There seems to be a lot of folks here who seem to be confused about the difference between DTS-MA and TrueHD. Especially now that PS3 supports DTS-MA.

The battle was intense in the lossy world of compression. But how about in the lossless world ?

Lets survey the crowd !!!!!!! :)

Not sure if one will be a clear "night and day" winner over the next but for me DTS-MA gets a slight margin of victory. I'm basing this conclusion off of my past experience with all types polled: TrueHD, Loseless PCM and (albeit limited experience) DTS-MA.

IMO, I feel that DTS provides a wider sound stage than it's cohorts - DTS to me seems to be a more dynamic, more encompassing audio structure, even it's older codecs seemed superior, at least to my ears. The subtle differences in the soundtrack of a movie are quite apparent when listening to a DTS encode movie.

Again just one guys opinion, but as I mentioned there's most likely no clear victor here. I do however think it's fantastic that the Sony is continually providing updates for us HT enthusiast's - makes the PS3 even more attractive as a standalone BR player!

I don't have any blu-ray's with all three codecs on 1 disc let alone the same mix. I'm not even sure if the movies with DD, TrueHD as well as LPCM are using the same mix. In the end now that the PS3 does DTS MA, I'm happy when they use at least one of them.

And, what precisely is the difference between TrueHD and dts-MA?

They are both compression codecs - ways to squeeze PCM data into a smaller package for storage. They cannot be played. They do not alter the data in any way. The material removed during encoding is restored bit-for-bit during decoding. If you start with the same studio master and use both codecs for compression they will produce the exact same decoded output at the end.

The only difference of which I am aware is the DTS feature called Multiple Speaker Playback Configurations, which will allow the user to select alternate speaker arrangements for 7.1 playback. That feature is not currently in use (although it is to blame for the 7.1 bug in the new PS3 decoder).

The TrueHD-dts-MA comparison is different than the lossy DD-DTS comparison, where each codec discards different data and the final outputs are not the same. TrueHD and dts-MA are both lossless codecs and must, by definition, produce identical outputs.

The TrueHD-dts-MA comparison is different than the lossy DD-DTS comparison, where each codec discards different data and the final outputs are not the same. TrueHD and dts-MA are both lossless codecs and must, by definition, produce identical outputs.

You let Garfield out of the bag :) Oh well, hopefully, people will vote before they read your post.

Here is a post from a guy who actually listened to both TrueHD and DTS-MA from the same Master:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13012374&highlight=Close+encounters+DTS-MA+TrueHD#post13012374

The disc ? Close Encounters of the Third Kind

M

I still honestly don't know the difference.

I guess we are assuming the tracks are the same bits, 16 bit compared to 16 bit or 24 bit compared to 24 bit?

As has been mentioned elsewhere, Spiderman 3 has a 16 bit pcm track and 24 bit True HD track.

I guess we are assuming the tracks are the same bits, 16 bit compared to 16 bit or 24 bit compared to 24 bit?

As has been mentioned elsewhere, Spiderman 3 has a 16 bit pcm track and 24 bit True HD track.

I believe the poll specifically states that all the tracks are 48/24.

Well ... it appears that a majority of the folks know their facts. We get an A+ on this subject !

I believe the poll specifically states that all the tracks are 48/24.

Oops, missed that part :o

5 people voted for Analog ... perhaps it makes sense, given that it IS the REAL Master and theoretically superior to its digital counterparts (no flames please!).

Also, very amusing is the fact that 18 people believe that DTS-MA is superior to TrueHD ... but NONE believe that TrueHD is superior to DTS-MA !!!

Given that, in the lossless world, there is virtually no difference between the two ... I can only attribute it to shrewd marketing by the DTS camp.

Folks who feel PCM is superior were clearly not tracking the march of the codecs from the lossy to the lossless world of audio.

Also, very amusing is the fact that 18 people believe that DTS-MA is superior to TrueHD ... but NONE believe that TrueHD is superior to DTS-MA !!!

Given that, in the lossless world, there is virtually no difference between the two ... I can only attribute it to shrewd marketing by the DTS camp.


I attribute that to the fact that people were waiting forever for the PS3 to be able to do DTS-MA, and people always want and desire what they can't have. Since they could never hear DTS-MA (until just recently), they considered it the "holy grail", and think it's somehow superior to another lossless track.

Is there an "audio" for dummies? I have absolutely no clue about any of the buzz words I see thrown around here, like PCM, DTS, True-HD.......

The only thing I know of is this: Dolby Digital and DTS are the two major "surround sound" formats, the basic principle being that they offer distint sounds to different channels (speakers) to give an immersion effect.

I seem to have a pretty good grasp on HD video, ie 720p, 1080i, 1080p, compressed, all that stuff.........But definitely not on the audio side.

What will it take for me to upgrade to the cheapest capable audio receiver to enjoy and notice the benefits of the latest PS3 FW upgrade that enabled DTS ? Is it worth upgrading? Whats it all mean?

Is there an "audio" for dummies?


HERE ... YOU SHALL FIND SALVATION (http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ:_Blu-ray_and_HD_DVD_Audio_Explained/1064) :)

What will it take for me to upgrade to the cheapest capable audio receiver to enjoy and notice the benefits of the latest PS3 FW upgrade that enabled DTS ? Is it worth upgrading? Whats it all mean?


Basically, you just need a receiver that has HDMI capabilities, and can accept audio via HDMI. Be careful, because alot of receivers have HDMI, but can't accept audio via HDMI. As for getting a cheap one, well it depends on exactly what you consider cheap. Also, a really big factor to consider is whether or not you have a 5.1 or 7.1 setup. A good cheap one for 5.1 is the Panasonic SA-XR57. I've seen it in the $239.99 or even $229.99 range. The sound quality is absolutley fantastic. The only downside, is that even though it's a 7.1 receiver, it can't do 7.1 lossless, and it can't matrix 5.1 lossless to 7.1. Of course, that only matters if you have a 7.1 speaker setup. If you have a 5.1 setup, then it would be very hard to do better than the SA-XR57. Do a search on AVS for that model #, and you'll find a detailed thread on it.

If you need 7.1, the cheapest option is probably finding a Yamaha RXV-661 on clearance.

If you can afford it, the best overall bang for the buck is what I just bought recently. A factory refurb Marantz SR7001 for $599. No tax, and free shipping. Yeah, $600 isn't cheap, but this puppy ain't no joke.

I bought the 661 on clearance ... and could'nt be happier !

Basically, you just need a receiver that has HDMI capabilities, and can accept audio via HDMI. Be careful, because alot of receivers have HDMI, but can't accept audio via HDMI. As for getting a cheap one, well it depends on exactly what you consider cheap. Also, a really big factor to consider is whether or not you have a 5.1 or 7.1 setup. A good cheap one for 5.1 is the Panasonic SA-XR57. I've seen it in the $239.99 or even $229.99 range. The sound quality is absolutley fantastic. The only downside, is that even though it's a 7.1 receiver, it can't do 7.1 lossless, and it can't matrix 5.1 lossless to 7.1. Of course, that only matters if you have a 7.1 speaker setup. If you have a 5.1 setup, then it would be very hard to do better than the SA-XR57. Do a search on AVS for that model #, and you'll find a detailed thread on it.

If you need 7.1, the cheapest option is probably finding a Yamaha RXV-661 on clearance.

If you can afford it, the best overall bang for the buck is what I just bought recently. A factory refurb Marantz SR7001 for $599. No tax, and free shipping. Yeah, $600 isn't cheap, but this puppy ain't no joke.

I'll look into it, anything under $500 is in my budget...I have a 5.1 setup, which is fine for me. I'm just not convinced now I'd notice any difference via an upgrade...Right now I use the HDMI on the PS3 for video and the optical out for audio since my receiver doesn't support HDMI. Are most DVDs and Blu-Rays encoded in DTS-HD or whatever the top standard is now?

HERE ... YOU SHALL FIND SALVATION (http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ:_Blu-ray_and_HD_DVD_Audio_Explained/1064) :)

Thanks, reading this now!

I'll look into it, anything under $500 is in my budget...I have a 5.1 setup, which is fine for me. I'm just not convinced now I'd notice any difference via an upgrade...Right now I use the HDMI on the PS3 for video and the optical out for audio since my receiver doesn't support HDMI. Are most DVDs and Blu-Rays encoded in DTS-HD or whatever the top standard is now?


You should notice a definite difference with Blu Ray movies (and HD-DVD movies if you have a HD-DVD player). Lossless sound with PS3 games, might not be quite as night and day.

If you have a 5.1 setup, I would take a really hard look at the SA-XR57. I have a dedicated Theater room, and before I upgraded to the Marantz SR7001, my primary receiver was the Panasonic SA-XR55. The sound of the digital path Panasonics is absolutely sensational. The only problem with my SA-XR55, is that it didn't have a HDMI input. I would have bought the SA-XR57 if it could do 7.1 lossless, but unfortunatley it can't. In my dedicated theater setup, I'm running 7.1, so having a receiver be able to do lossless 7.1, and matrix lossless 5.1 to 7.1 was absolutely crucial.

However, in my living room, I have a 5.1 setup, and 7.1 wouldn't ever make sense in that room. I'm currently looking for a SA-XR57 to buy for my living room.

You said you have $500 to spend, and with the money you save buying the SA-XR57, you can buy yourself some oc703 and make superchunks for your front corners, to improve your bass dramatically, or something like that.

Ok I have a quick question. I have an old onkyo receiver and I have a toslink that comes from my receiver to my 46xbr4 and my ps3 hdmi to my tv. I had the chance to watch hitman last night and I notice when I went to display that it has DTS-HD-MA on it. So I was wondering if I was receiving the tru hd sound that everyone was talking about because it sounded amazing Or would I just have to purchase a brand new receiver with the new codecs for it?

Given that, in the lossless world, there is virtually no difference between the two ... I can only attribute it to shrewd marketing by the DTS camp.


Just to pick nits- it's not that there is 'virtually no difference between the two'; rather it's that there is mathematically ZERO difference between the two (and PCM for that matter). :)

Agreed in the shrewd marketing of the perennially late DTS camp, but I think the bigger factor is the way it was on DVD with DTS having the generally higher bitrate of their respective lossy codecs, no dialog normalization, and was generally regarded to sound sonically superior to most DD tracks (which I personally attribute to DTS being encoded 3dB higher than plane jane DD).

Just to pick nits- it's not that there is 'virtually no difference between the two'; rather it's that there is mathematically ZERO difference between the two (and PCM for that matter). :)

Concur on the ZERO difference. Thanks for the correction.

HERE ... YOU SHALL FIND SALVATION (http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Joshua_Zyber/High-Def_FAQ:_Blu-ray_and_HD_DVD_Audio_Explained/1064) :)

This was a huge help, thank you.