I've heard some weird stuff on the net. Many people say that they favor an Uncompressed PCM track over a lossless track such as Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD. And also in a review of the new Matrix trology HD-DVD boxet on AVforum I read this:

"With the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack, it almost makes up for the originals lacking DTS, but either option is certainly a step up from the SD versions. The only thing that may better what is present here is an uncompressed PCM soundtrack."

I find that very strange. How can a PCM track (maybe 4.5mbps) be better then a Dolby TrueHD (maybe 18mbps)?

Besides, I doubt that Warner (who leans more towards HD-DVD) will give such a high-rez audio track to the blu-ray versions. All other blu-ray movies hove no more then a track that contains 1.5 mbps.

Blu-ray's PCM tracks are usually 4.5 Mbps and I think most of HD DVD's TrueHD tracks are significantly less than that. From what I've read in a couple of reviews comparing the two types of soundtracks directly, the PCM tracks are sometimes recorded a few decibels louder than TrueHD (this is most notably mentioned in ***************'s review of The Departed) and thus sounds "better" to the ear when switched between the two on the fly. I'll take either one to be honest.

Whoever wrote that about The Matrix is a douchebag, though. By all means, the two sound identical.

If everything is equal. TrueHD is as good as PCM.

But not everything is always as they seem.


First if you have TrueHD you have to be able to decode it. Either in the player or in the receiver. So if you have PCM its already decoded. Now thats isnt really an issue becuase all HD DVD can decode TrueHD. For BD it could be a bigger problem.

As for how good the audio really is, here comes the funny thing. TrueHD with 24bit will in theory sound better then PCM with 16bit. So in those cases TrueHD is even better.

So its not better, just because you have PCM.

If everything is equal, same bit etc. They should both sound the same.

You also have to look at the equipment you have and how everything is hooked up. Some players/receivers will do digital to analog conversion better than another. So if you do D/A in your receiver for one player but let the D/A take place in the player and use analog outs you could see a difference. Not saying one is necessarily better than the other. Again, that depends on your gear. Just saying you need a true apples to apples comparison of the two to truly tell.

An ideal test would be to test TrueHD and Uncompressed out of the same player using the same outputs. This isn't possible on an HD-DVD player since they don't support uncompressed. I can't think of any titles that would have Uncompressed and THD. Logic tells me this would be stupid.

I've heard comments that the Tosh HD players sound better using analog jacks than HDMI. This is a definite possibilty because of the Sharc processors doing the D/A conversion rather than the receiver. The down side to this is lack of bass management in most receivers.

In the end, I don't think I'd worry too much about THD vs Uncompressed. Even if there was a difference, it would be SO minimal. They are both GREAT!

I wish that older films were released with PCM instead of DD+. I have yet to find a DVD or High Def release of any older mono or stereo film where the laserdisc's PCM sound was beat.

I wish that older films were released with PCM instead of DD+. I have yet to find a DVD or High Def release of any older mono or stereo film where the laserdisc's PCM sound was beat.

Yep, the "Top Gun" pcm track on Laserdisc or for that matter any other PCM track sounds better than any of the SD-DVD releases of the same film, Star Wars included.

An ideal test would be to test TrueHD and Uncompressed out of the same player using the same outputs. This isn't possible on an HD-DVD player since they don't support uncompressed.Actually, the Toshiba players do support PCM according to the instruction manual (see audio format table in the back). However, to my knowledge there is no HD-DVD with a PCM track (wouldn't make much sense either, since TrueHD is supported by every HD-DVD player).

Search for "dialog normalization" to understand the difference.

Basically TrueHD runs through a filter after decoding so that the final output stream is not "lossless" = a bit-for-bit replication of the source anymore.

I find this to be really strange as well. I hear a big difference in quality when listening to PCM on BD titles but not so much with TrueHD. Troy's TrueHD track sounds slightly better but then you have Batman Begins where it sounds pretty much identical to the DD+ track. I don't care if it's psychological, PCM sounds better to my ears so I would rather have uncompressed than lossless.

tlreddragon, how do you transport the signal from the player to the reciever?

What bitrate did the DD track use in the BD version?

Search for "dialog normalization" to understand the difference.

Basically TrueHD runs through a filter after decoding so that the final output stream is not "lossless" = a bit-for-bit replication of the source anymore.

May I know if the Dolby insider on this forum has acknowledged this? Or is there a highly credible source to dispute Dolby Labs' claims that Dolby TrueHD is a 100 percent lossless coding technology and delivers tantalizing sound that is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, unlocking the true high-definition entertainment experience on next-generation discs.

How about DTS-HD Master Audio which also claims bit-for-bit identical to the studio master used?

I'm no audio expert here. Just wanted to know the facts via the simplest way...

Search for "dialog normalization" to understand the difference.

Basically TrueHD runs through a filter after decoding so that the final output stream is not "lossless" = a bit-for-bit replication of the source anymore.
On which title do you hear a difference between the PCM track and the TrueHD track?

I agree with dragon, I have both blu-ray and hd-dvd and I think that PCM sounds more crisp than TrueHD, but this might be because with truehd I have to cut my receiver up more than usual to match the volume of a PCM track. At any rate, I do agree that PCM sounds better to me right now, but HD-DVD still looks better. ;)

PCM Hands Down is Better
LOL
my 2 cents
;)

I think the Blu-Ray owners just perceive PCM as better due to the lack of a decent lossy codec.

What do HD DVD discs get when they don't have Dolby TrueHD? They often get 24 bit DD+ @ 1.5 mbps

What do Blu-Ray discs get when they don't have PCM? They often get DD 640 kbps

So there is a much larger gain in audio quality for the Blu-Ray owners when they go from lossy to lossless, DD 640 kbps ---> PCM

When HD DVD owners go from lossy to lossless, there is less of a gain in audio quality since HD DVDs lossy audio quality is almost Universally (no pun intended) better than Blu-Rays lossy audio quality. DD+ 1.5 mbps ---> Dolby TrueHD

Quality Scale
Less Quality..................................................... ................................ Best Quality
DD 640....DD+ 640 kbps............DD+ 1.5 mbps..................................Dolby TrueHD..PCM

I also prefer PCM on Blu-ray over TrueHD on HD DVD. Take for example Black Hawk Down with an absolutely incredible PCM 5.1 soundtrack that has lifelike dynamics and is rich and enveloping. Another one that quickly comes to mind is The Prestige. (48kHz/24-Bit) Those electrical snaps sound amazing and downright scary. Crank is Uncompressed PCM 6.1 and another title that completely rocks. I could go on and on, but time and time again PCM has proven itself to be superior on my setup.

As none of your samples are available in THD, in fact at least two of the movies are not even available on HDDVD, then how can you say you prefer the PCM to THD? Might not they have sounded equally good to you in THD if offered?

Allen

As none of your samples are available in THD, in fact at least two of the movies are not even available on HDDVD, then how can you say you prefer the PCM to THD?

Allen

Everything I have heard on Blu-ray with PCM soundtracks in regards to sound quality take for example realism, clarity of dialog, immersiveness, pans, dynamics and bass response (just to name a few audio traits) has bettered anything that I've heard in TrueHD on HD DVD.

PCM and TrueHD sound equally dynamic, expansive, clear, etc. to me. I'd be hardpressed to discern any difference between them. I prefer both!

They both sound great and all things being equal they will sound the same. A lossless codec is supposed to be transpaerent to the master. So all things being equal, Dolby True HD, PCM, and DTS-HDMA will sound the same.
A higher voulume level does not equate to sounding better.

I prefer to keep my spreadsheets uncompressed, because when I zip them, numbers change and others are missing. :rolleyes:

They both sound great and all things being equal they will sound the same. A lossless codec is supposed to be transpaerent to the master. So all things being equal, Dolby True HD, PCM, and DTS-HDMA will sound the same.
A higher voulume level does not equate to sounding better.

I agree with you, but I clearly hear the difference and it has nothing to do with different levels. So do you think that it possibly has something to do with the DACs in the players and how well they are implemented so therefore all things NOT being equal? I have the Panasonic DMP-BD10 Blu-ray player and a Toshiba XA-2 and A1 and I prefer the PCM audio out of the Panny.

Thanks,
B

I like em all! Just give me a good sound mix and usually it doesn't matter which sound format is used. We Were Soliders DD+ is amazing, so is the sound on Black Hawk Down. As I get used to HD quality PQ, sound is becoming increasingly my benchmark for a disc.

They both sound great and all things being equal they will sound the same. A lossless codec is supposed to be transpaerent to the master. So all things being equal, Dolby True HD, PCM, and DTS-HDMA will sound the same.
A higher voulume level does not equate to sounding better.
We all know this, that's not what this thread is about. Of course on paper both should sound identical, yet there are many people who prefer PCM over TrueHD and I'm sure most people are smart enough to adjust their volumes before making any comparisons.

I wish that older films were released with PCM instead of DD+. I have yet to find a DVD or High Def release of any older mono or stereo film where the laserdisc's PCM sound was beat.

That's why I frequently prefer to transfer an LD to DVD rather than buy the DVD. The sound is almost invariably better (often by a lot) -- though I typically lose a little ground on the video (though not always :)!)

Man, stop making me think of hooking up my old LD player! Haven't tried since getting my latest receiver.

We all know this, that's not what this thread is about. Of course on paper both should sound identical, yet there are many people who prefer PCM over TrueHD and I'm sure most people are smart enough to adjust their volumes before making any comparisons.

According to the insiders thread, certification of DD_THD encoders/decoders requires a bit for bit match between the master and the output. If that is true (and it should be a simple thing to professionally analyze), then any perceived differences from an accurate LPCM copy of the master have to come from some other source than the CODEC.

Man, stop making me think of hooking up my old LD player! Haven't tried since getting my latest receiver.

I've got one in my main HT rig and one in my "den" for making transfers to DVD (together with an S-VHS deck for the same purpose). Still have 1200 plus of the 12" beasties in my video library! I anticipate LD continuing to be a part of my entertainment scene for a long time to come :).

No laser rot?!
Nice....

No laser rot?!
Nice....

I've a handful of titles that I set aside shortly after used purchase due to rot issues (near enough all my titles were bought during the sell off.) However, they don't appear to have worsened over the seven odd years I've had them. It's always possible some titles that were without rot have developed it, but I've yet to identify that -- everything seems stable.

I'm guessing this may be due to my keeping the room temperature somewhat reasonable during high swings and the humidity consistently low. Hopefully, I won't be unpleasantly surprised at some point.

Everything I have heard on Blu-ray with PCM soundtracks in regards to sound quality take for example realism, clarity of dialog, immersiveness, pans, dynamics and bass response (just to name a few audio traits) has bettered anything that I've heard in TrueHD on HD DVD.

I agree with you, but I clearly hear the difference and it has nothing to do with different levels. So do you think that it possibly has something to do with the DACs in the players and how well they are implemented so therefore all things NOT being equal? I have the Panasonic DMP-BD10 Blu-ray player and a Toshiba XA-2 and A1 and I prefer the PCM audio out of the Panny.

As with many things in audio, people hear what they want to hear, usually based in some way on, or rationalized using, conclusions generated using faulty logic. The posts I quote above are great examples: comparisons of completely different movies' soundtracks used as the basis of a comparison between different formats -- a fundamentally flawed concept -- then summary dismissal of one factor that could easily explain any audible difference because it would place the cause in the listener's head rather than in the equipment or technology.

It would be great to do a blind A/B comparison and let a group of people vote on which sounds better...

As none of your samples are available in THD, in fact at least two of the movies are not even available on HDDVD, then how can you say you prefer the PCM to THD? Might not they have sounded equally good to you in THD if offered?

Allen

by that same logic, hd dvd supporters shouldn't be able to claim PQ superiourity based on VC1 titles available on on hd dvd, right?

Correct. But what does VC-1 on HD DVD have to do with this discussion? Nothing, that's what. Thanks for adding zero value to this discussion other than some lame attempt to make this another Blu-ray vs HD DVD thread. Yeah, good job, we're getting short on those.

Nice post by the way. Only one line of text, at least one edit attempt, yet it has the grammatical flow a dyslexic 4-year-old would be proud of. Bravo.

by that same logic, hd dvd supporters shouldn't be able to claim PQ superiourity based on VC1 titles available on on hd dvd, right?

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

^^Billy Madison!!!

Anyways, I finally got my Elite receiver back from a firmware upgrade and need to hook up my HD-A2 to it via HDMI, what should I set the players audio setting to so that the best soundtrack is transmitted via HDMI to the receiver?

... is almost Universally (no pun intended) better than ...

Then why the capital U? :p

There's no question: TruHD lossless tracks will be bit for bit identical to the L-PCM lossless tracks used as the source.

There is a particular BD reviewer who continues to claim that L-PCM sounds better than TruHD or DTS HD MA, but this is not true.

Some folks seem to want to make this TRUHD/DTSHD MA/ L-PCM thing an urban myth, due to the fact that LPCM is the only sort of lossless audio that can be guaranteed to be decoded by a BD player, due to the lower minimum player specs.

TruHD and DTS HD MA are preferable to L-PCM, due to them being 1/2 to 1/3 the file size for the identical audio, leaving more space and bandwidth available for the PQ.

Then why the capital U? :p

ohhh you caught me :cool:

What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

if you cant challenge the argument, attack the person making the argument, right?

Hey Braddad, no one responded to you but I will.
I feel there is much more to the the soundtrack than simply PCM vs. DD+ vs. TrueHD.
If you prefer PCM then you prefer PCM. No worries.
For me sometimes DD+ is better than TrueHD but both are great.
I find more differences in how the soundtracks are recorded and processed than I do between the two formats.
Just as I don't care what video codec is used as long as the PQ captures the film and looks good on my screen.
I've no experience with PCM so I can't offer an opinion there.
It would be really nice to have 24/96 in all soundtracks. Maybe some day.
Rest assured that TrueHD is bit for bit accurate and takes up far less space.
Someone asked the question earlier about TrueHD being bit-for-bit accurate.
Rest assured it is. Basically it is DVD-Audio, MLP lossless packing.
I for one trust Dolby and Meridian implicitly to know their stuff.
All this angst over codecs is a bit tiresome, mostly people who aren't in the business and haven't a real clue.

This topic is completely subjective and really serves no purpose other than to argue what "sounds" better to 1 person. But, it was bound to happen...


This thread should be closed

I've heard some weird stuff on the net. Many people say that they favor an Uncompressed PCM track over a lossless track such as Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD. And also in a review of the new Matrix trology HD-DVD boxet on AVforum I read this:

"With the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack, it almost makes up for the originals lacking DTS, but either option is certainly a step up from the SD versions. The only thing that may better what is present here is an uncompressed PCM soundtrack."

I find that very strange. How can a PCM track (maybe 4.5mbps) be better then a Dolby TrueHD (maybe 18mbps)?

Dolby TrueHD=18mbps? Really? More bitrate goes to the soundtrack than the 1080p picture? If an uncompressed 5.1 track is 4.5mbps, a compressed one is going to be less than that by definition.

Is there a difference in quality? That's dubious. I know that my Dolby TrueHD track on Phantom of the Opera is head and shoulders above the DD+ track, and that the uncompressed PCM track on all of my Sony Blu-rays are head and shoulders above the DD tracks. However, direct comparisons of a Dolby TrueHD track and PCM track on The Departed by others have had results that range from "a very slight edge going to PCM" to "too close to call." Personally, I'm thrilled to have any title with either Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, or PCM uncompressed.

Besides, I doubt that Warner (who leans more towards HD-DVD) will give such a high-rez audio track to the blu-ray versions. All other blu-ray movies hove no more then a track that contains 1.5 mbps.

The Departed, actually. It contains a Dolby Digital and an uncompressed PCM 5.1 track on Blu-ray. This, however, has not become the norm. Furthermore, there are a buttload of Blu-rays from other studios with 4.5mbps uncompressed PCM tracks.