dts-HD MA vs.True-HD volume level decoded to LPCM? - Page 3 - Home Theater Forum and Systems - HomeTheaterShack.com

Thread Tools
post #21 of 25 Old 01-19-11, 09:00 AM
Magyar's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: CA. Vine country
Posts: 39
Re: dts-HD MA vs.True-HD volume level decoded to LPCM?

Drudge wrote: View Post

Does the lowering of the volume -4dB for dts tracks(if it doesn't have dialog norm) vs. DD with dialog norm still apply when playing back all dts encoded movies including ones on Blu-ray to have and equal dialog reference level?I just want to make sure that that is still a recommended practice.
If the decoding happens in a THX certified receiver or Pre amp this happens automatically, however if you use the analog MCH inputs, then you would have make that correction via the MV. Quiet frankly though unless you watch all movies at calibrated reference levels, I wouldn't worry about those differences, and adjust the MV for each movie for comfort level regardless where the MV is reside at that point.
Magyar is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #22 of 25 Old 01-19-11, 12:31 PM
Senior Shackster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 365
Re: dts-HD MA vs.True-HD volume level decoded to LPCM?

Magyar wrote: View Post
Well DD was used quiet a bit on DVD-A and or Dual Discs, having said that Dolby never advocated the the use of DD for music only purposes, nor it claimed any transparency in that regard, unlike DTS which made that claim each time it revised it's codec, so I guess legacy DTS was transparent then DTS HD MA is even more as such.
DTS claims on Legacy DTS is that it is "perceptively" transparent. In other words, in a DBT you could not tell the master from the encode. They were very successful in proving this, and went out of their way to do so. They went out of their way to prove that point by conducting DBT of their codec, and the master. The never made the claim of total transparency, and that point should be made clear.

DD was used as a backwards compatible codec, not the primary codec like DTS was. There is a difference.

There is also the issue of efficiency, and the fact that DTS's FR isn't flat at 754kbps unlike DD at 448kbps is.
DD relies VERY heavily on global bit sharing, and has to channel join to get to 20khz(in other words, use all the available bits within the system), DTS is -3 at 19khz with no channel joining. Those of us who have access to audio masters, and both companies encoders/decoders know first hand that DTS encodes did less damage to the signal than DD does. Nobody would talk about it except audio professionals outside Hollywood, as Dolby is very politically powerful in Hollywood.

The mag masters used for encodes on both formats only had a frequency response to 16khz, so being flat to 15khz was not in reality a disadvantage at the time.

But the former is the reason why DD remained the studio's choice as default encode, not to mention DTS was late to deliver their version to be considered by the DVD forum.
While I cannot argue DD's efficiency, I would have gladly traded it for better fidelity

Actually Warner was pushing the process of codec testing to benefit Dolby. Nobody within the industry thought that Warner needed to go as fast as they did at that point in the process. So late is a matter of perspective.

The full bit rate version just wasn't viable for DVD, which why it's hardly ever used on DVD.
Universal thought it was viable, and apparently the DTS only discs sold very well.

Nevertheless DTS turned out to be a good marketing tool to promote certain releases, but all this is not relevant these days we have lossless on BR and it's not important who provides it.

Titan Reference 1080p 3D projector with 130" SI Black Diamond II screen, Oppo BDP-83SE, Oppo BDP-95, Cell based Grass Valley Pro HD A/V switcher and processor, Audyssey XT32 Pro equalization all main channels, Audyssey Sub Equalizer 7 Onkyo M-588 power amp ,7 Onkyo M-508 power amp,2 Onkyo M-504a power amps, 2 custom 4 way horn hybrid monitors,1 custom 2.5 way horn hybrid center monitor 8 custom 2 way horn hybid surrounds, 4 custom 15" servo H-PAS tuned subs

Member of AES/M.P.S.E/SMPTE

Last edited by Sir Terrence; 01-20-11 at 11:09 AM.
Sir Terrence is offline  
post #23 of 25 Old 06-14-11, 03:13 PM
New Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Milwaukie, OR
Posts: 3
Re: dts-HD MA vs.True-HD volume level decoded to LPCM?

This thread helps a lot, i too have a PS3 for BluRay and just picked up a new receiver and when connected via HDMI to the new receiver, and all possible codecs are selected in the sound setup for the PS3, it defaults to PCM. I really didnt know much about PCM until this happened, and I researched it. Up until I got the new receiver, i thought DD and DTS were the best routes , having bitstream sent to the receiver, not knowing any better. But sounds like since the PS3's processing is very good, and stuff like DTS-HD can be decoded by the PS3 and sent via PCM to the reciever and be close to lossless, I will stick with that setting. When I didnt see Dolby Digital or DTS lit up on my receiver, just PCM, when i was running movies and games on the PS3, i thought something was wrong or i needed to set the sound so PCM wouldnt be sent, not realizing PCM was the best way to go, and not realizing that my 5.1 surround tracks were still being decoded correctly, just by the PS3 and not the receiver as I was used to. Forums like this have really helped me catch up on theater tech, and Im glad to be here. Thanks for having me
DDSDTS is offline  
post #24 of 25 Old 06-14-11, 04:41 PM Thread Starter
Senior Shackster
Drudge's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 241
Re: dts-HD MA vs.True-HD volume level decoded to LPCM?

Welcome aboard,

With Blu-ray there is no real need for Dolby True-HD or dts-HD MA lossless compression and it would have been much better to have just used LPCM instead of adding too all the confusion,but that's marketing for you.
Drudge is offline  
post #25 of 25 Old 08-31-11, 06:21 PM
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: australia
Posts: 90
My System
Re: dts-HD MA vs.True-HD volume level decoded to LPCM?

JohnJSmith wrote: View Post
I don't know if they should be the same, but in my experience they are not.

I just got a PS3 the other day, and I didn't realize it defaulted to LPCM. When I put my first disc in, I immediately noticed the levels were low. Switching the PS3 to bitstream brought the levels back up with my previous BD player.

My old BD player (a $98 Wal-Mart special Magnavox) was similar. The LFE track was much louder with LPCM conversion than without.
Yea, I have to agree as my experience has been that I have my ps3 running through my avpa1hd processor and have been listening to movies running through PCM for the last year and only yesterday switched to bitstream and have noticed the difference in my main speakers being louder so to speak. But is it louder or is it just the way it is decoded through my avp for example. I am finding by switching to bitstream the avp does all of the mixing, so in essance the experience of the sound is different. It seems louder but is it? I am interested to hear others experiences and if anyone could explain this to me further I would be pleased to listen. I think due to what you explained with your wal mart special this may be a ps3 issue of the sound being low on PCM. I watched a movie last night and my avp and ps3 experience was definitely different than before and in my case I would say better.
grassy is offline  


decoded , dts-hd , lpcm? , vs.true-hd

Quick Reply

Register Now



Confirm Password
Email Address
Confirm Email Address
Random Question
Random Question #2

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address



Activation requires you reply to an email we will send you after you register... if you do not reply to this email, you will not be able to view certain areas of the forum or certain images... nor will you be able download software.


See our banned email list here: Banned Email List

We DO NOT respond to spamcop, boxtrapper and spamblocker emails... please add @hometheatershack DOT com to your whitelist prior to registering or you will get nowhere on your registration.

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML is not allowed!
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome