Any particular reason for DTS-MA over Dolby TrueHD? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-02-2012, 01:58 AM - Thread Starter
EJ
AVS Special Member
 
EJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 2,779
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've been a long-time member of the forum, and would like to think I have a good understanding of the various audio codecs. As blu ray has matured, I've noticed that the majority of lossless audio tracks have utilized DTS-MA over Dolby TrueHD. Is there a technical reason for this? If all technical issues are equal, I wonder if DTS offers a better licensing deal.

I've always been a big fan of DTS, and have a collection of laserdiscs that gave be my first taste of home, multichannel discreet sound. When DVD came along, I understand a Dolby track was a requirement under most conditions, so I can understand Dolby gaining traction. I found myself rooting for the, often superior sounding, DTS underdog.

I'd be interested in knowing more about why the perennial "also-ran" is suddenly leading the race? I know their both lossless, and I've seen DTS-MA tracks with 7.1 channels and 20 bit audio. Is Dolby capable of similar resolution? Being based on MLP codecs, I would imagine so. Thanks in advance for the help.

Former USSB uplink operator.
EJ is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 10-02-2012, 02:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
Michael Sargent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Kemptville, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 899
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 40
TrueHD is an optional codec in Blu-Ray, unlike HD-DVD where it was a mandatory codec (like DD was mandatory on DVD, where dts was optional).
Michael Sargent is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 04:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
IanD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 1,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 23
My guess is that since the open source community have not yet developed a DTS-HD decoder (unlike TrueHD), the studios are preferring to go with the codec that is the hardest for the consumer to play back for free without paying a license to someone: it's just part of their plan to facilitate "no pay, no play".
IanD is online now  
Old 10-02-2012, 09:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Patsfan123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Quincy, MA
Posts: 1,845
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I believe it was because the original DTS-HD MA encoders worked on both Windows and Mac while TrueHD only worked on one (I forget which). It was easier to use DTS-HD MA since they could do both audio and video on the same machine.

Michael

Collection: DVD | High-def
Patsfan123 is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 11:57 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked: 424
I asked both Dolby and DTS this question, and received a consistent answer from both (from each company's perspective). DTS encoders worked faster, and they had better authoring software. Studios switched to them because DTS was easier to use and saved them money (given that time is money in Hollywood). Dolby later improved both their encoding times and software to be comparable to DTS, but by then a lot of the studio relationships had already moved.

It was never a question of quality. Both TrueHD and DTS-HD MA are lossless.

Dolby recognizes that they kind of blew it here, and have recently been trying to add new features (such as 96k upsampling) to bring some of the studios back.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 12:05 PM
Member
 
mezman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 89
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My understanding is that the reason is technical. The BD spec requires that (I think at least) that if an lossless audio track is provided, that a lossy DD or DTS track is also provided as a fallback for universal compatibility. Since the DTS-HD MA codec is built around a "core plus extensions" design, it has a loss 1.5Mbs lossy "core" track as the basis and the extensions around that make the audio lossless and therefore satisfies the fallback requirement with one audio stream. TrueHD on the other hand does not contain a lossy "core" DD stream within it and as such if a disc is to have TrueHD audio on it, the disc must also have a separate DD stream making producing a disc with TrueHD less appealing to whoever is mastering the disc.
mezman is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 12:17 PM
Senior Member
 
djdmt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 246
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
because dts is louder!
/sarcasm
Kevin Snyder likes this.
djdmt is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 04:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIG ED's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: California Wine Country
Posts: 3,290
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Any particular reason for True-HD over Drops The Sound?

"I wonder if any of the releases had slipcovers though."
"Are these comfirmed to have slipcovers?"
"They look nice in those slips."
"This slipcover looks too good to pass up."
BIG ED is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 06:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Kilian.ca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ex-50Hz, now 60Hz
Posts: 1,901
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 36
It's all been covered before, is there a real need for another thread?

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1270468/dts-ma-and-truehd

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1174168/is-sony-moving-from-dolby-truehd-to-dts-hd-master-audio

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1171739/sony-sphe-has-switched-from-truehd-to-dts-hd-ma

Audiosceptics accept audio trials using 25 people. A recent Oxford study with over 353,000 patient records from 639 separate clinical trials shows for every 1,000 people taking diclofenac or ibuprofen there would be 3 additional heart attacks, 4 more cases of heart failure and 1 death every year.

Kilian.ca is offline  
Old 10-02-2012, 09:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Phantom Stranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Between the known and the unknown...
Posts: 3,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked: 105
There was also an infamous poll conducted over at Blu-ray.com where DTS-HD MA soundly beat out Dolby TrueHD as the people's choice when Sony asked the question. It did no favors to TrueHD that it was the music format most associated with HD DVD in the public's mind. Once HD DVD went down, it basically took Dolby TrueHD with it.
Phantom Stranger is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 03:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kilian.ca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Ex-50Hz, now 60Hz
Posts: 1,901
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 36
For those unaware, since you mention that poll, it was started by someone who claimed or led others to believe for a long time that he is a Hollywood/Sony insider. Long story short, earlier this year after a Sony high level personnel came forward, his identity was questioned (it was never verified) and that forum decided to remove his insider status and lock his fanclub thread. He is the second 'insider' to be stripped of that status. I don't want to comment on other forums normally but this is to say the legitimacy of the poll is doubtful. I challenged their polling methodology about sample being representative and my post was deleted.

Audiosceptics accept audio trials using 25 people. A recent Oxford study with over 353,000 patient records from 639 separate clinical trials shows for every 1,000 people taking diclofenac or ibuprofen there would be 3 additional heart attacks, 4 more cases of heart failure and 1 death every year.

Kilian.ca is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 04:45 AM
Member
 
jeffw69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: East Coast, USA
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
jeffw69 is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 09:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Foxbat121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: VA
Posts: 10,061
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 259 Post(s)
Liked: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Sargent View Post

TrueHD is an optional codec in Blu-Ray, unlike HD-DVD where it was a mandatory codec (like DD was mandatory on DVD, where dts was optional).

TrueHD is only mandatory on HD-DVD player, not discs. The only thing mandatory on HD-DVD discs are DD+ IIRC.
Foxbat121 is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
space2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,052
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Many use it do to the fact that the DTS-HD includes the DTS CORE and does not need a separate track.

With True-HD you need another track of AC3
space2001 is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:24 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by space2001 View Post

Many use it do to the fact that the DTS-HD includes the DTS CORE and does not need a separate track.
With True-HD you need another track of AC3

You presume that anyone at the studio cares whether the lossy track is a "core" or a separate file. They don't. The Dolby authoring software automatically renders a lossy downmix during encoding. It's no extra work for the studio, and the amount of disc space used by TrueHD plus DD isn't significantly different than a DTS-HD Master Audio track.

As I explained earlier, the reason studios moved to DTS is that the encoding times were faster and the software was more user-friendly. I asked both sides of the issue, and they both gave me a consistent answer. Had DTS wanted to brag about something they felt they were doing better than Dolby, they had every opportunity to do so.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Phantom Stranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Between the known and the unknown...
Posts: 3,253
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 114 Post(s)
Liked: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilian.ca View Post

For those unaware, since you mention that poll, it was started by someone who claimed or led others to believe for a long time that he is a Hollywood/Sony insider. Long story short, earlier this year after a Sony high level personnel came forward, his identity was questioned (it was never verified) and that forum decided to remove his insider status and lock his fanclub thread. He is the second 'insider' to be stripped of that status. I don't want to comment on other forums normally but this is to say the legitimacy of the poll is doubtful. I challenged their polling methodology about sample being representative and my post was deleted.
I think I know whom you speak of, that is news to me but I hadn't paid attention to the so-called insiders over at Blu-ray.com in a long time.
Phantom Stranger is offline  
Old 10-03-2012, 12:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

You presume that anyone at the studio cares whether the lossy track is a "core" or a separate file. They don't. The Dolby authoring software automatically renders a lossy downmix during encoding. It's no extra work for the studio, and the amount of disc space used by TrueHD plus DD isn't significant different than a DTS-HD Master Audio track.
As I explained earlier, the reason studios moved to DTS is that the encoding times were faster and the software was more user-friendly. I asked both sides of the issue, and they both gave me a consistent answer. Had DTS wanted to brag about something they felt they were doing better than Dolby, they had every opportunity to do so.

100% agree. If DTS-MA was superior in sound quality to TrueHD, DTS would market the hell out of it and every audiophile website and magazine would be denouncing Dolby and pushing DTS.

I personally could care less if the track is PCM, TrueHD, or DTS-HD-MA. Makes no difference to me.
John Stockton likes this.
ack_bk is offline  
Old 05-30-2013, 02:27 PM
Senior Member
 
Larry Geller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Bayside, New York, USA
Posts: 203
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Well, Onkyo & Integra receivers deliver 7.1 DTS HD-MA as 7.1H if you use height speakers (and I do), but they downmix DD TruHD 7.1 to 5.1. Therefore, I prefer DTS by far.

"MMMM,Snout!"---Homer Simpson
Larry Geller is offline  
Old 05-31-2013, 12:45 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,341
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 507 Post(s)
Liked: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Geller View Post

Well, Onkyo & Integra receivers deliver 7.1 DTS HD-MA as 7.1H if you use height speakers (and I do), but they downmix DD TruHD 7.1 to 5.1. Therefore, I prefer DTS by far.

Do you use both height speakers and back surrounds - meaning 9.1 channels? I can't imagine why the receiver would downmix TrueHD to 5.1. It's not supposed to.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off