Kyler Cavers Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 Im really frustrated with DD and DTS, for example, when I watch "Eagles: Hell Freezes Over" I find that DD sounds better, the voices aren't quiet and crappy, there isn't too much bass, and the highs sound great too. What is it that DTS actually does? Even in movies, it makes the voices all quiet and I always find myself switching back to good ol DD to satisfy my ears, it just sounds more balanced as to DTS sounding extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyler Cavers Posted August 8, 2005 Author Share Posted August 8, 2005 wow, nobosy answer much? wheres the helpfullness everyone always blabs on about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodog Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 I think everyone is intimidated by the 'straight up, true, no bs answer' part of your request. I think if you'll allow for some convolution and bs -- then you'll get results. all best, Woo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 My version of the HFO's video has a DTS track and a PCM 2.0 track, not Dolby Digital. DTS (Digital Theater Systems) is a digital compression codec. The compression codecs (DTS and DD) get rid of more than 90% of the sound information to save space on a DVD. Neither one is superior to the other, but DTS is frequently mixed hotter and therfore has a better reputation. PCM means pulse code modulation just like a CD. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunburnwilly Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 I looked in the glossary of my proc. manual and it pretty much describes them as the same thing , just written a little bit differently . Hope that helps LOL . Maybe you should try the Dolby website after all they made them . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 DD and DTS are completely different formats and you can't exactly just switch between DD and DTS unless your source material supports both (which a very few select dvds do). It sounds to me like you're switching between DD and a matrixed DTS signal (which is essentially taking a stereo mix and converting it to every speaker instead of taking a discrete 5.1 mix and sending it around). Technically, DTS is the better format because it supports 6.1 discretely and runs at a higher bit rate for the audio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted August 8, 2005 Share Posted August 8, 2005 While DTS has 5.1 channels, matrixed 6.1 and discrete 6.1, Dolby also has a matrixed 6.1 called Surround EX. Personally, I cannot tell the difference between 6.1 discrete nad matrixed 6.1. The only way that I know the difference is to look at my processor's readout. The higher bit rate of DTS (754 kbps or 1508 kbps vs. 448 kbps for DD) does not audibly improve the sound quality. Blind listening tests that are level matched show no audible difference. DVDs are NOT mixed with equal sound levels however. DTS is frequently louder and therefore has the better reputation due to the "higher bit rate" placebo effect that is really just a hotter mix. I must admit I like the hotter mixes, if they are well done. Pirates of the Carribean has a poor DTS mix and a good DD mix. It all depends on the mix in each movie as to which is better. Some processors may do a better job on one than the other, but that is pure speculation on my part. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 The differences you hear are due to differences in the way the sound was mixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spkrdctr Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 You will always have to switch between the two for the various reasons mentioned in the other posts. You just listen to whichever you like the best. There is no "best" betweem DD and DTS. The no bull answer is that the recordings are all over the place from each mixing house. This is why you will hear us talking about an especially good mix on Cds/DVDs, and movies. See! You have learned something already by hanging around here........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJkizak Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 What MrMcGoo means is that 90% of the music is compressed, not lost. JJK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 What Malcom said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 ok, i don't pretend to be on expert on this subject, but why the heck would there be two seperate mixes? Doing audio for a filmscore is hard enough as it is...I could never imagine trying to do it all twice! I do know that DD and DTS involve different algorithms for converting the final mix into their industry standard formats...I can't imagine that they would greatly effect the balance (ie, I highly doubt they're using a crappy conversion alogorithm) I have also never heard before that DTS is louder...anyone got a tech note stating that? 0dB is always the loudest any digital format will go and I can't imagine a reciever making 0dB for different digital formats be a different volume...perhaps there is some reciever specific issue here and not so much a format issue. btw, I meant to say that DTS has a higher sampling rate (192kHz versus 96kHz), which limits the highest frequency possible...though I believe they both actually have the same bitrate (24 bit), which is what limits the dynamic range (thus they should be entirely the same volume). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 I have not ever heard a DTS dvd that I preferred over DD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 DrWho, " but why the heck would there be two seperate mixes?" There usually isn't. However early on the encoding was done by DTS themselves and they tended to 'play' with the mixes they were fed. Later their encoders also did the same thing by running surrounds hotter and such. " I have also never heard before that DTS is louder...anyone got a tech note stating that? 0dB is always the loudest any digital format will go and I can't imagine a reciever making 0dB for different digital formats be a different volume." That is true, however their are also volume offsets (I think it is called Dialog offset but would have to look it up again) encoded into DD that I don't think DTS uses. That can make the same mix between the two be louder on DTS. " I meant to say that DTS has a higher sampling rate (192kHz versus 96kHz), which limits the highest frequency possible.." That isn't true. Both regular DD and DTS sample at 48kHz. But talking about the highest frequency possible in a perceptual encoding system is sort of silly since one of the things a perceptual encoder does is throw out inaudible material. "...though I believe they both actually have the same bitrate (24 bit)" Nope, they are 20bit systems. Excepting DTS 96/24 which is barely used.... Here is an interesting comparison of DTS and DD against a *lossless* high resolution version of the identical mix... http://highfidelityreview.com/tech/germerica.asp Which one looks closer to the reference? Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herc Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Talk about impatient! Only let an hour go by before you complain about no answer? Chill!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 ---------------- On 8/9/2005 2:28:44 PM sfogg wrote: DrWho, " but why the heck would there be two seperate mixes?" There usually isn't. However early on the encoding was done by DTS themselves and they tended to 'play' with the mixes they were fed. Later their encoders also did the same thing by running surrounds hotter and such. " I have also never heard before that DTS is louder...anyone got a tech note stating that? 0dB is always the loudest any digital format will go and I can't imagine a reciever making 0dB for different digital formats be a different volume." That is true, however their are also volume offsets (I think it is called Dialog offset but would have to look it up again) encoded into DD that I don't think DTS uses. That can make the same mix between the two be louder on DTS. " I meant to say that DTS has a higher sampling rate (192kHz versus 96kHz), which limits the highest frequency possible.." That isn't true. Both regular DD and DTS sample at 48kHz. But talking about the highest frequency possible in a perceptual encoding system is sort of silly since one of the things a perceptual encoder does is throw out inaudible material. "...though I believe they both actually have the same bitrate (24 bit)" Nope, they are 20bit systems. Excepting DTS 96/24 which is barely used.... Here is an interesting comparison of DTS and DD against a *lossless* high resolution version of the identical mix... http://highfidelityreview.com/tech/germerica.asp Which one looks closer to the reference? Shawn ---------------- Wow, I had my numbers way off this time. I was thinking of the 96/24 DTS format, but did not realize that it wasn't the standard. I think the difference between the DD and the DTS on those graphs might be because they were only measuring the LFE track. It looks to me like the DTS has a steeper slope crossover on the LFE and then the mains are probably required to dig a bit deeper. If it's not this, then it's gotta be something similar because there's no way they're going to effectively introduce an EQ to every source material. That would be like a mastering studio automatically deciding to introduce a -3dB cut centered at 800Hz on every single track being mastered AFTER it has been dialed in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyler Cavers Posted August 9, 2005 Author Share Posted August 9, 2005 Well I appreciate all the input, and I apologize for I ment to say that the PCM sounds better to me then the dts mix of HFO, as with movies in dts all I really notice is louder deeper bass then if it was at the same volume as DD. I was just confused because I was reading some older posts of what movies/music to show off on your system and HFO (dts) was chosen so I had to ask some questions. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j-malotky Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 I agree with Malcome, it is probably the mix. I usually prefer DTS, but I do have a few DD soundtracks that sound better than the DTS track on the disk. I do not own the HFO disk so I can't comment on that mix. Also, I have a good friend who says he also prefers DD over DTS, in his case, I think it is his low cost decoder, for I own some of the same disks he has, and my DTS tracks are superior than the DD track. JM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Button Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 Well since you don't want any BS, you won't get any. Not that I had an answer. BS Button Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 "I think the difference between the DD and the DTS on those graphs might be because they were only measuring the LFE track. It looks to me like the DTS has a steeper slope crossover on the LFE and then the mains are probably required to dig a bit deeper. If it's not this, then it's gotta be something similar because there's no way they're going to effectively introduce an EQ to every source material. " Or the difference is simply that one lossy encoding worked better then the other. All three encoders were fed the same mix. And they were measured after decoding without a crossover on the LFE channels. Remember on MLP the sixth channel is a full range channel, it isn't an LFE at all. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.