TND
LD WS vs SE vs UE vs BD
PQ: Again like GE, the LD is overall more pleasing ot the eye than the early DVD counterpart. While the DVD is overall sharper and lacks the NTSC inherent problems of the LD format, the LD I think provides the better image again, and here you find yourself marveling at how much they packed onto a LD. This is even with all the wizard circuitry inside my XBR960 having its way. The LD also has the opening caption that is player generated in the SE.
The UE fixes any color and flashtone issues I had with the slightly contrasty at times SE, and beats the LD in every department as well. The filmic look becomes more pronounced here, with no appearance of video or DVD nasties like EE. Compression is also far better but not perfect.
The BD is another leap forward, though obviously the UE master in 1080p. Bitrate more than 6 times the UE means everything is greater.
Winner: BD, but the LD is SHOCKINGLY good.
AQ: Two mixes only from what I can tell, the 5.1 and the 2.0 mixdown for LD. All the 5.1 tracks appear the same, LD and SE seem identical but I might nod to the LD. This may be due to better decoding in my separate ac3 rf-demodulators than onboard stuff. Both are 384 kbp/s. The UE has a 384 kbp/s DD and 755 kbp/s DTS track. They also appear the same but that the level of loudness may have been raised. Both tracks seem louder and are louder than the foreign dubs on disc. The DTS is the usual several dbs louder.
The BD DTS-hdma 5.1 is the same mix but it seems to lack the loudness I felt in the UE mixes. So in summation any version is good, but the nod goes to the BD.
The 2.0 is very nice and more fitting with the older films. Very robust with a nice low end. It lacks the discrete pans sometimes and the extreme aggressive high end of the 5.1 mix but it is a very nice alternate and should be preserved I think.
The isolated score track is at a slightly higher bitrate on the BD too.
Verdict: BD and LD
Overall, BD wins. The LD is gorgeous, The UE is great, and the SE is problematic but serviceable.