QueenZone discussion #1060655
QRM HD-DVD Now Shipping, Anybody Got There's Yet?
| KevoM 28.11.2007 10:00 |
Just been notified by Play.com that my QRM HD-DVD has been posted today. Anybody got there's and seen it yet? |
| coops 29.11.2007 08:17 |
Not yet. I watched some of the HD presentation on Rave the other day and it did look and sound very good, particularly considerning the shows age. My experience has been that HD OR Bluray releases are superior to the tv HD broadcasts, so it should be quite something. |
| PieterMC 29.11.2007 08:28 |
I'll certainly be picking up the Blu-Ray when it comes out, but it's not out until December 4th. |
| Jjeroen 29.11.2007 09:28 |
PieterMC wrote: I'll certainly be picking up the Blu-Ray when it comes out, but it's not out until December 4th.Over here (NL) it's already in the shops. Both Blu-ray and HD. |
| Paul Mark 29.11.2007 11:21 |
I picked up my Blu-Ray from HMV in Oxford Steet this afternoon. Took them about half an hour to find it in the store! Cant wait to get home and watch it. |
| Erin 29.11.2007 11:25 |
I wonder how long it will take before Alex posts. ;-) |
| Adam Baboolal 29.11.2007 12:26 |
I look forward to hearing about how it looks in comparison to the dvd version. It'll be very interesting to compare the two. Adam. |
| KevoM 30.11.2007 05:17 |
Paul Mark wrote: I picked up my Blu-Ray from HMV in Oxford Steet this afternoon. Took them about half an hour to find it in the store! Cant wait to get home and watch it.From HMV!? How much did that cost you? They're normally well overpriced when it comes to HD/BD |
| Paul Mark 30.11.2007 05:26 |
Yeah it cost £20. Normally I would have ordered from Play.com but I thought it was out on 4 December so I hadnt ordered it yet and was too impatient to wait for a delivery. I managed to watch a bit of it last night and the picture quality truly is amazing. |
| KevoM 30.11.2007 05:49 |
Think i'll wait til around Xmas before I watch it. I like to save 'big DVDs' for the right time and with the least amount of interruptions. |
| queenfanNY 05.12.2007 15:30 |
I just got my HD-DVD in the mail today. I put the 2001 DVD version in my standard def DVD player, and the HD-DVD in my HD player, and paused both of them at numerous of the same stills. There's no comparison.....what looks fuzzy and out of focus on the DVD, has much more detail on the HD-DVD! Yes, I did notice that the HD-DVD, just like the new version on standard def DVD has shots where the brightness is set too high on Freddie's face, etc, but I can deal with that since it has more than 1000 lines of resolution instead of only 500 lines. :) |
| PieterMC 05.12.2007 15:41 |
I wish I had been able to find it somewhere last night, but nope. Had to order it from Amazon. |
| Tero 05.12.2007 16:26 |
queenfanNY wrote: There's no comparison.....what looks fuzzy and out of focus on the DVD, has much more detail on the HD-DVD!That's good to know... In case I ever happen to watch videos frame-by-frame! :P How does it compare as a realistic watching experience? Can you actually see the difference when you're watching the video in normal circumstances from a reasonable distance (at least twice the diameter of the TV set)? |
| queenfanNY 06.12.2007 01:08 |
Tero wrote:Of course you see the difference when watching it. However, to be 100% sure that I wasn't "fooled" by thinking "it looks better simply because this is an HD-DVD", I wanted to pause the same stills.queenfanNY wrote: There's no comparison.....what looks fuzzy and out of focus on the DVD, has much more detail on the HD-DVD!That's good to know... In case I ever happen to watch videos frame-by-frame! :P How does it compare as a realistic watching experience? Can you actually see the difference when you're watching the video in normal circumstances from a reasonable distance (at least twice the diameter of the TV set)? As for the past reports of the 2007 standard def DVD having less detail / looking worse than the 2001 DVD, I've seen that before with movies on DVD too. Sometimes when new transfers are done in High Def, for technical reasons I do not know, the down conversion to standard def makes it look pretty bad as compared to that same High Def transfer being released in HD also. Anyways, for those of you who already have an HDTV and an HD-DVD or Blu-Ray player (or are thinking about buying them soon), I definitely recommend the HD version of Montreal. It's no doubt the highest visual quality version ever seen. |
| KevoM 06.12.2007 07:19 |
Just watched the HD-DVD version and did a side by side comparison withe the Pioneer SD version. What I found strange was the colours on the HD version started off looking a little washed out and looked rather flat compared to the dyamic, bright SD version (much like a poor LCD picture where the picture is dull and lacks depth). But the detail was there to be seen and much sharper than teh SD version. The Heineken bottle on the piano was a lot more legible....tsk tsk...'product placement ;) The medium shots of Fred at the piano looked to have a really dully, green, murky, lacklustre cast on the HD version. HOWEVER as the concert wore on the picture seemed to improve somewhat and the inital 'washed out look' seemed to have disappeared and the HD looked excellent. I can only assume that it was eithet due to the lighting or the original prints of the first 15 mins or so. Really strange, it's the first HD-DVD I have seen that PQ wise starts off poor and gets better the longer it goes on. The detail in the group's faces, the drumkit and lifelike textures of their clothing and the faces in the crowd are excellent and it's well worth owning. The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1. Can't say much for the poor Live Aid extras and that pointless US 1982 interview. Haven't listened to the commentary yet. |
| kansas666 06.12.2007 11:00 |
I received the blu-ray version yesterday. The picture quality is outstanding. You can see the uneven finish in Brian's guitar, the dust and finger prints on the monitors and all the detail in Roger's drum kit. The way film saturates the colored lights is simply amazing. This has to be the best picture I have seen in a blu-ray concert. I agree that there seems to be a slightly washed out green tint to the faces in some of the shots. I attribute this to increasing the light level since much of my original vhs version looks quite dark by comparison. Highly recommended. |
| KevoM 10.12.2007 12:14 |
What now for Queen's back catalogue as far as the digital technologies go? Have we reached a peak with High Definition pictures and High definition audio? Nothing more to look forward to? |
| PieterMC 10.12.2007 12:50 |
I find the washed out look really distracting imo. Yes the picture clarity on the Blu-Ray is fantastic, but it just seems to washed out to me. |
| kansas666 10.12.2007 14:39 |
KevoM wrote: What now for Queen's back catalogue as far as the digital technologies go? Have we reached a peak with High Definition pictures and High definition audio? Nothing more to look forward to?Well, Return of the Champions was shot in HD but only released in standard definition DVD. I am waiting for a re-release of that. |
| Deacon Fan 10.12.2007 20:09 |
queenfanNY wrote: I've seen that before with movies on DVD too. Sometimes when new transfers are done in High Def, for technical reasons I do not know, the down conversion to standard def makes it look pretty bad as compared to that same High Def transfer being released in HD also.That could very well be the case. The Stanley Kubrick films recently went Hi-Def and when I bought the new standard 'The Shining' DVD I immediately noticed how much worse it looked compared to the previous version, which was perfect.. for DVD. I think you're on to something there.. it makes sense. I hope studios catch on to this problem soon then. |
| inu-liger 13.12.2007 22:48 |
Got my Blu-ray copy of QRM finally, for $23.31 CDN at HMV. Will be quite a while before I can watch this in high-def, since I am waiting until after Xmas to get an HDTV + a new 80GB PS3 for my new house that I recently moved into. But am glad I got it on sale in the meantime :) |
| inu-liger 13.12.2007 22:54 |
KevoM wrote: The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1.Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name. I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :( |
| inu-liger 13.12.2007 22:57 |
-double post, sorry- |
| Deacon Fan 15.12.2007 11:56 |
<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:It's also only 4.1 ;)KevoM wrote: The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1.Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name. I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :( |
| inu-liger 15.12.2007 19:55 |
konijn met goud broek wrote:Yes that too!<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote:It's also only 4.1 ;)KevoM wrote: The 5.1 is excellent, though not sure if it's much of an improvement on teh Pioneer though, but then again I can't access the full DTS HD audio on my sytem, only sapled down vanilla 5.1.Sorry to break it to you, but the DTS HD track on there is the same as the DVD version. It isn't the DTS HD "Master Audio" version, which would be lossless. It's the "High Resolution" one, which is lossy and is basically DTS 96/24 with a fancy name. I knew they were going to do that, based on something JSS wrote where they basically said that they didn't have a need for Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA :( (Too bad it wasn't the first lossless 4.1 mix on any high-def release....but then again, I suspect there may be a release or so with a mix like that....will look into it further ;) |
| inu-liger 15.12.2007 20:02 |
And apparently, at least they were smart to use VC-1 for the video codec (was scared they would REALLY go backwards and use MPEG-2) on the BD release (unsure about HD DVD, but maybe KevoM would like to confirm if it's also VC-1 encoded?):
link
Originally Posted by inu-liger:What video codec is it that's used on this? I got the BD, but don't have a player atm so I can't tell :PHollywoodguy wrote:VC-1. |
| inu-liger 03.01.2008 11:30 |
HighDefDigest.com posted their reviews: link link |
| PieterMC 03.01.2008 11:41 |
<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote: HighDefDigest.com posted their reviews: link linkGreat review. Although I found this amusing: "audience at the height of their fandom" |
| inu-liger 04.01.2008 21:57 |
PieterMC wrote:Yeah, they're not exactly the brightest with their comments all the time.<b><FONT SIZE=4>inu-liger</b> wrote: HighDefDigest.com posted their reviews: link linkGreat review. Although I found this amusing: "audience at the height of their fandom" I've had to call them out once or twice on other reviews and news items before. |