I agree that the audio isn't the best. It sounds too front-and-center to me.
The picture is fantastic, though. Not only was it filmed on well, film, but was meant for IMAX theaters or the like.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
There is absolute no live feeling on the WWRY DVD. It's like Queen playing in your living-room. But the audience is also very bad. I love the sound in DTS 5.1 surround. Especially the opening (the big thunder sounds) en the big explosion before the head banging part of Boh Rhap.
I did some searching on the old wwry dvd stuff here as it's no longer stored on Brian's site. I found this:
"...really glad that the "We Will Rock You" performance DVD didn't win... instead of risking the EXTRA money to let US remix it properly in DTS 5.1 surround. They frigged around with the old Stereo mix to make a kind of surrogate surround. Unfortunately the old mix was crap. I only wish we could have stopped them putting it out in this shoddy fashion - it's the only Concert footage which we don't own - we let this company called "Mobilvision" film us to put us on an experimantal large-screen show for "concert"- type audiences many years ago. So we lost control of this footage".
Peace,
Adam.
"...really glad that the "We Will Rock You" performance DVD didn't win... instead of risking the EXTRA money to let US remix it properly in DTS 5.1 surround. They frigged around with the old Stereo mix to make a kind of surrogate surround. Unfortunately the old mix was crap. I only wish we could have stopped them putting it out in this shoddy fashion - it's the only Concert footage which we don't own - we let this company called "Mobilvision" film us to put us on an experimantal large-screen show for "concert"- type audiences many years ago. So we lost control of this footage".
Peace,
Adam.
That doesn't stop them from offering to buy back the rights to the show, and the master materials (film, multitrack tapes (though I would imagine that QP own multitracks for almost all shows since 1974...?)). After all, didn't they buy back the rights to Hammy '75 from the BBC? (Or was it just a rumour?)
And to relate on a point or two from above:
Yes, WWRY and Budapest, as well as ROTC (and all the other 2005 and current & upcoming shows from the current tour that have been or will be filmed) would all benefit with an HD DVD / Blu-Ray release, tho' I'd rather stick with just Blu-Ray, since although it uses the exact same codecs as HD DVD, it has more space, and thus could do the shows justice by using a higher bitrate. HD DVD discs only have 15GB (sl) / 30GB (dl) of capacity, while Blu-Ray has up to 27GB (sl) / 50GB (dl) of capacity (and it doesn't stop there either - they're currently developing quad-layered 100GB discs for a 2008 release, and eventually 200GB discs!), so the extra space could be used up to give the films more quality for both video and audio.
What's nice about the two newer codecs, being H.264/MPEG-4 and VC-1 (the latter an enhanced version of the Windows Media 9 video codec, I believe), is that they are advanced codecs which are way much more efficient than MPEG-2, which is also being included in the standards to ensure backwards capability with DVD's and recording compatibility with HDTV broadcasts (at least until newer codecs are included in the bitstreams).
I believe the Blu-Ray specs allow for a max. bitrate of 40Mbps for the video data alone, as opposed to 9.8Mbps for DVD, so with these advanced codecs, you could fit a 2+ hour film or concert on a DL disc at this rate, and get the best bitrate. But with the newer lossless DTS and Dolby Digital codecs, DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD respectively, that bitrate could potentially be lowered a bit to allow for multiple audio tracks (did I mention Blu-Ray supports up to *32* audio streams?)
The only thing that would worry me is how Queen Productions would handle such releases on BD/HD DVD (except for WWRY).
They're notorious for not going above 6.5Mbps at best on any of their DVD's (except for ROTC, I think, but I'm not sure), which is a factor in the decreased quality problems we all know about.
How do we know they won't go and use near-DVD bitrates on BD/HD DVD? (And not to mention not skipping proper remaster jobs?)
Not to mention that half of their DVD's are in cropped 16:9 widescreen.
The worst DVD in terms of compression and on-screen artifacts is Wembley, as far as I'm concerned.
They wasted a good opportunity with the video quality by wasting space on a faked 5.1 DTS mix.
(/bitch mode on)
For fuck sakes, if they have the mastertapes, as evidenced by Freddie's isolated piano and vocal on BohRap from that concert as heard (and seen) on the current Q+PR tour and DVD('s), then why didn't they properly remaster the audio into true 5.1 from those tapes?!
I'll tell you why: Quick money maker to finance the WWRY musical
(/bitch mode off)
I think I'll end this post here, and post more thoughts later, if I feel up to it.
And to relate on a point or two from above:
Yes, WWRY and Budapest, as well as ROTC (and all the other 2005 and current & upcoming shows from the current tour that have been or will be filmed) would all benefit with an HD DVD / Blu-Ray release, tho' I'd rather stick with just Blu-Ray, since although it uses the exact same codecs as HD DVD, it has more space, and thus could do the shows justice by using a higher bitrate. HD DVD discs only have 15GB (sl) / 30GB (dl) of capacity, while Blu-Ray has up to 27GB (sl) / 50GB (dl) of capacity (and it doesn't stop there either - they're currently developing quad-layered 100GB discs for a 2008 release, and eventually 200GB discs!), so the extra space could be used up to give the films more quality for both video and audio.
What's nice about the two newer codecs, being H.264/MPEG-4 and VC-1 (the latter an enhanced version of the Windows Media 9 video codec, I believe), is that they are advanced codecs which are way much more efficient than MPEG-2, which is also being included in the standards to ensure backwards capability with DVD's and recording compatibility with HDTV broadcasts (at least until newer codecs are included in the bitstreams).
I believe the Blu-Ray specs allow for a max. bitrate of 40Mbps for the video data alone, as opposed to 9.8Mbps for DVD, so with these advanced codecs, you could fit a 2+ hour film or concert on a DL disc at this rate, and get the best bitrate. But with the newer lossless DTS and Dolby Digital codecs, DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD respectively, that bitrate could potentially be lowered a bit to allow for multiple audio tracks (did I mention Blu-Ray supports up to *32* audio streams?)
The only thing that would worry me is how Queen Productions would handle such releases on BD/HD DVD (except for WWRY).
They're notorious for not going above 6.5Mbps at best on any of their DVD's (except for ROTC, I think, but I'm not sure), which is a factor in the decreased quality problems we all know about.
How do we know they won't go and use near-DVD bitrates on BD/HD DVD? (And not to mention not skipping proper remaster jobs?)
Not to mention that half of their DVD's are in cropped 16:9 widescreen.
The worst DVD in terms of compression and on-screen artifacts is Wembley, as far as I'm concerned.
They wasted a good opportunity with the video quality by wasting space on a faked 5.1 DTS mix.
(/bitch mode on)
For fuck sakes, if they have the mastertapes, as evidenced by Freddie's isolated piano and vocal on BohRap from that concert as heard (and seen) on the current Q+PR tour and DVD('s), then why didn't they properly remaster the audio into true 5.1 from those tapes?!
I'll tell you why: Quick money maker to finance the WWRY musical
(/bitch mode off)
I think I'll end this post here, and post more thoughts later, if I feel up to it.
I think you meant to say -remix- instead of remaster, into 5.1. Plain and simple, there never needs to be anything radical done for a 5.1 concert dvd. As creative as you can get, the best idea is always - main output at the front with slapback sound and crowd noise at the back. That is generally what people are used to anyway. It's jarring to hear something at the back like a vocal or an instrument because that's not what an audience (for the main) experiences.
And btw, it's silly to say that anything less than 6.5MB on a dvd bitrate is bad. It's all about the source material. I've just finished encoding a theatre dvd at.. gasp (!) 4.7MB bitrate! Oh horror... But it looks great. Really, Inu, you don't seem to know much about this aspect. Why make a comment that doesn't hold water?
Peace,
Adam.
And btw, it's silly to say that anything less than 6.5MB on a dvd bitrate is bad. It's all about the source material. I've just finished encoding a theatre dvd at.. gasp (!) 4.7MB bitrate! Oh horror... But it looks great. Really, Inu, you don't seem to know much about this aspect. Why make a comment that doesn't hold water?
Peace,
Adam.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Adam Baboolal wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I think you meant to say -remix- instead of remaster, into 5.1. Plain and simple, there never needs to be anything radical done for a 5.1 concert dvd. As creative as you can get, the best idea is always - main output at the front with slapback sound and crowd noise at the back. That is generally what people are used to anyway. It's jarring to hear something at the back like a vocal or an instrument because that's not what an audience (for the main) experiences.[/QUOTE]
True, but the sound quality itself isn't the greatest (though I'm sure the DTS mix itself is better than the older mixes).
[QUOTE]And btw, it's silly to say that anything less than 6.5MB on a dvd bitrate is bad. It's all about the source material. I've just finished encoding a theatre dvd at.. gasp (!) 4.7MB bitrate! Oh horror... But it looks great. Really, Inu, you don't seem to know much about this aspect. Why make a comment that doesn't hold water?[/QUOTE]
I'll give you that (Admittedly, at one time I used to make single-layered anime DVD-R's with 6 episodes per disc, at around 4-5Mbps, and they looked nice on a normal TV - but then again, I've never watched them on a higher-end TV...)
But surely, the same masters they used for the original Flix videos (which were re-released as a single DVD with new DVD players back around 9 years ago, and are apparently regarded as having superior quality compared to the GVH DVD's) couldn't have degraded THAT much to the point where they were unable to be properly restored, did they??
I mean, look at the Led Zeppelin DVD's with shows from the 1970's - THOSE look great, even the one show that was filmed on 2" video tape (which, according to the liner notes, they literally had to hunt down a machine that COULD play those tapes!).
Queen videos and concerts in those days surely would've either been filmed on similar tape material, or film...?
They wouldn't have been so cheap as to use bad quality tapes, would they?
More on this later...
[QUOTE]Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Same,
Richard
True, but the sound quality itself isn't the greatest (though I'm sure the DTS mix itself is better than the older mixes).
[QUOTE]And btw, it's silly to say that anything less than 6.5MB on a dvd bitrate is bad. It's all about the source material. I've just finished encoding a theatre dvd at.. gasp (!) 4.7MB bitrate! Oh horror... But it looks great. Really, Inu, you don't seem to know much about this aspect. Why make a comment that doesn't hold water?[/QUOTE]
I'll give you that (Admittedly, at one time I used to make single-layered anime DVD-R's with 6 episodes per disc, at around 4-5Mbps, and they looked nice on a normal TV - but then again, I've never watched them on a higher-end TV...)
But surely, the same masters they used for the original Flix videos (which were re-released as a single DVD with new DVD players back around 9 years ago, and are apparently regarded as having superior quality compared to the GVH DVD's) couldn't have degraded THAT much to the point where they were unable to be properly restored, did they??
I mean, look at the Led Zeppelin DVD's with shows from the 1970's - THOSE look great, even the one show that was filmed on 2" video tape (which, according to the liner notes, they literally had to hunt down a machine that COULD play those tapes!).
Queen videos and concerts in those days surely would've either been filmed on similar tape material, or film...?
They wouldn't have been so cheap as to use bad quality tapes, would they?
More on this later...
[QUOTE]Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Same,
Richard
I don't know the details on what they filmed on, but I'm sure a lot of the detereoration would come from badly stored material. If what people around here say is true, it wouldn't be surprising. You can't put it past them! Even the tape they use. So, it's all possible.
But I honestly don't know.
Peace,
Adam.
But I honestly don't know.
Peace,
Adam.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Adam Baboolal wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I don't know the details on what they filmed on, but I'm sure a lot of the detereoration would come from badly stored material. If what people around here say is true, it wouldn't be surprising. You can't put it past them! Even the tape they use. So, it's all possible.
But I honestly don't know.
Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Again, you could very well be right.
I guess the only ones I could really ask about those tapes are Greg and Justin, but I'm not sure that I'll be able to squeeze any answers out of them (as evidenced in an exchange of e-mails between me and Justin a few months ago regarding questions I had about certain concert mastertapes, some of which he did answer, and some where he basically said that I was asking a bit too much).
I *could* try, but I'm not going to. At least, not for the moment.
And as far as I can remember, the WWRY DVD was shot with a certain type of film for showings in IMAX (according to the director's commentary), so it would more than benefit from an HD release, as I said.
Budapest was shot on 35mm film, so it would seem likely also to benefit from a BD/HD DVD release (according to some people, the 35mm footage apparently was shot in widescreen, but I don't know if this is true or not...can anyone confirm?).
But you're right, it's down to the quality of the source material and how it's handled.
I would kinda guess that when they made the material back then, they probably thought the best quality consumer medium they would best benefit from back then was LaserDisc (which had 440 lines of resolution, compared to 240 lines for VHS (both numbers for NTSC; dunno about PAL), so they probably didn't think to store it in the best conditions once they were used for the Flix videos, if that was the case.
Peace,
Richard
But I honestly don't know.
Peace,
Adam.[/QUOTE]
Again, you could very well be right.
I guess the only ones I could really ask about those tapes are Greg and Justin, but I'm not sure that I'll be able to squeeze any answers out of them (as evidenced in an exchange of e-mails between me and Justin a few months ago regarding questions I had about certain concert mastertapes, some of which he did answer, and some where he basically said that I was asking a bit too much).
I *could* try, but I'm not going to. At least, not for the moment.
And as far as I can remember, the WWRY DVD was shot with a certain type of film for showings in IMAX (according to the director's commentary), so it would more than benefit from an HD release, as I said.
Budapest was shot on 35mm film, so it would seem likely also to benefit from a BD/HD DVD release (according to some people, the 35mm footage apparently was shot in widescreen, but I don't know if this is true or not...can anyone confirm?).
But you're right, it's down to the quality of the source material and how it's handled.
I would kinda guess that when they made the material back then, they probably thought the best quality consumer medium they would best benefit from back then was LaserDisc (which had 440 lines of resolution, compared to 240 lines for VHS (both numbers for NTSC; dunno about PAL), so they probably didn't think to store it in the best conditions once they were used for the Flix videos, if that was the case.
Peace,
Richard