Ditching Blu-ray And DVDs To Go Digital

SkribbelKat said:
I had to watch them all once. Well, I didn't have to, but I thought I was being nice by humoring someone who wanted to watch them all over a weekend. Worst weekend ever.

Usually, once is enough for most movies. Most of them are predictable/boring/rely on special effects and not acting talent/etc and aren't worth the price of admission. TCM has some good stuff occasionally and pretty much anything the BBC makes is awesome. I never get bored (though I have no idea why) with watching Lady Such-and-Such plot to poison Duke Blah-Dee-Dah over his affiar with the scullery maid that invariably ends in tragic suicide by leaping off the walls of the castle or manor house.
Click to expand...

Your bone marrow is made out of dry crackers.
 
Netflix is good for those old 80's movies that are still in VHS quality and you'll watch once.

For everything else, there is Blu-ray. With a dedicated home theater, you want the best image and sound quality you can. That puts streaming WAY out. Storing on a home server? Yea, I do that. But, most of my media is still on physical disk.

You don't buy a nice projector, a nice audio system and seats and a great screen just to play VHS on it. You want to put all that equipment to good use. Blow you away.

For those that really don't care, streaming works fine. My wife doesn't mind. As long as she can see Honey Boo Boo's face and Mama's sketti, she's fine. Me, on the other hand, has to have The Avengers in perfect 1080P with 7.1 digital HD audio, reclined with a bucket of popcorn and a bottle of ice cold beer. My kids are also getting to the point where they will say the video looks bad. My son (11 years old) asked if I could give his cousin an HDMI cable because his Xbox looks like crap on a new TV. :)

HD is where it's at. Why go higher in resolution and image quality yet stream in lossful video and audio? Doesn't make sense to me.
 
SkribbelKat said:
I had to watch them all once. Well, I didn't have to, but I thought I was being nice by humoring someone who wanted to watch them all over a weekend. Worst weekend ever.

Usually, once is enough for most movies. Most of them are predictable/boring/rely on special effects and not acting talent/etc and aren't worth the price of admission. TCM has some good stuff occasionally and pretty much anything the BBC makes is awesome. I never get bored (though I have no idea why) with watching Lady Such-and-Such plot to poison Duke Blah-Dee-Dah over his affiar with the scullery maid that invariably ends in tragic suicide by leaping off the walls of the castle or manor house.
Click to expand...

And those damned kids keep skateboarding on the sidewalk! :mad:
 
Zarathustra[H];1039540142 said:
Never mind. I was thinking of different types of "treatments" :p
Click to expand...

LOL

You had me scratching my head for a second. Now I'm picturing doilies.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Did you only watch Star Wars once?
Click to expand...

Well, I did watch the original three movies a few times.

But that was when I was a kid/teenager and had time to burn.

Things are different when you're an adult (at least for me)

I actually still haven't seen Revenge of the Sith.

I was excited when I heard that they were finally going to come out with the prequels. I watched the Phantom Menace at launch in the Theater. (actually one of the last times I went to the theater. I did go once after that to see Gladiator, but that's about it)

I hated the Phantom Menace soo much (that annoying brat, Jar Jar Binks, the demystifying of the force, turning it more into a action film, and removing a lot of the originals story feel) that I refused to see Attack of the Clones when it came out in theaters. I eventually watched it later on DVD. It was much better than the Phantom Menace, but Anakin being portrayed as that whiny bitch completely turned me off from the series.

I guess I had planned on watching the last one when it hit DVD, but I never got around to it. I don't feel like I am missing much.


But yes, when I was a kid and teenager and boredom was often (or even ever) a problem I would re-watch movies. Star wars trilogy, indiana jones trilogy, back to the future... These were all movies that got repeated viewings.

Since having graduated college though, boredom just isn't a problem I have had. I just don't have enough free time, so when I watch a movie, or read a book, I choose one I haven't yet read, because I'll NEVER have time to read every book, watch every movie or play every game that I want to.
 
Also need to keep in mind this: many ISPs are d-holes about AUPs and/or limiting bandwidth usage. With the trend for stream this, download that on top of everything else being downloaded, it's not hard at all to get bent over. ISPs need to ease up (prefer REMOVE) stupid ideas like AUPs and download caps/overages.
 
Zarathustra[H];1039540285 said:
Since having graduated college though, boredom just isn't a problem I have had. I just don't have enough free time, so when I watch a movie, or read a book, I choose one I haven't yet read, because I'll NEVER have time to read every book, watch every movie or play every game that I want to.
Click to expand...

Double-edged sword. I'm self-sufficient and comfortable. Certainly not rich, but quite comfortable...and have tons of time. All a matter of how many responsibilities you want to take on.
 
SkribbelKat said:
That's completely awesome that you don't have to worry about it (as much) with on-board calibration. I retract parts of my complaining and bemoaning of home theaters. :)
Click to expand...

Another part that many don't consider is the effect a good subwoofer has on the listening experience. For action movies you can't get the chest slam a subwoofer provides through a set of TV speakers or even a HTIB. Even most theaters (including IMAX) are subwoofer limited to a low frequency of around 35 Hz. A really good sub will give you ultra low frequencies (ULF - sub 20 Hz) that give feel in addition to the audible spectrum.
 
Raffin said:
Another part that many don't consider is the effect a good subwoofer has on the listening experience. For action movies you can't get the chest slam a subwoofer provides through a set of TV speakers or even a HTIB. Even most theaters (including IMAX) are subwoofer limited to a low frequency of around 35 Hz. A really good sub will give you ultra low frequencies (ULF - sub 20 Hz) that give feel in addition to the audible spectrum.
Click to expand...

That's my newest endeavor - ULF subwoofer. Building a new 15" sub box with a Dayton 15" HO sub and 500 watt BASH amp. Tuning it to 18 Hz, ported. On paper, it looks real nice. Waiting for parts to build it and see and feel how it sounds. 5.625 cu.ft. internal volume on the box (taking into account the port, sub chassis, etc.). It's 90% movies, 10% music, so I think it should fit the bill.
 
Ur_Mom said:
That's my newest endeavor - ULF subwoofer. Building a new 15" sub box with a Dayton 15" HO sub and 500 watt BASH amp. Tuning it to 18 Hz, ported. On paper, it looks real nice. Waiting for parts to build it and see and feel how it sounds. 5.625 cu.ft. internal volume on the box (taking into account the port, sub chassis, etc.). It's 90% movies, 10% music, so I think it should fit the bill.
Click to expand...

A build log would be nice. Don't forget to subtract bracing from the enclosure volume!
 
And don't forget DSP. Reality is that commercial sub manufacturers like SVS have gotten so good with DSP that it's really, really tough to match their performance and price point without doing careful DSP on your own sub.
 
I think the argument is quite simple.

If you don't care about audio/visual quality or actually owning your content, then sure digital is fine. Otherwise blu-ray no exceptions.

I enjoy my streaming content, but it in no way remotely compares to my blu-rays for sound and picture.
 
Ur_Mom said:
That's my newest endeavor - ULF subwoofer. Building a new 15" sub box with a Dayton 15" HO sub and 500 watt BASH amp. Tuning it to 18 Hz, ported. On paper, it looks real nice. Waiting for parts to build it and see and feel how it sounds. 5.625 cu.ft. internal volume on the box (taking into account the port, sub chassis, etc.). It's 90% movies, 10% music, so I think it should fit the bill.
Click to expand...

The latest rage seems to be a sealed box with big power and a driver that will go down to 5-10 Hz. Check avsforum.com's DIY forum if you already haven't. I use a horn sub that is flat down to 10 Hz, but if I was building one now would strongly consider going the sealed route.
 
kumquat said:
And don't forget DSP. Reality is that commercial sub manufacturers like SVS have gotten so good with DSP that it's really, really tough to match their performance and price point without doing careful DSP on your own sub.
Click to expand...

miniDSP should do the trick just fine.
 
I actually built a big ported box with a Dayton 12" HF and then, years later, moved it to a 2 cf sealed box. Much happier with the sealed, despite the lower overall output. Sealed just.... sounds better.
 
kumquat said:
I thought about posting that, but laziness won out.
Click to expand...

The situation in that image right there is probably one of the reasons I am no longer married. :p

(Well, that and the fact that my ex is a sneaky, lying, cheating piece of shit) :p
 
kumquat said:
I actually built a big ported box with a Dayton 12" HF and then, years later, moved it to a 2 cf sealed box. Much happier with the sealed, despite the lower overall output. Sealed just.... sounds better.
Click to expand...

A BFM or F-20 style horn would have much lower distortion, higher output and need much less power. Though, quite a bit larger footprint. I personally prefer a horn, a properly tuned bass reflex, or transmission line setup myself. The benefit of sealed really only shines with multiples.
 
Ur_Mom said:
That's my newest endeavor - ULF subwoofer. Building a new 15" sub box with a Dayton 15" HO sub and 500 watt BASH amp. Tuning it to 18 Hz, ported. On paper, it looks real nice. Waiting for parts to build it and see and feel how it sounds. 5.625 cu.ft. internal volume on the box (taking into account the port, sub chassis, etc.). It's 90% movies, 10% music, so I think it should fit the bill.
Click to expand...

Excellent. I'm building a Tuba HT.

http://www.billfitzmaurice.com/THT.html

I have all the parts and the wood is rough cut, but I haven't cut the panels to final size or started assembling the cabinet. It's been that way for almost a year now. I have troubles finishing my projects in a timely fashion.

My MAME cabinet is pretty much done though. It's complete enough to be useable and I actually started that project after the Tuba HT.

You can't get the parts to build them any more, but my mains are Poly Natalia's. http://blackdahlia.com/polyarti/polyarti.html

My current sub is a 12" one I bought 10-15 years ago when I was in college. I actually keep it off most of the time as it detracts from the experience because it's a worn out POS and I think the system sounds better without it muddying up the low end although there is less rumble when it's off.

Can't wait til I finish the Tuba HT.

And...no...I don't plan on going digital anytime soon. I need the Dolby TrueHD and DTS MA sound tracks and the better picture quality.
 
striker444 said:
no DTS-HD or Dolby TruHD audio, until they can give me my 5.1 and in some movies 7,1 in full HD audio I will not be doing this
Click to expand...

When I transcode my blurays, I keep the original video (no re-encode) and cut out the extras.
I also transcode the TrueHD/DTS-HD/Whatever audio to 5.1 AAC (nero encoder 0.50 Q setting)

You can not hear the difference. I have encoded several movies with the original THD/DTS track preserved and my AAC track, and switched between them on my, let's say, half way decent audio setup, and I have not heard the difference.

This strategy gets the average movie size down from 50GB to 13GB over the 25 or so I've done. I use .mkv format to pack the original video, audio and subtites.

Biggest savings was Akira with its 5.1 24bit 192kHz DTSHD master track that I transcoded to 96kHz 24bit AAC. I challenge you to hear the difference. They were identical in my testing, with a 13GB space savings.
 
i will never go purely digital.. until google fiber or true gigabit is available in my area... plus im already so invested in my bluray collection lol...
 
Zarathustra[H];1039539674 said:
Many newer Netflix titles now use SRS 5.1 surround.

I haven't been able to compare it myself though.

I don't have a surround receiver, I just use the built in speakers in my TV, they are good enough for me, and I have no desire to further complicate my TV with more remotes, wires, etc.
Click to expand...

BIG difference between anything Netflix uses and Lossless, HD audio on blu-ray titles. Especially if you have a real sound system. May not sound much different on TV speakers though. Home Theater nuts like me on AVS Forum aren't satisfied with streaming audio qulality.
 
Haven't bought a Blu-ray in a couple years. In fact, I haven't bought any kind of optical disk in a couple years. My days of sticking plastic discs in trays and having them spin around, vibrate and fail catastrophically due to seemingly insignificant scratches are done. Same goes for hard disks.
 
okashira said:
When I transcode my blurays, I keep the original video (no re-encode) and cut out the extras.
I also transcode the TrueHD/DTS-HD/Whatever audio to 5.1 AAC (nero encoder 0.50 Q setting)

You can not hear the difference.
Click to expand...

Seriously? Wow! I can definitely tell a clear difference. Lossless audio is clearly better IMO.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
I think the argument is quite simple.

If you don't care about audio/visual quality or actually owning your content, then sure digital is fine. Otherwise blu-ray no exceptions.

I enjoy my streaming content, but it in no way remotely compares to my blu-rays for sound and picture.
Click to expand...

Well I think you're ignoring another avenue all together, I think many people here are. And that's either rips or remuxed file formats.

For instance I watch plenty of 1080p mkv movies, yet I don't have a Blu-Ray player nor do I have the hassle of worrying about internet congestion on Netflix or buying third party software just to play a disc.

This is where the world is heading, physical media is a joke. If you have to spin something to read it, you're going to have a bad time. Be it a disc or HDD platter.
 
wonderfield said:
Haven't bought a Blu-ray in a couple years. In fact, I haven't bought any kind of optical disk in a couple years. My days of sticking plastic discs in trays and having them spin around, vibrate and fail catastrophically due to seemingly insignificant scratches are done. Same goes for hard disks.
Click to expand...

You still need an optical drive to rip your movies to your SSD stack. Right? ;)
 
Crotan said:
Well I think you're ignoring another avenue all together, I think many people here are. And that's either rips or remuxed file formats.

For instance I watch plenty of 1080p mkv movies, yet I don't have a Blu-Ray player nor do I have the hassle of worrying about internet congestion on Netflix or buying third party software just to play a disc.

This is where the world is heading, physical media is a joke. If you have to spin something to read it, you're going to have a bad time. Be it a disc or HDD platter.
Click to expand...

But but but... where do you get your mkv's?!
 
I'm a bit of a mix. I've got Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon for casual movie watching on titles I really don't give a shit about, or if they have a movie that I am mildly interested in seeing, but don't want to pay for. If it's a movie that I want to buy, but not sure how much I'll like it, or if I'll watch it again, or don't care about special features, digital download is fine with me as long as the quality is adequate. For movies I am really into though, I will always buy the blu. I want the quality, and I really like special features on certain movies.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
You still need an optical drive to rip your movies to your SSD stack. Right? ;)
Click to expand...
I still have one lingering hard disk for movies and a few large files I can't just easily re-download. It's just been iTunes movies recently. I don't have a huge movie collection or anything, so they'll just go onto an el cheapo SSD when the hard drive shows signs of dying.
 
mls1995 said:
Couldn't agree more! Blu-rays have HIGH DEF AUDIO... good luck getting that via streaming.
Click to expand...

That's the worst part about Netflix. The compressed audio makes my ears bleed.

The article didn't show me anything I didn't already know; the DRM schemes are a pain.

I will stick with DRM free digital copies. It's easy enough to rip my own copy & compress it slightly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top