The Future of DTS - Page 2 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 121Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 77 Old 03-10-2016, 01:08 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
saprano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bronx NY
Posts: 4,118
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 581 Post(s)
Liked: 602
Isnt it ironic dts it late with their audio format just like they were for DVD? That caused Dolby to dominate. Weird the same thing is happening now leading into UHD. Dolby was so far behind with bluray compared to DTS-MA. They have to be happy with the turn of events.

This is all on DTS.
Steve Crowley and oneeyeblind like this.

home theater addict
saprano is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 77 Old 03-10-2016, 02:59 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 3,388
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by saprano View Post
Isnt it ironic dts it late with their audio format just like they were for DVD? That caused Dolby to dominate. Weird the same thing is happening now leading into UHD. Dolby was so far behind with bluray compared to DTS-MA. They have to be happy with the turn of events. This is all on DTS.

Remember that the DTS:X codec is intended to compete with both Dolby Atmos and Dolby AC-4. We'll get a better sense of which is better after we see how the DTS and Dolby offerings compare when delivering lower-bitrate content over streaming|mobile|IP distribution channels in addition to the present BD and download areas.


_

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is offline  
post #33 of 77 Old 03-10-2016, 04:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,530
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 568 Post(s)
Liked: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
Remember that the DTS:X codec is intended to compete with both Dolby Atmos and Dolby AC-4. We'll get a better sense of which is better after we see how the DTS and Dolby offerings compare when delivering lower-bitrate content over streaming|mobile|IP distribution channels in addition to the present BD and download areas.
People seem to forget this part: http://www.tvnewscheck.com/playout/2...-sound-system/


Let's face it, a company founded on a "Ours goes to 11" policy isn't going to last long not truly innovating and being consistently late to market on everything. They got extremely lucky with Blu-ray.
Can't rely on a fanboy following forever.
thehun and oneeyeblind like this.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #34 of 77 Old 03-10-2016, 04:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,530
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 568 Post(s)
Liked: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal68 View Post
I believe that DTS-X needs the equivalent of a "killer app" to demonstrate why people should upgrade to it. The current crop of movies with DTS-X soundtracks leaves much to be desired because IMHO, most of them are not the type of movies that have the potential to showcase sound effects. Ex Machina and The Big Short are not going to have the wow factor that more action oriented movies could have. I always preferred DTS over Dolby soundtracks, but Atmos seems to have grabbed the baton from DTS-X. At least for now!

Is there a list of movies releasing on BluRay this year with DTS-X soundtracks?
I don't see how they can get a "killer app" when the performance of DTS-X vs. Atmos is lacking. Posted in another thread:
Quote:
As a matter of fact, as it stands now, you cannot take an MDA master (theatrical version of DTS:X) and encore it directly into DTS:X.

With Dolby, you actually can. They have an authoring tool to take the theatrical master (called the DAMR) and encode it directly into Atmos via TrueHD or Dolby Digital + (there are titles on shelves where that has been done already..)

The hype behind DTS allowing you to place speakers anywhere and adapt is just that.... that simply isn't the case. Have you seen a receiver yet with that technology? (Rhetorical question )

DTS depends on the same predefined speakers locations in the renderer. Have you seen the support speaker positions for DTS:X? There are a total of 32 positions.. However 2 of those are subs, and three of them are "below screen," so for all practical purposes 27. They have allowances for more height layers (3 vs 1) but less positions in each layer.

At this point the DTS codec is limited to 11 channels of output.... Atmos can support 34.

DTS also allows for a maximum of 16 audio streams + 2 LFE channels. So max 7.1 + 9 objects. Atmos allows for 7.1. + max 20 objects.

Atmos at home can be a straight port. *Any* DTS-X soundtrack has to be redone. Even if it was a theatrical DTS-X presentation. That's a big deal.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #35 of 77 Old 03-10-2016, 04:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 3,388
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
Remember that the DTS:X codec is intended to compete with both Dolby Atmos and Dolby AC-4. We'll get a better sense of which is better after we see how the DTS and Dolby offerings compare when delivering lower-bitrate content over streaming|mobile|IP distribution channels in addition to the present BD and download areas.
People seem to forget this part: http://www.tvnewscheck.com/playout/2...-sound-system/


Good point. It's easy to forget that DTS may still consider DTS:X a viable contender for non-ATSC country 'next gen' OTA broadcasting competitions . . . and even inside the ATSC country group there would seem to be no obstacle to it's use on CATV. But my thought is that by acquiring iBiquity, DTS might be trying to lock up the 'audio-only ATSC 3.0' Global marketplace and to make DTS:X the codec for some next generation HDRadio...?!


_

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."


Last edited by SoundChex; 03-10-2016 at 06:32 PM.
SoundChex is offline  
post #36 of 77 Old 03-10-2016, 05:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
Lazarus Dark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 621
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 226 Post(s)
Liked: 257
I prefer option 3: the SMPTE open standard for object audio.
With DTSMA and TrueHD, there was always the option of decoding to PCM and then you could apply whatever enhancements you wanted onto the audio. With Atmos vs DTSX that is not possible.
Because of this fundamental change, there needs to be a standard container format for object audio, this shouldn't be too hard as its really just compressed audio with xyz coordinates. Atmos and DTSX can still compete, but they will compete over rendering (you can choose DTSX or Atmos hardware for your rendering) and they can compete for mastering (the studio can choose to use Atmos or DTSX tools to master with, but the output file should be in standard SMPTE format, there could even be metadata extensions, like DTSX could identify dialogue objects and that would not interfere with playback on an Atmos renderer as it would just ignore the DTSX metadata but play the object audio just fine). This would also allow any other competitors, Auro could simply output their channels as objects on the mastering side, then it could be rendered on the other side using any of the renderers; while they can still claim in marketing that rendering Auro mastered titles on Auro hardware provides the "best" experience.
I think as part of the standard SMPTE file, it would identify whether the audio was originally mastered in DTSX, Atmos or Auro, then when you bitstream, you can either choose to have it always use a particular render engine, or it can change the rendering engine based on the mastered metadata flag. That way UHD discs and such can still label the audio as "mastered in Atmos" or whatever, even if the file format is open standard, and you get a lightup on the front of the AVR that tells you what audio its receiving.
Lazarus Dark is offline  
post #37 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 03:06 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leftardia Kommiefornia
Posts: 9,623
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1076 Post(s)
Liked: 1076
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthray View Post
I agree on this statement "DTS was the standard audiophiles loved and now we may be seeing it go the way of the Dodo".


In the laser disk days, DTS was the way to go.
Now a day with lossless, a lot less important, but that said, everything now is about convenience and Not sound quality


I am glad when I see younger people trying to get into our Hobby, but money talk.
The days of perfect sound are dying.


Ray
What? There are no other times where high quality sound is more readily available than today. Let's not confuse with one player's demise as the end of all good sound and technology. Both picture and sound technology today is vastly superior to the fabled Laserdisc times, which at it's peak penetrated about 2% of the US market. Yes physical media becoming harder and harder to market these days, but that doesn't mean that quality must suffer as well. I don't see it that way, and neither is today's engineers.
oneeyeblind likes this.

De sagittis Hungarorum libera nos, Domine!

Attention, don't read my posts if you're a snowflake or easily offended.

The Hun
thehun is online now  
post #38 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 03:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leftardia Kommiefornia
Posts: 9,623
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1076 Post(s)
Liked: 1076
Quote:
Originally Posted by drriddhish View Post
This is turning out to be classic business story- how gates once showed the "Windows" to world before apple could get Macintosh out..and captured software market and rest is history. Dolby atmos coming out early and implemented all around us, having titles available for home crowds has created positive feedback loop that DTS:X will have hard time claiming that market back. Even if it ends up being better object based audio codec and have leniency with speaker placement
DTS was always late to the party, yet they managed to get a sizable loyal following, just look at this thread. I wouldn't write their obituary just yet.

De sagittis Hungarorum libera nos, Domine!

Attention, don't read my posts if you're a snowflake or easily offended.

The Hun
thehun is online now  
post #39 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 04:31 AM
Senior Member
 
philipbtz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 138
There still doesn't seem to be a recommended speaker placement for DTS:X. This alone makes me pretty skeptical of their future. I don't care about wireless, portable stuff. Has DTS given up on UHD Bluray? I see there are titles out but what about speaker placement etc.?

Pretty sad that Dts seems to be going the way of Auro.
oneeyeblind likes this.
philipbtz is offline  
post #40 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 07:12 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darthray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cold lake Alberta Canada
Posts: 6,189
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2037 Post(s)
Liked: 2886
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehun View Post
What? There are no other times where high quality sound is more readily available than today. Let's not confuse with one player's demise as the end of all good sound and technology. Both picture and sound technology today is vastly superior to the fabled Laserdisc times, which at it's peak penetrated about 2% of the US market. Yes physical media becoming harder and harder to market these days, but that doesn't mean that quality must suffer as well. I don't see it that way, and neither is today's engineers.

I was saying, in the days, DTS was superior.
Now a day, lossless is lossless, and the sound and picture is vastly superior to what it was.
But a lot more people now a day, go for convenience over sound quality.
like MP3, listening to music through there I-phone and so...


Ray
darthray is online now  
post #41 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 07:45 AM
Senior Member
 
philipbtz's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 426
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthray View Post
I was saying, in the days, DTS was superior.
Now a day, lossless is lossless, and the sound and picture is vastly superior to what it was.
But a lot more people now a day, go for convenience over sound quality.
like MP3, listening to music through there I-phone and so...


Ray
Those were the days. I remember how superior the Dts soundtrack was in the movie Gladiator...or was it some other movie. Anyways now it's a different ball game.
darthray likes this.
philipbtz is offline  
post #42 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 08:41 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: United States
Posts: 2,511
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1248 Post(s)
Liked: 1934
Think about 3D TVs,

Step outside of AVS for a moment and really think about what 80% of the population uses for video. Think of all the hype over the past 5 years or so promoting 3D TV and yada, yada, yada. Most people care far more about screen size and video performance and shoot for sound to be "good enough". To the typical consumer, they were fresh off the HD-DVD VS BluRay format wars where they got burned again. That body was not even cold when the next big thing, 3D was hyped everywhere.

Consumers jumped on 3D TV at the same rate they did for Mini-Disc VS digital cassette in the 1990's. Thanks to the AV companies never getting their act together, the consumer has been trained to expect a format war every decade and for this one it is 3D VS no 3D and Atmos VS DTX VS to hell with it.

My brother has a new 4K TV, he has no 4K BluRay or 4K streaming. He was all in for surround sound and then did his research 5.1 VS 7.2 VS Atmos VS DTX. Looked around and saw the Atmos bouncy house speakers and the option to mount them in the ceiling. Then he looked at the cost, complexity and sheer dominance 11 speakers + at least 2 subs would do to his room--he passed. The new 4K TV has digital outputs that feed the digital inputs on his 1998 5.1 AVR...done!

It's OK to get burned on the wrong DVD format, it's annoying to pay extra for the 3D format--it's NOT OK to pay out thousands of dollars, run over 100 feet of cable everywhere and hang speakers, calibrate etc. to support a format that is not stable.

Then look at the Atmos in a soundbar... sure, it's expensive right now but the prices will fall fast and if not, it will go away.

IMHO, I feel that Atmos was pushed out as fast as possible as a beta and they plan on changing it until they get it right. To me, it is not worth it to tear up my ceiling and after seeing Auro3D, I don't believe I should have to. Figure eventually Atmos, DTS or whatever will get the speakers off the ceiling and use processing to perform the same duty.
That way 20 somethings can have a kick butt audio system in their apartments, college dorms, bedrooms and living rooms without structural modifications.

In my house, the ceiling fans are more important that Atmos--yeah, I'm not going to move that for a speaker.

Maybe DTS should get with Auro3D, figure out how to process an Atmos signal and convert it to Auro3D and go that way. They could do to Dolby what CD-R and MP3 did to the Mini-Disc and digital cassette format war. Pack the processors into a box with 50 watts X 4 channel class D chip amps and have the output of the box go the a regular 7.2 channel AVR. Slap a $300 price tag on it and go. It won't be the audiophile standard but that market has been in decline since the 1990 peak so not a major concern.

Now about those 8K TVs...
bass excavator and steve1971 like this.
18Hurts is offline  
post #43 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 08:54 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
sdurani's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 27,470
Mentioned: 190 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6917 Post(s)
Liked: 5879
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Hurts View Post
I feel that Atmos was pushed out as fast as possible as a beta and they plan on changing it until they get it right.
What changes?

Sanjay
sdurani is offline  
post #44 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 11:18 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,530
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 568 Post(s)
Liked: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Hurts View Post
IMHO, I feel that Atmos was pushed out as fast as possible as a beta and they plan on changing it until they get it right. To me, it is not worth it to tear up my ceiling and after seeing Auro3D, I don't believe I should have to. Figure eventually Atmos, DTS or whatever will get the speakers off the ceiling and use processing to perform the same duty.
That way 20 somethings can have a kick butt audio system in their apartments, college dorms, bedrooms and living rooms without structural modifications.
Have you read the Atmos & DTS-X threads here? Atmos was well thought out and ready from the get-go, complete with upfiring speakers that work better than anyone initially gave them credit for. After a year of being vaporware DTS-X launched and has had more bugs and configuration issues than I've seen in a long time. Seems to me they pushed out DTS-X just to get something on the market - better buggy than vaporware (which it continues to be on Onkyo and many other manufacturers). Atmos is still solid and growing.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #45 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 12:02 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
thehun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Leftardia Kommiefornia
Posts: 9,623
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1076 Post(s)
Liked: 1076
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthray View Post
I was saying, in the days, DTS was superior.
Now a day, lossless is lossless, and the sound and picture is vastly superior to what it was.
But a lot more people now a day, go for convenience over sound quality.
like MP3, listening to music through there I-phone and so..
.


Ray
I hear ya, but I don't see how other people's choices should cloud your days.For example people use pandora for portable music listening, I have large SD cards in my phone listening lossless files with full size headphones, they use earbuds.......... etc..
The sky is not falling.....
oneeyeblind likes this.

De sagittis Hungarorum libera nos, Domine!

Attention, don't read my posts if you're a snowflake or easily offended.

The Hun
thehun is online now  
post #46 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 01:48 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SoundChex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA, west coast
Posts: 3,388
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by darthray View Post
I was saying, in the days, DTS was superior.
Now a day, lossless is lossless, and the sound and picture is vastly superior to what it was.
But a lot more people now a day, go for convenience over sound quality.
like MP3, listening to music through there I-phone and so...
Ray

Low-bitrate DTS:X promises support for streamable|downloadable AV or Audio content delivery of encoded discrete multi-channel audio which you can play back as all of (e.g.) 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 7.1.4 from the same single-stream component. Of course both Dolby AC-4 and MPEG-H 3D Audio, the competing codecs|technologies, make the same promises!


_

[Home Office system schematic]
"My AV systems were created by man. They evolved. They rebelled. There are many speakers. And they have . . . A PLAN."

SoundChex is offline  
post #47 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 02:00 PM
Advanced Member
 
dschulz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 967
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 799 Post(s)
Liked: 547
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundChex View Post
[
Low-bitrate DTS:X promises support for streamable|downloadable AV or Audio content delivery of encoded discrete multi-channel audio which you can play back as all of (e.g.) 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, 7.1.4 from the same single-stream component. Of course both Dolby AC-4 and MPEG-H 3D Audio, the competing codecs|technologies, make the same promises!
_
Yes, but if the content is originally mixed in Atmos for the theatrical release, and the same mix is repackaged for the home version of Atmos for the UHD Blu Ray, who is going to re-encode in low bitrate DTS:X when Dolby is providing tools for their own low bitrate solution?

Dolby has been playing the long game by spending a fortune in supporting the content creation process.
David Susilo and oneeyeblind like this.
dschulz is online now  
post #48 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 07:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darthray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cold lake Alberta Canada
Posts: 6,189
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2037 Post(s)
Liked: 2886
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehun View Post
I hear ya, but I don't see how other people's choices should cloud your days.For example people use pandora for portable music listening, I have large SD cards in my phone listening lossless files with full size headphones, they use earbuds.......... etc..
The sky is not falling.....

I hear you, did not meant to derail this topic.
Just now a day, very few people seem to care about sound quality.
Where I work, I can say 1 of each 100, compare to when I grew up, around 6 of 10


Like you said, the sky is not falling!
Just, they do not know, what they are missing.


Best regard


Ray
thehun likes this.
darthray is online now  
post #49 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 07:36 PM
Advanced Member
 
pdasterly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 268 Post(s)
Liked: 92
personally like dts over dolby digital, sounded better to me. I have atmos which is great and im sure dts:x will not let me down when my receiver finally gets the firmware upgrade.

Internet is going to go fast soon, probably not cheap
https://fiber.google.com/about/

Routers wont melt either, well maybe those older one's. Need 4 antennas minimum and look like a spaceship
pdasterly is offline  
post #50 of 77 Old 03-11-2016, 08:32 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
darthray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Cold lake Alberta Canada
Posts: 6,189
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2037 Post(s)
Liked: 2886
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdasterly View Post
personally like dts over dolby digital, sounded better to me. I have atmos which is great and im sure dts:x will not let me down when my receiver finally gets the firmware upgrade.

Internet is going to go fast soon, probably not cheap
https://fiber.google.com/about/

Routers wont melt either, well maybe those older one's. Need 4 antennas minimum and look like a spaceship

Technology is in deed moving really fast lately.
Some can be good and some can be bad, the day they can do high speed, Without compromise for audio and video if customer support-it, it will be good, if not compression and compromise.
That day for the best is coming, If customer demand it, if not it will be speed and convenience only, when both could be done.


Ray
pdasterly likes this.

Last edited by darthray; 03-11-2016 at 08:40 PM.
darthray is online now  
post #51 of 77 Old 03-12-2016, 07:19 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Molon_Labe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 2,063
Mentioned: 100 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3069 Post(s)
Liked: 3689
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Hurts View Post
It's OK to get burned on the wrong DVD format, it's annoying to pay extra for the 3D format--it's NOT OK to pay out thousands of dollars, run over 100 feet of cable everywhere and hang speakers, calibrate etc. to support a format that is not stable.

IMHO, I feel that Atmos was pushed out as fast as possible as a beta and they plan on changing it until they get it right. To me, it is not worth it to tear up my ceiling and after seeing Auro3D, I don't believe I should have to.

In my house, the ceiling fans are more important that Atmos--yeah, I'm not going to move that for a speaker.
Where have you had to pay extra for Atmos encoded disc? You haven't - ever. UHD you may be paying for more resolution and Atmos but that is a different argument.

Atmos is very stable, why do think otherwise? There is nothing beta about Atmos. Did you mean to say DTS:X?

Keep your ceiling fans, no one is telling you to install Atmos speakers. It is 100% backward compatible to 7.1, 5.1, or to your TV speakers. You make it sound like this is being forced on you and you have to make a choice. Nothing is further from the truth.

You have a deep disdain for Atmos, and I don't know why. Your arguments have no validity and are simply wrong. Atmos isn't going anywhere. It is here, and it is staying. It is the new sound format from Dolby and everyone at the top is on board from studios to cinemas. The only question is if DTS:X can gain some market share back. If object based audio was a fad or flash in the pan as you say, why would DTS bother with DTS:X?


Quote:
Originally Posted by pdasterly View Post
Internet is going to go fast soon, probably not cheap
https://fiber.google.com/about/

Routers wont melt either, well maybe those older one's. Need 4 antennas minimum and look like a spaceship
Google fiber is in select markets and only in select areas of that market. For instance, I live in San Antonio, which is listed as Google fiber market. Yeah, I get true high speed fiber. Nope, not coming to my location in San Antonio. Nor do I have U-verse which is one subdivision over (new subdivision). Look at the expansion page of the link you posted. Does that look like widespread coverage? I am on copper and so are the majority of ISP customers in the United States and Canada.

Most home routers will not have a problem with streaming UHD. I would caution using wireless (even if looks like a spaceship ) If you have kids on tablets or watching netflix in another room, while you are streaming a larger UHD file you may have issues. Most consumer grade wireless hardware uses cheap asics and cheap RF antenna/transmitters which cannot handle a lot of capacity. You are better off using devices that will run the data over your electrical wires in your home for the best performance if you can't run Cat5/6 directly. They actually work well.

Last edited by Molon_Labe; 03-12-2016 at 12:35 PM.
Molon_Labe is online now  
post #52 of 77 Old 03-13-2016, 03:58 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Defcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,900
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1533 Post(s)
Liked: 857
Streaming will only get worse in the US, not better, because all providers are going ahead with higher prices and bandwidth caps, since they control Congress and have the full protection of the govt, consumers be damned. We already have terrible Internet and cell phone value for money compared to a lot of countries.

The AVS member is a dying breed, 99% of people have no clue about sound or video and will happily buy based on lowest price, if they are even interested in watching content on anything other than a tablet, or on the other end of the spectrum they hire a custom installer.
Molon_Labe likes this.
Defcon is offline  
post #53 of 77 Old 03-13-2016, 09:06 AM
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,901
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2012 Post(s)
Liked: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kressilac View Post
Not going to disagree. 4K/UHD will kill the torrent market too. Was discussing this with friends online tonight that we talking about torrents and ripping movies. I basically said, enjoy the 720p rips of Game of Thrones because you're not getting 4K rips for any of it. torrenting a 4K movie is an easy way to chew through your monthly bandwidth allotment. At 70 - 100GB per movie, you will melt your router seeding those files.
Native 10-bit video compresses better than 8-bit, and you don't need to download raw 4K movies to get the benefits of increased video quality.

Last I checked, there's already a lot of 2160p content available online, and more will definitely keep coming. Some of us have unlimited upload / download quotas, I guess I'm lucky to have that option. (I prefer to buy UHD Blurays anyway).

Even for 2160p movies, you can probably get 90% of the quality at 10% of the file size on UHD Bluray, for the same reason that you can find perfectly decent 2-3gb 1080p rips. It's all a question of how much quality do you want / need and how much d/l quota and patience that you have.
thehun and oneeyeblind like this.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #54 of 77 Old 03-13-2016, 06:30 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Saturn94's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,418
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by ROMEO 1 View Post
Certainly count me in as pretty nervous about the direction of DTS. As irony would have it, I just listened to 2 old school DTS demo discs and remembered that it was DTS's great robust sound that sold me back then in finding a receiver that was DTS capable, to replace my Dolby Digital only receiver (1998ish). I would like to see DTS continue to focus on us as enthusiasts of HT and multichannel surround sound in movies and home applications, but the reality is that DTS really did market to the audiophile or a replica of the same.

Years ago I was a true audiophile and still continue to believe that I am, but I recall when I set up HTs for family and friends; I spelled out and provided listening demonstrations of the differences between Dolby Digital and DTS. Regardless of how I was able to point out and describe the differences between the clarity and more robust bass applications of DTS in comparison to DD, those family members, and friends still simply maintain the default on DVDs which was DD when the DVD had two listening options. Dolby has done an excellent job in marketing since the days of noise reduction as oppose to DTS, who depended on the true listener like us. As you know you cannot continue to do the same thing if you want to reach the masses. Dolby got it right with Dolby Atmos, and even though I have not experienced it yet since the nearest Dolby Atmos theater for me (Hampton Roads area Virginia) is two and a half hours away north in DC, the word clearly got out more efficiently than DTS-X. Don’t get me wrong, I love Dolby True HD and I recall some issues with some receivers in the past where it passed it through as DTS. So I am not a Dolby hater.

This begs the question, is this generation really tuned into sound as strongly as they are for video HD Content? We have 4k TV’s and yes our Blu-Ray discs come in the various sound formats that include DTS-HD 7.1 but are they listening. Here we have the push in sound bars with a sub-woofer to provide "theater like sound". I hope I do not offend those who use a sound bar and sub, but I can see why DTS is having difficulties in one area and seeking out areas to compensate. I don't know how DTS made it so long other than listeners like us to keep it needed.
Hi neighbor.

Not often you see Hampton Roads members here.
Saturn94 is offline  
post #55 of 77 Old 03-14-2016, 01:32 PM
Senior Member
 
JP32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 443
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanAbby View Post
I really want to experience DTS:X can somebody wake me up when my Denon AVR-S910W gets the update I was promised.
Same here... I knew it would be 'awhile', but I did hope that we'd get it sometime before the new freakin' models come out this year.

Last edited by JP32; 03-14-2016 at 01:37 PM.
JP32 is offline  
post #56 of 77 Old 03-24-2016, 05:38 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 8,901
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4433 Post(s)
Liked: 3208
Quote:
Originally Posted by CinemaAndy View Post
Meanwhile, the old Digital Theater Systems, Inc lumbers along....DTS Digital Cinema being sold to Beaufort International Group Plc and being renamed Datasat Digital Entertainment, really took the wind out of DTS's sails in the commercial exhibition industry. Between Dolby Atmos and Barco Auro-3D, here is not much left for DTS:X in the commercial arena, as most owners have been adding Atmos or Auro to their theaters. DTS may pull off some :X for the home crowd, I don't see them expanding at any significant rate at the commercial level. Streaming and downloadable content is starting to rip into DTS sales, as their bread and butter has been DVD/Blu-Ray for years.
At least with their past reputation, DTS has a shot. But Auro? Auro? How many Auro BluRays have been released in the US since the initial Auro annoncment at CEDIA 2014? I would give DTS much better odds than Auro.
oneeyeblind likes this.
audioguy is online now  
post #57 of 77 Old 03-24-2016, 05:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
audioguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Not far from Atlanta - but far enough!
Posts: 8,901
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4433 Post(s)
Liked: 3208
Quote:
Originally Posted by drriddhish View Post
This is turning out to be classic business story- how gates once showed the "Windows" to world before apple could get Macintosh out..and captured software market and rest is history.
Revisionist History? The Mac was released in January of 1984 and the first Windows system was released at the end of 1985, almost 2 years later. IBM certainly owned the market but not due to the dates released.
oneeyeblind likes this.
audioguy is online now  
post #58 of 77 Old 03-24-2016, 06:11 AM
Senior Member
 
drriddhish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Cary NC
Posts: 235
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by audioguy View Post
Revisionist History? The Mac was released in January of 1984 and the first Windows system was released at the end of 1985, almost 2 years later. IBM certainly owned the market but not due to the dates released.

Gates "announced" it before Macintosh started selling. Gates was given early prototypes to developer GUI based os by jobs before predict release in 1984. Gates having glimpse of what gui can do developed his own version. In 1983 November Windows was announced at Comdex, the industry's premier trade show by Microsoft. He simply wanted to be "first" to introduce gui based os. But finished product did not ship till 85.

Hence the analogy: you have atmos working doing well with titles, DTS does not want to miss out..announces DTS X. Like Windows it is working with various providers and mediums of entertainment. But yet to have foothold in bluray releases or avr in home theaters.

Atmos was announced for theaters in 2012. Home theaters June 2014

DTS :X announced dec 2014 and pushed avr fast but does not have that much of theaters and bluray release support

Yamaha RX-3050 5.2.4 JBL studio 1 (front, center, sorround) Tannoy Di8 DC (four on ceiling ATMOS)
Google NSZ-GT1 player
EPSON PowerLite Home Cinema 3010
drriddhish is offline  
post #59 of 77 Old 03-30-2016, 07:25 AM
Member
 
Daylightdon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sacramento CA
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Having worked with Terry Beard and Jim Ketchum one on one while at Paramount pictures in the early 80's I've always been a DTS fan.
I've heard Dolby Atmos, both in a movie theater, ( where they put a $5.00 surcharge just to view the movie with Dolby Atmos sound----more on this in a minute), and on a blue ray disc, I was not that impressed. The sounds of distinct objects tended to be blurred.
Having viewed movies with DTS:X with my Denon AXR-X6200, there is much better definition, clarity, and overall a better experience.

In 1977 I installed the first Dolby System in the Hicksville twin cinema on Long Island, New York, for the opening of the first Star Wars release. There was NO SURCHARGE for patrons just because it was Dolby. When my wife and I go to the movies I resent having to pay extra for a sound format.

When viewing movies at home, DTS is my First Choice!

PS, Went to Dolby school in San Francisco, and installed more Dolby Systems in movie theaters than I can remember; that said, I am still a huge DTS fan!
KBMAN and Carl_Huff like this.
Daylightdon is offline  
post #60 of 77 Old 04-03-2016, 10:23 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
KBMAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Posts: 3,650
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 400 Post(s)
Liked: 206
DTS would still hold a valuable marketplace if they would have implemented DTS:X for all of us music listeners, esp. hitting the streaming market 2 years ago. This is just my opinion

Anyway, I imagine those DTS Demo discs are going to become more and more valuable, and fetching a pretty penny on 'the bay'....
KBMAN is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Latest Industry News

Tags
Dts , dts x , play-fi

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