Is DTS important?

[Phil M]

Welcome to the forum, and yes entering with a bang.

The first few concert DVD's I listened to sounded more dynamic with DTS, and as a consequence I just instinctively choose DTS over DD if the disc allows the option. I never read any posts, or read papers, comparing the two formats at the time so it was purely based on my subjective listening. I've never considered doing an AB since this time, and I've probably emerged into a DTS supporter. Like similar forum members part of the motivation is supporting the underdog, but its encouraging to see that an industry professional supports DTS also for the right technical and business reasons.

[russ.will]

Sir Terrence wrote:

How is that for my first post!

Ample and informative.

Russell

[Tommy]

khellandros66 wrote:

There are times when DTS is too much. Great examples are WOTW and Haunting. Both of these movies are capable of harming your equipment, especially if you are un-aware of its capabilities.

~Bob

Can you elobarate on that, "harming your equipment"?

[Sonnie]

They will both test your sub capabilities... if your subs are not up to par it is very possible you could damage them.

[Exocer]

From my first hand experiences, switching between DD and DTS will yield some differences. Most notably for WOTW, where the DTS track is way more involving in the areas of LFE as well as information being sent to the surrounds. Would I be disappointed without DTS? Probably not... DTS wont make or break a system. By my nature I favor situations where there are options, so yeah it is cool IMO to have DTS as an alternative but I definitely wouldn't lose any sleep over not having DTS. There are many DD encoded movies with awesome soundtracks...Like The Incredibles for 1. my 02.

[Steve Williamson]

Personally I prefer DTS, however I have now resorted to using my Xbox360 as my DVD player and although I use the Pioneer 814 mentioned before, the Xbox will not pass the DTS encoding to the receiver I will probably reinstate my Pioneer DVD player for the time being and just use the XB for TV distribution.

[caser85]

I always consider DTS to be a plus when buying DVDs. I would definitely want my DVD player to process DTS and would get a new one if it didn't.

[russ.will]

Sir Terrence wrote:

How is that for my first post!

Comprehensive!

So to recap, you prefer DTS too?

I obviously don't have your proffessional knowledge on the subject, so it tends to boil down to such criteria as, which format renders mumbling/whispering better/which format makes my windows rattle more. DTS for me all the way. Or to put it another way, now, when I drop a new disc in the tray, I select the DTS soundtrack automatically.

It is perhaps remiss on my part, but having done the subjective comparisons a few times some while ago, I always came to the same conclusion. Now, I prefer to watch a new film as soon as I get it and rightly or wrongly, go with what I know and select DTS.

While you're about it. What discs do contain the full bitrate sound tracks and with the same master possibly? Any of the Superbit stuff for example? I buy them for their picture quality (MIB II ) but the soundtracks have always impressed.


Russell

[MACCA350]

This may be of interest, http://www.spannerworks.net/reference/10_1a.asp

From the article:

Any attempt to compare the domestic versions of Dolby Digital and DTS with one another is extremely difficult due to one major technical difference. The domestic version of Dolby Digital incorporates a feature, called 'dialog normalization', designed to maintain a consistent centre-channel volume from all Dolby Digital sources. The dialog normalization system is designed to ensure that the average centre-channel volume is always between -25 and -31dBFS (decibels below digital full-scale), regardless of source. As a result, if dialogue is recorded at a higher volume, the Dolby Digital decoder automatically attenuates the volume of all channels to the level at which the centre-channel outputs dialogue at the set 'dialnorm' level (usually -31dBFS for Dolby Digital on DVD). Most movies' centre-channels are recorded at -27dBFS, which results in an overall lowering of 4dB in all channels. Movies can be recorded at anything from -23dBFS (e.g. 'Wild Things') to -31dBFS (e.g. 'Air Force One', non-SuperBit and 'Twister: SE'), resulting in nominal overall volume attenuation of up to 8dB ('Wild Things') or more. All channels maintain their correct relative balance, so no detrimental sonic effects can be attributed to the dialnorm process. But, because the result can be up to an 8dB reduction in volume, there is no easy way to compare DTS and Dolby Digital versions of a film's soundtrack. The overall volume of the DTS version may be 8dB or more higher than the Dolby Digital soundtrack, making direct comparisons nearly impossible. As dialnorm is constantly variable in 1dB increments, the exact difference in overall volume between Dolby Digital and DTS soundtracks often varies from film to film.

Any argument for or against a particular system must be based on competing coding schemas. DTS's supporters claim that it is superior to Dolby's system because it uses a higher bitrate and less aggressive compression scheme. These two facts are essentially irrelevant in determining whether DTS is 'better' than Dolby Digital: neither automatically equates to higher sound quality. The quality of both systems stands or falls on the effectiveness of their respective compression and perceptual coding systems. Both systems use extremely effective coding systems. As both systems are based on completely different technologies, and rely on human perception, there is no technical or scientific means to determine which is 'better'. An apt analogy is that of the Porsche and the Corvette: the Corvette has a powerful V8, while the Porsche has a smaller engine but is turbo-charged. Both cars use very different power sources, yet both are extremely effective at performing their desired functions. Undoubtedly there will be those who argue for one system over another, but any such argument must be based on individual preference rather than scientific theory. There are no technically valid grounds for believing either audio system is inherently better sounding than the other.

cheers

[J_Palmer_Cass]

MACCA350 wrote:

This may be of interest, http://www.spannerworks.net/reference/10_1a.asp

From the article:


Quote:

Any attempt to compare the domestic versions of Dolby Digital and DTS with one another is extremely difficult due to one major technical difference. The domestic version of Dolby Digital incorporates a feature, called 'dialog normalization', designed to maintain a consistent centre-channel volume from all Dolby Digital sources. The dialog normalization system is designed to ensure that the average centre-channel volume is always between -25 and -31dBFS (decibels below digital full-scale), regardless of source. As a result, if dialogue is recorded at a higher volume, the Dolby Digital decoder automatically attenuates the volume of all channels to the level at which the centre-channel outputs dialogue at the set 'dialnorm' level (usually -31dBFS for Dolby Digital on DVD). Most movies' centre-channels are recorded at -27dBFS, which results in an overall lowering of 4dB in all channels. Movies can be recorded at anything from -23dBFS (e.g. 'Wild Things') to -31dBFS (e.g. 'Air Force One', non-SuperBit and 'Twister: SE'), resulting in nominal overall volume attenuation of up to 8dB ('Wild Things') or more. All channels maintain their correct relative balance, so no detrimental sonic effects can be attributed to the dialnorm process. But, because the result can be up to an 8dB reduction in volume, there is no easy way to compare DTS and Dolby Digital versions of a film's soundtrack. The overall volume of the DTS version may be 8dB or more higher than the Dolby Digital soundtrack, making direct comparisons nearly impossible. As dialnorm is constantly variable in 1dB increments, the exact difference in overall volume between Dolby Digital and DTS soundtracks often varies from film to film.



cheers

War of the Worlds DD uses a DIALNORM value of -23, so it plays back at 8 dB (-31 - (-23) = -8) lower than the DTS version. So, you have to lower the DTS version by 8 dB to make a comparison of the two versions.

I can hardly tell the difference between the two versions once I reset the MV control to compensate for DIALNORM.

My receiver reads out the DD DIALNORM value, so the above numbers are correct!

[eddthompson]

i personaly think its more down to the mix, gladiator is a good one for this i seem to recall, the scenes in the caravan the backround noise is definately more pronounced (this is going from memory)

is for being more dynamic etc, never realy noticed, though it has to be said, my jurasic park dts laser disc is still one of my reference sound discs, its superb.



edd

[MACCA350]

J_Palmer_Cass wrote:

War of the Worlds DD uses a DIALNORM value of -23, so it plays back at 8 dB (-31 - (-23) = -8) lower than the DTS version. So, you have to lower the DTS version by 8 dB to make a comparison of the two versions.

I can hardly tell the difference between the two versions once I reset the MV control to compensate for DIALNORM.

My receiver reads out the DD DIALNORM value, so the above numbers are correct!

Anyone who has the Denon 3805 can press the 'ON SCREEN' button on the remote to see the DIALNORM offset value. They also need to make sure the Dynamic Range Compression feature for DD tracks is not engaged.

I found that even after compensating for the Dialog Norm offset the DTS track's bass was still higher SPL then the DD version, I had to turn the receivers sub vol down by a further 7db just to get bass about the same. This proved, to me that DTS plays with the sound a bit, they must think people prefer a hotter bass line then what the mixer intended.

cheers

[Exocer]

With my recent experiences regarding the loss of dynamics due to DD stereo downmixing, i'll have to change my previous opinion on this issue. DTS for people like me who are using less than 5.1 speakers is our only ticket to reaching the highest level of dynamics possible...Overall, its better to have more options to choose from, especially when your systen isn't equipped to take advantage of true DD 5.1.

[rolyasm]

All I can say is DTS rocks. The new formats are coming out, HD DVD and Blue Ray, and we will be getting almost 20 times the bitrate transfer rates. DTS Master should sound exactly the way the studio produced it. No loss. MMM. All we need now is the receives/pres to handle the signal.
Roly

[MACCA350]

rolyasm wrote:

All I can say is DTS rocks. The new formats are coming out, HD DVD and Blue Ray, and we will be getting almost 20 times the bitrate transfer rates. DTS Master should sound exactly the way the studio produced it. No loss. MMM. All we need now is the receives/pres to handle the signal.
Roly

HD-DVD owners have been using Dolby TrueHD for a while, which is a lossless format and bit for bit identical to the studio masters and uses less space then DTS Master I believe.

cheers

[khellandros66]

DTS is a great thing, because it presented Dolby with a problem.. To compete Dolby needed something that at the time was superior to Pro Logic and Dolby Surround. DTS started the snowball that is the avalanche that now is 6.1/7.1 Bit for Bit to the original recordings.

~Bob

[toecheese]

Are there actual 6.1/7.1 sources? When wiring my HT, I set it up for 7.1, but I thought everything was simulated?

[Sonnie]

Someone else mentioned in another thread that Star Wars and LOTR both had rear information. I do not know if it's true and/or if it's one or two channels. I'm thinking there are some out there and these are a couple of them, but again, can't guarantee it. Maybe someone else can.

[JCD]

Gladiator had a DTS 6.1 ES audio track.

Also found this aritcle one DTS 6.1 ES and Dolby EX.

JCD

[bobgpsr]

toecheese wrote:

Are there actual 6.1/7.1 sources? When wiring my HT, I set it up for 7.1, but I thought everything was simulated?

The EX & ES 6.1 tracks can at a minimum matrix the back channel audio info into the side surround channels. This matrixed info can be recovered and set to the back surrounds using DD PLIIx or the dts/neo 6.1 equiv. Not "simulated".

Bob

[pmenasce]

Sorry to get in late on this thread but here's my two cents anyways....

I've always preferred DTS, from my original HTIB setup to my current separates system. It just seems to sound richer and better given the shortcomings of my room (two open archways, wife opposed to acoustic panels etc...)

Later ...