Lossless vs lossy - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 53 Old 07-17-2010, 10:39 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
stang323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Has anyone really tried comparing the two?

Dolby true hd vs dolby digital
Dts ma vs dts digital?

Can someone really tell the difference?

I tried it on dark knight and mostly just heard a db difference?

Just want to know...
stang323 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 53 Old 07-17-2010, 10:40 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
stang323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The reason I ask is because I'm thinking of upgrading some of my DVD to bluerays for that factor
stang323 is offline  
post #3 of 53 Old 07-17-2010, 10:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Many, many people have done comparisons. You'll find lots of threads on the subject.

Unfortunately, there are no rigorous studies. But, this article may shed some light for you. The test environment is quite good, better than most of us can do in home comparisons.

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby...compressed_PCM

All of that aside, DD 5.1 and DTS are less compressed on BD than on DVD. So, upgrading to Blu-rays will almost certainly give you better audio even if your equipment can't process the lossless tracks. Besides, upgrading to BD gives you HD video, too.
BIslander is online now  
post #4 of 53 Old 07-19-2010, 10:23 PM
Advanced Member
 
Steve_Vai_rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: The land of Ice and Snow
Posts: 988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
it all depends on a variety of factors. like: How well trained your ears are (for catching digital artifacts, and no not some magazine editors ears), how good other components in your chain are (speakers, amps, pres, processor, transport, DAC, etc.), and of course the acoustics in your room....

Some people may not notice a difference, having played lossless 24 bit 192khz master tracks from my studio vs 16 bit 44.1khz "final" masters over my home system I can notice a difference yet many people I work with at the studio (both musicians and engineers and producers) to just friends and family can't hear anything. Now I know that's not an exact analogy for what you are dealing with but close. Some people can notice the difference but it all depends... Also when mixing and mastering for lossless or lossy some studios may make changes to the final master tracks or even for different versions of the disc (and there can be a variety of changes made, different foley work, different mix/master engineer, different eq'ing, extra dubbing, new filters, etc. etc. etc. etc.)..


Sorry there really is no easy answer.

I would say go to blu-ray, better video, and better audio. get the oppo bdp-80 or 83, and enjoy how much better things look and sound.. *just in my humble opinion.. ymmv*


Matt

"The main reason Santa is so jolly is because he knows where all the bad girls live." - George Carlin
Steve_Vai_rules is offline  
post #5 of 53 Old 07-20-2010, 04:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Easyaspie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
^^^Bsed on what you said, which isn't entirely untrue, it is possible that a lossy soundtrack could sound better than a lossless one due to mixing variations.

But for the most part I agree with you: get BR and you are guaranteed better audio. Whether lossless or HBR lossy.
Easyaspie is offline  
post #6 of 53 Old 07-20-2010, 10:57 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
stang323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
So to sum it up, it's not just only compression but also a different mixing job? If so thanks for the clear up
stang323 is offline  
post #7 of 53 Old 07-20-2010, 12:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 58
Well, different mixes just kind of happen, especially on older movies where they remaster the sound. Sometimes you get good audio mixers and sometimes not so good ones. Once in a while someone working on a lossless mix can accidentally hose it up so that a lossy one sounds better, but I don't think that happens TOO often.

Mostly the difference is in compression, but again it varies from person to person and setup to setup on how much you'll hear it.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #8 of 53 Old 07-20-2010, 05:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Steve_Vai_rules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: The land of Ice and Snow
Posts: 988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
even current movies being sent to blu ray and dvd may have completely different studios do the final mastering and mixing and in some cases even editing...

Lots of variables. but yes a lossy "could" sound better if the engineers are better then the lossless engineers. or the studios are different and one is setup better. etc. etc.

and yes it doesn't necessarily mean just compression. It can, and if it's just a matter of compression go with lossless because then you are starting with (odds are) the best source material. It's like sacd/dvd-a/hrcd/xrcd/hi-rez vs. normal "redbook" cd's.. best source material you start with the better it will sound coming out of your speakers.

tulpa is accurate imho

I say don't worry too much about it, blu ray just feature wise and performance is a better option than dvd now, even costs aren't a substantial turn off.. hope I could be of some help.

Matt

"The main reason Santa is so jolly is because he knows where all the bad girls live." - George Carlin
Steve_Vai_rules is offline  
post #9 of 53 Old 08-01-2010, 12:51 PM
Newbie
 
joe9984's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Im no audiophile guru but the best way I describe the difference is the difference between an mp3 and a cd. You get so used to how mp3s sound that when you put on an uncompressed cd vs compressed mp3, it tends to shine through. Now equipment makes a huge difference as well, if i was listening to music through stock computer speakers there's not as much of a difference.

TV = Vizio 47xvt 240hz
Receiver = Onkyo sr608
Fronts = Polk Monitor 60s
Center = Polk CS10
Surrounds = Polk Monitor 30s
Height = Polk R15
Subs = JBL e250p and an onkyo htib sub
joe9984 is offline  
post #10 of 53 Old 08-01-2010, 01:40 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
I would say the difference is minor, and most appreciated on high-end theater systems in proper rooms.

For me, the difference is not insignificant, but neither is it large. It's a very nice improvement, but clearly the move to HD video is what really makes the big difference. But I have an acoustically treated room with a ~$10K audio system.

Clearly if you have HD video capability, that would be your motivation to upgrade to BD. If you are a stickler for audio and already have a very nice theater system, then that might be a motivation, but otherwise I think your money would probably be better spent elsewhere on things that would make a larger difference.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #11 of 53 Old 08-01-2010, 01:53 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
ccotenj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: the toxic waste dumps of new jersey
Posts: 21,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 89
+1... good post chris...

for the GREAT majority of home users, pq is about 99% of the advantage of bluray, with aq 1% (to allow for placebo on the users part )...

to the op... if anyone tells you about the "huge, awesome differences" between the lossy and lossless codecs, you can discard that "advice"... as chris points out, even on a well thought out and setup system that will allow the additional resolution to "come through", the difference is hardly "dramatic"... i'm fortunate enough to have an "adequate" setup, and while i wouldn't encourage bd author's to stop using the lossless codecs, i wouldn't cry bloody murder if only the lossy cores of them existed...

otoh, there are "huge awesome differences" from the visual standpoint, especially if you have a large screen viewed from an appropriate distance...

- chris

 

my build thread - updated 8-20-12 - new seating installed and projector isolation solution

 


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ccotenj is offline  
post #12 of 53 Old 08-01-2010, 02:12 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
The other thing to point out obviously, is that you need an AV receiver or processor capable of handling the lossless audio. Additionally, even legacy units can still get a gain in audio because the down-ressed lossy output via SPDIF on a bluray player will be full-bitrate (still lossy though) DD or DTS, which will still be a step up from most any DVD.

So for people going to BD but debating whether to upgrade their audio receiver to get lossless audio capabilities, that would probably be an even more minor change, because even lossy on BD is still going to be a step up.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #13 of 53 Old 08-19-2010, 09:06 AM
Member
 
centurymantra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I recently upgraded to Blu-Ray and have noticed the DTS-HD lossless audio is an improvement over the standard DVD sound. It provided a little more improvement than I was honestly expecting but, that being said, it is certainly not a huge difference.

I see the occasional debates about mp3 vs. CD, lossless vs. lossy, etc. and with some saying that you can't really hear any difference. I will admit that it becomes very difficult to hear a difference in a lot of material as you the approach 256kbps-320kbps. Being able to detect a difference is subjective, but at least in this case (unlike say, comparing amps, transports, etc.) it is very easy to establish that there is a measurable difference in the signal. The debate is - can we hear the difference? I would argue that the way we respond to a compressed mp3 with its lossy data and truncated frequency response can be different at a subconscious level which ultimately effects our enjoyment of the music. You may not be able to sit in front of a stereo in an analytical mindset and reliably pick out a difference as you toggle between two tracks, but I feel it may be possible to respond to one differently and simply enjoy it more without really knowing why.. I can imagine that, if one is in the kitchen going about their business with a CD playing a mixture of lossless wav files and 192kbps mp3 files, you simply might - without thinking about it - find yourself tapping your toes a little more when the wav files are playing. In a similar note, perhaps playing those discs with lossless audio will provide a deeper sense of subtle realism and immersion that will be hard to pick out in A/B test, but will simply lend to a greater sense of overall enjoyment.
centurymantra is offline  
post #14 of 53 Old 08-19-2010, 09:08 AM
Member
 
centurymantra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

I would say the difference is minor, and most appreciated on high-end theater systems in proper rooms.

For me, the difference is not insignificant, but neither is it large. It's a very nice improvement, but clearly the move to HD video is what really makes the big difference. But I have an acoustically treated room with a ~$10K audio system.

Clearly if you have HD video capability, that would be your motivation to upgrade to BD. If you are a stickler for audio and already have a very nice theater system, then that might be a motivation, but otherwise I think your money would probably be better spent elsewhere on things that would make a larger difference.

Stepping aside from my observations above, I'll concur with this, and say that it is pretty much the summation of our discussion.
centurymantra is offline  
post #15 of 53 Old 08-19-2010, 09:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Easyaspie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by centurymantra View Post

I recently upgraded to Blu-Ray and have noticed the DTS-HD lossless audio is an improvement over the standard DVD sound. It provided a little more improvement than I was honestly expecting but, that being said, it is certainly not a huge difference.

Sure there is a big difference when you're doing an apples to oranges comparison. There is an absolute improvement with lossless on BR from low bit rate, lossy audio on DVD.

For a closer to apples to apples comparison connect your BRP up via optical and select the dts MA track. By using an optical connection you'll get what is referred to as high bit rate lossy.

If you do that I don't think you'll hear that much of a difference.

YMMV though.
Easyaspie is offline  
post #16 of 53 Old 08-19-2010, 10:24 AM
Member
 
centurymantra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 68
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Easyaspie View Post

Sure there is a big difference when you're doing an apples to oranges comparison. There is an absolute improvement with lossless on BR from low bit rate, lossy audio on DVD.

For a closer to apples to apples comparison connect your BRP up via optical and select the dts MA track. By using an optical connection you'll get what is referred to as high bit rate lossy.

If you do that I don't think you'll hear that much of a difference.

YMMV though.

I've actually got my system hooked up like this, as I use the BRP for the DTS-HD processing, but still use my Primare A/V processor for the standard DD 5.1 decoding as I believe it sounds a fair bit better than the internal processing of the BRP. I've switched back and forth, and have been impressed by how much nicer it sounds. I guess we need to define what we mean by HUGE difference. I was actually downplaying my enthusiasm a bit, as I think folks ideas of what qualifies as a huge difference will vary a lot. I'm also running a pretty nice system with ATC speakers all around in an acoustically treated room, and realize a lot of folks aren't in the same situation.

That being said, I'm not sure I've done the exact test you describe above - selecting DTS-HD on the optical (or, in my case, coaxial output). I'll have to mess around with that a bit.
centurymantra is offline  
post #17 of 53 Old 08-19-2010, 11:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,940
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by centurymantra View Post

I've actually got my system hooked up like this, as I use the BRP for the DTS-HD processing, but still use my Primare A/V processor for the standard DD 5.1 decoding as I believe it sounds a fair bit better than the internal processing of the BRP. I've switched back and forth, and have been impressed by how much nicer it sounds. I guess we need to define what we mean by HUGE difference. I was actually downplaying my enthusiasm a bit, as I think folks ideas of what qualifies as a huge difference will vary a lot. I'm also running a pretty nice system with ATC speakers all around in an acoustically treated room, and realize a lot of folks aren't in the same situation.

That being said, I'm not sure I've done the exact test you describe above - selecting DTS-HD on the optical (or, in my case, coaxial output). I'll have to mess around with that a bit.

Not to be difficult, but try that with an SPL meter in hand. My guess is you'll find a level difference between the two decoding options that will likely account for very much of the difference. It's how we're wired - - louder typically "sounds better"
JHAz is offline  
post #18 of 53 Old 08-19-2010, 11:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DonH50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Monument CO
Posts: 6,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Liked: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

It's how we're wired - - louder typically "sounds better"

...unless it's my teenagers...

"After silence, that which best expresses the inexpressible, is music" - Aldous Huxley
DonH50 is offline  
post #19 of 53 Old 08-27-2010, 01:31 PM
Member
 
Dingane Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think the reason why DD at 448kbps does not sound as good as 640kbps DD & TrueHD, is because of the dynamic range compression applied to all Dolby Digital recordings under 640kbps, resulting in audio that is distorted & muddy. I don't think that it is just bitrate either, because I've heard 2ch 448kbps DD material, & it suffers from DRC. That is 224kbps per channel, which is a higher bitrate per channel than 640kbps, & it still suffers from DRC. Also, I have done comparisons of DTS vs DD & the reason why DD loses is not because of Dialnorm or bitrate, but DRC. If there was a way we could take the DRC, it would sound a LOT better! I heard a 320kbps DD 35mm soundtrack in an Imax theater, & it did not suffer from low volume, tinny sounding effects, & hard to understand dialogue. Every other movie theater I go to other than that Imax theater suffers from the same issues I have at home with Dolby Digital.
Dingane Walker is online now  
post #20 of 53 Old 08-27-2010, 08:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingane Walker View Post

I think the reason why DD at 448kbps does not sound as good as 640kbps DD & TrueHD, is because of the dynamic range compression applied to all Dolby Digital recordings under 640kbps, resulting in audio that is distorted & muddy.

I'm not aware that DRC is applied by DD 5.1 decoders when the bitrate is less than 640kb/s. Can you point to the source of that information? Downmixes and RF outputs will have DRC applied to prevent clipping. But, that's not the same thing you are talking about.
BIslander is online now  
post #21 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 08:17 AM
Member
 
Dingane Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
BIslander, It seems to me that every DD track under 640kbps is masked. I know that the mix hasn't changed from the original master, but it sounds like it is being capped & compromised.

On my reciever, everytime I listen to DD sources under 640, the dialogue is unintelligible, the music & the sound effects are muddy, & I can never get it to play loud enough to hear everything comfortably. I was assuming that DRC was applied to DD sources under 640kbps, but i guess i am wrong. There are too many issues with Dolby Digital, which is why people prefer DTS.


I know that DD can sound so much better, but it is frustrating trying to get it to sound proper on my setup.
Dingane Walker is online now  
post #22 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 09:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingane Walker View Post

BIslander, It seems to me that every DD track under 640kbps is masked, limiting the sonic impact.
On my reciever, everytime I listen to DD sources under 640, the dialogue is unintelligible, the music & the sound effects are muddy, & I can never get it to play loud enough to hear everything comfortably. I was assuming that DRC was applied to DD sources under 640kbps, but i guess i am wrong. There are too many issues with Dolby Digital, which is why people prefer DTS.


I know that DD can sound so much better, but it is frustrating trying to get it to sound proper on my setup.

You may want to look into your set-up, then. I don't experience what you describe with DD 5.1 tracks. The sound is clear, both dialog and music, and they play plenty loud enough. There are quality variations in mixes, but that has nothing to do with the codec.

DRC would not produce the symptoms you describe. In fact, it would help dialog. Dynamic Range Control lowers the loud volumes, boosts the quiet ones, and leaves the middle ones alone.

As for why some people prefer DTS, I suspect is has more to do with volume (DTS plays back louder due to Dolby's use of dialnorm) and marketing. Or, perhaps some people prefer the choices that DTS makes in what to remove from the original soundtrack. But, those are just opinions on my part.
BIslander is online now  
post #23 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 10:47 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
stang323's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 511
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I did some of my own testing dts vs dd with fast and the furious DVD and I besides the volume difference I did feel like dts had more dynamic range. With Dolby I had to crank the volume up but still didn't give me the same dynamic range
stang323 is offline  
post #24 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 11:32 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 997 Post(s)
Liked: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingane Walker View Post

On my reciever, everytime I listen to DD sources under 640, the dialogue is unintelligible...

That would encompass practically all DVDs. So for the past 13 years that DVD has been around, dialogue has been unintelligible on your system? And you think that might be due to a reduction in dynamic range (the very thing that makes it easier to follow dialogue when listening softly, late at night)?

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #25 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 01:57 PM
Member
 
Dingane Walker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
sdurani, I have a Pioneer SX-315 reciever that I bought about a year ago, & I'm having problems hearing dialogue on a lot of DVD movies. Maybe it's because of my crappy speakers that it sounds like characters are whispering most of the time.


I wish that DD was as loud as PCM. Dolby & DTS should have made their Compressed codecs to be encoded at same exact volume as the PCM master.



Maybe getting a new reciever will solve my problem with the low volume.


I'll probably get an Onkyo 7.1 reciever.
Dingane Walker is online now  
post #26 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 03:08 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 19,350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 997 Post(s)
Liked: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingane Walker View Post

I have a Pioneer SX-315 reciever that I bought about a year ago, & I'm having problems hearing dialogue on a lot of DVD movies.

What about before that, did you always have trouble hearing dialogue on DVD?
Quote:


Maybe it's because of my crappy speakers that it sounds like characters are whispering most of the time...Maybe getting a new reciever will solve my problem with the low volume.

Well this is some change of tune. Earlier you claimed that there was "dynamic range compression applied to all Dolby Digital recordings under 640kbps, resulting in audio that is distorted & muddy". When asked to back up your claim, you couldn't, but were still convinced of the culprit "There are too many issues with Dolby Digital..." Too many? Can you list some? And now the problem may be your speakers or your receiver.
Quote:


I wish that DD did not have the low volume issue.

If you're talking about the fact that DD soundtracks often decode 4dB lower than DTS soundtracks, then simply raise the volume 4dB. Issue resolved. Based on what you've posted so far, I'm willing to bet that your "it sounds like characters are whispering most of the time" issue isn't due to your speakers nor your receiver. You may want to look into how you set up your system.

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #27 of 53 Old 08-28-2010, 05:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 8,539
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingane Walker View Post

Maybe getting a new reciever will solve my problem with the low volume.

Perhaps. But, you clearly have a set-up problem with your current equipment. I would recommend that you start over from scratch. Set your receiver and disc players to the factory defaults. Go through the receiver configuration process, using the system's auto calibration, if it has that feature. Then check the speaker calibration with the tones on a disc such as Avia and an SPL meter. You may find that proper set-up and calibration solves most of your problems.

Meanwhile, please don't make stuff up. Or, if you want to make wild claims such as the one about how Dolby secretly applies DRC for most encodes, please include the fact that you have simply jumped to a conclusion based on absolutely no information.
BIslander is online now  
post #28 of 53 Old 09-05-2010, 12:20 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Ovation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. Hubert, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 3,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 34 Post(s)
Liked: 27
I won't go into all the details that led me to pose this question (it would be a LONG post) but recently I've begun to wonder where the balance between resolution and advanced audio processing in real world situations might lie.

I'm thinking of upgrading my receiver to take advantage of advanced processing like Audyssey (or something similar). Right now, I am deprived of the lossless BD audio, though I do have a good (for its vintage) set up for DVD-A/SACD. My DVD-A/SACD player is analogue output only, though, so a new receiver would not apply advanced eq'ing to those formats (unless I dropped a small fortune on something from Anthem). My PS3 is SACD capable, though, so I would be covered on that front with a new receiver--however, DVD-A would be out of luck.

I wonder if DD/DTS lossy tracks on a DVD-A WITH Audyssey would be "close enough" to MLP lossless WITHOUT the advanced processing? I know I could A/B the two should I upgrade the receiver, but I thought I'd pose the question to see if anyone has already done so and with what results?
Ovation is offline  
post #29 of 53 Old 09-05-2010, 01:29 PM
Newbie
 
xsesve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I prefer lossless
xsesve is offline  
post #30 of 53 Old 09-05-2010, 01:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JHAz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,940
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovation View Post

I won't go into all the details that led me to pose this question (it would be a LONG post) but recently I've begun to wonder where the balance between resolution and advanced audio processing in real world situations might lie.

I'm thinking of upgrading my receiver to take advantage of advanced processing like Audyssey (or something similar). Right now, I am deprived of the lossless BD audio, though I do have a good (for its vintage) set up for DVD-A/SACD. My DVD-A/SACD player is analogue output only, though, so a new receiver would not apply advanced eq'ing to those formats (unless I dropped a small fortune on something from Anthem). My PS3 is SACD capable, though, so I would be covered on that front with a new receiver--however, DVD-A would be out of luck.

I wonder if DD/DTS lossy tracks on a DVD-A WITH Audyssey would be "close enough" to MLP lossless WITHOUT the advanced processing? I know I could A/B the two should I upgrade the receiver, but I thought I'd pose the question to see if anyone has already done so and with what results?


I think the general consensus around here is that the higher bitrate lossless on BD with good room correction is superior to lossless without the correction, in most circumstances. I think I'd agree. I did just a llittle comparison when I first got my BD player, and I was only sure (okay reasonably sure) I heard a difference between lossless and the higher bitrate lossy maybe in one or two limited circumstances. For example, they say that you can hear the difference more easily on white or pink noise signals. I thought the rain that opens the second Pirates of the Caribbean movie (whihc is pretty npink noise-ish) sounded realer and the louder splashes stood out better on lossless. But honestly I did not spend a ton of time worrying about it. Once I had the ability to play lossless multichannel, I simply went with that.
JHAz is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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