HD DVD or Blu-ray: My Choice is...?

[Richard]

I would like everyone to consider that there are four choices possible here, not two: blue, red, both, and neither. It would appear you have, in fact, made a choice: both.

Gee, never looked at it that way since most folks want a winner declared but you are indeed correct, I did make a choice and so did rfowkes. Thanks for the other two choices most of us overlook as a choice!

I appreciate all the comments and was greatly surprised how most related to HD audio, SACD and DVD Audio.

I love high fidelity surround sound and have an equal number of SACDs and DVD-A disks in my collection. I will continue to buy from whomever continues to release (preferably in the ROCK category!).

Hallelujah! It is the lack of rock and pop titles that turned me away. Not that I don't like classical but over the years I have become quite picky about the orchestra, the conduction and how the sonic event was captured. I have some very special favorites on that front most notably Beethoven interpreted by Christopher Hogwood and The Academy of Ancient Music. If he is correct Beethoven and other composers understood rhythm and beat just like a rock and roller in which case the romantic interpretations of the 20th century have done more bad than good for classical. Hogwood keeps your toes, fingers and brain tapping to the beat and it is a fantastic experience of the classical genre bringing new insight and respect for Beethoven!

However, if Sony thought that would be a selling point for PS, they found out differently. Wii is beating them to pieces, and it has nothing to do with a High Definition DVD player, or lack of one.

My son bought a Wii and it truly is a phenomenal experience! While graphics and sound are cool the Wii provides something other game consoles don't; a simplistic and intuitive control interface. I have not seen one person yet not smile and get into the gaming experience called Wii. On the other hand if you are into performance gaming it is clearly limited...

fpnovak, HD audio streams via HDMI are here. Toshiba HD-A30 review in process... $399 MSRP!

ButchieK, all audiophiles feel your pain... There isn't much music in the current music that is being offered and TV has replaced music as the background buzz of choice for most folks. I don't know if the days of sitting down and simply listening and focusing to music for an hour or two like a movie or TV show will ever return.... With what is being offered in hardware and content there is every reason to doubt it will. I wonder if this is not the progress of all things that become everyday commodities; they lose their luster and uniqueness and we slowly but surely lose our passion. I hear so many people watch movies while doing other stuff so maybe Hollywood is our next passion to lose... In this house a movie remains an event of reckoning!

Since there was so much comment about music I'll throw out a bone... either HD video format could provide it if only there was worthy content and a market...

BTW, great HD DVD article from my colleague Shane Sturgeon. There is a lot to like about the HD DVD camp while Blu-ray is still figuring it out...

Which is More Consumer Friendly: HD DVD or Blu-ray?
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/articles/20 ... lu-ray.php

[free2speak]

I would disagree. Both formats deliver the same experience. Why is it Blu-Ray and PS3 fans always talk about future development that will show how superior BD is? That is because there really isn't a compelling performance advantage for BD or PS3 now. You will pay more for BD and get the same movie experience. The extra storage space will largely go un-used because both formats will get the same movie with slightly different content.

You write:
"HD disc does not even remotely provide the same level of perceived performance improvement that broadcast HDTV does compared to broadcast NTSC; that one was a no-brainer."

That statement makes no sense. SD TV equals NTSC, and HD TV equals ATSC HD Broadcast. HD DVD and BD both exceed HDTV so how can you say these new formats are not a huge jump in performance? HDTV is also just arriving in the mass market, but in the future all new TV's will be HDTV so the new formats will naturally be purchased more often.

Most consumers don't know or care about 1080p/60 or 1080p/24. But they do know a good value. Anyone looking for a good price should walk by BD, and pick up the real value in HD DVD.

[Richard]

You write:
"HD disc does not even remotely provide the same level of perceived performance improvement that broadcast HDTV does compared to broadcast NTSC; that one was a no-brainer."

That statement makes no sense.

Per statisticians in the marketing industry, to replace any old technology with new technology in which the only real difference is the experience, broadcast TV, there has to be a 5 times improvement in consumer perception. The new technology has to perform 5 times or more better in quality to capture the passion of the mass market.

That leaves convenience as the only remaining factor for a consumer to make the change.

HDTV met that challenge in spades compared to broadcast NTSC; even with an old TV that isn't HD capable you will get a DVD like experience!

HD disc is not perceptually five times better than SD DVD and as for watching the main feature there is no difference in convenience. As noted by ALL users, currently HD disc is actually less convenient due to slower boot up times along with the frustrating bumps and pot holes along the way that come with any new technology. An audio and video system that can fully utilize the capability of these new formats costs far more than just the player...

[free2speak]

I don't see how you can say HD video on the new DVD formats isn't 5 times better than SD DVD. I will not even watch my old DVD's now that I have HD DVD. Video quality alone is enough to sell me on HD DVD. HDTV and the next gen DVD formats are all sold with "six times the resolution" sales pitch. I am thinking the increase in video quality moves Hi-Def DVD a lot closer to a 5 time improvement over current DVD.


Yes the machines are a little slow because of all of the additional processing going on under the hood. No one ever waited for early DVD drives to boot, but it is clear from the startup times on all next gen players that they have a lot of boot time. I don't see this as a huge issue, and it should improve as the designs are refigned. If you want to judge stictly by convenience because of long startup time then yes that is a minus.

HDTV met that challenge in spades compared to broadcast NTSC; even with an old TV that isn't HD capable you will get a DVD like experience!

Again this makes no sense. DVD is NTSC TV. I am not impressed by 480i on a regular television, or 480P on an HDTV. Old NTSC is supposed to give a "DVD like experience" since DVD predates ATSC (HD) it is obviously NTSC (SD). If you watch old DVD on an HDTV you don't see HDTV; you see all ugly NTSC quality video stretched to fit a larger HDTV. HDTV is going to replace SDTV by February 2009. Everyone will buy HDTV eventually and most of them will want all HD video sources. Sure some will always say it's good enough, but most will never want to see SDTV again. That need for HD content means HD cable, HD satellite, and HD DVD's too.

[Richard]

All video starts life as full bandwidth RGB for the system it is being mastered for. From there it is compressed via analog or digital means to make it fit within the bandwidth or space it was designed for distribution.

NTSC is based on composite video and carries the greatest penalties of any form of compression. This is a nasty process that used analog compression to make it all fit in the same space as the b/w TV of the time. As good as Laserdisc was the use of NTSC composite video was it's greatest flaw. There is no scaler on the planet that can separate the color from the luminance and correct the all the artifacts this signal standard created. Once these two signals are mixed for NTSC the destruction is final. At this point we have not even broadcast this signal which adds another layer of very nasty imaging artifacts that will vary by your location and antenna. On displays 25" or smaller at the typical 8-15 times viewing distance it worked great and the public ate it up! Our displays got bigger, lots bigger, and that is where the trouble began starting with the Klipsch Nova beam CRT front projector in the mid 70s for consumers and business and their 50" screens.

S-video uses the same signal level standards as composite but the color and luminance (b/w signal) are split, hopefully at the source. This connection on a laserdisc player never had the value many thought because the signal on the disc is NTSC. S-VHS and prerecorded movies on the other hand could have an advantage as the color and luminance are laid down on the tape separately (signal to noise ratio for color though was much worse than laserdisc). The color signal in this form has twice the resolution of NTSC and no artifacts related to mixing them and separating them.

DVD use the same signal level standards as NTSC but the color signal is closer to the RGB source using another form of analog compression to create an RGB color signal using only two channels, Cb and Cr, what we call component video. 480I component uses NTSC signal levels. This provides nearly 4 times the color resolution of NTSC by not being analog compressed into a single color signal. NTSC and DVD are not even remotely the same in terms of high fidelity.

HDTV uses the same signal levels standards of NTSC for everything except video levels. NTSC requires a 7.5 IRE black level offset and HDTV recovers that for a greater dynamic range using the full 0-100IRE video signal level. Like DVD the color signal is component but in this case due to the different levels we call that Pb and Pr. all 480p sources and inputs are setup for these video levels and that includes upscaling 480i DVD to 480p.

Going from analog NTSC composite broadcast video to digital HDTV component video is a momentous leap not only in delivery via radio waves but also in circuitry removing numerous conversion and compression schemes that NTSC required. The only way to get closer is to provide true RGB signals but that would require more bandwidth and storage space. With HDTV we are only 1-2 steps away from the original source rather than 10-15!

This created what marketers call a 5 times perceptual improvement for the mass market. Personally I'll go with 1000 times better and there simply is no comparison that can be made!

If they call that 5 times better than I'll say HD disc is 1-2 times better than properly scaled SD DVD. Based on the above the only difference between SD DVD and HDTV or HD disc is resolution and nothing else. Resolution though never was the key element in the HDTV transition; the key was artifacts related to noise and clarity and that is what sold the public on DVD as well! While resolution is a function of clarity, artifacts related to noise and signal processing are far more apparent to the mass market and typical in the industry. Some of these artifacts remain, namely edge enhancement.

I have compared The Fifth Element on Blu-ray and Superbit DVD with quality performance players, both discs mastered for the best delivery and the ONLY difference is resolution and image depth. The affect of this will vary greatly depending on the system used, viewing distance and the trained eye. if you can't perceive it this won't matter. If you can perceive it then your system and the way you use it will make the difference you perceive anywhere from none existent or subtle to visually and audibly beneficial worthy of your investment. Based on HD audio we are in the same territory and that is one where the difference will not have the same impact for most users because it simply is not great enough.

If you see so much difference than you are not the typical user. The ones that need convincing are not those spending money on performance products and using them properly; it is the thousands more that buy mass market performance and use it improperly adding to the problem making the difference between SD DVD and HDTV quite small indeed. Indeed, it's SACD and DVD Audio all over again except for one major difference; video attributes are far easier to point out and discuss - I can show you a difference by pointing at the screen where with audio you have to be capable of hearing a difference that we can only relate to in words.

[free2speak]

You want to stick with DVD you go ahead. I want HD content for my HD TV. I am not waiting around for some arbitrary performance barrier to be smashed. We are talking about HDTV in general, and it isn't going anywhere. HD is a market on the rise, and the big waves haven't even started. I can't wait around for you people to decide on a standard. You are nit picking about slow perfomance comparing early HD DVD and Blu-Ray players to mature DVD products. From a computing stand point there is a lot more processing going on in a new HD player. Do you think Toshiba and Sony are using the most powerful processors on the market? No they are using the cheapest that will get the job done. Sony and Toshiba will also improve performance through firmware upgrades. Did you ever upgrade the firmware on your DVD movie player? I updated my HD-A2 twice already, and I expect more in the future. A firmware upgrade shows the new players are much more like a full computer for better or worse. The performance benefit for the new formats is in the video and audio quality. They will get better, and they will come down in price, but there will not be a huge change in the design of the players.

[Richard]

I don't know why you have taken a combative and argumentative approach to this article and the detailed explanation your post inspired. I chose both formats, clearly not sticking with DVD...

[free2speak]

You are correct I was being a little combative. For that I apologize. The whole format war Blu-Ray V HD DVD, and don't forget Xbox 360 V PS3 makes me a little edgy. I see a lot of silly partisan comments from both sides. People making statements about technology they don't fully understand.

I do not include you in this group. It is obvious that you and Dale are both thoughtful and informed.

[dabhome]

The comparison should be between an average DVD on an average DVD player and an average HD DVD or Blu Ray on an average HD DVD or Blu-Ray player, not a Super-Bit DVD. Most DVDs are not Super-Bit and most users do not see them.

[free2speak]

http://www.thelookandsoundofperfect.com/overview.html

HD DVD "Six times the picture quality of standard formats."

I think the increase in resolution makes a huge difference in image quality. HD TV is a "visual" medium so this should count for a lot in my book. I have a 48" HD TV and I watch from 7 feet away. I can see the difference between DVD and HD DVD. I just purchased all the Harry Potter movies on HD DVD and for me it is like seeing these fun movies for the first time.