AVS Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Difference as in they both output 5.1, but is there anything as in sound quality that would make me want DTS over DD for movies. I mean some DVDs have DTS tracks but what makes it special. I just don't understand why some movies have it but not all come with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,560 Posts
At one time, DTS decoders in AVRs were not as common as DD, and DTS licensing cost more per disc. So it was seen less and still is for DVD.


They are very different codecs, DD uses more compression but is also a more efficient compressor. DD on DVD tends to be 448Kb, DTS on DVD can be 784Kb or 1.5Mb. It's long been a hot topic of debate which one "sounds better", but DTS seems to have the edge in popularity for quality. Unless you are comparing the same title with both codecs, it's not much of a comparison and winds up being a popularity contest more than a true comparison. DTS tends to have higher volume levels than DD, which also greatly impacts perception of quality. When DTS first came out for movies, DD was still a matrixed multichannel codec where DTS was discrete. those differences are no longer relevant.


Let your ears be the judge.


Dolby TruHD and DTS-MA produce identical results on BD movies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,187 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdgrimes /forum/post/18154489


When DTS first came out for movies, DD was still a matrixed multichannel codec where DTS was discrete.

By "movies", do you mean commercial cinema or home video? In either case:


DTS first came out theatrically in 1993 (Jurassic Park). DD had already come out a year earlier (Batman Returns) as discrete 5.1, not matrixed multi-channel.


DTS first came out on laserdisc in 1997 (again, Jurassic Park). DD had already come out two years earlier (Clear & Present Danger and True Lies) as discrete 5.1, not matrixed multi-channel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,500 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rixxell Stryfe /forum/post/18154322


I mean some DVDs have DTS tracks but what makes it special. I just don't understand why some movies have it but not all come with them.

Marketing. Some studios used DTS as an "added value content" to boost sales on certain titles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
392 Posts
When the HDTV standard was being set in mandated that the audio standard meet certain standards such as speech normalization. Only Dolby Digital submitted a proposed audio system that met that mandate.


When audio was being selected for analog stereo TV, Dolby Labs submitted a proposed standard with the industry desired speech normaliztion.


When multi-channel was proposed for DVD's Dolby Labs provided speech normalization, as requested by the standard, and a standard for bass levels; DTS submitted a proposed system without speech normalization and with a different spec (louder) for the bass level in the sub channel.


Thus when playing back a DVD's or Blue Rays Dolby audio track, unless the receiver was/is properly calibrated for both systems (not always the case) the DTS tracks provided louder (improperly calibrated) bass. And the DTS tracks lacked speech normalization. This was the major reason why one sounded significantly different than the other. Typicall the Dolby tracks were more accurate, but not always favored by the listner or reviewer often ignorant of these technical differences.


Also, most Dolby Digital DVD tracks were mastered at its maximum sampling rate, while few if any DTS tracks were mastered at that systems maximum sampling rate due to storage room constraints on DVD's. Confused yet?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,169 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feirstein /forum/post/18372882


When the HDTV standard was being set in mandated that the audio standard meet certain standards such as speech normalization. Only Dolby Digital submitted a proposed audio system that met that mandate.


When audio was being selected for analog stereo TV, Dolby Labs submitted a proposed standard with the industry desired speech normaliztion.


When multi-channel was proposed for DVD's Dolby Labs provided speech normalization, as requested by the standard, and a standard for bass levels; DTS submitted a proposed system without speech normalization and with a different spec (louder) for the bass level in the sub channel.


Thus when playing back a DVD's or Blue Rays Dolby audio track, unless the receiver was/is properly calibrated for both systems (not always the case) the DTS tracks provided louder (improperly calibrated) bass. And the DTS tracks lacked speech normalization. This was the major reason why one sounded significantly different than the other. Typicall the Dolby tracks were more accurate, but not always favored by the listner or reviewer often ignorant of these technical differences.


Also, most Dolby Digital DVD tracks were mastered at its maximum sampling rate, while few if any DTS tracks were mastered at that systems maximum sampling rate due to storage room constraints on DVD's. Confused yet?

A lot of history there.
I believe DTS fell into line on the LFE issue quite early on. So, there's no current difference between the two on that front. The use of dialog normalization remains a point of differentiation. DD 5.1 uses dialnorm, DTS Surround does not. And the Dolby implementation means most DTS tracks are a bit louder. But, DTS included dialnorm with its lossless Master Audio codec.


As for sampling rates, DD 5.1 is never encoded at the maximum 640 kbps rate on DVD since the DVD standard limits it to 448 and it is often less than that in practice. DTS is generally encoded at 754, half the maximum rate of 1509.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
452 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIslander /forum/post/18374303


As for sampling rates, DD 5.1 is never encoded at the maximum 640 kbps rate on DVD since the DVD standard limits it to 448 and it is often less than that in practice. DTS is generally encoded at 754, half the maximum rate of 1509.

Actually, Pink Floyd's "Pulse" concert DVD uses DD 5.1 in both 448 and 640 kbs. There are likely other DVDs that do the same, though I am unaware of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,169 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sitting Bull /forum/post/18374440


Actually, Pink Floyd's "Pulse" concert DVD uses DD 5.1 in both 448 and 640 kbs. There are likely other DVDs that do the same, though I am unaware of them.

That's the only one that I've ever seen. And, I think it was only the initial release.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,187 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feirstein /forum/post/18372882


DTS submitted a proposed system without speech normalization and with a different spec (louder) for the bass level in the sub channel.

Not sure what you mean by "speech normalization", but DialNorm is an overall volume offset intended to keep average dialogue levels roughly the same from program to program. Also, I have trouble believing that DTS would submit a spec that admitted to deliberately changing the bass level during encoding. Compression codecs attempt to stay as faithful to the original as possible, not re-mix the sound for louder bass.
Quote:
Thus when playing back a DVD's or Blue Rays Dolby audio track, unless the receiver was/is properly calibrated for both systems (not always the case) the DTS tracks provided louder (improperly calibrated) bass.

IF the Dolby track has DialNorm, it will play back softer (typically 4dB lower) than the DTS track. But that doesn't mean the DTS track will provide "louder (improperly calibrated) bass". The low frequencies will remain proportional to the rest of the soundtrack, irrespective of volume level.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,500 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by BIslander /forum/post/18374465


That's the only one that I've ever seen. And, I think it was only the initial release.


"DVD Spectacular" was released in 1997 by Delos and Dolby had the first 640kbps "hidden" DD track of the "1812 Overture"
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top