High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

Here is a review of the HD DVD/BD versions of the new DVE HD Basics calibration discs

PFC5
04-05-2008, 04:35 PM
http://ultimateavmag.com/testtools/308dve/

Thought some might want to see this. ;)

Lee Stewart
04-05-2008, 04:44 PM
That is a Resolution Test Pattern on the right!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

kamspy
04-05-2008, 06:49 PM
I have the older HD DVD DVE. I made one adjustment. I turned the color down one notch on my menu. So, not only do I have 'ears like a bat', I've also got 'eyes like a hawk';)

PFC5
04-05-2008, 07:50 PM
I have the older HD DVD DVE. I made one adjustment. I turned the color down one notch on my menu. So, not only do I have 'ears like a bat', I've also got 'eyes like a hawk';)

Same for me. When I tested the audio with my SPL meter I was only off 1db on ONE speaker. I did a much better job than the Denon or Yamaha receivers ever did with their mic and auto setup routines.

I am getting the BD version of this as i also already have the HD DVD combo DVE and I want to test the BD players for deinterlacing etc. also.

With the DVE and using the 24Fps output of the A20 I have excellent deinterlacing in the bedroom display. Not bad for only spending $1,000.00 on a 47" 1080p LCD. :D

Nikopol
04-06-2008, 12:50 AM
Thank for the link on how to use these "must have" ;) titles.

Cowboy X
04-06-2008, 04:08 AM
I am just a little annoyed that the HD DVD version has so much more. I assumed that they would be the same and sent for the Blu-Ray version.

Chris Gerhard
04-06-2008, 06:20 AM
Thanks for the link. I have always used DVE and always get bored and have to get a better handle on what to do with it.

Chris

bruceames
04-06-2008, 08:10 AM
http://ultimateavmag.com/testtools/308dve/

Thought some might want to see this. ;)

Good review. Another illustration of how much further HD DVD was along than Blu-ray and it's a crying shame that the better format lost.

I guess I'll have to double dip on this. I found the other disc to complicated to use, but I can use it for SD calibration since it's a combo.

PFC5
04-06-2008, 08:13 AM
I am just a little annoyed that the HD DVD version has so much more. I assumed that they would be the same and sent for the Blu-Ray version.

From reading this review I think it points out from an authoring standpoint WHY many of the "optional" features of the BD format needs to be made mandatory IMO.

The problem with having a lot of optional features and differing implementations of it among the various players could make for a nightmare for authoring as was pointed out. I think this will only get worse as time goes by and they find different ways for players to implement things including the mandatory stuff.

I got the impression that even the mandatory stuff on BD has differing implementations that can be problematic. I am pretty sure that this is likely because the BD format was launched too soon, and will eventually be ironed out on the mandatory stuff, with possible issues down the road on the older 1.0 players like I have. I guess this just means more people should just get the PS3 until SAL BD players stabalize, if they can just consciously get past the "game Console" stigma. ;)

Lee Stewart
04-06-2008, 08:29 AM
So if Sony can build a Game console with the Cell BE and sell it for $399 . . .

How come they can't build a BD SAL with the Cell BE instead of a SoC?

Some of the stuff needed on the PS3 like WiFi and multiple USB ports aren't necessary.

?

PFC5
04-06-2008, 08:37 AM
So if Sony can build a Game console with the Cell BE and sell it for $399 . . .

How come they can't build a BD SAL with the Cell BE instead of a SoC?

Some of the stuff needed on the PS3 like WiFi and multiple USB ports aren't necessary.

?

Simple. Sony is selling the PS3 at a loss because they make so much money of the sale of games for it to eventually cover the cost of the loss.

The CE companies do not have that luxury to do that so they need to use a SoC to make the kind of margins they want to make NOW, and going forward.

It certainly would be nice to have a SAL BD player with a programmable CPU in it so they can modify the player as they work out the fine details of the format and players don't get left behind as that happens. It would also likely help speed up the process of refining the format if they didn't have to try to make everything work with the 1.0 players, since they could be modified with a programmable CPU.

Lee Stewart
04-06-2008, 08:47 AM
Simple. Sony is selling the PS3 at a loss because they make so much money of the sale of games for it to eventually cover the cost of the loss.

The CE companies do not have that luxury to do that so they need to use a SoC to make the kind of margins they want to make NOW, and going forward.

It certainly would be nice to have a SAL BD player with a programmable CPU in it so they can modify the player as they work out the fine details of the format and players don't get left behind as that happens. It would also likely help speed up the process of refining the format if they didn't have to try to make everything work with the 1.0 players, since they could be modified with a programmable CPU.

I would love to see what the cost difference is between a SoC based BD player and a Cell BE based player.

Remember - with the SoC - you need many companion IC's and processors to support it.

Plus you can remove the cost of the HDD from the the PS3 tally of costs.

Great marketing angle - fully upgradeable to future changes . . . unless Sony doesn't want to do that.;)

PFC5
04-06-2008, 09:21 AM
I would love to see what the cost difference is between a SoC based BD player and a Cell BE based player.

Remember - with the SoC - you need many companion IC's and processors to support it.

Plus you can remove the cost of the HDD from the the PS3 tally of costs.

Great marketing angle - fully upgradeable to future changes . . . unless Sony doesn't want to do that.;)

I agree. Some have said they hoped Sony would come out with a PS3 that looked like your average player and add IR to it. They say they would pay more for this model so that it fits in a equipment rack like normal CE components and of course have full IR support for a more seamless control experience.

I have no doubt this would be a popular configuration for the many people who bought or want to buy a PS3 as mainly/completely as a BD player. I would think the other CE companies would blow their tops though if they did it, so I doubt it would happen anytime soon.

Chris Gerhard
04-06-2008, 10:00 AM
Good review. Another illustration of how much further HD DVD was along than Blu-ray and it's a crying shame that the better format lost.

I guess I'll have to double dip on this. I found the other disc to complicated to use, but I can use it for SD calibration since it's a combo.

What's a crying shame is that people here continue to post this nonsense. 25GB/layer is better than 15GB/layer and 48Mbps is better than 30Mbps, those are just simple facts and the better format won. You can say the less expensive format didn't win, but not that the better format didn't win, at least not if you like to make true statements.

Chris

cbcdesign
04-06-2008, 10:18 AM
What's a crying shame is that people here continue to post this nonsense. 25GB/layer is better than 15GB/layer and 48Mbps is better than 30Mbps, those are just simple facts and the better format won. You can say the less expensive format didn't win, but not that the better format didn't win, at least not if you like to make true statements.

Chris

Since when has the 48Mbps ever meant anything anyway when Blu-Ray has not released one single movie that has ever exceeded the best PQ HD DVD offered? I grant you that the bigger capacity will be useful but the 30 versus 48Mbps argument holds no water whatsoever.

PFC5
04-06-2008, 10:30 AM
What's a crying shame is that people here continue to post this nonsense. 25GB/layer is better than 15GB/layer and 48Mbps is better than 30Mbps, those are just simple facts and the better format won. You can say the less expensive format didn't win, but not that the better format didn't win, at least not if you like to make true statements.

Chris

Sorry Chris but a more stable format is a better format IMO. HD DVD was/is the more stable format so I would agree with Bruce on this.

This doesn't mean that BD cannot become as stable in time, but it is not there yet and some of what is in the link here points out the instability of having too many things "optional".

Sure it is "nice" to give CE companies more options, but if it causes problems as a result, it is NOT a good thing IMO.

Talking about 15GB HD15 discs is really not fair because except for a couple of releases that only needed 15GB, virtually all HD DVD releases were on HD30 (30GB) discs. The same cannot be said for BD now can it?

hatt
04-06-2008, 11:46 AM
Sorry Chris but a more stable format is a better format IMO. HD DVD was/is the more stable format so I would agree with Bruce on this.

This doesn't mean that BD cannot become as stable in time, but it is not there yet and some of what is in the link here points out the instability of having too many things "optional".

Sure it is "nice" to give CE companies more options, but if it causes problems as a result, it is NOT a good thing IMO.

Talking about 15GB HD15 discs is really not fair because except for a couple of releases that only needed 15GB, virtually all HD DVD releases were on HD30 (30GB) discs. The same cannot be said for BD now can it?
Every BD plays on every BD player. You might miss some features that you may want but it goes both ways. Tell me how to get the A3 to output 1080p24. A lot more people likely have a 1080p/24 TV than plugged the ethernet cable into their A3 to WE it.

PFC5
04-06-2008, 01:11 PM
Every BD plays on every BD player. You might miss some features that you may want but it goes both ways. Tell me how to get the A3 to output 1080p24. A lot more people likely have a 1080p/24 TV than plugged the ethernet cable into their A3 to WE it.

Oh and a better question IS how many people have HDTVs that can even accept a 1080p/24Fps signal?

If you want to know the answer it is under 5% of the HDTVs out there. Are you trying to say that less then 5% of HD DVD owners have their players hooked up to the internet? :lol:

If most features on BD are "optional", then most movies will have a limited subset until the clear majority of players (not just the PS3) have those "optional" features. ;)

Did you read (all the pages) the link for this thread? It explains why some things were left out of the BD version and this is what I am talking about. :hithere:

hatt
04-06-2008, 01:37 PM
Oh and a better question IS how many people have HDTVs that can even accept a 1080p/24Fps signal?

If you want to know the answer it is under 5% of the HDTVs out there. Are you trying to say that less then 5% of HD DVD owners have their players hooked up to the internet? :lol:

If most features on BD are "optional", then most movies will have a limited subset until the clear majority of players (not just the PS3) have those "optional" features. ;)

Did you read (all the pages) the link for this thread? It explains why some things were left out of the BD version and this is what I am talking about. :hithere:


I asked how many people have a 1080p/24 TV vs how many connected their A3 to the net. Do you have these numbers?

PFC5
04-06-2008, 01:44 PM
I asked how many people have a 1080p/24 TV vs how many connected their A3 to the net. Do you have these numbers?

Didn't Universal state that something like 70% of the people who bought one of their HD DVD titles with Web interaction actually did connect to their servers?

Why not answer my question? What percent of HDTV owners have models that can even accept 1080p/24Fps?

I will tell you that ZERO did in the first year that 1080p came out. Heck none but one HP DLP even accepted 1080p/60Fps second and that ONE model that COULD accept 1080p at all couldn't even accept 1080p/24Fps.

The reason WHY I ask is that something over 95% cannot accept 1080p never mind 1080p/24Fps, so the very rare owner that DOES have such a display would just buy the next model HD DVD player up.

There. Now I have even told you WHY I asked my question so lets see if you dodge it again because it would just prove that 1080p/24Fps is a read herring for almost all the people who even have a HDTV.

hatt
04-06-2008, 02:03 PM
Didn't Universal state that something like 70% of the people who bought one of their HD DVD titles with Web interaction actually did connect to their servers?

Why not answer my question? What percent of HDTV owners have models that can even accept 1080p/24Fps?

I will tell you that ZERO did in the first year that 1080p came out. Heck none but one HP DLP even accepted 1080p/60Fps second and that ONE model that COULD accept 1080p at all couldn't even accept 1080p/24Fps.

The reason WHY I ask is that something over 95% cannot accept 1080p never mind 1080p/24Fps, so the very rare owner that DOES have such a display would just buy the next model HD DVD player up.

There. Now I have even told you WHY I asked my question so lets see if you dodge it again because it would just prove that 1080p/24Fps is a read herring for almost all the people who even have a HDTV.


If you will note I did say "likely." And using you number of 5% of HDTVs give what? 2.5 million. Certainly not anywhere near 2.5 mil HD DVD players floating around to be connected to the web.

If 1080p/24 is a red herring, what is WE? Certainly more interest in people wanting 1080p TVs vs WE. Already been noted of what, like 20 HD DVD titles use it? Add in the handful of BDs that have it. No one is beating down the door for WE, not consumers or studios, if this were so HD DVD would have had the nuts in the war. 1080p is a selling point however.

PFC5
04-06-2008, 03:56 PM
If you will note I did say "likely." And using you number of 5% of HDTVs give what? 2.5 million. Certainly not anywhere near 2.5 mil HD DVD players floating around to be connected to the web.

If 1080p/24 is a red herring, what is WE? Certainly more interest in people wanting 1080p TVs vs WE. Already been noted of what, like 20 HD DVD titles use it? Add in the handful of BDs that have it. No one is beating down the door for WE, not consumers or studios, if this were so HD DVD would have had the nuts in the war. 1080p is a selling point however.

Actually I think the HDTVs that can actually accept a 1080p/24Fps signal is much less than 5%. I think only about 5% of HDTVs can accept ANY 1080p signal, and about 1/3 of THAT figure might be able to accept the 24Fps signal. No question at some point this feature will be more desirable to more people but when HD DVD came out there were virtually zero (0.1% of HDTVs) that could accept 24/Fps.

That is WHY you offer the other models that CAN accept it and have at least ONE lower priced alternative for the people who don't have the ability and cannot see themselves getting the capability for many years. I think the BD companies should also offer a 1080i pBD player since many just add a second chip to do the deinterlacing anyway. Let the display do this for those who might get into BD much sooner if they came out with a much cheaper alternative model right now.

It is all about getting mass adoption so we can get a large diverse array of titles on BD to satisfy most people. What the hell is wrong with that?

HiramAbiff
04-06-2008, 06:51 PM
I have the older HD DVD DVE. I made one adjustment. I turned the color down one notch on my menu. So, not only do I have 'ears like a bat', I've also got 'eyes like a hawk';)

I can do convergence with my eyes closed. And I can adjust grayscale by *ear*.

I'm bad.

Lee Stewart
04-06-2008, 07:53 PM
Initially - only the Pioneer's could do true frame rate multiplication at 72 Hz (3:3). They were VERY expensive. In 2007 Pioneer sold less than 500,000 PDP's. That is why they are stopping their manufacturing of their own PDP and will use another CEM's panels with Kuro electronics in it.

There are less than 1 million 24P HDTV's - out of over 60 million.

And no - most 120Hz sets will not do 5:5

Lee Stewart
04-06-2008, 07:54 PM
So . . .

Anyone put up a Resolution Test Pattern yet? PFC5 - how about you?

PFC5
04-06-2008, 09:48 PM
So . . .

Anyone put up a Resolution Test Pattern yet? PFC5 - how about you?

I have before but I won't be doing that until AFTER 4/15/08 at this point. :D