"Lord of the Rings" soundtrack reissues on Blu-Ray

[stormchaser]

Kudos for the advance warning! <wallet set for future emptying 8'/>

Love ya guys for this 8').

So, do you now predict the Hobbit soundtracks will receive the same treatment? <wallet ripped and torn 8'(>

My pessimistic guess is that they won't get the same treatment. These packages are re-releases of the existing mixes from the DVD-As. A quick glance at Doug Adams' Twitter and Blog shows no indication of this happening. I'd love to be proven wrong.

 

[rtbluray]

"The Return of the King" CD/Blu-Ray set will be released on September 21, 2018
https://www.amazon.com/Lord-Rings-Complete-Recordings-1Blu-ray/dp/B07FW4CN99/

 

[H.A.L.]

The TWO TOWERS edition is set to be released tomorrow! The FELLOWSHIP blu ray, while supposedly the same mix, really outdoes the DVD-A in many respects.

Clarity is a lot better, as is surround (DTS instead of Dolby, for starters). I saw an analysis on another site, and it has been tweaked a bit louder, as well.

 

[H.A.L.]

THE TWO TOWERS blu ray has arrived! Much more somber in tone as far as music, but still sounding beautiful. I tried to start a separate poll for the blu ray, but was told it was the same mix. I'm wondering how that could be -- the DVD-A is "Dolby Surround" and to quote off Google:

"When a Dolby Surround soundtrack is produced, four channels of audio information (Left, Center, Right and Mono) surround are matrix-encoded onto two audio tracks."

Yet the blu ray is "DTS-HD Master 5.1 Surround" and again to quote Google:

"Five speakers (Front Left and Right, Center, and Surround Left and Right), plus a subwoofer" Also, unlike Dolby, the Master can hold up to 192 khz at variable bit speed.

Here is where one of you experts will probably slap me down (please do 8')) and explain how the mix is still no different between them. Maybe so, but the Dolby has only four channels of audio information, and the DTS-HD Master has five plus the subwoofer, right? So there must be some difference in how the information is handled. . . .

Still learning surround!

Meanwhile, the blu ray menu is far better than the DVD-A, which was rather clunky. Everything stays on the same menu and no flipping through repetitive scenes which sometimes caused a pause. And yes, I pre-ordered RETURN OF THE KING of course 8').

 

[4-earredwonder]

THE TWO TOWERS blu ray has arrived! Much more somber in tone as far as music, but still sounding beautiful. I tried to start a separate poll for the blu ray, but was told it was the same mix. I'm wondering how that could be -- the DVD-A is "Dolby Surround" and to quote off Google:

"When a Dolby Surround soundtrack is produced, four channels of audio information (Left, Center, Right and Mono) surround are matrix-encoded onto two audio tracks."

Yet the blu ray is "DTS-HD Master 5.1 Surround" and again to quote Google:

"Five speakers (Front Left and Right, Center, and Surround Left and Right), plus a subwoofer" Also, unlike Dolby, the Master can hold up to 192 khz at variable bit speed.

Here is where one of you experts will probably slap me down (please do 8')) and explain how the mix is still no different between them. Maybe so, but the Dolby has only four channels of audio information, and the DTS-HD Master has five plus the subwoofer, right? So there must be some difference in how the information is handled. . . .

Still learning surround!

Meanwhile, the blu ray menu is far better than the DVD-A, which was rather clunky. Everything stays on the same menu and no flipping through repetitive scenes which sometimes caused a pause. And yes, I pre-ordered RETURN OF THE KING of course 8').

The Long of the Rings MLP DVD~As were 5.1 and were most probably remastered from the original 5.1 master tapes. QUAD was a 70's thing. LOTR was minimum 6 track in theaters and will probably be remastered for Dolby Atmos when finally released on UHD 4K.

 

[H.A.L.]

Thanks, 4-earredwonder! I have the blu ray LOTR film set, and it is 6.1 indeed. Atmos would be awesome! Except I'd have to upgrade my Denon amp (although my 7.1 can place 2 upper left and right speakers if I configured it to do so (am using the extra 2 speakers as wides right now) . . . I don't think my codecs have been updated for that, though.

 

[H.A.L.]

Warning, Grammar police! OMG, there's a typo in the TTT blu ray menu! Track 42 is "The Nasgul Attack," but of course the correct spelling is "Nazgul," as used elsewhere in the booklets and back of the box.

I do not anticipate a recall, however Hmm . . . wonder if that is on the DVD-A menu, too.

 

[4-earredwonder]

Warning, Grammar police! OMG, there's a typo in the TTT blu ray menu! Track 42 is "The Nasgul Attack," but of course the correct spelling is "Nazgul," as used elsewhere in the booklets and back of the box.

I do not anticipate a recall, however Hmm . . . wonder if that is on the DVD-A menu, too.

As long as it doesn't affect the sound.........no BIG deal! Nit picking aside, I hope you're enjoying the BD~A.........can be addictively hobbit~forming!

 

[haikubass]

Quite a price-drop over at Amazon.ca - CDN$ 82.07

 

[H.A.L.]

The FOTR blu ray is now 57 dollars on Amazon.us. In fact, you can get all three (ROTK out next month) for 200 dollars -- the price of a single one in the OOP DVD edition!

 

[H.A.L.]

RETURN OF THE KING arrived today Haven't opened it yet; dinner first. . . .

Takes some of the sting sneaky out of not getting the Hendrix AXIS.

 

[Old Quad Guy]

Question: if memory is correct; Wasn't the DVD-Audio high resolution 24 bit/48 kHz?
And what is the Bru-ray, I presume 24/96 or higher? Thanks.

 

[H.A.L.]

Rrod on the blu ray forum posted this:
_________________________________
I compared decoded DTS HD to the decoded MLP from the original DVD-A (both are 24/48). Here's a summary of what I've heard or seen so far:

stereo:
.Loudness levels and range match
.A bit more masked treble content above 3kHz in the Blu-Ray DTS-HD
.A tad bit of peak limiting in the Blu-Ray DTS-HD (not really noticeable)
.Audibly identical in short AB test

5.1 (audio comparison of L/R tracks, visual/numerical comparison of others):
.DTS-HD is ~0.7dB hotter than MLP
.Loudness range is the same (21.2LU)
.Same minor peak limiting on DTS-HD
.Same extra treble above 3kHz on both tracks
.Some significant spectral difference in last track in certain sections
*Found the cause: seems to be some splicing causing misalignment here and there. Aligning each section, I find extra content much like in the stereo mix, but instead of just being above 3kHz, there is a 'hole' around 3k, with low-amplitude content that modulates with the rest of the content. ABing of each section didn't pop up anything obvious.
.MLP subwoofer track is 16-bits padded to 24-bit
.DTS-HD subwoofer track appears native 24-bit
____________________________________

Unless you have ears that handle the lfe, I don't suppose it would make much of a difference -- that said, the blu ray sounds far better to me! Maybe because it is non-Dolby.
Rumor had the last box, ROTK, at 96/48 but I haven't opened it to see yet.

 

[superkrups20056]

Rrod on the blu ray forum posted this:
_________________________________
I compared decoded DTS HD to the decoded MLP from the original DVD-A (both are 24/48). Here's a summary of what I've heard or seen so far:

stereo:
.Loudness levels and range match
.A bit more masked treble content above 3kHz in the Blu-Ray DTS-HD
.A tad bit of peak limiting in the Blu-Ray DTS-HD (not really noticeable)
.Audibly identical in short AB test

5.1 (audio comparison of L/R tracks, visual/numerical comparison of others):
.DTS-HD is ~0.7dB hotter than MLP
.Loudness range is the same (21.2LU)
.Same minor peak limiting on DTS-HD
.Same extra treble above 3kHz on both tracks
.Some significant spectral difference in last track in certain sections
*Found the cause: seems to be some splicing causing misalignment here and there. Aligning each section, I find extra content much like in the stereo mix, but instead of just being above 3kHz, there is a 'hole' around 3k, with low-amplitude content that modulates with the rest of the content. ABing of each section didn't pop up anything obvious.
.MLP subwoofer track is 16-bits padded to 24-bit
.DTS-HD subwoofer track appears native 24-bit
____________________________________

Unless you have ears that handle the lfe, I don't suppose it would make much of a difference -- that said, the blu ray sounds far better to me! Maybe because it is non-Dolby.
Rumor had the last box, ROTK, at 96/48 but I haven't opened it to see yet.

Hi Halbroome! Can you confirm that the ROTK is indeed 96/48? And if it is, what would I play it on to achieve full quality? Can the Xbox One X handle 96/48? Still a newbie at surround, but thanks for the info!

 

[JediJoker]

Hi Halbroome! Can you confirm that the ROTK is indeed 96/48? And if it is, what would I play it on to achieve full quality? Can the Xbox One X handle 96/48? Still a newbie at surround, but thanks for the info!

96kHz/48-bit is entirely non-standard. 48 bits would be overkill. Do you mean 96/24?

 

[superkrups20056]

96kHz/48-bit is entirely non-standard. 48 bits would be overkill. Do you mean 96/24?

I am just quoting what halbroome said in his previous post. He said 96/48!

 

[edisonbaggins]

For players that can't decode extended DTS (96k), you'll end up getting a 48k stream. Maybe that's what they meant? But that's more relevant to DVD.
Maybe they were just confused.