This got really involved, but I think I finally have it.
Note: using the xbr960 is a major challenge, as practically each separate input and format must be re-calibrated from scratch. It also makes even really bad BD transfers shine and SD has all it’s anamolies magnified.
GOLDENEYE
THX LD v SE DVD v UE DVD v Blu-ray v 1080p hdtv capture Lowry master
Video: The BD is indeed an older master, indeed riddled with noise reduction. The Lowry processed transfer is cropped, but it has an intact patina of grain throughout that can be seen in a few select frames/moments of the BD such as fadeouts. The grain is even visible on the UE DVD. However, Lowry introduced some color elements that i don’t think are quite right and I swear there’s perhaps a bit of teal here and there but it may be my eyes tricking me. After going over the same test scenes over and over again between all formats it breaks down like this:
hdtv: Best detail, but loses points to the heavy compression. Noticeably cropped on all four sides. Identical to UE. Color probably not 100% accurate.
BD: No compression issues. DNR and EE present but on a good display it’s still watchable and has better color timing.
For some time I thought the BD was the SE master, but when comparing kept seeing differences. Then it suddenly dawned on me. The SE is contrast boosted and a bit washed of fine detail because they merely ported the LD master for the extremely early snapper case disc. Comparing side by side shows the LD does NOT have the contrast issue and when held up against both my CLD-D702 and DVL-700 (the latter of which has inherent DVNR processing) shows that the DVD image is somewhere in the middle. So despite having the noise and NTSC issues of video, on a good player (with separate comb filtering optional) I actually think the LD is PREFERABLE to the SE. Thus I was able to tell more accurately that the BD is INDEED the SE master after all.
Thus the BD is the best compromise for new fans and BD lovers, because you get the original look of the old transfers without the analog headaches of NTSC formatting. It also has the correct contrast/color balance of the LD unlike the SE DVD. Unfortunately there is the issue of it being far older in transfer date so you have to live with the DNR but at least the full composition is restored.
Until we see evidence of the new 4K master, the result is a draw between the BD and Lowry, with each having their own deficiencies. The LD is one of the best ever produced IMO.
Audio: There are three distinct mixes. DD 5.1 ac-3 on the LD and SE with the heavier hot mastered LFE channel, the 2.0 matrixed PCM downmix, and a remixed cleaned up 5.1 track found on all subsequent copies in DD 5.1 384 kbp/s, DTS @ 755, and DTS-HDMA on the BD.
The audio overall is quite good on all three. The remix merely cleaned things up and did not change anything from what I can tell. The highs come across a touch cleaner and clarity is better but at the cost of a slight bit of the old track’s impact. It was claimed the LFE was mastered about 10 db too high for LD and DVD-corrected only on the DTS LD. I’ve considered if that was the source of the new audio, but without the DTS LD I can’t know for sure. I don’t think it is however, as they did correct the inherent distortion in the title song-which is on all singe/soundtrack releases I know of and the older mixes. The hotter LFE isn’t bad at all, just be ready for it. The PCM 2.0 downmix is quite exceptional for downmixing and at times sounds near identical to the 5.1 counterpart-excepting that is the mono matrix surround instead of the discrete stereo surround. It does sound a tad more like the older films this way though.
The BD presents in 24/48 to boot.
Slight nod to the hot LFE old 5.1 and 2.0. Otherwise a draw.
So there you have it. When I get to try out the theatrical DTS, I’ll certainly add that in too.
I think I may have just watched the entire opening about 60 times. 😉