AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Surround Music Formats › Genesis DTS 5.1 96/24 Dithered Down to 2-channel vs. the Redbook CD Mix
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Genesis DTS 5.1 96/24 Dithered Down to 2-channel vs. the Redbook CD Mix

post #1 of 35
6/1/07 at 6:34pm
Thread Starter 
I know this may be a weird question, but I'm just wondering what people think.

I can playback the 5.1 DTS 96kHz/24bit DVD down-mixed to 2-channel if I run my receiver in "pure direct" mode. What I'm wondering is if this would be the better way, SQ-wise, to listen to the new discs in 2-channel versus listening to the redbook CDs.

My concern is that the 5.1 mix, down-mixed to 2-channel, will not really be the same as the redbook CD mix. But I'm also wondering about the relative SQ of doing it either way. Should the 96/24 DTS 5.1 mix, down-mixed to 2-channel, theoretically sound "better" than the redbook CD sounds?

I've tried to compare both ways as objectively as possible, but it's impossible for me to A/B them as quickly as would be necessary to make a valid comparison.

Thoughts?
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #2 of 35
6/1/07 at 9:00pm
For 2 channel listening, my guess is that the redbook CD would be better. CD is lossless, while the DTS is lossy compressed. And taking into account the 5.1channel mixdown to 2 channel ....

But I haven't done any comparisons myself.
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 35
6/1/07 at 9:19pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherbona View Post

CD is lossless, while the DTS is lossy compressed.

I know DTS is lossy, but I'm not sure about 96/24 DTS and how it differs from regular ol' DTS.
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 35
6/1/07 at 10:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

I know DTS is lossy, but I'm not sure about 96/24 DTS and how it differs from regular ol' DTS.

There is a lively discussion about that subject here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=809400
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 35
6/3/07 at 5:49pm
Thread Starter 
So, any differences in the down-mixed DTS96/24 5.1 to 2-channel "mix" versus the redbook CD's mix aside, which should theoretically have the better SQ; the DTS96/24 5.1 > 2-channel downmix or the redbook CD mix?
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 35
6/3/07 at 9:00pm
In theory, the redbook should have better sound--all things being equal--as it is lossless and DTS is lossy.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 35
6/3/07 at 10:09pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ovation View Post

..................... DTS is lossy.

Yeah, but as I said in Post#3, I know that regular DTS is lossy, but it's unclear to me that DTS96/24 is lossy.

The link in Post#4 doesn't really clarify that question either. Neither does THIS page at the DTS site.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 35
6/3/07 at 11:14pm
DTS 96/24 is lossy also, it is not a lossless process - a DTS96/24 data stream has the same data rate as regular DTS, which is much less than the datarate that a lossless compression could achieve.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 35
6/4/07 at 9:03am
DTS 96/24 always uses the highest of the 'original' DTS bitrates (1500) , while 'regular' DTS could use a lower bitrate (768).

DTS 96/24 is lossy, but it is unclear to me just what the 'lossiness' entails in this particular case, both in terms of what data are considered disposable, and in terms of audibility. DTS has in the past claimed audible transparency for its highest bitrate.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 35
6/4/07 at 9:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

So, any differences in the down-mixed DTS96/24 5.1 to 2-channel "mix" versus the redbook CD's mix aside, which should theoretically have the better SQ; the DTS96/24 5.1 > 2-channel downmix or the redbook CD mix?

The redbook is lossless, so *theoretically* the SQ is better. But given that most people couldn't tell a >200kbps mp3 from source, it's maybe not such a big deal. The difference in mixes is likely to be far more significant than teh format difference format, unless your playback system applies different levels, eq, etc to DTS vs redbook.
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 35
6/6/07 at 10:42am
But the redbook CD isn't recorded at the same sampling and bit rates, therefore it's possible the DTS96/24 lossy is > CD lossless...
Reply
Reply
post #12 of 35
6/7/07 at 12:07pm
CD 'bit rate' is a constant 1411 kbps (44100Hz × 2 channels × 16 bits per channel = 1,411,200 bits). If DTS 96/24 stereo format was analogous to CD, it would have a constant 96kHz @ 24 bits and thus a bitrate of 4608 kbps compared to CD. But of course it doesn't; it's 1500 kbps. Which devolves back to my question of just what data are discarded.
Reply
Reply
post #13 of 35
6/7/07 at 2:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

CD 'bit rate' is a constant 1411 kbps (44100Hz × 2 channels × 16 bits per channel = 1,411,200 bits). If DTS 96/24 stereo format was analogous to CD, it would have a constant 96kHz @ 24 bits and thus a bitrate of 4608 kbps compared to CD. But of course it doesn't; it's 1500 kbps. Which devolves back to my question of just what data are discarded.

I meant bit depth, not bit rate...

i.e. 96K/24bit might be better than 44.1K/16, even lossy, because there's probably a lot in the 48K-96K range that could be compressed without much notice on our parts...
Reply
Reply
post #14 of 35
6/7/07 at 2:41pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clepto View Post

i.e. 96K/24bit might be better than 44.1K/16, even lossy, because there's probably a lot in the 48K-96K range that could be compressed without much notice on our parts...

Yah, that's what I was wondering about, basically. No one has really given a definitive answer, yet.

I know the "5.1 down-mixed" most likely isn't identical to the mix on the CD (however, with the quality of these discs, it really wouldn't surprise me if they just lazily downmixed the 5.1 mix to make the 2-channel mix ), but I think the down-mix of the DVD's 5.1 track actually sounds better, SQ-wise.

I DO know it's very difficult to compare apples to oranges, and there could be many reasons why I have this impression, none of which are related to the actual SQ, but I've been listening to ATOTT and DUKE both ways and have sorta concluded that I like the sound of the 96/24 DTS down-mixed to 2-channel better than the sound of the CDs.

Anyway, no biggie.
Reply
Reply
post #15 of 35
6/10/07 at 10:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

CD 'bit rate' is a constant 1411 kbps (44100Hz × 2 channels × 16 bits per channel = 1,411,200 bits). If DTS 96/24 stereo format was analogous to CD, it would have a constant 96kHz @ 24 bits and thus a bitrate of 4608 kbps compared to CD. But of course it doesn't; it's 1500 kbps. Which devolves back to my question of just what data are discarded.

It's a perceptual coding. There isn't a way to know what exactly is discarded, unless you one of the designers of the codec.
Reply
Reply
post #16 of 35
6/12/07 at 9:32pm
It's not a question of what the technology is capable of, but of how the discs were mastered.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 35
6/13/07 at 3:30pm
Ok Here is a question. I got a hold of this in a DL version. The file was 6.6 gigs and I believe it has all 3 formats on it, sacd, dts 96/24 and the redbook version. Has anyone run into this DL version and if so which files are the DTS ones. I don't have sacd just dvd audio and dts so I don't need the sacd files. anyone one know?

Thanks
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 35
6/13/07 at 4:52pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterdog View Post

Ok Here is a question. I got a hold of this in a DL version. The file was 6.6 gigs and I believe it has all 3 formats on it, sacd, dts 96/24 and the redbook version. Has anyone run into this DL version and if so which files are the DTS ones. I don't have sacd just dvd audio and dts so I don't need the sacd files. anyone one know?

I don't know the answer, but doubtful the DL contains the SACD data as I don't think there is a way to extract that from an original disc.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 35
6/13/07 at 5:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

I don't know the answer, but doubtful the DL contains the SACD data as I don't think there is a way to extract that from an original disc.


I thought that too. But with the size being almost 7 gigs I know a DTS and redbook version would be no where near this size. Even a standard DVD Audio disc with both DTS and DD on it is only 4.5 gigs or so and most movies that have both dts and DD are no more than the 4.7 or so too. Which leads me to believe it may be on there. I know the video commentaries are PAL not NTSC so that would cause it to be more pecause PAL is a bit higher res but not that much. Well I guess I'll just burn the whole thing and see what happens. Worse case is a waste a disc.
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 35
6/13/07 at 5:28pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterdog View Post

I thought that too. But with the size being almost 7 gigs I know a DTS and redbook version would be no where near this size. Even a standard DVD Audio disc with both DTS and DD on it is only 4.5 gigs or so and most movies that have both dts and DD are no more than the 4.7 or so too. Which leads me to believe it may be on there. I know the video commentaries are PAL not NTSC so that would cause it to be more pecause PAL is a bit higher res but not that much. Well I guess I'll just burn the whole thing and see what happens. Worse case is a waste a disc.

Not sure if it would account for the size, but there IS quite a bit of "bonus" DVD-Video info on the discs.
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 35
6/13/07 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterdog View Post

Ok Here is a question. I got a hold of this in a DL version. The file was 6.6 gigs and I believe it has all 3 formats on it, sacd, dts 96/24 and the redbook version. Has anyone run into this DL version and if so which files are the DTS ones. I don't have sacd just dvd audio and dts so I don't need the sacd files. anyone one know?

Thanks

The DTS and the PCM 2ch would roughly equal on file size. They both run about 1.5mbps but DTS is not constant rate, so it's total size may vary but would be close to the 2ch PCM.
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 35
6/13/07 at 8:13pm
the DTS 96/24 is heavily compressed where as the CD audio isn't compressed at all.. so even though it is only 44.1/16 the CD audio should be better though in real world use the difference shouldn't be that noticable.. really you will probably find more problems from the 5.1 to stereo downmixing than dts versus CD audio.
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 35
6/13/07 at 9:22pm
Ok copied this to my HHD and it played just fine. Options were DTS 24/96, DD, and 2ch LPCM.
The DTS trcks sounded excellent compared to the DD track. Comparing the DTS to the 2chn track I still preferred the DTS one. The surround mix was done very nicely and really opened up the soundfield. Also embedded was 3 videos from 1976 and a concert from 1977.

All in all a very enjoyable release with good production. This was a PAL version and I don't know if there is a US one yet. I ran this on my HTPC going to my projector so I have know problem playing different broadcast systems. Picture quality considering it is 30 years old was pretty good. The concert from 1977 was LPCM and the videos were remixed in DTS 5.1.

scooter
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 35
6/13/07 at 10:32pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooterdog View Post

Ok copied this to my HHD and it played just fine. Options were DTS 24/96, DD, and 2ch LPCM.
The DTS trcks sounded excellent compared to the DD track. Comparing the DTS to the 2chn track I still preferred the DTS one. The surround mix was done very nicely and really opened up the soundfield. Also embedded was 3 videos from 1976 and a concert from 1977.

All in all a very enjoyable release with good production. This was a PAL version and I don't know if there is a US one yet. I ran this on my HTPC going to my projector so I have know problem playing different broadcast systems. Picture quality considering it is 30 years old was pretty good. The concert from 1977 was LPCM and the videos were remixed in DTS 5.1.

scooter

Is this a legit DL, scooter?

Just wondering, as legit Hirez DLs are beginning to appear at some online music sites as discussed in THIS thread.
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 35
6/14/07 at 9:14am
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehun View Post

The DTS and the PCM 2ch would roughly equal on file size. They both run about 1.5mbps but DTS is not constant rate, so it's total size may vary but would be close to the 2ch PCM.


Actually I'm told elsewhere that DTS 96/24 is CBR (constant bitrate), not VBR or ABR (variable/average) does anyone know for sure?

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...dpost&p=496814
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 35
6/14/07 at 9:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivadselim View Post

Is this a legit DL, scooter?

I highly doubt it. As best I can tell the Genesis remixed discs aren't available for 'download' anywhere...except on torrents.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 35
6/14/07 at 10:25am
I purchased TOtT at Frys last week DVD/CD...I assume it's the same version as scooterdog's...has the concert features, etc. While the DTS96/24 version is clean, it lacks the dynamics and bottom I was expecting...compressed...yes. The CD and concert clips sound better to me. The clips created severe nostalgia moments...man I think I saw myself in some of the fresh faced 20 year olds in the audience. Amazing how good they were and so young.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 35
6/14/07 at 4:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

I highly doubt it. As best I can tell the Genesis remixed discs aren't available for 'download' anywhere...except on torrents.

Reply
Reply
post #29 of 35
6/14/07 at 4:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Temple View Post

I purchased TOtT at Frys last week DVD/CD...I assume it's the same version as scooterdog's...has the concert features, etc. While the DTS96/24 version is clean, it lacks the dynamics and bottom I was expecting...compressed...yes. The CD and concert clips sound better to me. The clips created severe nostalgia moments...man I think I saw myself in some of the fresh faced 20 year olds in the audience. Amazing how good they were and so young.


I totally agree Ron. I would love a DVD Audio versionof this
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 35
6/15/07 at 6:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

Actually I'm told elsewhere that DTS 96/24 is CBR (constant bitrate), not VBR or ABR (variable/average) does anyone know for sure?

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...dpost&p=496814

My understanding of this is that,
DTS is a perceptual coding so it can't be CBR. 96/24 is just an extension on the top of the core, unlike true 24/96 PCM.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Surround Music Formats

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Surround Music Formats › Genesis DTS 5.1 96/24 Dithered Down to 2-channel vs. the Redbook CD Mix