DTS-HD bad, poor, junk, clipped sound thread

[Quiet_Hollow]

DTS...Quit throwing the game! It sounds awful!

Blu-Ray audio codecs and shoddy mixing / mastering...good grief!

What's the point of high resolution digital audio capability if you're going to squash the daylights out the mix and clip the rest? I mean, it's not like we can't obviously hear what's going on from our end.

There's a trend here, and it isn't good. CD and DVD have
already suffered the same fate.[N]

Other forums have similar threads about
suspiciously crap-tastic HT sound, we need one here.

So sound off. List your experiences or findings here...let's lay it out.

If you watched a DTS-HD encoded movie where that was the only audio sound-track option, and your ears felt violated, post about it.

[garyrc]

IMO, most newer movies (those originally made after about 2000) have pretty good sound on Blu-ray, whether it's DTS-HD or not, but Blu-ray sound doesn't warrant the raves about great sound it is getting. The Blu-ray of Lord of the Rings - Fellowship of the Ring in DTS-HD has awesome sound, but it was just about as good on the DVD.

I do agree with Cask that the movie people usually don't seem to be nearly as allergic to dynamic range as the CD people are (at least for movies made since about 2000).

My (big) problem is the shoddy audio treatment of film classics from the late 1950s through about 2000 when they are transferred to either Blu-ray or DVD.
The restorers (if any) and the disk producers often seem to have
lavished all of their attention on the visual image, which is usually superb (on BD) but is mated with sound much worse than I heard in these films in San Francisco theaters, and much worse sound than is in BDs/DVDs of newer films. Many of these older soundtracks had great, warm, rich magnetic soundtracks in multi-channel stereo, usually 4 channel in 35mm and 6 channel in 70mm. Here are just a few pet peeves:

• The DTS-HD sound in the Lawrence of Arabia BD is much too bright. The reviewer in the current Home Theater agrees (although he didn't say "much"). There are magnificent drums that can't be reproduced loudly enough, because other instruments are too bright ... either that, or the dynamic range has been constricted, which would turn down the drum peaks.
• ET doesn't have enough bass and lower midrange punch (during the bicycle chase). I may be able to fix this with EQ, but I shouldn't have to.
• Ben-Hur may have worse sound on BD (DTS-HD) than on the second try on DVD -- I haven't run an A-B test yet, but that's my impression. The famous score does not reveal its textures as clearly as I remember them on DVD, and certainly not as clearly as in the 70 mm (not the 4K theatrical digital) revival. Also
  -- trying to avoid a spoiler here -- something happens about 1/3 of the
  way through the film, long before the chariot race -- that is
  terrifically and frighteningly loud in the theatrical presentations, that has had its dynamic range compressed in the BD. It sounds pinched.
• 2001: A Space Odyssey has wonderful, astounding PQ, but the sound is slightly distorted in Zarathustra on the BD.
  
• The opening music in North by Northwest has far better audio on the CD of the soundtrack than it does on the BD (Dolby true HD).

[Chris A]

My (big) problem is the shoddy audio treatment of film classics from the late 1950s through about 2000 when they are transferred to either Blu-ray or DVD. The restorers (if any) and the disk producers often seem to have lavished all of their attention on the visual image, which is usually superb (on BD) but is mated with sound much worse than I heard in these films San Francisco theaters, and much worse sound than is in BDs/DVDs of newer films. Many of these older soundtracks had great, warm, rich magnetic soundtracks in multi-channel stereo, usually 4 channel in 35mm and 6 channel in 70mm.

Wow Gary - you have a very good memory indeed. My recollections of these movie classics in their rerun '60s and 70s theaters are dim, to say the least, and I'm pretty sure that these theaters weren't THX-certifiable theaters, etc. So I'm pretty sure that I've never heard any of these great films in their original acoustic reference conditions, even though I do own all of them in more than one video/audio format for HT.

Some observations related to the discussion at hand:

1) One of the biggest differences is the acoustic space: large auditoriums, especially older movie theaters with stage-like acoustics, really can't be matched in a HT, even if you were to turn you living room into an anechoic chamber and use a 7.1 or 9.1 system to play back the films on their original film projectors and use the original sound systems. Time constants on sound reflections are much more thrilling in real theaters. You already know this, however.

2) Film degradation is real and this overall degradation also significantly spills over onto audio track degradation, unfortunately. You already know this, too.

3) I'm sure that there are a lot of mastering/mixing engineers from audio that are looking for work - and I'm sure that the standard practices used in Loudness War CDs are also being applied by these same individuals to the HT mastering processes. I can't say anything nice on this subject, other than perhaps these people might find time for retirement or retraining into other professions. But alas, we have little control over this other than not buying their work products (DVDs and BDs). I believe this factor is the strongest factor in the effects that you mention above, but are followed closely by the two factors above in terms of effect on audio track degradation. I'm sure that these folks believe that they are adding value by degrading the sound tracks in certain portions of the film sequences using DR compression techniques and other digital techniques. They're wrong, however, since they cannot truly enhance anything but rather degrade it.

4) One factor that you mentioned was that newer films sound better. There can be at least four reasons for this:

a) Degradation of the older films, as above.

Increases in fidelity of the sound tracks due to use of digital techniques that effectively introduce no noise or other signal degradation in the sound handling, mixing, and mastering processes,

overseen by the film director(s)

.

c) Big films nowadays can command the hiring of the best people, while the remastering of old films, well, probably not.

d) Maybe you don't have a pre-existing aural memories of the audio experience in theaters, since if you're like me, I don't go to theaters very often.

You get my drift.

While I'm not saying much above in reality, I'm actually thinking out loud on what might be happening: I find that this type of thinking actually helps me a great deal to understand why these type of situations occur.

Note that I really am not impressed by the current Loudness War culture of a whole bunch of "audio professionals" today. I actually wish these people with their culture would collectively retire en masse to be replaced by new, young people with clean slates who have a bit of an audiophile "first, do no harm" attitude and real ears that haven't been blasted away by years of ear bud use. [] I'm not holding my breath, however.

Chris [~][8]

[troy2003]

I have had minimal opportunities to put my setup through its paces at or near reference since it has all been set up. Now there are two movies that most recently come to mind. First being Django: Unchained -- which was breifly spoke about in the latest blu ray thread. It seemed that in this film Tarantino reached for the modern Western style audio track and in my opinion it was a rude interruption at certain scenes throughout the film; however, the film was incredibly well written and directed the audio was simply a bit of a let down. On the side Garyrc spoke on which is brightness one other film comes to mind. Thor -- at points throughout the film there was incredibly deep and detailed sound but at times too detailed. I found myself at times cringing throughout the film due to spikes in the audio that just seemed a bit over the top but for a film such as Thor i guess you must go into viewing it expecting this. I am by no means well versed in the many aspects and "artistic" uses of dialogue and soundtracks in todays films but I am however an enthusiast that has the equipment to and misfortune of sometimes noticing flaws in otherwise perfect films.

[Chris A]

DTS...Quit throwing the game! It sounds awful!

I have a DVD of Diana Krall from the mid 2000s that has both a DTS track and a Dolby 5.1 track. It's pretty clear to me what DTS is doing, however: I find that the DTS track sometimes sounds more punchy than the Dolby track, and this probably entices people to use it. I use the Dolby surround tracks for music DVDs since it sounds much more natural to me.

Now, the story gets a bit more complicated with DTS-HD - I think that Dolby TrueHD sound a bit more alike, and maybe a bit less "Loud", but I'm not sure what has happened: either DTS HD throttled back a bit on their Loudness, Dolby TrueHD punched up the Loudness, the recording, mixing, and mastering engineers weighed in and degraded the sound on their own ( a most-likely factor), or combinations of the three. I typically listen to the default surround track on most soundtracks, which seems to be going toward DTS-HD.

BDs typically use DTS-HD nowadays, including some music-only BDs that I own. I don't detect compression being used in these particular soundtracks, in fact, I don't detect much of any sound editing on these. These sound spectacular on music that has, to date, been very difficult to hear detail due to orchestration by the composers. The multi-channel format really clears up the listening experience, sort of like putting prescription lenses on after seeing poorly for a long period of time. One disc in particular, Prokofiev's Symphony #5 by the Sao Paulo Symphony (Marin Alsop, Dir.), presents this composition in a way which allows the listener to actually hear buried instrumental lines not been able to be made out clearly before.

However, I've noticed a definite trend in cinema toward turning comic books into full feature films: I cannot long endure the soundtracks and the visual extravaganza: it's pretty discouraging to think that these type of movies currently make so much money since their soundtracks are pretty far from what I would call "hi-fi" and the images are far from something natural or imitative of life. I typically feel numb after sitting through one.

Chris

[Heritage_Head]

I dont really watch any older movies on blu ray (rocky and star wars is probably the oldest) but i have watched easily 1000 blu rays and they always sound good imo. Now some are no where close to others because it either was not in the budget or was not a priority. To date i have never heard a dvd that sounded better than its blu ray. If you look at rocky vs star wars as one example you cant blame dts-hd for rocky not having the sound star wars does. Im not saying its perfect but if its crap it was crap to begin with most likely.

[Heritage_Head]

I have had minimal opportunities to put my setup through its paces at or near reference since it has all been set up. Now there are two movies that most recently come to mind. First being Django: Unchained -- which was breifly spoke about in the latest blu ray thread. It seemed that in this film Tarantino reached for the modern Western style audio track and in my opinion it was a rude interruption at certain scenes throughout the film; however, the film was incredibly well written and directed the audio was simply a bit of a let down. On the side Garyrc spoke on which is brightness one other film comes to mind. Thor -- at points throughout the film there was incredibly deep and detailed sound but at times too detailed. I found myself at times cringing throughout the film due to spikes in the audio that just seemed a bit over the top but for a film such as Thor i guess you must go into viewing it expecting this. I am by no means well versed in the many aspects and "artistic" uses of dialogue and soundtracks in todays films but I am however an enthusiast that has the equipment to and misfortune of sometimes noticing flaws in otherwise perfect films.

I thought Django was amazing.

[Quiet_Hollow]

I thought Django was amazing.

The DTS-HD audio track?

[garyrc]

One of the biggest differences is the acoustic space ... Time constants on sound reflections are much more thrilling in real theaters.

I sometimes very sparingly use a Lexicon ambience proccessor for this very reason. If the film puts music through the surround channels, I may use it there. If all of the dialog comes through the center, I may use it on RF & LF.

You make good points.

[Sancho Panza]

OK, so I've not heard any bad dts-HD tracks, only one I own mentioned as bad is Ben Hur

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1385/benhur.html#Section4 review gives audio 5 stars, as do I

[Heritage_Head]

I thought Django was amazing.

The DTS-HD audio track?

Yes i thought it sounded really good. We have to keep what it is in mind and not try and compare every blu ray to the best ones we have ever heard (like transformers for example). Some movies I'm sure they don't spend much time during the transfers like they do on others. A really old James bond movie will never sound anything like transformers. And i think its hard to not have that expectation after we get spoiled on something reference grade.

[Vital]

DTS...Quit throwing the game! It sounds awful!

Blu-Ray audio codecs and shoddy mixing / mastering...good grief!

What's the point of high resolution digital audio capability if you're going to squash the daylights out the mix and clip the rest? I mean, it's not like we can't obviously hear what's going on from our end.

There's a trend here, and it isn't good. CD and DVD have already suffered the same fate.

Other forums have similar threads about suspiciously crap-tastic HT sound, we need one here.

So sound off. List your experiences or findings here...let's lay it out.

If you watched a DTS-HD encoded movie where that was the only audio sound-track option, and your ears felt violated, post about it.

I thought the whole point of the new Blu-ray codecs was lossless audio. You shouldn't be hearing anything being compressed unless you're not selecting the DolbyHD, DTS-HD MA or PCM track before the movie starts. These codecs should sound just like the studio master.

[Heritage_Head]

Quiet_Hollow what movies have you heard that you didn't like?

[garyrc]

OK, so I've not heard any bad dts-HD tracks, only one I own mentioned as bad is Ben Hur

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1385/benhur.html#Section4 review gives audio 5 stars, as do I

Compaerd to the original, and perhaps to the DVD, it would be about 4 stars, IMO. The dynamics are especially lacking compared to the 70 mm.

[Quiet_Hollow]

Quiet_Hollow what movies have you heard that you didn't like?

Top Gun, TRON Legacy for example.

Both have DTS-HD and Dolby tracks where you can A/B the two on the fly.

As far as anything else noteworthy, most of my small collection is Dolby True HD. What I get through NetFlix is where I run into a lot of DTS-HD, as of late.

When you start with DTS-HD, start at -6 dB REF. Then switch to Dolby and feed in 6 dB back up to -0 dB REF. Listen in particular to what's going on in the center channel and what the subwoofer is doing.

The DTS-HD tracks are louder, usually by 6 dB or so. Listen for harshness in the center channel and a bloated sounding subwoofer.

I definitely agree with you guys that there's going to be variance between titles...but with Dolby allegedly being phased out of Blu-Ray, we're going to be stuck exclusively with DTS soon, which would not be a problem so long as DTS would remain faithful to the studio.

However...

What conclusions are we supposed to draw when viewing the same title with such a remarkable performance contrast simply between the codecs?

IMO at this point in the game and according to each party's claims, there should be no difference between the two, but yet there it is. [^o)]

[Vital]

IMO at this point in the game and according to each party's claims, there should be no difference between the two, but yet there it is

There is a difference between DTS-HD and DTS-HD MA, the DTS-HD is lossy. The DTS-HD MA is what you want which is lossless and should sound like the studio master and be comparable to the Dolby True HD.

[garyrc]

I thought the whole point of the new Blu-ray codecs was lossless audio. You shouldn't be hearing anything being compressed unless you're not selecting the DolbyHD, DTS-HD MA or PCM track before the movie starts. These codecs should sound just like the studio master.

You can still get dynamic range compression with a lossless format it the people who put the movie on disk put the signal through either a limiter or a dynamic range compressor in order to save the cheap speakers that are built into standard flatscreens, or even inexpensive HT audio systems. [] Another reason they may do this is they may have the mistaken notion that the type of person who would buy old movies would not want full dynamics in their home. A third bad reason some BDs of classic movies often have limited dynamics (compared to the original multichannel magnetic tracks) is that the disk people go back to the original sound elements ( a good idea if the correct follow through happens) but fail to painstakenly restore the changes in SPL that the original filmmakers added in the mixdown. These dynamics were sometimes added by volume riding in the mix because it was too risky let an orchestra of 80 something highly paid players (Ben-Hur) or 114 pieces (Around the World in 80 Days -- 1956 Todd-AO version) put in the intended dynamic contrasts in the original music recording, due to the expence of re-takes, given maybe 60 dB dynamic range avaible in mag. Later, in the mix, they would establish the maximum loudness in their most dramatic musical sequence, set that just under the max tolerable distortion level -- by test, and repeated tries -- and mix everything else softer. Yes, there was some mag hiss in the soft parts, but the best theater speakers then would start to roll off at about 10 or 11K Hz, thus would hide a bit of the hiss. New soundtracks are recorded with the intended dynamics in the original session because digital has such wide dynamic range. Plus, as Cask said, the original filmmakers are sometimes at the mix, being still alive, which is a considerable advantage.

The moment I mentioned 1/3 of the way through Ben-Hur is a perfect example of DR compression, to say nothing of the ending. And DTS-HD Master Audio may give something identical to the version they have in the studio, but if the studio version is a doctored up, DR compressed "master," that's what we would get when we play it.

[Deang]

There is no compression with DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD. If you don't like the way it sounds you have to blame the mix (there is no shortage of half deaf sound engineers). With old movies what I detect is laziness or an unwillingness by someone to go the extra mile to clean things up. Things EQ'd to sound correct from behind the screen need to be fixed, and if they aren't, it can sound pretty brutal -- I especially notice this with transfers of older films. There are a myriad of factors that contribute to why a recording sounds the way it does. It's easy to suspect or blame compression when our ears are assaulted -- see what they've done to us.

[garyrc]

There is no compression with DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD. If you don't like the way it sounds you have to blame the mix (there is no shortage of half deaf sound engineers). With old movies what I detect is laziness or an unwillingness by someone to go the extra mile to clean things up. Things EQ'd to sound correct from behind the screen need to be fixed, and if they aren't, it can sound pretty brutal -- I especially notice this with transfers of older films. There are a myriad of factors that contribute to why a recording sounds the way it does. It's easy to suspect or blame compression when our ears are assaulted -- see what they've done to us.

I do indeed blame the mix, the mix for disk, not the mix for the original film. Sometimes, when playing movies at home, we do not hear the mix for the final film, because the disk people bypass it, by going back to the original sound elements which are then re-mixed for disks, sometimes with the laziness or unwillingness you mention, or sometimes with just plain ignorance of what the original film mix sounded like. I'm talking about movies that were made with magnetic soundtracks only. Modern films which are recorded in digital have little or no problem with dynamic range, unless it's deliberate and stupid. Why would they be ignorant of what the old filmmakers' original magnetic mix sounded like? Perhaps they didn't play it. In a few instances, they may painstakingly compare the best available original film mix to what they are doing, and restore the volume riding and bass EQ manipulations the filmmakers made. For 70 mm especially, the 6 channel (usually 5 behind the screen for the music) original mixes were very dynamic. When preparing the mixes for 35 mm reduction prints with 4 channels ( 3 behind the screen), they sometimes toned down the dynamics -- either that, or almost every 35 mm equipped theater in which I've heard a general release mag print of a film I earlier heard in 70 mm had a pitiful sound system, or a wimpy loudness hating projectionist or manager. And there were preset, mandated SPL levels for many 70 mm roadshows, with instructions to the projectionists on how much to compensate for different audience sizes. I'm takling about magnetic multichannel prints only. We won't even talk about 35 mm optical.

Concerning other aspects of quality, there is no reason why these tracks shouldn't sound as good, or better (more channels) as the best studio recordings of the'50s, '60s and '70s. The magnetic film (often a fully coated strip of 35 mm film, with oxide a bit less than an inch wide) traveled at about the speed of studio recorders and the 6 magnetic stripes on the 70 mm release prints traveled at 22 ips (as I remember). For at least one film, they used "double system" in the booth with the sound on its own, synced, 35mm magnetic film. The sound system used by most 70 mm films before Dolby was designed by Ampex for Todd-AO.

In the case of Ben-Hur, if you set the dialog very carefully to a natural level, using several samples from several parts of the film, the overture is way too soft, and the bass isn't nearly strong enough. In the two 70 mm theaters I saw the film in repeatedly, the first notes of the overture were loud enough to make people jump. The same thing happened with the first note of Star Wars. In the original Alien, when the thing I won't mention happens, the sound was amazingly loud, loud enough to make nearly everyone jump, and to motivate my wife to sink her fingernails into my arm. In the DVD, this moment is pitifully soft. I haven't heard the BD, but I seriously doubt they have fixed it.