Is anyone else getting fed-up with all the audio options studios have to encode their movies in? With DVD, it was easy. Every movie (with few exceptions) came with a Dolby Digital soundtrack, so it was easy to have your equipment comply with what was required. Eventually, DTS was released onto the market, and you had to go out and purchase a new player if you wanted to get the superior sound, but you still only had two choices!

Now the choices seem infinite. Some titles are still using legacy DD and DTS encodes, which is ok because pretty much all equipment supports it now, it just isn't preferable. Then you have DD+ and DTS-HD, which is nice because they allow studios to provide a great sounding lossy encode, but they are rarely used correctly. Even though my Panasonic has DD+ stamped on the front of the unit, no Blu-ray disc uses the format. And to my knowledge, only Universal uses DD+ to the extent that gives it an advantage over legacy DD at 640kbps.

Then you have the much beloved TrueHD and DTS-MA. On HD DVD, TrueHD is used as a substitute for space consumming PCM, but very rarely. On Blu-ray, TrueHD is barely supported, even though the lossy core can be extracted by any Blu-ray player. I expect it to get wider use once the Panasonic and Sony/Pioneer get TrueHD upgrades, but studios could be putting these tracks out right now if they wanted to in anticipation (plus, the PS3 plays it today). DTS-MA is something I'm really pissed about. Fox has been encoding their titles with DTS-MA tracks, but their is no player out there which is using a chip that can decode the stuff. I applaud Fox for including lossless tracks on all their titles, but can someone tell me why DTS couldn't have their decoding technology ready to go when Dolby could?

And then you have PCM, which is the no-fuss audio format. Slap it on a disc and you can get no better and all players can output it. Why this wasn't implement as the defacto standard (much in the way DD was with DVD), I will never understand.

Don't get me wrong, I am not upset that I will eventually have to replace my Panasonic - as an early adopter it was inevitable. But the fact that we have to continually check if a new player will accept the many audio options is rediculous. Either make it manditory for playback compatibility, or don't allow it to be used at all.

Can you really extract lossy core from TrueHD tracks with Blu-ray. I thought that this was misinformation and could not be done. Is there any Blu-ray discs with TrueHD audio track so that I can test this out with my PS3?

Can you really extract lossy core from TrueHD tracks with Blu-ray. I thought that this was misinformation and could not be done. Is there any Blu-ray discs with TrueHD audio track so that I can test this out with my PS3?
Yes,

Legends of Jazz on Blu-ray.

I played it on my PS3, selected TrueHD track, and my 7 years old Sony receiver decoded it as DD 5.1 surround.

Does not the BD implementation of TrueHD require/mandate a DD bitstream (not embedded in TrueHD bitstream) to be included. I seem to recall Roger Dressler of Dolby Labs explaining this a while back. So no real space/bitrate savings but everyone gets to hear sound.

HD DVD with TrueHD did not require a DD bitstream since all HD DVD players were mandated to decode at least two channel stereo from TrueHD. So there is the theoretical possibility of a HD DVD title having only a TrueHD track without DD or DD+ and saving some space/bitrate but everyone would hear at least stereo audio. But I do not know of any HD DVD title doing this yet.

Receiver that can handle PCM audio from HDMI should do the trick. I am sorely tempted to get an onkyo 604 to tide me over until a better receiver shows up.

I thought HD-DVD required DD+ minimum as part of the spec?

If so there is some type of standardization from that format.

"Is anyone else getting fed-up with all the audio options studios have to encode their movies in?"

Yes but I just add it to the list of things that they are making difficult for consumers

I thought HD-DVD required DD+ minimum as part of the spec?Not sure if the DVD Forum's HD DVD spec (book?) requires all HD DVD titles to have DD+. It does seem that most all do, to the best of my knowledge, but then again -- I have a couple of Studio Canal HD DVD discs at home. IIRC they were dts-HD MA only.

Well, not only are there several audio options, it appears they operate differently depending on the format due to audio transport differences.

White paper from Dolby:

Unique Aspects of Dolby Digital Plus on Blu-ray Disc vs. HD DVD

There is a fundamental difference in the way programs are carried in the two HD disc formats.

Like DVD-Video, the HD DVD format carries audio and video signals in the MPEG-2 “program
stream” format, whereas the Blu-ray Disc format carries them in the MPEG-2 “transport
stream” format, the same manner in which ATSC DTV and DVB signals are broadcast. A
result of this otherwise subtle distinction is that there are packetizing differences for the audio
bitstreams between the two disc formats. You may recall that DVD-Video is not able to carry
Dolby Digital bitstreams of more than 448 kbps. The same remains generally true for HD DVD,
although due to finer granularity in the choice of data rates, the actual maximum rate increases
slightly, to 504 kbps. In order to support the higher bit rates and greater number of channels
offered by Dolby Digital Plus, HD DVD discs will use Dolby Digital Plus bitstreams (which have
progressively shorter coding frames as the bit rate increases, thereby always fitting within the
defined audio packets on the disc). For example, standard Dolby Digital has a six-block frame,
and in that case the Dolby Digital Plus bit rate can reach 0.5 Mbps; a three-block frame can
reach 1 Mbps; a two-block frame, 1.5 Mbps; and a one-block frame, 3 Mbps.

In contrast, the Blu-ray format has no such packetizing constraint, so one immediate result
is the ability to transport Dolby Digital at its maximum 640 kbps rate for the first time. That’s
slightly higher than the 576 kbps carried on D-VHS.

Another area where the two disc formats differ is in terms of mandatory versus optional use of
Dolby codecs. In HD DVD, Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, or Dolby TrueHD may be used as
the sole soundtrack on a disc, because every player will have a decoder that can process any
of these three bitstreams.

By contrast, the Blu-ray format mandates Dolby Digital, while Dolby Digital Plus is optional.
This means that Blu-ray Disc players might only be equipped with a basic Dolby Digital
decoder on board. If a Blu-ray disc carries Dolby Digital Plus (or Dolby TrueHD) bitstreams,
there will also be a companion Dolby Digital track to ensure playback compatibility with every
player configuration. Rather than transporting a core 5.1-channel Dolby Digital bitstream
and a separate 7.1-channel Dolby Digital Plus bitstream on the same disc, the Dolby Digital
Plus bitstream will be constructed as a hybrid of a 5.1 Dolby Digital core frame followed by a
Dolby Digital Plus extension frame. A basic two- or 5.1-channel Blu-ray player only needs a
conventional Dolby Digital decoder IC to play these bitstreams. An advanced player with 7.1-
channel decoding capability will include a Dolby Digital Plus decoder that will decode both
frames to reconstruct the 7.1-channel program as depicted in Figure 4. Because the Blu-ray
format has no audio packet constraints, Dolby Digital Plus will always operate with full sixblock
coding frames, just like Dolby Digital. This yields the maximum coding efficiency, and
makes the process of decoding core and extension frames easier because they always have
identical frame structures. It also means that in those cases where a disc and player permit
direct bitstream output over S/PDIF, the core Dolby Digital bitstream can be routed directly to
the S/PDIF with no need for conversion.

These differences between the two disc format structures also lead to differences in the
maximum bit rates for Dolby Digital Plus. On HD DVD, the maximum is 3 Mbps regardless of
the number of channels. The maximum bit rate for Dolby Digital Plus on Blu-ray Disc is 640
kbps for the core audio packet (carrying from one to 5.1 channels) and 1.024 Mbps for the
extension packet (carrying up to 5.1 channels) for a total bit rate maximum of 1.7 Mbps.In the
future, the bit rate can rise to as high as 4.7 Mbps (a core packet plus up to four extension
packets), should the format developers elect to support even more than eight discrete
channels.
http://www.dolby.com/assets/pdf/tech_library/DPlus_TrueHD_whitepaper.pdf

"Is anyone else getting fed-up with all the audio options studios have to encode their movies in?"

Yes but I just add it to the list of things that they are making difficult for consumers


nailed it on the head

Interesting stuff. I don't really care about which codec they use, as long as it's lossless on every title. Even an old film like Casablanca had PCM on laserdisc. This stuff is confusing now because so many codecs are new and HDMI 1.3 receivers aren't on the market yet. Luckily the PS3 already decodes many of these, and hopefully will decode the DTS-MA and DTS-HD tracks in a month or so.

Wireless, thanks for posting that white paper. It sounds like BD was set up better to handle the Dolby codecs than HD-DVD was, but with most releases containing PCM or DTS-MA, no one has really taken advantage of it yet.

Apropos of a question I raised in another thread, I would find it helpful to have a breakdown of the different formats, their availability on the two competing formats, and an indication of what is actually on the discs. I am utterly confused~ it appears right now that, apart from using the 5.1 analog outputs on the back of the player (and relying on the conversion process that occurs in that unit), I will have to await the availability of outboard processors that are compatible with the latest HDMI standard, something that companies like Meridian are not likely to offer in the near future. From what I gather, using the optical output on my existing Blu/HD player (LG) gives me no more than I had with a conventional player, sonically. Or am I missing something that all the rest of you are currently enjoying?

Not sure if the DVD Forum's HD DVD spec (book?) requires all HD DVD titles to have DD+. It does seem that most all do, to the best of my knowledge, but then again -- I have a couple of Studio Canal HD DVD discs at home. IIRC they were dts-HD MA only.
Yes, both DD+ and TrueHD are mandatory in HD DVD, and optional in Blu-ray.

Apropos of a question I raised in another thread, I would find it helpful to have a breakdown of the different formats, their availability on the two competing formats, and an indication of what is actually on the discs. I am utterly confused~ it appears right now that, apart from using the 5.1 analog outputs on the back of the player (and relying on the conversion process that occurs in that unit), I will have to await the availability of outboard processors that are compatible with the latest HDMI standard, something that companies like Meridian are not likely to offer in the near future. From what I gather, using the optical output on my existing Blu/HD player (LG) gives me no more than I had with a conventional player, sonically. Or am I missing something that all the rest of you are currently enjoying?
The future is uncompressed video and audio out of player over HDMI 1.1+. The native bitstream of audio really isn't want you want in the modern era, since both formats allow multiple audio events to play at the same time (e.g. main audio, audio commentary, and menu button SFX). So no matter what happens, the audio will be processed in the player, and any output other than PCM involves a recompression.

LD had many audio formats as well

Analog 2 channel (dual mono or stereo, CX encoding)
Digital PCM 2 channel (4ch Dolby Surround, DTS Stereo, Chance Surround, Ultra Stereo)
AC-3(Dolby Digital) 5.1/6.1
DTS 5.1
A-mode (HiVision LD Analog 4ch Dolby Surround)
B-mode (HiVision LD PCM 2 channel)

I'm on this thread, less to bitch, and more to get information. BenW- my question is both more sophisticated, and more naive, than your answer indicates: I appreciate that some processing must be done, but I am assuming that an outboard unit of the quality of a Meridan would do a better job in every respect than the on-board processing of a player that outputs in analog (5.1).
And, here's where I'm naive, if not downright ignorant:when you say that any other output, apart from PCM requires recompression, I thought that the HDMI (1.1+) output from the player, insofar as audio was concerned, offered three things: (1) access to some of the more advanced codecs, assuming that they were used on the disc, including ones which involved so-called "lossless" compression, which are not available to me using the optical audio output on the player; (2) the ability to have those codecs decoded in an outboard device, rather than the one packaged within the player; and (3) the possibility of better D/A conversion in the outboard device, than from within the player itself. Please help me to the extent I am wrong.
Now, to reveal my complete ignorance- when some audio formats are described as "optional" in either HD or Blu, are we talking about the player, the disc, or both? I'm going to remain agnostic about which of the two (HD or Blu) are better, for the time being, so this is not meant to bait a response that favors one over the other. I'm just wanting basic info about the audio formats that are available, and how they are accessed, along with reliable information to guide me in making software (and perhaps, ultimately more hardware) purchases.
Randosel- You may be right, but somehow, even when I sent my Pioneer LDS-2 out to have an additional output installed, so I could use a demodulator and capture AC-3 off the Laserdiscs, I took it in stride. Maybe ignorance or analog (video) was bliss, I dunno.
Best.

PCM can be sent as HDMI as well as analog. If sent as HDMI, then all D/A conversion is performed in the receiver.

I get PCM and lossless through HDMI so this doesn't really affect me, but I've always been confused as to how someone can get DD+ but not trueHD. From what I understand, the only way to get DD+ is through HDMI or analog outs, so can't you just get trueHD or PCM from that?

I get PCM and lossless through HDMI so this doesn't really affect me, but I've always been confused as to how someone can get DD+ but not trueHD. From what I understand, the only way to get DD+ is through HDMI or analog outs, so can't you just get trueHD or PCM from that?
Your player must be able to decode TrueHD in order for you to get that on analog and so far on HDMI. The way it works is that the player decodes DD+ or TrueHD into PCM inside the player and then send that information digitally over HDMI or after converting via D/A in the player, send it out over analog outputs. 1G Toshiba HD DVD players also had the option of transcoding DD+ and TrueHD into 1.5Mbps dts 5.1 and sending the transcoded bitstream out via digital coax or SPDIF optical connection.

All Toshiba HD DVD players are able to decode TrueHD. PS3 is able to decode TrueHD. Samsung 1G player was not able to decode TrueHD. I don't know about the other players. AFIK, there are no receivers that can decode TrueHD, but based on how high def players mix audio, that may not be desirable or needed.

Yes, both DD+ and TrueHD are mandatory in HD DVD, and optional in Blu-ray.


Ben, the poster was asking about what audio is mandatory on the disc, not what codecs are mandatory for playback on the HD-DVD players.

The answer is that as long as a content producer has one of the mandatory-supported codecs on the disc then he meets the obligations for the format. This could be a simple Dolby Digital stream. There is no obligation for content producers to encode (as additional streams) their audio into DD+ or Dolby TrueHD, or any other codec as long as one mandatory codec is supported.

Your player must be able to decode TrueHD in order for you to get that on analog and so far on HDMI. The way it works is that the player decodes DD+ or TrueHD into PCM inside the player and then send that information digitally over HDMI or after converting via D/A in the player, send it out over analog outputs. 1G Toshiba HD DVD players also had the option of transcoding DD+ and TrueHD into 1.5Mbps dts 5.1 and sending the transcoded bitstream out via digital coax or SPDIF optical connection.
Yes I know this. So how can someone get DD+ but not TrueHD?

Yes I know this. So how can someone get DD+ but not TrueHD?It appears that when many posters are talking about not getting TrueHD what they really mean is the lossless benefit of TrueHD. When someone uses a S/PDIF connection (coax or Toslink) for multichannel audio then they lose the lossless benefit because the multichannel audio must be re-encoded to a lossy audio codec for transport over S/PDIF.

IMO S/PDIF was limited to two channel linear PCM for political (content providers copy protection needs) reasons only. The clock on S/PDIF could have been upped to support multichannel PCM, but never put into any spec. :(

BTW I verified that my Studio Canal HD DVDs only have dts-HD MA and dts-HD HR only. No DD+ or DD at all.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

That said, I wish Blu-ray mandated that there were uncompressed PCM tracks on every disc. Since getting an HDMI receiver (Denon 4306), this is my preferred soundtrack.

I wouldn't want to see PCM mandated, as it would take up too much space on some titles, such as longer films and those on single-layer discs. By mandating it, you would probably be mandating it for discs that really don't need it, such as those comprised only of extras (second discs of 2-disc sets).

You probably have to provide DD anyway for legacy compatibility and features like dynamic range compression (remember, a lot of people are going to be listening to these discs out of the built-in speakers on their HDTVs). Also, for older titles, it's questionable how much benefit there would be to lossless audio. I'm not sure it would be such a good idea to have a lossless 5.1 remix of an old film taking up space, when purists will prefer the original mono track anyway.

It will also work wonders with more modern monophonic movies like Mr. Woody's films. ;)

My thoughts on audio options:

I think all releases should be DTS HD MA. I have a pre-HDMI receiver, meaning my only option for digital audio is optical/coaxial SPDIF. DTS HD MA has a "core" DTS track that runs at 1.5 mbps; PCM, on the other hand, is usually encoded by the playback device to something less than desirable (I think the Playstation 3 ends up sending it out as Dolby Prologic II; the only other option is usually a 640 kbps Dolby Digital track). And Dolby TrueHD doesn't (AFAIK) have a core track (at least not on HD DVD; I think I read somewhere that Blu-ray Disc handled TrueHD slightly differently).

On general principle I dislike PCM because it wastes space better used for higher video bitrate (or more content); we have these lossless audio technologies, studios should absolutely use them and shun uncompressed PCM. I would be fine with Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD MA so long as it was also functional with pre-HDMI technology (SPDIF optical/coaxial)... which, IME, so far DTS HD MA seems to work great.

My thoughts on audio options:

I think all releases should be DTS HD MA. I have a pre-HDMI receiver, meaning my only option for digital audio is optical/coaxial SPDIF. DTS HD MA has a "core" DTS track that runs at 1.5 mbps; PCM, on the other hand, is usually encoded by the playback device to something less than desirable (I think the Playstation 3 ends up sending it out as Dolby Prologic II; the only other option is usually a 640 kbps Dolby Digital track). And Dolby TrueHD doesn't (AFAIK) have a core track (at least not on HD DVD; I think I read somewhere that Blu-ray Disc handled TrueHD slightly differently).

On general principle I dislike PCM because it wastes space better used for higher video bitrate (or more content); we have these lossless audio technologies, studios should absolutely use them and shun uncompressed PCM. I would be fine with Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD MA so long as it was also functional with pre-HDMI technology (SPDIF optical/coaxial)... which, IME, so far DTS HD MA seems to work great.

This is incorrect information about the PS3.
If your receiver can accept audio through HDMI, there is no encoding of the PCM track. It is not sent out as PLII.
What confuses a lot of people are those that have only the optical hooked up. As PCM though optical is limited to two channels of 24/48 PCM, the receiver will likely kick in Neo:6 or Pro Logic II(x) processing unless in "DIRECT" mode. Thus it simulates the surround field.
If you have the HDMI connection providing the picture and your HDMI audio output setting set to "PCM" then the HDMI connection will send out PCM or TrueHD converted to PCM. It does not encode it to something less than desirable.

On standalone Blu-ray players if you have the HDMI or analog connections enabled then the PCM is sent out as such as well. It is also not encoded to something less than desirable. I'm not sure where you got that information from, but it's just not true.

PCM is uncompressed, it neither require encoding nor decoding and as such is one of the simplest audio formats to use, despite it's bandwidth and space consumption.

On Blu-ray the TrueHD track can contain the legacy DD information. This was done with Nine Inch Nails and Legends of Jazz. Neither has a Dolby Digital 5.1 option, only the TrueHD option. The player can output the DD 5.1 information at 640 Kbps from the TrueHD track.

This is incorrect information about the PS3.Sigh... no, it's not.

If your receiver can accept audio through HDMIAs I indicated in my original post, I'm using a pre-HDMI receiver.

What confuses a lot of people are those that have only the optical hooked up. As PCM though optical is limited to two channels of 24/48 PCM, the receiver will likely kick in Neo:6 or Pro Logic II(x) processing unless in "DIRECT" mode.I'm not confused. As I explained in my post above, this is why I think studios should avoid PCM at all costs and instead standardize on DTS HD MA (or Dolby TrueHD, though the "core" track would be limited to 640kbps I believe where the core DTS would be limited to 1500kbps).

I'm not sure where you got that information from, but it's just not true.As I indicated just above, it is, in fact, true.

PCM is uncompressed, it neither require encoding nor decoding and as such is one of the simplest audio formats to use, despite it's bandwidth and space consumption.Again, it wastes space I would rather see put into the video bitrate (I'm not against lossless audio, in fact I love it, but I think studios (*cough*, Sony, *cough*) should use DTS HD MA or Dolby TrueHD).

I'm trying to see where my "information" was wrong given that I'm using a pre-HDMI receiver (which, again, I indicated quite clearly in the post above).