label the packaging appropriately.)

(Side note on this: I realized this morning (and therefore didn't get to ask the rep about it) that if you are using an older set with no digital input, you could end up in a situation where a DVD copy of a movie could be up-converted to 1080i while the HD-DVD copy of the same movie would be down-converted to 480p. How lame is that ?!?!?)

This is a big concern for me as my five year old Toshiba HDTV doesn't have digital inputs. It would be really nice if the players passed along 1080i through the component cables. I hope all reviews of HD format DVD players test for this. If it was certain that HD movies would play 1080i through the component cables I'd probably buy a player today. But upgrading my TV is not an option for another year so I'll be sitting on the sideline until this becomes clear.

Nice post too!

 

[Duffinator]

Best Buy Deal

Also curious if anybody who did the in-store deal with Best Buy where you could pre order the player for less than $200 actually got their player???

 

[djoxygen]

It would be really nice if the players passed along 1080i through the component cables. I hope all reviews of HD format DVD players test for this.

Don't look to the players. It's the software that sets the ICT flag that makes the player down-convert to the analog outputs. The players (at least the ones announced so far) are capable of 1080i analog.

 

[Duffinator]

Don't look to the players. It's the software that sets the ICT flag that makes the player down-convert to the analog outputs. The players (at least the ones announced so far) are capable of 1080i analog.

There have been questions whether or not the players would pass a 1080i signal via component cables. Most, if not all, upconverting 480i dvd players only upconvert via digital inputs so that's another reason I'm concerned about this.

 

[djoxygen]

There have been questions whether or not the players would pass a 1080i signal via component cables. Most, if not all, upconverting 480i dvd players only upconvert via digital inputs so that's another reason I'm concerned about this.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060327-6473.html

 

[Electone]

According to that article, it looks as if only Warner Brothers will be using ICT and only on a few initial releases. The studios would be idiots to downconvert the analog outputs. Why the hell would people bother to buy a HD-DVD or BD Player if they wouldn't be able to see the full resolution picture? Morons...

 

[djoxygen]

Warning: Editorial

One could make the assumption that the studios would know that the people most likely to be buying into HD are tech-savvy early adopters. And judging by the announcements regarding ICT (i.e. not implemeting it) this assumption appears to be correct. Eventually, though, one of these formats should start to gain strength in the market over its rival. In the early going, that strength will be determined by those same early adopters. However, in the long term, the make-or-break money is going to come from people who aren't going to take the time to dig into the arcana of each hardware format, the available software flags, which of the mandatory hardware codecs is preferable for your software, and so on...

If either HD-DVD or Blu-Ray is going to succeed as a mass-market format, some guy (or woman) whose DVD player just died is going to walk into Best Buy, and say to 17 year old kid in a blue polo shirt, "I need a new DVD player." If the kid starts down the tech talk road, the average customer will tune out within 30 seconds. If this customer has a non-HDCP-compliant display, and all of their existing content is on DVD, they won't be expecting any great leap in quality. As far as they are concerned, the player will only give them the option for an HD format if and when they decide to take advantage of it. For the extra money they didn't buy extra quality, they bought insurance.

(Given how poorly set up most TVs I've seen in the homes of pretty smart friends of mine are anyway, I doubt even some allegedly tech-savvy people will notice the difference between SD and HD. I have one friend who has a DVD-burning TiVo, a decent Samsung 16:9 LCD TV, and does Unix sysadmin work. His TV is usually set on the wrong aspect ratio. Color temperature settings? The most basic user-level calibration? Forget about it.)

In my opinion, by adopting ICT, Warner Brothers is intentionally throwing away the early adopter market (or assuming enough of them (us?) have HDCP-capable digital displays) and hoping to make it up when the HD formats reach the Best Buy masses.

 

[RHB113]

HD-DVD vs. BD-ROM
=
DVD-A vs. SACD

Its this simple.

 

[djoxygen]

HD-DVD vs. BD-ROM
=
DVD-A vs. SACD

Its this simple.

I don't think it is that simple.

Before portable formats (8-track, cassette, CD, etc...) people gathered around their console stereo systems to listen to albums (or radio programs) the way we gather at the TV to watch Lost or in our home theaters to watch movies today. For the past several years music sales have been declining independent of any format (hi-res, downloadable, or otherwise). The dramatic increases in downloadable music sales in opposition to the overall trend over that same period tells me that people use music differently than video.

In fact, people are physically able to use music differently. We participate in many other activities while we listen to music: Driving, excercising, working, cleaning house. Music demands less of our attention and engages 1/2 of the number of senses that video does. (Of course, that's not to say that we don't ever sit down and listen to music as an event, it just isn't as requisite a part of the experience.) And with all the background noise (road, office, gym, vacuum) the value of high-quality audio is even more difficult for the average person to perceive.

So as our lives became more busy, more active, more mobile, we started to perceive the value of music differently, and changed our buying habits accordingly. SACD and DVD-A came into a market that was just about to enter a decline, made themselves less convenient (5.1-channel headphones at the gym anyone?) than the market desired.

Regardless of delivery system, video demands our full attention. The perceived value of something that demands more of our attention and engages more of our senses is higher, and we are more likely to place value on increasing that quality. (It is my opinion that legal music downloading will come to dominate the market in the next few years, while compressed, low-resolution video will be a niche for the subway commuter.)

One final point: Anyone who's been to a movie in a theater has a reference to measure their home experience against. Few of us have a regular experience to compare our audio experiences against. If more of us were fans of opera and went to classical concerts, maybe more of us would be searching out higher quality audio. I don't believe it is coincidence that what adoption of hi-res audio we have seen has largely been in the jazz and classical markets. Unfortunately, the average live rock concert has horrible sound that is generally made worse by the accidental and uncontrolled "surround" created by the arena or rock club.

While I think that the looming format war is stupid and will dramatically lengthen the time before a High Definition format is labelled a market standard, it will still happen before HD video downloads are a realistic possibility.

 

[MACCA350]

djoxygen, that was very well thought out and you've made some good points.

cheers

 

[mfabien]

Thanks for your post, djoxygen.

In recent months I ordered a carousel CD player from Sony and because it was still unshipped after a few weeks I changed the order for a 5 disc changer DVD player.

Since then, I always have 5 discs in the changer and they are usually 5 different concerts that I love. Since the changer is able to memorized "Resume" position for up to 6 DVDs at any time I can resume playing the DVDs at the position I left them with the audio setup also in memory.

Well I will admit that since I received the 5 disc changer, I listen to a few pieces of DVD concerts every day but have hardly listened to any CDs since. I guess this confirms your point that if one combines Video and audio it captures our interest much further.

 

[djoxygen]

Well I will admit that since I received the 5 disc changer, I listen to a few pieces of DVD concerts every day but have hardly listened to any CDs since.

I am very much looking forward to enjoying the concert DVDs we have once our home theater is built. Underworld's Everything Everything is already amazing in plain old stereo.

Y'know, 5 years ago I thought mp3 players were a complete waste of money. Then I won a 1st generation iPod in a drawing and it completely changed how I listen to music - for better and for worse. I hardly ever listen to an album front-to-back anymore. Generally when a new CD is purchased it gets a full spin or two, then it gets ripped into iTunes and "shuffle played" from that point on. The major benefit to this way of enjoying music is that when I rip old CDs, I discover and re-discover tracks I didn't know I had or had completely forgotten about. Because of the way my brain works when picking CDs off the shelf, I always seemed to end up listening to the same things over and over.

I'm convinced that CDs will eventually go away and the entire pre-recorded music industry will be compressed downloads and long-form DVDs (concerts and collections of music videos). Some people think the decline of the "album" format is a bad thing. It's just a change to something different. There never would have been another Darkside of the Moon anyway, nor should there be - that's already been done. Artists we've never heard of will do incredible things we never imagined in whatever new media or delivery formats come along.