Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Super-Bit DVD's

This is topic Super-Bit DVD's in forum The Afterlife at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=000309

Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 06-12-2004, 11:30 PM:

i was wondering what the opinion's on Super-Bit dvd's good, bad, not worth the extra money? i have never heard one, but have had friends say they are worth it. i know columbia house is the only maker so far, and they have maybe 50 titles out. does anyone here use them or have an opinion about Super-bit dvd's?

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 06-13-2004, 02:23 AM:

I am guessing the benefits would be more obvious on big tvs. If you have no intention of buying a huge tv, then i would not base the decision on the superbit factor alone.

Posted by Paul Linfesty (Member # 214) on 06-13-2004, 09:02 AM:

IMHO, Superbit DVDs are nothing more than a marketing gimmick by Columbia. They are regular formatted DVD's. It's just that they are using the upper limits of the data bit rate that the regular consumer DVD format allows. Many other DVD's may in fact use approximately the same rate that Columbia is using without attaching the "superbit" label. A consumer DVD recorder set at the "XP" mode is in fact using the highest data rate possible (10mbps) for the consumer version of DVD.

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-13-2004, 09:38 AM:

The only way one might see a difference is if you are using a progressive scan capable TV or if you happen to have an upconverter that outputs all standard video as 1080i. LG makes a neato HDTV receiver that also has a DVD player built in. The DVD comming out of the LG is upconverted to 1080i and DVD's needless to say will look really nice. Samsung also has a DVD player with a Farodja processor built in and that player also looks incredible but the Farodja is only active via the DVI digital out connector.

Mark

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 06-13-2004, 12:23 PM:

Sony Superbit titles typically have to be judged on a title by title basis, but overall, like Paul mentioned, it is mainly a marketing gimmick. Lots of DVDs from other studios do the same thing as Superbit (and more) when they put the movie alone on one disc and then locate the extras on another.

The main thing you're gaining with a Superbit title is a DTS audio track and a more detailed video image. The level of detail improvement varies from title to title. It's tough to see those improvements on a standard 4:3 NTSC TV set. "Air Force One" Superbit is a noticeable improvement over the older release. And the Superbit version "Lawrence of Arabia" fixed several problems visible in the previous Columbia 2-disc release.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 06-13-2004, 01:32 PM:

I agree it's really a title by title call on whether they are better. Lawrence of Arabia is the only title that'd I'd say get for sure because of reworked transfer and audio by Robert Harris. Also, if you're a DTS fiend like me, they are cool too. I know on xXx the DTS track did make a big difference, but it still did lack the oomph of the theatrical DTS and SRD I remember hearing.

AJG

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-13-2004, 11:44 PM:

"but it still did lack the oomph of the theatrical DTS and SRD I remember hearing."

I never considered the L.O.A. tracks to contain any oomph at all.... mostly highs, no lows... they are actually somewhat lame as far as audio tracks of the time. It always sounded pretty flat to me, but the dialog was very good. I doubt that RAH inserted oomph where there was none.

Mark

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 06-14-2004, 01:26 AM:

I have found in my experience more breakage with superbit DVD's than regular carbide bits in drill press applications.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 06-14-2004, 03:44 AM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
I never considered the L.O.A. tracks to contain any oomph at all.... mostly highs, no lows... they are actually somewhat lame as far as audio tracks of the time. It always sounded pretty flat to me, but the dialog was very good. I doubt that RAH inserted oomph where there was none.

I think you misread me Mark. I was talking about the track on xXx. The track on Lawrence was beautiful and I would never ask for anything more, especially with Mr. Harris' approval on it.

AJG

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 06-14-2004, 01:02 PM:

quote: Aaron Garman
I think you misread me Mark. I was talking about the track on xXx.

Perhaps if you would have stylized or "set off" the title in your sentence you would not have been misunderstood. I'd suggest using quotations or italics when referring to titles in a sentence. Easier to read... makes the writer look good....

Just a bit of friendly advice for "effective communication"-challenged folks.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 06-16-2004, 01:13 PM:

Good point. Myself, being a speech communication major, should have thought of something like that!

AJG

Posted by John Lasher (Member # 968) on 06-18-2004, 07:54 PM:

"Tommy" is a pretty good one. The original DVD was the first that we rented. I purchased (special-ordered, actually) the SuperBit edition relatively recently. I'll compare them..

Video:

Original:
Excellent picture quality, especially considering the age of the film. Some artifacting to be seen, but not really that distracting.

SuperBit:
Even better. No artifacting (that I noticed), more detail (in one scene I could see Ann-Margret's panties through the outfit she had on). In some places it bordered on looking like a recently-shot film.

Audio:

Original:
English audio in the original Quintaphonic (5.0) and 2.0 Surround. On my (stereo) system, the only audible difference between the 5.0 and the 2.0 was what I can only describe as an unpleasent "loudness" in the 2.0 version. The bassists on this film might as well have stayed home, I actually checked the speaker switch on my receiver to make sure the subwoofer was on.

SuperBit:
English Dolby & DTS 5.1 Surround. Now I can hear the bass, and while it doesn't exactly give the subwoofer a workout, it doesn't leave me questioning wether or not I should have it serviced.

The original edition featured performer and filmmaker biographies and a printed essay about the restoration of the soundtrack (which is available online if you know what to type in Google).

The SuperBit edition features... well, nothing really, unless you count the little catalog of the other SuperBit releases available.

Minor note(in case I've convinced you to buy this one): The disc defaults to DTS, you have to go to the audio set-up menu and select Dolby if you're watching on a non-digital system (like me).

Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 06-19-2004, 07:59 PM:

thanks for the opinions on superbit. i have an apex dvd player, very cheap. i plan on buying a 5 dvd changer optical outputs, and a 36" flat hdtv and wanted to hear about these dvd's.

i no longer have internet acces and have stopped working at the Charleston IMAX, well only on the weekends. i have a new job, so sorry about the delay to reply, thanks again.

Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 06-20-2004, 10:16 PM:

I like the Superbit branding. It's all about consistency.

Yes, their explainations and diagrams of how it works (dedicating as much of the bit budget as possible to the actual video and audio instead of extras) can inspire a bit of a "no shit, Sherlock" response, but I have found it to be the most reliable mark of quality out there.

Many studios have developed branding for their "high end" releases. New Line has their "Platinum" series, Fox has their "Five Star" series, and so on. And of course, there is also the non-studio specific THX branding. I have found none of these logos give me a clear expectation of the quality I will find on the disc once I actually start to play it. It's always been hit and miss.

Except for Superbit. It is the only branding I've seen that actually makes me feel like I know what I'm getting. Columbia/TriStar has earned this reputation with me by doing such a good job at putting out a consistent level of quality. If it's a gimmick, it's a good one.

Posted by Liam Utley (Member # 1931) on 07-20-2004, 05:11 AM:

I have "Bram Stokers Dracula" on superbit, and although the sound is great, the transfer is still lacking for a movie that really isnt THAT old. I can't compare it to the original dvd release, but in my opinion they are not worth the extra money.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 07-21-2004, 12:34 AM:

Superbit DVD's will not play on the new DVD players with kryptonite lasers.

Posted by JC Cowles (Member # 914) on 08-22-2004, 05:52 PM:

DVDFile often posts difference they see on their reviews of Superbit DVDs. This one (link) for Air Force One notes:

quote:
The first and most obvious improvement is in the level of detail; the Superbit disc displayed much more detail than the original release. I captured a close-up of Gary Oldman at 9:42 into the film, just after his fingerprint is displayed on the laptop computer at Air Force One's last security checkpoint. The original release looks quite soft in comparison with the Superbit release. Notice the texture of Mr. Oldman's skin. You can more clearly see his pores, the individual hairs in his eyebrow, and the crease above it; they are more delineated on the Superbit disc.

Air Force One is the only movie I own in both standard and SuperBit formats and even with a significantly smaller setup than Dan Ramer (who wrote the review), I can see the subtle differences he's talking about.

In regards to audio improvements, Dan comments:

quote:
The new Dolby Digital 5.1 track seems indistinguishable from the original. It remains demo quality. But when I synchronized the two discs and switched back and forth between the Dolby Digital disc and the DTS disc after careful gain matching, I found the DTS track to be even better. Timbre was subtly improved, deep bass had slightly more authority, and the surround effects seemed to image around me in a slightly more coherent way. Either track is superb; the DTS track has the edge.

I for one cannot hear distinct differences between the two tracks, but my ears and equipment may not be up to the task. Regardless, being the type who can't stand to watch old DVD because of all the specs of dirt I see, I also catch myself seeing compression artifacts on DVDs. So the SuperBit series is a welcome addition to the DVD world for me.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 08-24-2004, 10:21 PM:

You guys are all crazy. DVDs, whether they are regular or "Superbit" are DIGITAL...meaning they are PERFECT! Yes, PERFECT AND FLAWLESS ALL THE TIME! Digital DVDs are even better than 70mm. Digital is so awesome. It's like "HQ" for VHS decks, but even better! [Roll Eyes]

I have been told never to author DVDs at a higher bitrate than 9mbps because many of the cheaper players cannot safely handle higher bitrates. I wonder what these Superbit DVDs are averaging.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 08-24-2004, 10:32 PM:

Apparently they are at 6-7Mbps. The also, apparently, suck. They are DVDs after all.

Posted by Ron Lacheur (Member # 1126) on 08-25-2004, 02:14 AM:

Superbits average between 6 to 9.9 usually. I haven't really noticed all that much improvement with Superbit titles.

The Bad Boys Superbit and regular " Special Edition " set are apparently from the same source or even the same transfer, as there is a ton of dirt right at the beginning of the movie.