DD+ at 1.5 seems to be the gold standard.
- Thread starter nonrev
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 35
- Views 4K
Well seems like if you have both you should know most of the stuff you say about SQ on blue ray is FUD! So seems to me your full of sh!t??
Not only do i not remember this. I also remember before both formats we both thought blue ray would be better!! In fact i was so upset with the PQ of blu ray at first i would not rent or buy a movie!! Thank goodness things are looking up!:up I just think it's silly I know for a fact a lot of people like DTS over Regular DD.. So why can't we like True HD or PCM better then DD+?? I know for a fact I DO and MANY other do also. Not ripping HD DVD Not pushing Blu ray!! I LOVE HD! On my set uo Blu ray sounds better!:up
So, what exactly did I say about SQ on BD that offended you so much?Well seems like if you have both you should know most of the stuff you say about SQ on blue ray is FUD! So seems to me your full of sh!t??
Who was ever arguing about the "right to like" one sound over another? By all means...
Just when trying to "prove" that one soundtrack is better than the other, don't go Joe's way inventing facts you know nothing about...
Diogen.
EDIT: Looking back at your older posts, you seem to use a 360 with the HD DVD add-on to play HD.
If this is still true, you actually have no clue what DD+ sounds like: the 360 is re-encoding the HD soundrack
into regular DD, DTS or WMA Pro. And if your receiver can't decode WMA Pro over SPDIF, DTS 1.5Mbps is the best you can have.
Last edited:
You are in denial. The standalone BD players are at least 100-200 dollars higher than the HD DVD players.
You can. But for some movies there is no discernable difference http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/s...Def_FAQ:_Uncompressed_vs._Lossless_Audio/1233
It'd my pleasure.
In this post from August two such statements are quoted that you never retracted:
http://www.satelliteguys.us/1002389-post52.html
If you need more, let me know.
You wish...
Diogen.
Diogen , tis the Xmas season and I will turn the other cheek. You were right about the MPEG4 on HD-DVD -- it has been used a few times. However, you were wrong when you suggested that there is no differance between DD5.1+ and any lossless audio codec.
High-Def FAQ: Uncompressed vs. Lossless Audio | High-Def Digest
Are you ready to admit to that or are you too perfect?
High-Def FAQ: Uncompressed vs. Lossless Audio | High-Def Digest
Are you ready to admit to that or are you too perfect?
Last edited:
What It Boils Down To"Apprehensions about lossless compression being inferior to an uncompressed version of the same soundtrack are not borne out by the facts. One methodology may have technical advantages over the other in terms of space savings, but the end result is the same whether the disc you buy has an uncompressed soundtrack or a lossless one. They're both equally good,..."
But of course.
Honestly, I don't hear the difference between 256kbps MP3 and original CD.
And DD+ mathematically is not lossless, hence I believe there is a difference and somebody's ear can hear this.
I never ever argue taste, preferences, abilities. Never will. Keep your factual arguments sound and we'll never cross paths.
Diogen.
