[stephen99]

Hello,

There used to be a web site that you could type in a SD DVD title and it would tell you that the R2 dvd had no extras and stereo sound but the R1 had 5.1 sound, deleted scenes, director's commentary, etc. This way you could choose the best version of the disc.

Some titles are available on both BD and HD DVD. Is there a similar web site that tells you the differences between the two versions of the same title? Or is the content and quality always the same?

If a studio only releases on one format, you have no choice but to buy that format, but if the studio releases both and you have both players, does it matter whether you choose the BR or HD DVD disc?

[Jarrak]

Well for reviews and news I like the High-Def Digest and it also has active forums for both formats. The AVforums also have reviews and an active user section again actual views from the disk owners is always good to read.
I don't think there is a direct comparison site (as there is for R1 v R2 etc) but the basics are always covered in terms of spec within the reviews.
There are plenty more HD review sites out there, google is your friend and a click later it seems the grand daddy DVD Compare has some HD comparison but not quite in the same manner is R2vR1, teach me to not check first



If you do have a choice then the differences you'll see are these...


Price (UK prices are higher than US and the HD DVD combo tends to be higher than Blu-ray)

Audio (There are a number of audio formats used from "basic" DD5.1 through TrueHD and PCM multichannel)

Interactive Features (PIP video, graphic overlays for adding extra information while watching the movies basically the ease of accessing value adding content)

Web enabled (The ability to access content from the net both specific to the movie being watched and general stuff)


They are the main differences when it comes to releases on both formats. I didn't include region coding since Warner doesn't support that on Blu-ray and there is no region coding at all on HD DVD. Video I don't consider critical either since dual releases tend to use the exact same master and the extra capacity a BD50 provides is rarely used to increase the bitrate of the movie.

So basically we are really talking Price and the Interactive/Web stuff, they are the main differences.

The most recent examples are the Potter movies for dual release. The HD DVD is fully web enabled and has all the HD interactive stuff you would expect but the Blu-ray has the featurette in HD (only in SD on HD DVD) and has a PCM track as well as more languages. Overall all video and audio quality is rated the same and price is the same from most online retailers.
So for this movie/s it comes down to which is more important, the HDi features of the HD DVD or the vastly more extensive Audio options of the Blu-ray.

[stephen99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarrak

If you do have a choice then the differences you'll see are these...
Audio (There are a number of audio formats used from "basic" DD5.1 through TrueHD and PCM multichannel)
[snip]
Video I don't consider critical either since dual releases tend to use the exact same master and the extra capacity a BD50 provides is rarely used to increase the bitrate of the movie.

Thank you. I'll look at the sites you mentioned.

I am reassured that they use the same video masters and bit rate, I wasn't sure whether one format had better picture quality than the other but I know that's controversial and that wars have started over HD vs. BR.

Regarding audio, I am a bit confused by all the different types out there. Is there a faq where I can learn about them? Not wanting to start another "which is best" battle but does one audio format stand above the rest?

[stattospur]

Uncompressed is the best audio but you will have to part with alot of cash for an amp to decode it.

Blue Ray 1.1 is out this month and this supports the PiP which HDDVD has. Blue Ray sold 3:1 over and above HD-DVD and passed the 1million units sold marker last week. There are plans for Sony to have more SDDS encoded disks which is great news for me anyway as I have SDDS hardware as well as DTS etc.

The problem I have with HD-DVD is that MS want it to fail, its there to confuse the market so MS can get downloads working for HD (although nobodies broadband is that wide just yet). Money has been given to studios although they would of sold more in the Blue Ray camp, to make them HD-DVD exlusive although this hasnt made much difference. Egg on face time. Have a look at sales figues at DVDempire.com they have a good ales chart there.

[Jarrak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stattospur

Uncompressed is the best audio but you will have to part with alot of cash for an amp to decode it.

Yes, it's almost overkill considering the amps/speakers the viewer will require to get the best out of it. I'm more than happy with lossless formats such as TrueHD and DTS HD MA(supported by both HD DVD and Blu-ray) and even higher bandwidth DD and DTS probably has just as much impact for the "average" viewer without a couple of grands worth of audio kit

Quote:

Blue Ray 1.1 is out this month and this supports the PiP which HDDVD has. Blue Ray sold 3:1 over and above HD-DVD and passed the 1million units sold marker last week. There are plans for Sony to have more SDDS encoded disks which is great news for me anyway as I have SDDS hardware as well as DTS etc.

Yep finally, should have been part of the base spec but Blu-ray was rushed to market and we still have Profile 2 to come. Just a shame many standalone players can not be upgraded, old profile players are still being sold including the latest from SONY and the 1.1 spec is no longer mandatory.
The use of these extra features as a "bonus" is quite simply disgraceful but covers any complaints from early adopters who can not access 1.1 features on new movie releases.
Yet again we see the PS3 being the most adaptable and cheapest Blu-ray player, it is just so bizarre

I could be wrong but surely SDDS is only a theatrical format, never appeared on DVD and isn't part of the Blu-ray spec since DTS-HD and TrueHD (and others) support 8 channel anyway?

Quote:

The problem I have with HD-DVD is that MS want it to fail, its there to confuse the market so MS can get downloads working for HD (although nobodies broadband is that wide just yet). Money has been given to studios although they would of sold more in the Blue Ray camp, to make them HD-DVD exlusive although this hasnt made much difference. Egg on face time. Have a look at sales figues at DVDempire.com they have a good ales chart there.

I thought the accusation was MD were encouraging the format was by supporting HD DVD?
Of course MS could be looking long term but hey hands up who doesn't think SONY won't be offering downloadable content to their premiere home entertainment hub known as the PS3, it does everything else
SONY, champion of the people, yeah right.

Of course money and licensing/promotion has been used to encourage support just as SONY went on a spending spree to buy whole studios to make them exclusive.
Neither camp is fighting this war on merit, such a shame since if it was then cost would probably the only factor.

Egg on face time indeed, for all the power of SONY they have failed to kill off HD DVD with their main weapon of exclusive content since they couldn't compete on features and price in the first year.

[Jarrak]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephen99

I am reassured that they use the same video masters and bit rate, I wasn't sure whether one format had better picture quality than the other but I know that's controversial and that wars have started over HD vs. BR.

This is Warner only since there are not that many studios supporting both formats and at this time when it comes to Blu-ray exclusives that appear on HD DVD it's thanks to EU, Japanese etc companies and then masters and even finally codecs used can be different.

Quote:

Regarding audio, I am a bit confused by all the different types out there. Is there a faq where I can learn about them? Not wanting to start another "which is best" battle but does one audio format stand above the rest?

This Wiki has a decent comparison table and links to explanations of the various audio codecs supported by one or both formats.


As stattospur says uncompressed multichannel PCM should be the best but even then the choice of resolution be it 16bit or 24bit (max supported) will effect the final result. In general PCM should be better but given the choice by the audio creator the lossless version could be the superior source and even then on a users setup DD+ or a DTS soundtrack may be preferred.

Decent PCM/Lossless article here.

Whatever you end up choosing you will get excellent video and audio, the rest is pretty much in the eyes of the beholder. For me web features and the interactive extras are more important than PCM but I fully accept others will think the opposite