- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://piefed.social/c/nonpolitical_comics/p/1657114/mr-lovenstein-volume
Hey everyone! In case you haven’t noticed, this is a new community focused on NonPolitical Comics (NPCs), which essentially means no gloom and doom of the day stuff. If you like the idea, help out by upvoting, commenting, or even talking about us! Remember, click like and subscribe!
![[Mr Lovenstein] Volume](https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/579/944/976/646/219/original/e93a9a49d1ddc0df.png){kind=link}
By my estimates that would add up to 4ish GB to the file size per 90 minutes of content
The high dynamic range 7.1 audio is already on the disc. What we’re wanting is a decent stereo mixdown. Could be 128kb mp3 for all I care. Not like I’ll be able to discern a higher bitrate on my tv speakers. That should require 86MB per 90 minutes.
Low dynamic range doesn’t need to be low quality though
Even high quality audio isn’t 4GB for a movie. Not FLAC or even 48khz WAV.
I took my numbers from the real bitrate of a Dolby MA audio track from a bluray.
Yea, and how many people torrent the full, actual complete bluray? Why would you want to waste that much space?
Do bluray players only support Dolby MA? You realize we’re talking about a situation where people DON’T want super crazy high dynamic range, perfect audio quality with 7.1 channels, right??
Modern CPUs can downmix and compress audio without a sweat, it doesn’t need to be done by the studio.
Agree
Looking into it, there’s a range of standards for Blu-Ray in terms of video quality. I doubt there are a ton of discs that can’t afford a few of those 25-50GB. Just spitballing ways to make it approachable rather than say only one way is correct. There’s all sorts of fancy stuff going on with DTS. Maybe they could work compression into part of the standard and just include alternate mixes.