Keeping TrueHD\DTSMA...dirty injection hack please?

[Furiousflea]

Hi there, I'm sure the ability to keep TrueHD\DTSMA\LPCM will be forthcoming at some point but me being the impatient swine I am would like to try it now (just got a bluray writer today)...BD25s here I come :)

I know TrueHD uses the same A_AC3 tag when muxing to an m2ts so I assume if I set the target output size at a lower level to compensate for the higher bitrate audio and rename my raw TrueHD with AC3 core to the name BD-Rebuilder has assigned to the encoded track I should be able to swap the tracks midway through encoding before the m2ts and BD structure building phase takes place.

Shouldn't have to change anything in the mpls either with this method.

However, I'm unsure as if just renaming will be successful as it seems that even when choosing not to encode audio in BD-Rebuilder, it still seem to be running the audio through some amplify filter...

#Created by BD Rebuilder - v0.19.06 (beta)
LoadPlugin("C:\Users\Rob\Desktop\BD_Rebuilder\tools\nicaudio.dll")
audio=NicDTSSource("00001.track_4352.dts").Amplify(1.2)
audio

(This is for a homebrew HD DVD conversion and uses dts audio but just as an example, as this was set to not encode audio too).

I've checked out the method for doing so after the BD Structure has been created in the HD DVD\Bluray authoring forum but it seems a bit dirty doing it that way as it involves hex editing the mpls file to point at the correct m2ts after creating the structure in Tsmuxer. Because Tsmuxer always creates m2ts bluray output beginning with 00001...00002...etc naming the pointers in the mpls it creates won't be pointing at the correct m2ts number, be it 00000.m2ts as is often the case or some other number.


Thanks for any help\advice :)

[deank]

Doing such things will not help developing BD-RB but will only make people try things they don't understand and then report as bugs (not referring to you). And another thing - clpi and mpls files hold values for audio type and they are of course different for DTS/MA/HRA/ES or DD/THD...

[Furiousflea]

Doing such things will not help developing BD-RB but will only make people try things they don't understand and then report as bugs (not referring to you). And another thing - clpi and mpls files hold values for audio type and they are of course different for DTS/MA/HRA/ES or DD/THD...

Helpinh BD-RB development wasn't my primary goal when asking this question ;) :p

But cheers for posting, I had to ask :)

[jdobbs]

Doing such things will not help developing BD-RB but will only make people try things they don't understand and then report as bugs (not referring to you). And another thing - clpi and mpls files hold values for audio type and they are of course different for DTS/MA/HRA/ES or DD/THD... Exactly. And if they aren't updated on most players you will either get silence or garbage...

[ron spencer]

why are people so hung up about LPCM and DTSMA and TrueHD????

I have a $3000 anp and $4000 speakers....does LPCM and DTSMA sound better? A bit, but it is NOT revolutionary (you are kidding yourself if you think so). Video is what people focus on in these movies, not so much sound. This is not like a DVD-A where all you do is listen. AC3 640 is perfectly fine cause your brain can't process everything at once....try watching TV and a DVD-A at the same time...you just do not notice the higher resolution audio like you do when it is just audio.

[Furiousflea]

why are people so hung up about LPCM and DTSMA and TrueHD????

I have a $3000 anp and $4000 speakers....does LPCM and DTSMA sound better? A bit, but it is NOT revolutionary (you are kidding yourself if you think so). Video is what people focus on in these movies, not so much sound. This is not like a DVD-A where all you do is listen. AC3 640 is perfectly fine cause your brain can't process everything at once....try watching TV and a DVD-A at the same time...you just do not notice the higher resolution audio like you do when it is just audio.

Some people have better hearing than others. I'm 24 and my ears are in tip top shape. My vision isn't. I was in a car crash 5 years ago and lost my peripheral vision and have blurring in right eye and permanent double vision - I can still appreciate hi def video. I can also appreciate hi def sound, be it TrueHD or DTSMA. I was watching my Bluray of "The Dark Knight" earlier and to say the TrueHD track only sounds slightly better than the AC3 one at 640k is laughable. We're talking streets ahead.

I would actually contradict your view on the expensive setup theory, It's CHEAP setups that benefit most from hi def sound in proportional terms. I don't mean lowest of the low, but my amp cost £350 and my fronts and rear and sub totals £500. Which is fairly low end. I would expect that a top end amp could do a much better job on the DAC than my amp could dream of. In your case I would suspect the speakers are more the limiting factor.

So, for hi def audio I use the 6 channel analouge output on my Sony BDP-S550 so the DAC work is done on the Bluray player which is known for very reasonable quality.

The most important factor here, is that since your backing up to BD25 the video bitrate is basically saturated for screens less than 50 inches at bitrates much above 12mbit on virtually any source that isn't riddles with grain.

There is plenty of bits for full HD audio + subs + extras on a BD25 for ANY movie. To not include a TrueHD\DTSMA (Not too sure about LPCM though that takes many GB) is criminal if the option is available...Not a slander at jdobbs, I'm sure he will add it when he feels the time is right. But an attack at the people rubbishing the "minimal" difference in sound quality, the same people who were most likely gibbering on back in the old days that 192k was pointless for mp3 encoding as 128k was "CD quality".

VBR 192k is classed as virtually transparent by the audiophiles for 16bit 44khz audio, Bluray audio is 48khz or above and often 24bit source. Do you think that can be held at a near transparent level at a CONSTANT bitrate of 640k for 6 channels on an audio codec that is 15 years old I say to them wake up and smell the coffee

I'm sorry you can't hear the difference to any significant degree. But I can.

Sorry for my rant :) just needed to get that off my chest. I know a fair bit about video encoding and h264 is a fantastic video encoding technology - video is already at near transparent levels with room to spare so why not include transparent audio?

Your losing nothing on a BD25, BD9 sure I can understand (even there, there is the odd CGI animated kids flick that can have near transparent video quality and lossless sound).

Just to re-iterate, I'm not having a dig at you, I'm just airing my opinion that is based on my own logic. It could be completely wrong and all placebo, just as the world could only exist it our minds...:)

[MikeyBK]

why are people so hung up about LPCM and DTSMA and TrueHD????

I have a $3000 anp and $4000 speakers....does LPCM and DTSMA sound better? A bit, but it is NOT revolutionary (you are kidding yourself if you think so). Video is what people focus on in these movies, not so much sound. This is not like a DVD-A where all you do is listen. AC3 640 is perfectly fine cause your brain can't process everything at once....try watching TV and a DVD-A at the same time...you just do not notice the higher resolution audio like you do when it is just audio.


My sentiments exactly.... the BD-9s with the converted AC3 still shakes the entire room my HDTV is set up in, and when playing the original using True HD or DTS-Master, there is really no difference in the actual audio other than that you can shake the entire room with less volume....
I don't really need to go deaf afterall....lmao :p

Sure True-HD sounds like a better audio to retain, but the more I think about it, the more I feel it's not essential neither..... I think that if you have a decent audio system to begin with, AC3 is far more than sufficient...

[Furiousflea]

Sorry but you guys just don't understand the ethos of creating a backup by the sounds of things.

Go and check out http://www.highdefdigest.com a respected review site, go to the audio part of a review and see what they have to say you obviously don't want to listen to my logic ;)

My point here isn't even that, it is that you can have your lossless audio track with no compromise anyway, we're talking 23.5GB available for the whole film!!! Do you guys realise how high bitrate needs to be for 1080p video that isn't a grain fest? It's around 12mbit with h264 on a good source. I say wait for "DVD Shrink" type program to be released on for Bluray to you all....sigh...groan....Brick wall.

[Furiousflea]

Anyway, this thread wasn't meant to be a talking shop. I was after some help with a problem. I'll just do it the harder way in the HD DVD\Bluray forum someone was kind enough to point me how to do it there.

[MikeyBK]

Furiousflea... if you require True-HD that's fine... but that's not the viewpoint of all of us. I used to think that retaining HD audio ws essential, but the more I compare it the more I am realizing that probably for most home theatre set-ups, AC3 is far more than sufficient.
I personally prefer to channel all possible quality towards the video content rather than trying to retain True-HD.

[ron spencer]

@furiousflea

you did not get the point of my post....I CAN hear the difference, but with good action and my mind looking at video, your brain focuses on that. Try my experiment with a DVD-A and listening vs. watching and listening. With a movie you watch and listen.

Again for me when I watch a movie I am immersed in Video nearly all the time, that is the purpose of a movie, so I am happy with AC3. When I listen to music, I DO NOT want to hear AC3 or MP3, etc.

Audio and video are two different things....you mind processes video first.

In a movie I want the immersive feeling the video gives, so I am turned off by macroblocking and the like, so I want most space for video. This is why I do not like BD5 backups...on my 50" Samsung Plasma they just do not look good.

For me a movie is video first and it should not be compromised by the audio.

When DVD-A was first "cracked" the folks at hydrogen audio found that alot of the so-called "high-resolution" audio was just upsampled....that gives you nothing. We have no idea if the LPCM in any movie is really high resolution...or just upsampled 16 bit 44.1 anyway; there is no way to tell if the audio is really high resolution or not, which is a travesity really (maybe only marketting). When BD-R becomes really cheap then I will keep that audio, but for now and my BD9 I will give up the "lossless" audio, as long as my player CAN play it.

As well....most movie only backups will fit on BD-R anyway....so there is no need for BD-RB in that case.

In any case....enjoy!!!

[Furiousflea]

@furiousflea

you did not get the point of my post....I CAN hear the difference, but with good action and my mind looking at video, your brain focuses on that. Try my experiment with a DVD-A and listening vs. watching and listening. With a movie you watch and listen.

Again for me when I watch a movie I am immersed in Video nearly all the time, that is the purpose of a movie, so I am happy with AC3. When I listen to music, I DO NOT want to hear AC3 or MP3, etc.

Audio and video are two different things....you mind processes video first.

In a movie I want the immersive feeling the video gives, so I am turned off by macroblocking and the like, so I want most space for video. This is why I do not like BD5 backups...on my 50" Samsung Plasma they just do not look good.

For me a movie is video first and it should not be compromised by the audio.

When DVD-A was first "cracked" the folks at hydrogen audio found that alot of the so-called "high-resolution" audio was just upsampled....that gives you nothing. We have no idea if the LPCM in any movie is really high resolution...or just upsampled 16 bit 44.1 anyway; there is no way to tell if the audio is really high resolution or not, which is a travesity really (maybe only marketting). When BD-R becomes really cheap then I will keep that audio, but for now and my BD9 I will give up the "lossless" audio, as long as my player CAN play it.

As well....most movie only backups will fit on BD-R anyway....so there is no need for BD-RB in that case.

In any case....enjoy!!!

I follow what you both say, it's just that I am writing to BD-R :) Definately wouldn't want lossless audio on a BD9 unless it was an animated CGI film that compresses like crazy and also short.

Say for example though that you have a Bluray that is 30GB. You only need to reduce it by 6.5GB to fit on a BD-R. I'd rather remove foreign languages and what not and keep the lossless audio.

Sorry for my tone, I do feel quite stongly and don't present well. Get a bit flared up, don't mean to be arrogant though :) I appreciate other peoples views on the subject and good to hear what others think.

[MikeyBK]

I follow what you both say, it's just that I am writing to BD-R :) Definately wouldn't want lossless audio on a BD9 unless it was an animated CGI film that compresses like crazy and also short.

Say for example though that you have a Bluray that is 30GB. You only need to reduce it by 6.5GB to fit on a BD-R. I'd rather remove foreign languages and what not and keep the lossless audio.

Sorry for my tone, I do feel quite stongly and don't present well. Get a bit flared up, don't mean to be arrogant though :) I appreciate other peoples views on the subject and good to hear what others think.


No worries Bro, just was voicing a differing opinion, as Ron is as well...
Just for fun, I have a clip which has two different audios... one is AC3 and the other is DTS-MA... can you tell which is which? Only takes about a minute to download from FileFactory. Download with option 2, Basic Download...

AudioComparison.zip (http://www.filefactory.com/file/af258ag/n/AudioComparison_zip)

[blutach]

I guess, at least for the time being, you could play your original disc to get TrueHD audio.

Regards

[GaPony]

The way I see it... If you're really, really, really that much into audio perfection.... you wouldn't be caught dead using a program like this. The laws of snobbery simply won't allow you to play anything but an original disc. I have a feeling that many people who proclaim they require certain specs have bought in more to the hype than the reality.

Programs like this are more for the working class stiffs who are just trying to get a good working copy of a movie, onto cheap media, in order to protect what they see as a sizeable investment into a Blu-Ray movie.

The same applies to those who demand nothing less than perfection of their video... most of us are willing to accept something just slightly short of that mark, but those that aren't have a multitude of other options available to them.

Me? I'm just a working guy, trying to protect my investment from premature accidental destruction. I'd like to get a good copy with good video and sound, but I'm not looking to replicate an original 40gb disc onto a $1.00 disc. I greatly appreciate the quality that jdobbs has achieved with BD-Rebuilder. Its much more than I ever expected. Honestly, I see the expectations of some as a bit silly.

[Furiousflea]

The way I see it... If you're really, really, really that much into audio perfection.... you wouldn't be caught dead using a program like this. The laws of snobbery simply won't allow you to play anything but an original disc. I have a feeling that many people who proclaim they require certain specs have bought in more to the hype than the reality.

Programs like this are more for the working class stiffs who are just trying to get a good working copy of a movie, onto cheap media, in order to protect what they see as a sizeable investment into a Blu-Ray movie.

The same applies to those who demand nothing less than perfection of their video... most of us are willing to accept something just slightly short of that mark, but those that aren't have a multitude of other options available to them.

Me? I'm just a working guy, trying to protect my investment from premature accidental destruction. I'd like to get a good copy with good video and sound, but I'm not looking to replicate an original 40gb disc onto a $1.00 disc. I greatly appreciate the quality that jdobbs has achieved with BD-Rebuilder. Its much more than I ever expected. Honestly, I see the expectations of some as a bit silly.

You should raise your expecations then, as far as backing up to BD-R. As a comparison to DVD SL backups of DVD DL pressed discs, the reduction in quality is far lower. I wish people wouldn't see my comments as complaints\moaning as such. I'm no stuck up "audiophile" type, basically I can tell the difference and that is enough. On the video, I can't tell the difference even when compressed to around half it's origianl bitrate. This is normal and a result of the fantastic h264 codec Vs smelly old mpeg2.

For example. there are a few early discs compressed with mpeg2 for main feature which is the codec used on DVD. h264 can compress to transparent levels in a third or less of the bitrate on the original disc.

I'm OCD on some things, I like to tweak and mess around and get the best I can that is suitable for me that's all this thread was about. People's opinions on these sorts of things rarely change....;)

[Furiousflea]

I guess, at least for the time being, you could play your original disc to get TrueHD audio.

Regards

Fair enough :)

[jdobbs]

jdobbs humble opinion: I know a lot of people believe they can hear a difference. But the test data says that just isn't the case. When told which source is which -- people say they can hear it all the time. But when a double blind test occurs, and they don't know which source they are listening too that can almost never identify which is the LPCM uncompressed source. For 640Kbs AC3 audio it is pretty much 100% that can't be distinguished. That's science, not conjecture, and that's what I follow.

Now, does that mean I won't support reintegrating non-AC3 sources. Of course not. I will eventually keep uncompressed sources for BD-25 backups. But I will do so with the knowledge that it is the audio equivalent of wanking. It will make somebody feel good, but it really doesn't accomplish anything. ;)

[ron spencer]

Ha HA

Simply put, if one does miovie only onto BD-R then you can pretty much do whatever you want for 100% quality with EAC3to and tsMuxer.

see here for file sizes:

http://forum.slysoft.com/showthread.php?t=27706


BD-r will become cheap (dual layer BD will not be).

Right now, if you go the bd9 route, then having the audiophile audio will only make video poorer, so I think there is no point in keeping such audio. In the BD-R world, keep what you want for movie only. If you want all the extras, use the original.

But as I said, when BD-R (single layer) becomes cheap, and it will as it is single layer, then the door will open up to all sorts of stuff. For me, video is most important for BD9. Furious Flea can afford to buy looks of BD-R it seems, so for him he wants audiophile audio. This can be done manually though or by using Clown_BD from the Slysoft forum

[jdobbs]

I guess the bottom line is that if I'm going to say BD-RB does full backups -- I need to give it an option of keeping HD audio too. :)

[Furiousflea]

I guess the bottom line is that if I'm going to say BD-RB does full backups -- I need to give it an option of keeping HD audio too. :)

Being a long time supporter of both DVD-RB, now BD-RB and masturbation I'm overjoyed at this news, just off to the bathroom...to uhhh...celerbrate :p

[gizzin]

Ya thats really the truth most people can't tell the difference. But some people do have far superior hearing than others.

[MikeyBK]

Ya thats really the truth most people can't tell the difference. But some people do have far superior hearing than others.

That's too funny...lmao :p

[gizzin]

That's too funny...lmao :p

why is that funny?

[MikeyBK]

why is that funny?

Because you seem to be insinuating that anyone who cannot tell enough differences has 'far inferior hearing'....

Tell me, what is it exactly, that you hear as different from say the AC3 that BD-RB outputs, compared to say a DTS-Master stream?

[jdobbs]

being a long time supporter of both dvd-rb, now bd-rb and masturbation i'm overjoyed at this news, just off to the bathroom...to uhhh...celerbrate :plmao :D

[ron spencer]

let's hope it is "high resolution" celebrating...if you compress it too much there is no point.

[captain_video]

Ya thats really the truth most people can't tell the difference. But some people do have far superior hearing than others.
It could also be that the vast majority of Blu-Ray discs have not yet been properly authored to take advantage of the higher quality audio formats. It should be on a par with DVD-Audio and SACD recordings in terms of sound quality. If you can't hear the difference between either of those formats and a standard CD then you probably won't hear the difference between AC-3 and TrueHD. OTOH, if you didn't care about either of those formats then you probably won't care about TrueHD or DTS-HD either. Most people are perfectly content if it sounds "good enough" to them. The rest of us want the best the format has to offer and will settle for nothing less. I mean, if the audio is there, why strip it out and replace it with something that is potentially less pleasing to the ear? Don't get me wrong, I think AC-3 audio can sound quite good. I just think that a properly authored TrueHD or DTS-HD soundtrack has the potential to sound far better.

FWIW, I'm one of the holdouts waiting for BDRB to include the option to keep the TrueHD and DTS-HD audio. The amount of compression I'm seeing with the video doesn't disturb me as much as the potential loss in audio quality, especially if I keep my disc sizes to BD-25. Just my 2 cents.:)

[MikeyBK]

It's all good... we're all entitled to our own preferences. No right or wrong here, just differing opinions...

I personally have mulled it over for a few weeks now, and for the life of me, can't see any reasons that I really need TrueHD or DTS-MA??
Playing the originals using TrueHD or DTS-MA, there is only a certain volume level that my ears can handle, and also not be pissing off my neighbors...:p
Then playing the Originals or the BD-9s, using the AC3 audio, I can easily attain the same volume, and still with very crisp sound......only difference was that I had to turn the volume up by a couple to reach the limit of the dBs which my ears are comfortable with.

I could understand if I 'could not' reach the same volume level as the HD audios when playing the AC3, but that's not the case. I'm not into that ego trip where guys drive down the road with their car bass shaking the neighborhood windows,,,lol I used to when I was an ignorant teenager...
I actually feel sorry for those guys because they will more than likely be the ones with hearing problems in their later years.:rolleyes:

If you guys had an amphitheatre and a $10,000 audio system, then OK...I'd understand the need for that HD audio.... but in a home theatre?? especially when you can crank up the AC3 to a maximum that is still healthy for your ears... while still sounding very, and I do mean, very crisp...
how friggin big is the rooms you have your home theatre set up in!?!?:eek::p

[Furiousflea]

It's all good... we're all entitled to our own preferences. No right or wrong here, just differing opinions...

I personally have mulled it over for a few weeks now, and for the life of me, can't see any reasons that I really need TrueHD or DTS-MA??
Playing the originals using TrueHD or DTS-MA, there is only a certain volume level that my ears can handle, and also not be pissing off my neighbors...:p
Then playing the Originals or the BD-9s, using the AC3 audio, I can easily attain the same volume, and still with very crisp sound......only difference was that I had to turn the volume up by a couple to reach the limit of the dBs which my ears are comfortable with.

I could understand if I 'could not' reach the same volume level as the HD audios when playing the AC3, but that's not the case. I'm not into that ego trip where guys drive down the road with their car bass shaking the neighborhood windows,,,lol I used to when I was an ignorant teenager...
I actually feel sorry for those guys because they will more than likely be the ones with hearing problems in their later years.:rolleyes:

If you guys had an amphitheatre and a $10,000 audio system, then OK...I'd understand the need for that HD audio.... but in a home theatre?? especially when you can crank up the AC3 to a maximum that is still healthy for your ears... while still sounding very, and I do mean, very crisp...
how friggin big is the rooms you have your home theatre set up in!?!?:eek::p

Well just like to say I'm pleased it's been taken away from that personal tone before (my fault, we're all chums here :))

I think there is more to it than meets the eye, I'll give an example of just yesterday I was visiting my brother a couple hundred miles away in birmingham. Anyway the old fart (we had a load of people there) wanted to show off his new "bluray player" and "I've got this amazing brand new pioneer plasma...I think its a kuro or something" plasma (quote). Anyway there was about 12-15 people in his large living room, I was half asleep lying on a bean bag (long nite day before)....

He forced everyone to watch an action scene from his "Casino Royale" Bluray. I was half asleep but I could tell it sounded pretty darn meaty and thought "lol he's even gone and changed it to the lossess track"....ponce! Anyway after a min or so, he said "hang on there a minute"...Then he did change it to the lossess track and the change in depth to the sound was immediately apparent. He asked the group if they could tell the difference. Not 1 could, apart from me and my other brother who didn't bother answering (nor did I). We just took the micky for him being such an openly proud geek.

Even I was jealous lol :) anyway my point being that we're all used to our own kit, we all have different discs that might sound different.

Some people look for more dynamic range etc and can hear it when it's there in front of them, some look past it and are more impressed by other things.

One thing I notice is that lossless tracks often have a much more natural feel to them, abit more ambience that you wouldn't miss if it wasn't there but is the icing on the cake...

I dunno :)

....Stalemate I suppose ;)

[captain_video]

Audio preference tends to be a very personal thing with most people. You're either content with what you have or you're one of those that's constantly looking for the Holy Grail. I used to be a diehard high end audio fanatic that was constantly looking for that little bit extra to reveal the highest level of detail possible. It literally got to the point where I was neurotic about it. I could actually hear changes in the sound of my system if the humidity levels changed in the listening room. I know it sounds crazy but I was so attuned to the sound of the hardware that I started to lose sight of what was really important - the music itself. I have since backed off and learned to appreciate the system I have, which is no slouch in itself.

That being said, I have tried to make sure I've always been able to enjoy the soundtracks of movies to their fullest extent, as well as the constantly evolving video formats to reveal increasing levels of detail. My system has evolved from basic stereo, various early matrixed surround formats, Dolby Digital and the variants it has spawned and now to the latest HD audio formats available on Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. I can live with the almost imperceptible reduction in video quality using BD-Rebuilder but I'd prefer to keep the high-end audio formats intact if I can. Ideally, I'd like to see JDobbs keep both the AC-3 and HD audio tracks intact for the BD-25 rips, or at least offer options to select one or the other or both for the final compilation.

I currently rip all of my BD discs to iso images and keep them on a server so they can be streamed to any PC in the house. I have one HTPC that feeds my 60" Sony HDTV and my Onkyo Pro PR-SC885 which is capable of decoding both TrueHD and DTS-HD audio. There are lots of folks over at the AVSForums that are anxiously looking forward to using BDRB if and when it includes these audio formats. A BD rip can take upwards of 50GB of storage for a single disc so having the capability of cutting the size in half while retaining the HD audio would be a major benefit to us. I also have a BD burner, so being able to make backups on a 25GB disc would be of great benefit.

[jdobbs]

Audio preference tends to be a very personal thing with most people. You're either content with what you have or you're one of those that's constantly looking for the Holy Grail. I used to be a diehard high end audio fanatic that was constantly looking for that little bit extra to reveal the highest level of detail possible. It literally got to the point where I was neurotic about it. I could actually hear changes in the sound of my system if the humidity levels changed in the listening room. I know it sounds crazy but I was so attuned to the sound of the hardware that I started to lose sight of what was really important - the music itself. I have since backed off and learned to appreciate the system I have, which is no slouch in itself.

That being said, I have tried to make sure I've always been able to enjoy the soundtracks of movies to their fullest extent, as well as the constantly evolving video formats to reveal increasing levels of detail. My system has evolved from basic stereo, various early matrixed surround formats, Dolby Digital and the variants it has spawned and now to the latest HD audio formats available on Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. I can live with the almost imperceptible reduction in video quality using BD-Rebuilder but I'd prefer to keep the high-end audio formats intact if I can. Ideally, I'd like to see JDobbs keep both the AC-3 and HD audio tracks intact for the BD-25 rips, or at least offer options to select one or the other or both for the final compilation.

I currently rip all of my BD discs to iso images and keep them on a server so they can be streamed to any PC in the house. I have one HTPC that feeds my 60" Sony HDTV and my Onkyo Pro PR-SC885 which is capable of decoding both TrueHD and DTS-HD audio. There are lots of folks over at the AVSForums that are anxiously looking forward to using BDRB if and when it includes these audio formats. A BD rip can take upwards of 50GB of storage for a single disc so having the capability of cutting the size in half while retaining the HD audio would be a major benefit to us. I also have a BD burner, so being able to make backups on a 25GB disc would be of great benefit. @Furiousflea and captain_video

Point taken. It's won't be in the version releasing today, but maybe the next one.

[nwg]

I have to agree with furiousflea. I can undestand not using it on DVD but lossless should be available when having a big 23.3GB BD 25 to burn to. I can easily tell the difference with the audio. I curently burn with HD audio intact when less than 23GB straight from the originals. I have to encode just the video with enough space leftover to mux the HD audio and keep it under 23GB.

The HD audio even makes a difference when using a Samsung 1500/2500 player and just DTS. It can convert any HD audio format to standard DTS (through HD - PCM - DTS encoding). I can tell the difference say when selecting TrueHD to DTS as the audio rather than the using the standard AC3 to DTS.

[jdobbs]

My biggest fear is that people will choose the HD audio as their only choice for movie-only encodes, and then blame BD-RB because it doesn't work on their player. Yeah, it's their fault -- but they always seem to leave out that kind of information when they post "this software sucks" posts all over the internet...

I've been there with DVD-RB and preprocessing. Self inflicted sucking chest wounds always seem to be somebody else's fault.

[gizzin]

Because you seem to be insinuating that anyone who cannot tell enough differences has 'far inferior hearing'....

Tell me, what is it exactly, that you hear as different from say the AC3 that BD-RB outputs, compared to say a DTS-Master stream?


Your assuming that I meant I have far superior hearing and I can tell the difference. Which I never said, I just said some people do have superior hearing which is the truth. It's like how some people run faster, or are smarter, never get cancer, things like that. And the truth for me is I can't tell the difference between AC3, and HD audio on bluerays. So what does assuming do? It makes a ass outta you and me :)

[MikeyBK]

Your assuming that I meant I have far superior hearing and I can tell the difference. Which I never said, I just said some people do have superior hearing which is the truth. It's like how some people run faster, or are smarter, never get cancer, things like that. And the truth for me is I can't tell the difference between AC3, and HD audio on bluerays. So what does assuming do? It makes a ass outta you and me :)


HaHaHaHa ...LMAO :D

That's an old one.... but I think 'assume' makes an 'ass' out of 'u' & 'me'.... not assuming... :p

BTW, I have very keen hearing, scored extremely high in a couple hearing tests I took over the past few years... perhaps 'that' is my problem, I can't seem to tolerate deafening volumes..... maybe that's why the AC3 audio is plenty loud enough for me. :confused: :rolleyes:

I mean I could understand 'IF' there were some sounds or speech that I couldn't hear on the AC3 stream where I could on the HD streams... but that's not even the case...:cool:

[Furiousflea]

HaHaHaHa ...LMAO :D

That's an old one.... but I think 'assume' makes an 'ass' out of 'u' & 'me'.... not assuming... :p

BTW, I have very keen hearing, scored extremely high in a couple hearing tests I took over the past few years... perhaps 'that' is my problem, I can't seem to tolerate deafening volumes..... maybe that's why the AC3 audio is plenty loud enough for me. :confused: :rolleyes:

I mean I could understand 'IF' there were some sounds or speech that I couldn't hear on the AC3 stream where I could on the HD streams... but that's not even the case...:cool:

Your a cynic, end of story :p

We are hopeless believers. :p

I'm sure both of those statements are true to a variying degree. I personally would go with the 1st one. You would go with the 2nd. Nobody is going to prove the other wrong. ;)

[Furiousflea]

My biggest fear is that people will choose the HD audio as their only choice for movie-only encodes, and then blame BD-RB because it doesn't work on their player. Yeah, it's their fault -- but they always forget to leave out that kind of information when they post "this software sucks" posts all over the internet...

I've been there with DVD-RB and preprocessing. Self inflicted sucking chest wounds always seem to be somebody else's fault.

I don't think the number of "retards" using your software is that high. Just to get it working requires someone who knows a bit about the process. The internet is plauged with the dregs of society, don't give into them ;)

[MikeyBK]

Your a cynic, end of story :p

We are hopeless believers. :p

I'm sure both of those statements are true to a varying degree. I personally would go with the 1st one. You would go with the 2nd. Nobody is going to prove the other wrong. ;)

LOL... you're right, it basically comes down to personal preference. Though I can take or leave either streams, I actually do know guys that spent more for their Home Theatre set-up than they did for their cars!!:eek: :p
So I can relate to what you're probably looking for, but only thru them and not by my own personal tastes...

Ahhh, our own prerogative... such a good thing, no??:)

[MikeyBK]

My biggest fear is that people will choose the HD audio as their only choice for movie-only encodes, and then blame BD-RB because it doesn't work on their player. Yeah, it's their fault -- but they always forget to leave out that kind of information when they post "this software sucks" posts all over the internet...

I've been there with DVD-RB and preprocessing. Self inflicted sucking chest wounds always seem to be somebody else's fault.

I don't think the number of "retards" using your software is that high. Just to get it working requires someone who knows a bit about the process. The internet is plauged with the dregs of society, don't give into them ;)

Hey aren't you always complaning about BD-RB?? ...lol... so are you saying he shouldn't give in to you??... :p ....J/k Of Course..:)

[jdobbs]

Your a cynic, end of story :p

We are hopeless believers. :p

I'm sure both of those statements are true to a variying degree. I personally would go with the 1st one. You would go with the 2nd. Nobody is going to prove the other wrong. ;)So I guess we could say "we can't hear the difference, but faith makes us believe that it is there." :D

Ok... I guess I'm the real cynic, eh?

[GaPony]

So I guess we could say "we can't hear the difference, but faith makes us believe that it is there." :D

Ok... I guess I'm the real cynic, eh?

Maybe... but just because you're a cynic doesn't mean you aren't right.

[blutach]

MikeyBK and gizzin - let's stay on topic please and not get into barbs against each other.

Regards

[ron spencer]

I think what is missing here is that for BD5 and BD9 backups, the sheer space of the lossless stuff means that too much is taken from the video to make it worthwhile, especially if you feel the need to do FULL disc backups.

For BD25, of course, such an option is more feasible.

This is true no matter if you like lossless or not.

[Furiousflea]

I think what is missing here is that for BD5 and BD9 backups, the sheer space of the lossless stuff means that too much is taken from the video to make it worthwhile, especially if you feel the need to do FULL disc backups.

For BD25, of course, such an option is more feasible.

This is true no matter if you like lossless or not.

Absolutely agree there. lossless audio has no place on BD5\BD9. I wouldn't mind having a play with lossless audio and some disney CGI movie that is pristine clean and could look good at 1080p on a BD9. But that would just be for fun seeing how far you can push the boundries :)

I would suggest that an option to retain lossless audio only be visible when backing up to BD25. Should keep the questions from the noobs asking why their backup looks crap on BD5\9 to a minimum.

[MikeyBK]

I would suggest that an option to retain lossless audio only be visible when backing up to BD25.

That's actually a very good suggestion Furiousflea.... should alleviate the concern JD had about some users trying to blame BD-RB because they decided to keep the HD audio stream on a BD-9 (or worse, onto a BD-5:rolleyes:) and then complains about BD-RB because the video is not as crisp as they'd like.... like he said, 'self-inflicted' issues...lmao:p:rolleyes:

And now that that's settled...lol... you can move onto your other concerns/issues.... :p :)

[ron spencer]

to add fuel to the fire (for fun)...check this out from cdfreaks:

Years of experiments by a Stanford University music professor found that his incoming students actually prefer the sound of MP3, despite its low quality.

Jonathan Berger presented his findings at a meeting of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, O'Reilly Radar reports. Each year, Berger plays a variety of music in different formats for incoming students, from MP3 to lossless audio. And each year, it seems that more students choose the sound of MP3 over technically better-sounding formats.

"He said that they seemed to prefer 'sizzle sounds' that MP3s bring to music, Dale Dougherty reports for O'Reilly. "It is a sound they are familiar with."

Dougherty theorizes that this phenomenon is similar to the way some older music lovers fetishize vinyl. Say what you will about the "warmth" of old records, but perhaps it's the technically unwanted artifacts -- crackles and pops -- that are most desirable. The same love of MP3s unpleasantries could be happening with today's younger listeners.

That seems like a bit of a stretch. People like vinyl not just because of its sonic quirks, but because of its tactile and totally unportable nature; it really forces the listener to relax at home with the music, while MP3 does the opposite. Still, I can buy the idea that people become used to the "sizzle" of MP3, provided that it's not completely warbling.

There are definitely some audiophiles lurking on this site. Does the news make you die a little inside?


Lets hear it for lowest bitrate possible!!!

[Furiousflea]

to add fuel to the fire (for fun)...check this out from cdfreaks:




Lets hear it for lowest bitrate possible!!!

"...sizzle sounds". I thought they were called unwanted artifacts that weren't there in the original recording. But hey, what would I know :p

On the flipside, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some university that did an "experiment" where the "students" preferred the look of heavily compressed h264 video to the original.

They might have said that the highly compressed video had "blocky bits", but they quite liked the way they reminded them of staircases when they could walk properly before they received their severe head injuries in car crashes. They liked the way although the image was blocky it gave them courage and determination to get better and one day walk up stairs again...Like myself :)

Sorry that's in bad taste, I do apologise but I was in a car crash, did receive severe head injuries and couldn't walk up stairs for a period of time. So I'm kinda allowed to say that right?

Maybe not.

...Too much time on my hands :confused: