Passengers and Cinavia

[Pete]

But I thought it might be possible to quickly read and "cache" the data for a few minutes worth of video, then display that while quick scanning through the movie's audio looking for CNV

That's about 150MB of compressed video per minute to cache. Doable, but not really worth it, I'd say.
Also - a BD drive usually delivers no more than 15-20MB/s, unless it has a patched firmware. That's about a maximum of 4x real time.
So there's not that much to gain.
So all in all - since Cinavia is usually detected almost immediately, I'll say things are pretty fine as it is.

 

[testiles]

... So all in all - since Cinavia is usually detected almost immediately, I'll say things are pretty fine as it is.

Oh, agreed.

Was just commenting on what I thought was going on "behind the curtain".


It absolutely works fine as is.


Thanks for the info.


T

 

[slovell]

Oh, agreed.

Was just commenting on what I thought was going on "behind the curtain".


It absolutely works fine as is.


Thanks for the info.


T

Passengers is the only disc I've processed that CloneBD didn't immediately detect Cinavia. It would be nice if Cinavia could be disabled without having to downconvert the HiRes audio to 5.1 DD but I'll take it.

 

[nebostrangla]

Passengers is the only disc I've processed that CloneBD didn't immediately detect Cinavia. It would be nice if Cinavia could be disabled without having to downconvert the HiRes audio to 5.1 DD but I'll take it.

Honestly though with the way the "fix" works. I don't think you would really want True HD audio.
Now I will also tell you that for a MKV file . You don't have to go all the way down to the AC3 codec. The audio only has to be processed (re-encoded) for the the fix to be applied so you just step down the audio one level ie DTS-HD to DTS and so forth. But it must be at least one step down. I've never tried to do this to for a disc copy I don't have any BD-RE's yet. But in theory it should work too. Just make sure that the icon losses the mask and turns purple during the encoding stage of CloneBD. I will say I just look for the mask removal as I cannot really see the difference between when purple or just red. On my 32" 1080p TV that I use with my desktop tower.
If nothing else try some tests to disc structure and just save to your HDD instead of using a blank.

 

[Serg1004]

CloneBD didn't detect Cinavia on Passengers. I got no detection warning but Cinavia was definitely on the disc.

+1
Dear RedFox, try will to do something with it...
and it's one more Sony issue...

Focus on Sony issues. If you want - I can give you Sony list.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

It's not just a Sony issue. Lionsgate and others use it too. Sony just uses it the most and is the main backer of the technology.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn Nexus 7 met Tapatalk

 

[Pete]

You don't have to go all the way down to the AC3 codec. The audio only has to be processed (re-encoded) for the the fix to be applied so you just step down the audio one level ie DTS-HD to DTS and so forth.

I'd like to take up the cudgel for AC3 at this point, because you make it sound like AC3 is the inferior codec ("all the way down to AC3").
That's a very old debate and most support in favor of DTS comes from the DTS claim, that they use a higher bit rate, so the sound surely has to be better. But that's marketing.
Dolby claims, it doesn't need that much space, because their tech is better. Marketing again.

What is known, is that when comparing DTS and AC3 at similar bit rates, DTS loses. So you can say, that AC3 has more efficient compression.
Comparing AC3 and DTS at their highest permitted bit rates (speaking of Blu-ray discs) is more difficult - I can't find any really good sources that come up with credible scientific test results proving either way.
You can't make an objective comparison due to the nature of lossy compression (psychoacoustic auditory masking etc...) the only way to "measure" the quality remains the human ear, because the compression is based on its flaws.

But all in all it seems like it is close to impossible to tell whether DTS@1509 or AC3@640 delivers better quality.
Even if you're able to tell "some difference", you can't say, which is "better" or closer to lossless.

I'd recommend AC3 any time, simply because it uses less space and I, for myself, know that I will never be able to tell the difference.

Here's a nice article, that tries to shed some light - yet in the end doesn't, because it's such a slippery topic: http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/dolby-vs-dts.html

 

[nebostrangla]

@Pete,
My apologies for the misunderstanding about this. I was in no way trying to be derogatory about AC3. I was just trying to point out that you could just step down the audio output by one level. To make it remove the cinivia. And actually I do ALL my MKV'S in the AC3 codec. For use with my Roku. Do to the living room TV not handling any other ones.

 

[Ch3vr0n]

@Pete slighly off topic, yet not. I've always kept HD audio. With your explanation and that article it raised the question with me. Not that discs compressed with CloneBD look ugly on my TV (even when i'm pretty close to the "red" area in the quality slider), but does AC3 support 7.1? What would happen where the main titles use an atmos stream and i were to opt to convert to ac3.

 

[ddjmagic]

does AC3 support 7.1? What would happen where the main titles use an atmos stream and i were to opt to convert to ac3

No, AC3 only supports 6 channels (5.1). If you downconvert an Atmos track to AC3 in CloneBD (or any software) it will be 5.1.

 

[testiles]

What is known, is that when comparing DTS and AC3 at similar bit rates, DTS loses. So you can say, that AC3 has more efficient compression.
Comparing AC3 and DTS at their highest permitted bit rates (speaking of Blu-ray discs) is more difficult - I can't find any really good sources that come up with credible scientific test results proving either way.
You can't make an objective comparison due to the nature of lossy compression (psychoacoustic auditory masking etc...) the only way to "measure" the quality remains the human ear, because the compression is based on its flaws.

But all in all it seems like it is close to impossible to tell whether DTS@1509 or AC3@640 delivers better quality.
Even if you're able to tell "some difference", you can't say, which is "better" or closer to lossless.

I guess in the end all that should really matter is which sounds best to the listener.

I personally prefer DTS. Whenever I've come across a movie with both Dolby and DTS tracks, the Dolby track seems to be a bit light in the loafers, so to speak. Crisp highs, but a tad bright. And not much going in midrange and bass.

The DTS seems to have a more pronounced bass and forward midrange while still having respectable treble. Sounds more natural to my ears. And that's what floats my boat. (lol)


T

 

[slovell]

I guess in the end all that should really matter is which sounds best to the listener.

I personally prefer DTS. Whenever I've come across a movie with both Dolby and DTS tracks, the Dolby track seems to be a bit light in the loafers, so to speak. Crisp highs, but a tad bright. And not much going in midrange and bass.

The DTS seems to have a more pronounced bass and forward midrange while still having respectable treble. Sounds more natural to my ears. And that's what floats my boat. (lol)


T

I agree, DTS always sounds better to my ears.