|
It is currently 27 Apr 2024, 15:21
|
View unsolved topics | View unanswered posts
| Author |
Message |
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 25 Sep 2020, 21:27
|
|
|
I’ve been interested in Super NTSC since reading about it here in the LDDB forums. Disclord (RIP) had the most to say about it and is the muse for my further investigation of its use on Laserdisc titles.
More people are also stumbling across this info here and have more questions and are interested in seeing the difference.
So, after watching Deep Impact yesterday I’ve decided to do a write up and see if we can convince people with the technical knowledge to come forward and share what they know. Please, if you know more that what is being covered here we’d love to hear it!
Background on the Technical Details
As noted by Disclord
Yep, it has to start in component D1 for,at to be encoded to SuperNTSC and then stored in the composite D2 format. I don't have the Faces set but if they were supplied to Kuraray in the D1 for,at then they would be SuperNTSC since, according to Joe Kane and someone else I can't mention, all component D1 sources were encoded to SuperNTSC at Kuraray - and that wouldnt be changing the films in any way but better mastering quality - it's hit and miss at the other pressing plants - towards the end of LaserDisc's life, say 1997 or so, almost everything from every plant is SuperNTSC since D1 had become the mastering standard from down reszed HD transfers - compare a non-SuperNTSC release like the CAV Dick Tracy with a later SuperNTSC disc and you'll see the major reduction in artifacts achieved, especially on diagonals, even when decoded with a non Faroudja decoder - and 3D Adaptive decoders look even better. The Fifth Element is an amazing looking SuperNTSC disc and has 2MHz of chroma resolution too.
Super NTSC on LD has to be from a component source and be encoded to Super NTSC as opposed to normal NTSC. The products used were likely Faroudja brand since they invented the technology and hold the patents. The source tape was either Sony’s D1 Digital component or Panasonic’s D5 HD.
D1 boasted uncompressed digital Rec.601 compliant (interlaced) 4:2:2 video in YCbCr color space. While this format was released in 1986 it was primarily used for broadcast since at that time there was no home video format that was in the component space. Sony released D2 a similar composite tape format in 1988. When you see “Digitally Mastered” on a LD it is probably on a disc released after 1988.
Once DVD was being developed the studios had to make new component masters from new film scans for newer movies that were just making it to home video. Think about movies that came out theatrically in 1996. Those were making their first home video appearance on VHS, LD, and DVD. The masters would likely be in component format to take advantage of the component nature of DVD and then be easily converted for other formats. I highly doubt they used Standard Definition D1 as a mastering format for DVD. If they were smart the studios would scan new films at a higher resolution to future proof them and save time/money. By that time some of the LD mastering facilities had new technology from Faroudja called Super NTSC. Kurray in Japan being one of, if not the first to use it.
It wasn’t until DVD came along late in 1996 that there was a need to produce component masters for duplication. I’m not positive, but I speculate that DVD master tapes were Panasonic D5 HD format (1994). D5 HD allows 1080p@23.98. If you rip any major studio DVD movie (film) you’ll see that the VOB/MPEG file on the disc is usually 23.98 progressive. 1080p/24 down-res’d to 480p/24 is easy to do and you have a Blu-Ray ready HD master at the same time. Makes sense to me but Disclord mentions that Kurray used D1 component tapes converted to D2 for LD mastering despite those being interlaced and hence locked at Standard Definition and not future proof.
What is Super NTSC anyway?
Super NTSC was an encoding/decoding process very much like NTSC or PAL are. You input component and the output is NTSC. The difference is all the things Disclord mentions; higher resolution due to pre-combing luma/chroma and extended color bandwidth. Also much less video noise. Its a very clean stable signal that looks like a soft or analog DVD.
The History of Television, 1942 to 2000 By Albert Abramson Page 228
https://books.google.com/books?id=JMTnTBmt7F0C&pg=PA228&lpg=PA228&dq=%22Super+NTSC%22&source=bl&ots=T9VGgJhiz0&sig=8ibNx2-lO712yiJ8_e_h_oJ85Fk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwik-Ny89-XbAhUEN30KHeM-Ba4Q6AEIeTAR#v=onepage&q=%22Super%20NTSC%22&f=false
Super NTSC has the visual characteristics of a 1050 line, 59.94 Hz, 15 Mhz RGB signal without NTSC artifacts. It included luminance detail processing, Y and C adaptive combing before NTSC decoding, Y/C multiplicative bandwidth expansions, and motion-compensated line doubling.
I have PDF files by Yves Faroudja describing the technology but can't upload them here because PDF is not allowed. I'd hate to have to convert them to jpg...I see all the manuals are in PDF format so maybe there is a way.
People have been asking for a list of titles and some have been mentioned; Titanic, Fifth Element, Deep Impact, Star Wars (Faces), etc.
How to tell the difference?
All I can add is that if you have any of the above titles and a Faroudja decoder you can tell what is Super NTSC quite easily. In fact, you don’t even need a Faroudja decoder as any NTSC decoder will still produce a better image with a Super NTSC encoded disc. Look for video noise, especially in dark scenes. If there is none its probably SN. Look for places where you’d normally see artifacts on fine details like car grills, space ships, AC vents, clothing patterns, wide moving shots of nature, etc. If there are few to none its probably SN. Look at the overall picture and check out the color saturation and bleeding. If it looks solid and doesn’t bleed its probably SN. At the other end of the spectrum pop in any disc from say 1994 or earlier. It should be pretty obvious that those discs are not SN encoded.
I watched Goldeneye the other day and it looked stunning. Then I put on Conan and it looked noticeably not as good. Then I put on Deep Impact, again a very noticeable improvement. Then put on Memoirs of an Invisible Man which was back to looking more like Conan. What I’m saying is that unless you A/B it can be hard to distinguish but it becomes pretty obvious when you see Super NTSC vs non-Super NTSC on the same system.
As mentioned previously, if you’re looking for Super NTSC encoded LDs good candidates are movies theatrically released ca.1996 or later and mastered by Kurray. They will all have new film scans made and be stored on D1/D5 HD.
Note that ALL DTS titles were released after 1997 and mastered at Kurray however if there was a catalog title that already had a LD release the older master tape may have be reused and DTS sound added in mastering. I have no idea but I’m saying that not all DTS titles pressed by Kurray are defacto SN encoded just that they are good candidates. I'd almost bet that all DTS LD releases are the same (video) masters as their DVD counterparts. It would be easy to reduce the bitrate of the DTS stream to fit on the DVD as required by the bit budget.
What About Star Wars?
This is my speculation with Star Wars faces set from 1995. According to lddb user Mitch the 2nd run was in 1998 at Kurray. The Definitive Collection , mastered by Mitsubishi, came out pre-DVD era (1993) and so was not likely on D1 unless they were thinking ahead (possible). Then again, since DVNR was applied it seems likely a new master was made and thus could be on D1 component. Legend here says the faces set is just the DC in CLV format (same master). I’m going to check out my faces discs today since they’re all the Kurray pressings. Being that they're later releases its possible that either Kurray had the time to implement SN encoding by 1998 if the master was D1 or that if the master was D1 in 1993/1995 for the DC and the first run of the Faces that Mitsibushi/Pioneer may not have been up to speed on SN encoding. However, the SE Trilogy Set from 1997 made by Pioneer does have Super NTSC encoding according to Disclord's comment. Everyone loves that version right?
So Pioneer ca.1997 has SN encoding capabilites....
The List
Titanic
The Fifth Element
Deep Impact
Meet Joe Black
Rounders
Wizard of Oz THX CLV 1996
From Dusk Til Dawn
The Man Who Knew Too Little
Good Will Hunting
Great Expectations
Nothing To Lose
Wild Wild West
Goldeneye AC3 (not Kurray)
Mission Impossible (not Kurray)
Top Gun AC3 (not Kurray)
Star Wars Trilogy (Faces 2nd press at Kurray) *maybe*
Star Wars Special Edition Trilogy 1997 (Pioneer)
If you have both Goldeneye AC3 and DTS you can do an A/B comparison since the DTS was manufactured at Kurray and the AC3 at Pioneer. Probably hard to tell since the AC3 is already impressive.
As mentioned by Disclord, at a certain point probably around 1997/1998 almost all mastering facilities were using Super NTSC encoding so that is probably why late releases look so good, blame DVD.
This was long winded but if you have anything to add please do. There is not enough reliable information on Super NTSC encoded Laserdiscs. I'd love to know more about the post-production video workflow using D1 sources to make composite products like LD. Please add movies to the list if you think they're SN encoded. There are probably a lot more than we previously thought. |
|
 |
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 16 Oct 2020, 18:04
|
|
|
Great responses from everyone so far.
I've been watching more movies with an eye for the mastering. I would have to agree that a major part of why later LDs look good is the component sources and higher resolution scanning of the film as compared to pre-DVD era LD mastering, even digital mastering. Anything from a D1/D2 source was always a 720x486 sample so that is baked into the image. When you scan a film at 2K then reduce that 2K to NTSC it will always look better than scanning the same film at D1 resolution. Especially now with large fixed resolution screens and the tendency to zoom in. Maybe it didn't matter as much with CRTs.
Also, consider the source generation. A movie released in 1982 and made available on LD in 1995 for the 4th time might be using a safety copy or other multiple generation copy away from the actual theatrical print. Criterion, and some other titles, specifically list what the film source was (negative, inter-positive, etc). So when all the stars line up and you get an old film that gets a new component HD scan (for DVD) from a new/better source and a SN mastered LD you win big. I'm assuming this is what Rein-O is talking about with GWTW. I have the snapper DVD that likely is the same transfer and it does look great. I think the THX Oz from the box or the single disc mastered by Kurray are similar situations.
Moving on, I found it interesting that while Kurray is touted for being the plant that used Super NTSC the most it seems that Pioneer USA has more titles that are noted by Disclord as being SN (Fifth Element, Titanic, Deep Impact, etc). How does he know anyway? Was it mentioned in an article/review back then? Did he have contacts? I never quite understood how he had all that info. I think he was a projectionist but I have no idea. He sounds like he could be a sales rep...
Another small point to be made regarding color is that D1/D2 uses 4:2:2 sampling while DVD compliant MPEG-2 uses 4:2:0. That means that technically speaking there is more color information on a LD versus a DVD. Combine that with Super NTSC and it is possible to have a much more vibrant color on LD but for things like chroma noise, etc.
@9954Tony you're totally with me on this and I love it. I have the same CFD-SN but I'm using the FLI2300 in the Cyrstalio II. Thanks for sharing the PDF. I think that you're correct in that the benefits are encoded into the signal and need to be decoded properly to work as intended. However, a lot of the Faroudja patented stuff is imitated and implemented under different names by other manufactures so its possible that they too decode SN in some way. Look at Dolby Stereo you can decode it with Pro Logic, PLII, PLIIx, or even DTS NEO, etc. And, again I agree that ALL of this info is speculative so from title to title and plant to plant there will be variances. I had that Abyss and sold it since I have both box sets and the DVD. Film does have grain and when you're shooting in a tank in the dark there will be grain no matter what. Underwater film grain has to be hard to encode/decode. Check out Sphere and see what you think. Pioneer USA press with 59-xxxxx mint marks. Similar visuals. Armageddon sounds like it may have been delivered to Kurray on D2 not D1...baked in NTSC. In fact, all Armageddon US LDs were Kurray pressed and probably all look exactly the same.
@signofzeta yes, I think you're correct that one could observe the difference on a scope. Though if SuperNTSC has to be compatible with NTSC (and also decoded) then it may look like PONTSC (Plain old NTSC) on a scope. I would guess that somewhere in the VITC you could find some info about it. I recall that some THX discs use the VITC for something like that.
@ertolli you can master a DVD from anything but for major Hollywood movies I'm hoping DigiBeta was not used as it records 2.34:1 DCT-compressed digital component video signal that then needs to get MPEG-2 encoded. I'm guessing not. But you're right there are some really amazing looking 100% analog LDs mastered from 1" C.
@odotb3 Good note on Con-Air. I have the AC3 that I should re-visit but remember it being "meh". Big action movies (especially 2.35:1) with lots of moving wide shots and a very detailed set are difficult for NTSC (and MPEG-2).
So maybe the Domesday crowd can help us out and see if there is any way to identify Super NTSC encoded LDs. Without that or a definitive list from a definitive source we're all just chasing at shadows in the dark. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 07 Dec 2020, 17:55
|
|
|
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 26 Jan 2021, 17:25
|
|
|
After not being able to find a VEQ1433 for my Panasonic LX-900U I purchased a VEQ1509 from eBay hoping it would work. It does. However, it is missing some dedicated buttons for some functions. Otherwise it works perfect. I am not sure which model player this remote is actually for. I thought it was for a LX-1000 but not according to this list.
VEQ1509.jpg |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 30 Jan 2021, 17:13
|
|
|
DigiKey will cancel your order, for either version, if you're not an HDMI adopter which is prohibitively expensive for this purpose. They canceled mine 2x even after phone calls and emails! I have yet to call ADV directly since they're not far from me. Maybe one day.
If you want to stay on the bleeding edge, Peter has already moved onto the next toy. EVAL is sooooo last month.
The same ADV chip (7842 or 78xx) is in a cheaper box called the Extron DSC-301 HD that is easily attainable. It isn't the bees knees but its good. The same chip is probably better implemented in the Lumagen but at a higher cost of course.
On my set up I preferred the C2. Maybe it was because I already had it. My 2015 Sony 4K also is no slouch and between that and the C2 the Extron didn't do anything better than what I already had going IMO. I also have a Denon AVR with a 2D ADV comb filter that does a really great job on LD and sends it out 1080p/24 over HDMI.
The interest in the EVAL is that you can output 480i over HDMI and use an external deinterlacer/scaler while having total control over the Comb Filter settings in the ADV chip. Downside it that it needs to be connected to a PC running a terminal software that connects to the board via USB/RS232. All settings are changed via software. Yes there are some work arounds but just more tech to deal with. Not my cup of tea.
The C2, however, gives you some control over the comb filter and had 2 deinterlacing chips to choose from. Both outdated, sure but not total crap either. The C2 is really hard to beat but very hard to find one.
For real-time decoding of LD on newer (2010+) displays your TV's composite input, C2, Lumagen, DVDO, Faroudja etc are your best options as far as actually finding something beyond a DVD recorder. All of these options have their pros/cons.
Lately I'm just watching my movies using the TV's composite input and I'm pretty happy :mrgreen: |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 07 Feb 2021, 17:11
|
|
|
Thank you very much ambroiseg for posting this tutorial. I've been meaning to get this done on mine. You've made it easier and left me no excuses.
Very impressive.
But when you say, “ ...it's impossible to have closed caption on it...”, I’m not sure that’s correct. Every NTSC LD player is compatible with CC as far as I know. It’s your TV or external box that actually renders them though. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant.
Wow, I know something Zeta doesn't! :wave:
Looky here Oh my and again here !
http://www.laserdiscarchive.co.uk/laserdisc_archive/pioneer/pioneer_ld-x1/pioneer_ld-x1.htm
The conversion back to analogue video is via an 8 fsc/9 bit converter (fsc = the multiple of the chroma sub carrier frequency).
TL;DR Due to the nature of the conversion process, line 21 is shifted down and thus not recognized as Line 21 on a decoder. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 07 Feb 2021, 17:34
|
|
|
Wow I never knew that, but then again I never had an S2, did have a 95 for a very short time but never tested it so we don't know about that either.
Actually, you did know that....3 years ago, lol. Now you know it again!
https://forum.lddb.com/viewtopic.php?f=52&t=7935
Did you get them before and it stopped now? Is it your TV, I thought that some newer TVs won't display CC but I may be wrong?
Thanks for posting :wtf: |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 16 Feb 2021, 19:26
|
|
|
:oops: ... :thumbdown: Well, at least I know I need to save about $150 to be on the safe side. I'm sure a chance will come along. (NOT aimed at you, I'm just really disappointed I missed that.)
No harm no foul. However, I am in negotiations with a gentleman here in SoCal that is a retired Middle School Science teacher. He's got a few players (2200/2400) with barcode readers and remotes and a ton of educational discs. I don't have a list of the titles or a price yet but should be the end of the week hopefully. He does have the binders with all of the pertinent barcodes as far as I can tell.
I also don't even know if the players power on or have issues. He says they've been stored for years. Feel free to PM me here if you want to stay informed. I'll probably at least post the titles and catalog numbers here as well as add any titles to the dB as needed. I do plan on getting myself a player with barcode reader and at least a few of the educational discs myself....depending on his price point. If I pass, I'll be sure to get his info so you can deal with him directly. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 21 Feb 2021, 18:19
|
|
|
I know not many people have these and they're getting harder and harder to find. However, they are one of the best options for LD processing. The people here who drove me to the madness of video processors have moved on to the next stratosphere of technology and I am happy to watch them try to reach the Sun.
The C2 is still a valid option for LD and still one of the best if you can find one. Part of the reason why is due to the fact that you can adjust the comb filter settings. Very few processors out there allow this. Some TVs will have these adjustments in the Service Menus but that isn't as convenient as a normal menu. Lumagen and the EVAL board are the only two that come to mind.
Anyway, I've read the threads here about the settings and also experimented myself. Some of the info seems unclear as presented and I'd like to share my own personal experience and settings. You don't have to use them and maybe they aren't correct for your system. Use these as a guide and a stepping stone.
There are 4 settings. Each setting is from 0-100 steps. They are:
Luma Gain
Chroma Gain
Luma Coring
Chroma Coring
Previously, I was using settings found here in other posts. While that was helpful it did not get me the results I had hoped for. So I re-read them and also re-read the TI TVP5160 3d Comb Filter Operation Guide and experimented on my own.
Here are my conclusions:
Think of Gain as a balance between 3D and 2D combing. Depending on the setting it defines how fast the filter switches between 3D/2D. But it doesn't just switch between them, it blends them together unless you're at the extreme ends like 1 or 100. In my mind I see it as a see-saw or a fulcrum. At 50 it has an equal bias toward either 3D or 2D and the change is blended so not a drastic change (no artifacts). At 1 it is locked to 3D all the time and at 100 it is locked to 2D. The switch is very visual and artifacts appear on screen. I have mine set somewhere between 25-50 depending on the disc. So a slight bias towards 3D combing.
The Luma Gain register is an 8-bit register that controls the gain (or attenuation) for inter-frame luma difference. Least significant 3 bits specify a fractional gain. Gain can vary from 0 to 31.875 in steps of 0.125. The minimum value of 0 favors 3D comb output, and the maximum value of 31.875 favors 2D comb output.
If the frame differences are large, Km saturates to the upper limit and 2D comb is output. If the frame differences are smaller than the threshold, 3D comb is output. If the frame differences are such that a Km between the upper and lower limits occurs, 2D and 3D comb are mixed proportional to Km . This provides for a smooth transition between 2D and 3D comb outputs.
Coring is a threshold for noise/motion. The way I set it was with the Video Essentials S&W pattern. Playing a loop on the S&W test pattern and looking at the resolution squares on the top of the image I increased the value until the diagonal lines in the 400 square stopped giving me cross color distortion (rainbows). This was at 26 for me.
The Luma Coring register is a 10-bit register that controls the coring level for inter-frame luma difference. A difference smaller than the set value is assumed to be noise, resulting in the pixel to be recognized as 'no motion' or 'still picture', favoring intra-frame (3D) comb output. The minimum value of x000 favors 2D comb output, and the maximum value of x3FF favors 3D comb output.
I set both Luma and Chroma values the same, but I suppose if you really wanted to dial it in you'd have slight variance for Luma and Chroma based on your set up.
Based on the settings found here, which were both gains at 1 and both corings at 26, I was seeing terrible artifacts on fine details and wide shots because the gain was always biased toward 3D combing when it should be falling back to 2D.
I'm no expert and I don't have an X0 or a Lumagen to compare to but damn if the C2 doesn't make LDs look fantastic when set properly . No artifacts, checker boarding or annoyances just a great film-y image. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 03 Mar 2021, 01:13
|
|
|
I don’t understand the hype about the RF demodulators and ac-3. I mean we held onto our LD players because they offered uncompressed PCM over lossy AC-3 on DVD. Not much so here but on the rest of the net there is a massive craze over RF demodulators and the ancient AV receivers with RF inputs. AC-3 legit sounds so thin and soulless on a half way decent system that there are maybe a handful titles on LD that I would stand for it’s better effects separation.
Everyone comes at it for different reasons. Like you, I love that there is Matrixed PCM but I also love that the format evolved to support discreet surround codecs like AC-3 and then DTS. Its just another cool feature of the format to enjoy. Fortunately for you, most AC-3 LDs also have PCM. Just like like how LBX is less resolution than full screen but it is a better overall experience, AC-3 may not be PCM but it does simulate a theatrical experience on humble home systems. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 23 Mar 2021, 18:11
|
|
|
Speaking of digital/analog sound misunderstandings, here's the video I recommend to everyone who insists that "vinyl better because analog". Also just great to watch if you want to learn more about digital sound.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM
My thoughts on vinyl are basically the same as my thoughts on LD: It's not better, but it's neat and I like it.
I reference this video ALL the time to analog nuts who say digital is evil. This is the BEST explanaition I've found.
It is worth checking out the Digital Domain site by Bob katz and reading through his Level Practices Pt1&2.
Also, as the Admin has mentioned, its all about the mastering process (ironically just like LD). CDs don't have to be brickwall limited, but they usually are these days. An LP record, by its nature, cannot fit that same waveform in its grooves and be analogous to the source. The RIAA curve requires the original tape master to be manipulated to get into the groove and then have the opposite curve upon playback. The audio in the groove is not accurate to the source as it exists in the groove. Kind of like how a film has to be manipulated into the NTSC format to be presented on LD because LD isn't designed for progressive 24fps playback (source).
It is, however, possible to record a sound either analog or digitally and capture and reproduce that sound digitally with more accuracy and resolution to the real world source without any additional processing. You absolutely cannot reproduce the full dynamics of an orchestra without audible noise or NR or over saturating the tape. The best ATRs were maybe 65-70db. Maybe. 16 bit is 96 on paper. Even if its more like 75-80 it is head and shoulders above analog with regard to SNR/Dynamic Range. All pro recording is now 24 bit digital or 2" analog. 24 bit is 144db SNR on paper and about 110 in reality. For reference that is about as loud as a rocket launching into space. You could also record whispers without noise. Tape can't do that. 2" analog, btw, has the same track size as 4 track 1/4" tape so while the tape is wider and theoretically that would equate to higher dynamic range you have 24 small tracks. Hey BTW, did you know that prior to (16 bit) DAT, all studio mixes were made on 1/4" analog tape? Your LP Albums and CDs are limited to the specs of quarter track 1/4" tape so the CDs CAN'T sound any better than that! There is a 2" 8 track format that will knock your socks off but no one has that in their home and it isn't necessarily standard for studio, more of a custom thing that then gets dumped into Pro Tools, lol. Even the albums that are being recorded to tape for aesthetic reasons get slammed in mastering (Robert Plant & Allison Krauss comes to mind). Check out the Honor Roll at the Bob Katz site, set up your monitoring system properly and enjoy.
Even if you were to compare an analog recording being played back on the same deck at the highest possible fidelity an ATR can provide it will fall short of a digital recording played back digitally. There is no analog process that even approaches the SNR of digital (even with NR). Frequency response is a similar story. Tape is not linear with regard to frequency response and requires bias to make it more linear. Digital is a flat line until nyquist.
I can clean off a CD with Novus or whatever and likely fix a slight imperfection easier than cleaning old records or even new records since dust is a killer. Found an original press? Cool. Hope it wasn't played to death on substandard equipment or else it may be trashed. Yes, you can DIY a vaccuum system for cleaning your LPs without spending $500 but you still have to maintain them unlike a digital file that the kids are using today.
That was fun. More Coffeeeeeeee! |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 06 Apr 2021, 18:15
|
|
|
You sir are doing fantastic work that inspires the hell out of me to follow the same path. I can't say enough flattering things about your extremely informative and detailed posts regarding these mods and upgrades. It is so refreshing have more than a simple one or two word or sentence explanation of what you're up to. Excellent photos make it even more helpful. Please don't ever stop sharing your progress and innovations with us!
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 03 May 2021, 15:56
|
|
|
Ha! Steve Sax was my favorite baseball player as a kid growing up in LA....odd reference but made me chuckle  |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 17 May 2021, 16:14
|
|
|
So "Kevin" I guess is Kevin Coons, one in a long line of haters who hate for no reason......
A long list of haters in your life speaks a lot of truth. It makes perfect sense that you don't understand the reasons people take offense or disliking to you.
Sorry Peter, I just stopped drinking the Kool-Aid and decided I don't need to compete with or follow your path down the rabbit hole. I foolishly thought there was an end and that at some point LD would magically become HD quality based on posts you made and technology that was unobtanium would somehow make LD THAT much better. I became obsessed with all things LD tech and wanted the best I could get. I think I have that now but don't claim its better than anyone else's system or even as good as it could be. My initial comment that you took offense to was only to say that you, who push the envelope with video processing for LD, have already moved onto yet another process now involving MadVR. Another prominent LD personality had already pointed that out. The EVAL board is soooo last week was just a fun little joke not meant to be offensive but I apologize if that's how you see it.
In the end I guess I just don't care as much about video processing as you do. I'm ok with that. You're just going to keep spending and digging that hole and that's fine too! I just don't need to follow suit mostly because I don't have the extra money it requires. I'm SO much happier now that I've decided to not worry about other people's set ups and just do me. I don't need an EVAL board or an R7G or MadVR.
I thought you were a person that had achieved the best set up (maybe that's true) and was a nice enough person that wanted to talk shop with others but it became obvious that we didn't communicate very well via the internet (imagine that!).
I don't hate you Peter I'm just disappointed that we never could communicate in a amicable way. I was actually trying to be your friend from day one. We might both have strong opinions on things and even disagree at times but what bothered me most was your tone and condescending nature (see your response above). The way you treated people was rude and at times unfair. You then went so far as to create your own safe space (4K80i) so you could control the narrative and the population when people called you out on that. There are other LD FB groups out there solely based on shaming or making fun of people in the "main" group mostly for being new or lacking knowledge about the format. I think that's gross but whatever. You can be their ring leader for all I care.
I'm just a dude out here in Los Angeles doing my own thing and enjoying this fun format and hobby on my own terms. I'm not taking myself too seriously or judging anyone else by their screenshots or basic questions. I'm just having fun.
You should try it :) |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2021, 16:16
|
|
|
Bummer you didn't get the Astrodyne one cheaper and faster but cool you actually got one (apparently made with 24K gold components inside for what it cost) from DVDO.
BTW I used to live on Kaua'i so I understand the plight of shipping strange old things to a small island in the middle of nowhere...
I'd keep the old one just in case you could have it fixed and uses it as a back up.
Enjoy! |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 29 Aug 2021, 17:44
|
|
|
This was the ULTIMATE LD flex. Well played.
I've thoroughly enjoyed reading all of the responses from the usual suspects that know everything about LD. The rage and confusion combined with passive aggressive man-splaining is brilliant!
This sale is certainly ambitious and highly questionable in its realistic feasibility.
I don't doubt there are people out there with this sort of pay-load and quirky vintage sensibilities. There may only be a few but I'm sure they're out there. Doubtful they're seeing this sale post here, but that is obviously not the point of the OP.
I mostly agree with the rest of the group that this will not sell as-is and you'll likely have to re-think your approach if you really want to get rid of these LDs, especially with this crowd! I suspect you already knew that...
Seems like now is not the time to be selling since a lot of collections are getting dumped. I'll say its a buyers market right now and people looking to buy should be forcing prices down based on the flood about to hit the LD market.
"Oh, you want to sell that Matrix for $300? Then I'll just keep spinning my snapper case DVD that cost me $1...but I'll buy the LD for $50" Is how all negotiations should go from now on.
Good luck to you and the person who ends up with this collection :) |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 27 Feb 2022, 18:04
|
|
|
You will never get 1:1 from a LD. That said the DdD is the best quality/workflow for actual preservation.
Any other type of capture (analog or digital) will be a mere reflection of the LD.
Some here claim that in an ideal scenario with a perfectly aligned player (aka unicorn for most people) and a high enough resolution capture device, maybe 4K (most likely prosumer level at best) there would be no loss. Even if that were true (I suspect it isn't) you're ignoring the possibility of ADDING things to the signal that aren't there. Ringing, Aliasing, Flicker, Color variances, etc. This is discussed on the DdD page I think.
Add to the fact that most LDs are made from D2 480i DIGITAL masters. Grid on top of an analog grid and then captured to another grid. Ugh. No.
The goal, IMO, is to get to that 480i 4:2:2 signal.
DdD all the way. It IS the high resolution capture device you want. It has enough bandwidth to actually contain the NTSC signal. You ever hear of Nyquist? RF>A/D>File and DSP in post for combing, de-interlacing, scaling and decoding of audio and CC/data. The only down side of this workflow is that it isn't real time, uses a lot of storages space and processing. Sure, you could do it with any player but at that point it should be done right, no spared expense... |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 28 Apr 2022, 15:16
|
|
|
Just a note, there are 2 version of the Fragile DVD-A. One with the 96/24 Stereo and one with the 192/24 Stereo. Mine is the 96/24 but I'm always on the look out for that 192/24 version. I guess I could just get the BR.
Nice to see the BR didn't just port over the MLP and they actually unpacked it and gave you the real deal PCM. DVD-A was great, especially for stereo but surround always required MLP for anything more than like 48/20 5.1 or 96/16 5.1, all dependent on the total throughput being less than 9 or 9.6Mbps.
So many yeas ago that I authored these things. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 09 May 2022, 16:36
|
|
|
This is an excerpt from page 47 of....
Publishing in the Age of DVD: A Primer for Creating Content for DVD by Mark Ely and Dave Block
2nd edition Copyright 1997-1998 Sonic Solutions
PCM Capture
"...The PCM Audio availabe for the DVD format ranges from mono to eight channels and can be 48K (24 bit up to 4 channels, 20 bit up to 6 channels and 16bit up to 8 channels) or 96K (24 bit stereo, 20 bit 3 channels or 16 bit 4 channels)."
This primer was written for Sonic DVD Creator on the Mac OS platform (as shown in the screen images). There is no mention of Scenarist as it had not yet been acquired from Daiken.
While DVD Creator could be used to author DVD-Audio discs, and it was, this information relates specifically to the DVD-Video format/specification. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 02 Jun 2022, 14:14
|
|
|
Because I'm local, I decided to go check out the site last year while I was working at the Soccer Stadium nearby. Nothing to see. Only industrial buildings and trucks.
Attachment: Pioneer LDCA July 2021.jpg |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 27 Aug 2022, 16:00
|
|
|
So I make a living in the audio world....nothing too exciting but I've been doing this since 1999 or so.
I also worked as a DVD-Audio and DualDisc author, then later DVD-Video. I know a few things too.
One of my professors was a big shot in the DVD-Audio world, Mark Waldrep of AIX. He was very much against SACD (obviously). At the time the Stanley P. Lipshitz AES paper was all the rage.
https://timbreluces.com/assets/sacd.pdf
ABSTRACT
Single-stage, 1-bit sigma-delta converters are in principle imperfectible. We prove this fact. The reason, simply
stated, is that, when properly dithered, they are in constant overload. Prevention of overload allows only partial
dithering to be performed. The consequence is that distortion, limit cycles, instability, and noise modulation can
never be totally avoided. We demonstrate these effects, and using coherent averaging techniques, are able to display
the consequent profusion of nonlinear artefacts which are usually hidden in the noise floor. Recording, editing,
storage, or conversion systems using single-stage, 1-bit sigma-delta modulators, are thus inimical to audio of the
highest quality. In contrast, multi-bit sigma-delta converters, which output linear PCM code, are in principle
infinitely perfectible. (Here, multi-bit refers to at least two bits in the converter.) They can be properly dithered so
as to guarantee the absence of all distortion, limit cycles, and noise modulation. The audio industry is misguided if
it adopts 1-bit sigma-delta conversion as the basis for any high-quality processing, archiving, or distribution format
to replace multi-bit, linear PCM.
I really don't care to die on any hill of opinions in either direction but I'm a PCM guy. All the way. DSD is cool, but unless DSD becomes the accepted standard it will always be considered as "other than" and thus go the way of the Laserdisc.
RE: Vinyl I'm so glad someone has the audacity to say that LPs are not the end all audio experience. I feel that way too. Limited frequency response, a required EQ curve, required cleaning, inner groove distortion, a medium that is damaged with every play, constantly needing a new stylus every 1000 hours or so, flipping the disc, etc. I enjoy the 1000 or so LPs I own but in no way do they compare to a CD except to say the mastering of many CDs is very poor. The potential of a CD vs an LP is night and day. However, as with every format ever, mastering is where things get screwed up!
Mastering audio is like color correction for video. The consumer has a lesser quality system than the professionals making the media. It has to all get manipulated to best translate to the consumer experience on consumer equipment. Think of a standard deviation bell curve. Mastering is trying to make it so MOST people don't complain or call the 1-800 number. Pro-sumer types (AuDioPHILES) ALWAYS complain so the corporations don't even care about them. FACT: Most people listen to music in a car or via ear buds. Those people pay for streaming services. They make more $ on streaming vs paying to make physical media to sell to a smaller market that wants physical media.
The sad fact is that consumers will never get as close to the master as they wish. Period. The good thing is that people like Bob Katz and his LKFS/LUFS scale which is changing how streaming is presented and making a positive difference in how we listen to music.
https://www.digido.com/articles/
He has several great articles on Mixing, Mastering and the Loudness wars. Read up kids.
Spotify is using this approach as well:
https://artists.spotify.com/en/help/article/loudness-normalization
OK that's all for now. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 25 Sep 2022, 15:38
|
|
|
The Pet Sounds disc has channels mis configured if I recall. The Front and Rear are reversed or the Center and Rear. Look it up.
The best part of that particular disc is the 96/24 MONO version of the album. Fantastic. Its the only way I really listen to it.
RE: 48k vs 44.1k the myth is that the guy in charge of making CD wanted to fit Beethoven's 9th Symphony on 1 disc as opposed to several LPs making 74 minutes at 44.1k a standard.
In fact, the first digital audio tape system ran at 44.056k because they used NTSC tape based systems.
48k is mostly from the video world where all digital audio married to video runs at 48k (Think D1, D2, DigitBeta, DV, DVCPRO, etc) This is also why DAT (based on video technology) is 48k, its for professional use. I'm guessing it has to do with the rotational head speed in those tape based systems.
I was shocked when I got into LD that the audio was 44.1k (44.056k actually) and not 48k like all other video with digital audio.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(signal_processing)#Sampling_rate |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 25 Sep 2022, 15:54
|
|
|
Was finally able to rip the supposed 24/94 audio from the DVD-Video side of Pet Sounds (disc was copy protected so had to use DVD Shrink to decrypt it.) Again, like Days of Future Passed it's turning up as 16/96 not 24/96.
Try DVD-Audio explorer, DVDAudiophile or DVD-Audio Rip if you have't already.
There is a small file on the disc, MKV. That is the KEY. You can copy it from the disc. Each studio has a different Lock/Key. If you note which studio you get the files from you can then use them to burn copies that will play on a real player. Some of the copy programs miss this file.
You're using DVD-Shrink and that is likely messing with the sample rate/bit depth. I can confirm its 96/24 files on the audio side. The video zone is going to be AC-3/DTS. When you put the disc in a non-audio capable player you get the video zone and it only has AC-3 usually and sometimes you get DTS also. I'm guessing what you ripped from the video zone was DTS or AC-3 that got converted to PCM. The DTS and AC3 files are 16 bit, sometimes 20. You you're seeing the correct sample rate, which doesn't change and the bit depth of the container file (DTS/AC3) that then gets converted to PCM and perhaps downconverted to stereo.
DVD-A Explorer works well....has bugs but works. |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 23 Oct 2022, 16:09
|
|
|
Trusted seller and a stellar human being. Buy with confidence. I've bought belts, grip rings and helped with the spindle motor bushing. Never not satisfied with the communication or the parts.
This is the ONLY place to get some of these parts and he has done extensive testing with constant improvement.
His passion for this is unparalleled - even to your need for the parts!
I'm over due on placing an order myself...you can never have enough belts! |
|
|
Jump to forum Jump to topic |
| sonicboom |
|
Posted: 23 Oct 2022, 16:28
|
|
|
Looks like there is a distinction between "Advanced Resolution Stereo" and "Enhanced" or "Superior Stereo" on some of these DVD-Video releases (makes me harken back to the early days of HDTV with "High Definition" and "Enhanced Definition" TVs.)
Deceptive ain't it? Yeah. I have Dr. Dre The Chronic on DualDisc and was disappointed to get Enhanced Definition of 48/16, not even 24 bit! Glad it was a $2 thrift store score...
It is almost never the formats themselves that are to blame for failing. It is ALWAYS the marketing people and to some extent the tech people pushing the envelope. The potential is always far greater than what is delivered and what's delivered is always bastardized in some way. Different edit/mix, bonus tracks/content, mastering/remastering, artwork/packaging. It never lines up exactly as you had hoped with the right content in the right package. Hence the evolution of the "Super Deluxe" box set releases that STILL manage to miss the mark.
My assumption with the Foo is that the first 1/2 is amplified Rock thus no need for the extended fidelity (think AC/DC) but 2/2 is acoustic based music that would benefit from the extended fidelity provided by DVD-A. Then there are the royalties to pay for the DVD-A logo or to the DVD consortium or whatever. Every penny counts! |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 [ Search found 58 matches ]
|
Thanks list