gleviv deadrick gennaro
Juanjo Pollreisz
I am just curious if your Netflix streams 5.1, 7.1, stereo, DD +. Also, is the dynamic range the same as playing a bluray? DD + was made for digital stream and a lower bitrate. Movie playback for me is most dynamic with a bluray disc compared to streaming. What is you take on this topic? Maybe I should also ask are you streaming from a PC, BDP, Smart TV, Roku, ect. and what is doing the decodings, the player or avr?
I stream Neflix from my Apple TV, and I believe the audio is dictated by the source of the programming you are watching, for example: Breaking Bad, House of Cards, and the movie The Avengers were all Dolby Digital. However most of the programming seams to be Stereo and I don't think they have any offerings in DD+ yet and that Hulu and VUDU are the only 2 that offer that level of audio at this time. And IMO, NO! none of these even come close to the audio (or video quality for that matter) of a Blu-Ray disc. But again it's more convenient, and we are a lazy society. So sadly it seams that streaming is the future and not Blu-Ray disc. I have over 150 Blu-Rays, but I only watch one every now and then. I stream daily and I cut the cord over a year ago and haven't looked back.
i really like netfix. tons of good political videos and true documenturies. kids movies are good. action movies lack imo although getting better. and i can run it in every room and other houses for $8 monthly
I stream Netflix from my Sony BDP or Samsung TV. My Denon AVR is doing the decoding in 5.1 DD+. I use Vudu for new releases. I think the video is much better than Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc. I don't run an optical and use just one HDMI from TV to the Denon. ARC channel. Vudu is obviously not as good as bluray discs but the video is very close but the audio does lack and I usually have to run at -5 to reference on the volume. Blurays I run the volume at -10 and that is quite loud for me.
The type of streaming seams device and app controlled. My TV and one BDP will stream in stereo and I can matrix to sound. My newer BDP can do DD + up to 7.1. The dynamic range just is not there for me that if I really like a movie, I have to get the disc. And yes, When I watch the disc I get a better movie experience. I am not sure if DD+ is better or same as matrix 5.1. Something tells me it shoud be roughly the same since we are talking about digital tranfer of data.
For now it's BD (or, if no BD exists, DVD) disks only for me. We tried a little Netflix streaming and the visual quality ranged from excellent to terrible. One particular movie (Barabbas) looked horrible when streamed, and had fantastic "walk-into-it" resolution and acutance -- just what you'd expect from a 70 mm source -- when we rented it as a lowly DVD. On the other hand, my wife streamed the Legend of the Seeker series, and it looked fine. I was told by a IT guy that streaming varies with the amount of traffic, as well as the source used. We didn't evaluate the sound, because we ran the streamed versions through our PC and our smaller, two channel system. The sound for The Seeker didn't grab me as being bad, or limited in dynamics, but it might have had we played it on our big system. The visual quality of the streamed Barabbas was so bad that the sound of our screaming drowned out the sound.
I wonder if those who are streaming on their PCs, etc., etc. now are less demanding than those of us who use BDs in home theater? That could bode ill for future quality. I have the impression that few in the industry care.
This is what I was getting at in my post.... there have been many articles about this issue. There are far more streamers out there than BD disc buyers. Streaming is without a doubt where things are headed, because quite honestly the majority doesn't care about sound quality. But hopefully the quality of the picture and sound will improve as time goes on.
I guess the DD + was made for streaming on all the new devices like ROKU, WD TV, smart phones, ect. It is a lossy format compared to DTS Master and Dolby TrueHD. I was reading that it is compressed and can fit into smaller bandwidths for transmission.
As Stuart says, it's a compromise between Netflix not wanting overly-large black bars that annoy viewers, and the widespread belief that wide aspect ratios are a shortcut to giving television shows a cinematic look.
2.35 is talked about every now and then in preprod but all the people end up using the 2.39 anyway when the show goes to post, no one would like to leave black bars on the sides of the frame or export their show to 2k flat just because wanting that very small aspect ratio difference...
technically one could letterbox the 2.35 to the dci 2048x1080 frame but I have never seen anyone use that format in real life, it may be that the post people just want to make projectionist's life easier by not adding third dcp format to the list of choices to complicate things (how did they manage in the film era or were the projectionists just more experienced back then, having to change gates and anything... compared to the current lazy iPad remote controlled work :rolleyes: )
So why have 2.35 -1 markers in just about every camera.. if no one uses this old aspect ratio.. thats my question.. ?.. is it a TV aspect ration with less black bars.. ? Ive only shot a cropped version of 16-9 ..with a" common head room".. andI I guess they just played around with the crop in post shot by shot.. but still I wonder.. why the prevalence of 2.35-1 markers in all modern camera,s EVF..?
It is called Univisium. Storaro invented the aspect ratio 1:2.00 (18:9) as a compromise. For him it was clear that the TV aspect ratio 16:9 will have sucess and that in the future many will film digital or 65mm film stock. And the aspect ratio for 65mm is 1:2,2. So he choosed as an average 1:2.00.
And what I really do not like is that Storaro also reframed his old work in this aspect ratio for new realeases. Why do not use the original aspect ratio? It is not only a decision of the cinematographer to choose a aspect ratio. And if it is choosen then also other departments are working for this aspect ratio! I do not like later reframing...
...now I was more interested and looked up in my "old" book about some some formats. I did not found the two you mentioned. Maybe because it is a book from Germany and the system was never used in Europe.
I use an HDMI switch with an SPDIF optical audio extractor to get the audio from the HDMI to my old surround amp which handles DD and DTS (not HD). This works well in surround sound with everything except for Netflix on Roku where I get 2.0 sound. The setup even gets DD surround with Netflix on a Fire Stick 2nd gen.
If your TV or A/V receiver isn't capable of playing Dolby Digital+ audio formats (as detected by the 'Auto' settings in Settings>Audio>Audio mode, you would only receive Stereo audio from the Netflix channel.
Plex is doing the transcoding, not the Roku. For what you are seeing, check to see of any of the audio processing functions are enabled. You can only access them when something is playing. Press the * button while the video is playing and look for any sound function and make sure it's turned off. It might be labeled volume leveling, or something different. But any audio processing must be turned off or you only get stereo sound.
Volume Leveling is turned off. The only other relevant setting I can see is Roku's main Audio Setting where I have tried all the options and none of them give surround sound with Netflix. Volume Leveling doesn't seem to stop surround sound on Plex.
90f70e40cf