Now that most people probably have their Kubrick shipments (Shining, Clockwork Orange, 2001, Eyes Wide Shut), has anybody had the opportunity and taken the time to compare the DTHD and LPCM soundtracks? I'm interested in what differences (if any) are being noticed. Is one genuinely preferable to the other (if so, in what way), or is it basically six of one and a half-dozen of the other?

TIA for your observations :)!

Once decoded, TrueHD is identical to PCM.

That's what I've always understood, though Dialog Normalization seems to be a possible complication.

It's interesting nobody is in any hurry to respond to what has been a popular topic in the past (though usually comparing different titles which is just a little useless in my opinion.) The reason I bring it up is simply that with the arrival of the Kubrick titles, there is the best opportunity ever to seriously apply evaluation skills and draw whatever rational conclusions can reasonably be drawn. In other words, it's an opportunity to apply the "S" part of AVS :)!

Are there any consistently audible differences? If so what are they? (Master volume levels being set for equal SPL, of course :)!)

That's what I've always understood, though Dialog Normalization seems to be a possible complication.

It's interesting nobody is in any hurry to respond to what has been a popular topic in the past (though usually comparing different titles which is just a little useless in my opinion.) The reason I bring it up is simply that with the arrival of the Kubrick titles, there is the best opportunity ever to seriously apply evaluation skills and draw whatever rational conclusions can reasonably be drawn. In other words, it's an opportunity to apply the "S" part of AVS :)!

Are there any consistently audible differences? If so what are they? (Master volume levels being set for equal SPL, of course :)!)

If we get 2 samples of a prominent scene (one PCM sample, and one THD, both ripped and decoded as wav, or hirez-captured from the analog audio player outputs), we could run some spectral analysis and gather signal statistics. But, like JoshZ said: if they are from the same source, they should be identical if decoded correctly. I guess a black box listening test would affirm that.

That's what I've always understood, though Dialog Normalization seems to be a possible complication...

Warner is consistently bad about using DN so I bought the BD to be safe.;)

That's what I've always understood, though Dialog Normalization seems to be a possible complication.

It's interesting nobody is in any hurry to respond to what has been a popular topic in the past (though usually comparing different titles which is just a little useless in my opinion.) The reason I bring it up is simply that with the arrival of the Kubrick titles, there is the best opportunity ever to seriously apply evaluation skills and draw whatever rational conclusions can reasonably be drawn. In other words, it's an opportunity to apply the "S" part of AVS :)!

Are there any consistently audible differences? If so what are they? (Master volume levels being set for equal SPL, of course :)!)

Dialog Normalization on Dolby TrueHD only adjusts the overall volume level, so it wouldn't affect the quality. (It does not change the dynamic range)

Dialog Normalization on Dolby TrueHD only adjusts the overall volume level, so it wouldn't affect the quality. (It does not change the dynamic range)
I can see why some people don't like Dialnorm(although I don't have a problem with it), but this fact seems to be ignored by many who use it as a reason to assume that TrueHD is inferior to PCM:rolleyes:

cheers:)

I can see why some people don't like Dialnorm(although I don't have a problem with it), but this fact seems to be ignored by many who use it as a reason to assume that TrueHD is inferior to PCM:rolleyes:

cheers:)

So what you're saying is that any "audible" difference is purely predicated on playback at different SPL levels. Given identical masters of the same film (such as in the case of the Kubricks) plus identical SPL, the result would be identical!

Any actual comparison results -- anybody :)?

Warner is consistently bad about using DN so I bought the BD to be safe.;)

I went with the DTHD versions, but that order was placed before I got serious about BD playback (as in bought players.) LPCM works well for me, though I've no hard reason to choose it over DTHD. My master volume is always selected viewing by viewing, so relative overall level isn't something that would persuade me either way.

My interest is whether there are any sonic characteristics that are discernably different between the two formats. Does one actually provide a more satisfying listening experience than the other? Should I have gone with the LPCM versions :)? (Or is it really just six of one Vs a half-dozen of the other?)

So what you're saying is that any "audible" difference is purely predicated on playback at different SPL levels. Given identical masters of the same film (such as in the case of the Kubricks) plus identical SPL, the result would be identical!

Any actual comparison results -- anybody :)?No need, the input to output of both TrueHD and DTS-HDMA encoders and decoders are mathematically identical. They are mathematically lossless encoding systems, output is bit for bit identical(which means no sonic difference to the master used) any difference between the master and the output of these decoders will be somewhere else in the chain not in the decoders.

cheers:)

I just noticed that on http://www.blu-raystats.com/ they have 2001 BD listed as 24bit. Is this a mistake?