Master & Commander Blu or DVD?

[timmay8612]

I know this topic has been talked about again and again, and I did a search, but I'm not finding a good answer.

I want to get M&C on some format, but I'm not sure based on the reading I've done if the LFE have been filtered or not on the BRD.

Being that I have an old school AVR (see sig) w/o the new codecs anyway, should I get the DVD or the Blu? If I get the Blu, will I get the picture quality of HD with the DVD audio track since my receiver only does the older codecs?

*Note, I do have my PS3 direct to my display via HDMI, so I do get full 1080P video, and have optical run separately to my AVR.

 

[GranteedEV]

It sort of depends on your setup.

If your sub can't even reproduce subsonics, you're not missing much from M&C.

If you got a monster sub, get the DTS DVD, it's a better experience even than the better video quality in this case.

 

[timmay8612]

Well my sub is an SVS PC12-NSD, I'm pretty sure according to SVS its supposed to get down to like 18hz in room. I don't have the equipment to measure actual extension in my room.

Am I right then, that there are Dolby Digital DVDs and DTS encoded DVDs and I should get the DTS version? How do I tell when purchasing?

 

[Nomo]

I don't think there are multiple versions of the DVD.
My copy has the DTS logo on the back, under the credits.
The DTS soundtrack is much better than the dolby version.
By far my favorite demo material for friends.

I can't speak at all for the BD version.

 

[sawzalot]

The Blu Ray is DTS lossless as well, so I think your best bet is to go for the best PQ possible along with the incredible soundtrack, definitely gives your subs a workout.

 

[j_garcia]

The problem with the blu-ray is that the PQ isn't really much better than the SD DVD. The sound, despite complaints, IS easily better than the previous SD DVD track. Those who are complaining are going based on a waterfall chart that really only tells us that the new track is that much more accurate in that it doesn't have anything that shouldn't be there IMO.

With my previous sub, I thought there was something missing, but after a few listens, it was obvious that what I was hearing was just how much cleaner the new track is.

Get the Blu-ray

 

[timmay8612]

So I should get the Blu even though my AVR doesn't support the lossless codecs? Meaning I'd be in Dolby Digital audio and have the HD picture quality?

 

[jostenmeat]

So I should get the Blu even though my AVR doesn't support the lossless codecs? Meaning I'd be in Dolby Digital audio and have the HD picture quality?

No you still get the DTS "core" stream, and through bluray, your bitrate is still doubled (at least compared to +99% of the DTS DVDs out there). I've never seen M&C listed as a 1509kbps DVD (if it was, then it's a push). It is probably like the other million DTS DVD titles (768 kbps).

IOW, the BD should be technically superior. Then once you get lossless capability, well then . . .

OTOH, I specifically have not watched, let alone bought, this title on BD because of the poor screen caps 'n reviews I have seen. DNR "scrubbing" as is prevalent with so many transfers. I have no idea how it looks on DVD, because that is a format that I can no longer watch for some years now.

 

[timmay8612]

Sounds like I should get the BD then if the video quality is at least on par with the DVD and the audio is at least equal, and better when I upgrade my AVR. Not sure what "DNR scrubbing" is and not turning up too many good results with google.

 

[jostenmeat]

Digital Noise Reduction. It comes in a ton of guises, and you will find it in televisions, receivers, anything, and yes your software too. The idea behind the tool is to reduce distracting flaws in the source material, but the cost comes with the plain and simple removal of detail. Perfectly good shots, let's say a woman's face with freckles, wrinkles, and skin detail, but then with a massive amount of DNR applied, will now look like a waxy face. Like a cartoon face.

It is IMO, by far, the easiest video flaw to pick out with anything. I didn't know that my friend's top tier Pana plasma had NR engaged, but I saw it coming through like crazy (wondering if it was his cable signal), but then found that his video mode had a couple of NRs engaged. Once you know what it looks like, it then becomes very easy to pick out.

Of course and unfortunately, a lot of the "scrubbed" titles have a lot of other things going on, like artificial contrast boost and/or strange color timing, edge enhancement, and whatever else they do to film.

For example, I think of Gangs of New York BD. These are between two different blurays! The first was so bad, and enough of us enthusiasts complained, they released another one.

Ok, this is my main issue. If it's an old title, with the source material being shot to hell, ok use DNR as it was meant to be intended. The funny thing is that there are so many great sources for even half century old (and even much older) titles that don't need any DNR!!!

But, with a modern bluray? C'mon gimme a freakin break.

I guess I would describe DNR as a subtle (but not really once familiarized), well, blurring of fine detail. For me, the color detail at borders, (or even the overall color though I might be imagining this), just never seems right.

So, look at the shredded cloth next to his right hand. Doesn't the remastered version look a lot more detailed? Almost as if it is just much better in focus? Well, with close up shots of faces, it can be a really big difference, if only because we are so familiar with faces, especially famous ones. OTOH, it's possible that actors might ask for DNR? Speculation though, to cover their blemishes . . . .

 

[DTS]

You can get a used Bluray from Amazon for $7.99 then get a used Sd for
1 cent. Then you can have hours of fun conducting comparisons.