Joined
·
162 Posts
If lpcm (uncompressed) is more bandwith, how can the hdmi on the ps3 handle this, but not handle bitstreaming the compressed audio?
LPCM = bandwith? why no bitstream on ps3??
1 - 20 of 136 Posts
Joined
·
35,722 Posts
The HDMI driver chips that Sony uses in the PS3 preclude this. Bandwidth is not the issue. The chips weren't designed to do that particular style of multiplexing. And now that decoding of all lossless formats to LPCM works just fine in the PS3, changing the chips to add this redundant "feature" would be rather silly.
You might as well ask why the PS3 doesn't offer the ability to transmit raw, undecoded AVC or MPEG2 data from the disc to some external processor. The decoded video stream has a much higher bit rate than the raw data coming off the disc. But it's pointless since the PS3 decodes the video off the disc just fine thank you, and the HDMI connection handles that higher bit rate, decoded video stream just fine as well.
The lossless packing formats were never intended to reduce the bandwidth on the HDMI connection. They were designed to reduce the size of the audio track on the disc, and, even more important, to reduce the bit transfer rate necessary to read it off the disc. The HDMI connection does not need nor benefit from the extra complexity of multiplexing the bitstream audio into the video stream sent to the next device. Bitstream transmission is only necessary for players that are not smart enough to do the decoding themselves.
ETA: And keep in mind that even decoding-capable receivers ALSO have to be able to receive HDMI LPCM audio or you won't be able to play raw PCM tracks from Blu-Ray discs offering those.
--Bob
You might as well ask why the PS3 doesn't offer the ability to transmit raw, undecoded AVC or MPEG2 data from the disc to some external processor. The decoded video stream has a much higher bit rate than the raw data coming off the disc. But it's pointless since the PS3 decodes the video off the disc just fine thank you, and the HDMI connection handles that higher bit rate, decoded video stream just fine as well.
The lossless packing formats were never intended to reduce the bandwidth on the HDMI connection. They were designed to reduce the size of the audio track on the disc, and, even more important, to reduce the bit transfer rate necessary to read it off the disc. The HDMI connection does not need nor benefit from the extra complexity of multiplexing the bitstream audio into the video stream sent to the next device. Bitstream transmission is only necessary for players that are not smart enough to do the decoding themselves.
ETA: And keep in mind that even decoding-capable receivers ALSO have to be able to receive HDMI LPCM audio or you won't be able to play raw PCM tracks from Blu-Ray discs offering those.
--Bob
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
Reality is the playstation 3 is lacking an important feature not being able to bitstream the new HD codecs, From what I am reading comparing internal decoding V Bitstreaming Given A choice "MOST" people say they get better resaults bitstreaming to there HDMI 1.3a receiver when they compared the 2 approaches at hand !!! This is just what I am reading and don't care either way....
There is no difference. Period. End of story. If anyone says there's a difference, either they are hallucinating or they have an issue/limitation with their receiver. "MOST" people don't have good enough quality speakers and/or ears to even hear the benefit of the lossless codecs to begin with. "MOST" people leave their TV in vivid factory mode and never see a good picture. Feel free to do whatever "MOST" people do, but don't confuse that with facts.
There is no difference. Period. End of story. If anyone says there's a difference, either they are hallucinating or they have an issue/limitation with their receiver. "MOST" people don't have good enough quality speakers and/or ears to even hear the benefit of the lossless codecs to begin with. "MOST" people leave their TV in vivid factory mode and never see a good picture. Feel free to do whatever "MOST" people do, but don't confuse that with facts.
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
In your oppinion there is no differance, But others in the know would disagree with you on that....
In your oppinion there is no differance, But others in the know would disagree with you on that....
Joined
·
6,288 Posts
See sig.
Understood.
Understood.
You're right, as is true with almost everything in this world. However, why do people insist that the PS3 is inferior because it lacks bitstreaming of the HD codecs, yet the opinions of millions is that there's no difference? The opinions of some that the PS3 should be able to bitstream, while perhaps valid, is not compelling enough for Sony to somehow add the feature even if they could (which, from my understanding is a hardware limitation, not something that can be altered with a FW update). If someone is of the opinion that there is a difference, there are players out there that do bitstream the codecs that they could go with.
I agree with the above posters, that it's primarily a psychoacoustic affect when people "insist" that they can hear a difference between PCM vs. bitstream, when I posit that many of them can't reliably hear the difference between lossless vs. lossy soundtracks. I know there are other threads regarding this, so I don't intend to get into it here. While I personally "think" I can hear a difference, I've never done a DBT to confirm it, and I'm primarily satisfied that I have a lossless soundtrack available and it technically is as good as it can be.
You're right, as is true with almost everything in this world. However, why do people insist that the PS3 is inferior because it lacks bitstreaming of the HD codecs, yet the opinions of millions is that there's no difference? The opinions of some that the PS3 should be able to bitstream, while perhaps valid, is not compelling enough for Sony to somehow add the feature even if they could (which, from my understanding is a hardware limitation, not something that can be altered with a FW update). If someone is of the opinion that there is a difference, there are players out there that do bitstream the codecs that they could go with.
I agree with the above posters, that it's primarily a psychoacoustic affect when people "insist" that they can hear a difference between PCM vs. bitstream, when I posit that many of them can't reliably hear the difference between lossless vs. lossy soundtracks. I know there are other threads regarding this, so I don't intend to get into it here. While I personally "think" I can hear a difference, I've never done a DBT to confirm it, and I'm primarily satisfied that I have a lossless soundtrack available and it technically is as good as it can be.
This topic has been discussed dozens of times (in just about every thread concerning the PS3) and the bottom line is both points of view are valid within the proper context. LPCM delivered to the AVR (or pre/pro) can sound just a good as having a bitstream input and doing the decoding within the AVR if the AVR buffers and reclocks the LPCM data stream. Most lower cost AVRs (and even some expensive models) don't do this and with these units a bitstream input for Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD-MA and internal decoding by the AVR can sound better than having the decoding done by the external source (e.g, PS3) and LPCM from the source to the AVR. However, on better AVRs that do buffer and reclock the LPCM data stream the results can be identical with using a bitsteam interface. There are also some other possible differences if the AVR applies different digital processing functions to LPCM inputs as compared to bitstream inputs. Bottom line this is a not a black vs. white issue and it all comes down to how good or bad a job your AVR does in handling LPCM inputs.
This topic has been discussed dozens of times (in just about every thread concerning the PS3) and the bottom line is both points of view are valid within the proper context. LPCM delivered to the AVR (or pre/pro) can sound just a good as having a bitstream input and doing the decoding within the AVR if the AVR buffers and reclocks the LPCM data stream. Most lower cost AVRs (and even some expensive models) don't do this and with these units a bitstream input for Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD-MA and internal decoding by the AVR can sound better than having the decoding done by the external source (e.g, PS3) and LPCM from the source to the AVR. However, on better AVRs that do buffer and reclock the LPCM data stream the results can be identical with using a bitsteam interface. There are also some other possible differences if the AVR applies different digital processing functions to LPCM inputs as compared to bitstream inputs. Bottom line this is a not a black vs. white issue and it all comes down to how good or bad a job your AVR does in handling LPCM inputs.
Joined
·
6,288 Posts
I'm not aware of any that have been done. Lots of sighted anecdotes, though, mostly anonymous.
The vast majority of people making claims should spend time on worthwhile things like room treatments...things that matter. It's easier to sit and post about this nonsense, though.
I'm not aware of any that have been done. Lots of sighted anecdotes, though, mostly anonymous.
The vast majority of people making claims should spend time on worthwhile things like room treatments...things that matter. It's easier to sit and post about this nonsense, though.
Joined
·
4,671 Posts
redundant
Joined
·
1,838 Posts
Hi Ray Jones,
What your above statment says makes A lot of sense and prove's useful in the explanation of the two approaches of the new HD codec's...
Basicaly it comes down to what your own beliefs and or experinces are that makes the 2 approaches right or wrong, But most importantly we must respect the right's of opinion and keep an open mined so that we can make informed/right choices with our own AV gear....
What your above statment says makes A lot of sense and prove's useful in the explanation of the two approaches of the new HD codec's...
Basicaly it comes down to what your own beliefs and or experinces are that makes the 2 approaches right or wrong, But most importantly we must respect the right's of opinion and keep an open mined so that we can make informed/right choices with our own AV gear....
Joined
·
35,722 Posts
Bugs are bugs. Examples of bitstreaming setups with SERIOUS bugs are also easily cited. Bugs have nothing to do with which approach is better. (And in reality most of the blame here goes to DTS, truly the gang who couldn't shoot straight.)
People just don't want to believe they got suckered into paying extra money for unnecessary decoding in receivers last year when DTS-HD MA decoding in players got delayed.
The DTS-HD MA light in those receivers really should be labeled, "Look at me! I have little patience and no sales resistance!"
![]()
--Bob
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxbat121 /forum/post/14323662
So, you're saying that PS3 never ever incorrectly flagged DTS-HD MA 5.1 as 7.1 output that prevents receivers to matrix from 5.1 to 7.1, right?![]()
Bugs are bugs. Examples of bitstreaming setups with SERIOUS bugs are also easily cited. Bugs have nothing to do with which approach is better. (And in reality most of the blame here goes to DTS, truly the gang who couldn't shoot straight.)
People just don't want to believe they got suckered into paying extra money for unnecessary decoding in receivers last year when DTS-HD MA decoding in players got delayed.
The DTS-HD MA light in those receivers really should be labeled, "Look at me! I have little patience and no sales resistance!"
--Bob
Joined
·
13,160 Posts
That's why you need flexibility of being able to do both. So you can work around the problem instead waiting for the player maker to relesea firmware updates.
Sounds like sour grape to me
![]()
I'm not the one here to argue which one is better. I've a problem with PS3 owners' atitude that the way PS3 currently does is the best way in the world, period.
There is nothing wrong have DTS-HD and TrueHD capability on your receiver. PS3 will not be your last BD player ever. Receivers usually last longer than players.
That's why you need flexibility of being able to do both. So you can work around the problem instead waiting for the player maker to relesea firmware updates.
Quote:
People just don't want to believe they got suckered into paying extra money for unnecessary decoding in receivers last year when DTS-HD MA decoding in players got delayed.
The DTS-HD MA light in those receivers really should be labeled, "Look at me! I have little patience and no sales resistance!"
![]()
--Bob
Sounds like sour grape to me
I'm not the one here to argue which one is better. I've a problem with PS3 owners' atitude that the way PS3 currently does is the best way in the world, period.
There is nothing wrong have DTS-HD and TrueHD capability on your receiver. PS3 will not be your last BD player ever. Receivers usually last longer than players.
Joined
·
18,923 Posts
Sometimes, when we have this bitstream vs. MPCM discussion, we forget to clarify what we are talking about. When TrueHD is decoded, for example, in a player vs. when it's decoded in a receiver the exact same PCM should result if both devices are implemented correctly. At that point, if you listened to each PCM channel independently, they would be identical. If you compared the bits, they would be identical.
If the receiver and the PS3 decoder are working correctly they will produce the same PCM. There is no debate there.
That being said, there are factors related to bitstream vs MPCM that could result in differences -
* Jitter (personally I suspect this is a non issue)
* Bass management (e.g. there's was a theory that some receivers had low LFE over PCM because they should have boosted the LFE by 10 dB - I am not sure whether this is a real problem or not)
* Secondary audio (Not available with bitstream as far as I know)
* Inability of some receivers to apply Dolby Pro Logic IIx to PCM for Dolby EX soundtracks or to create 7.1 from 5.1
If the receiver and the PS3 decoder are working correctly they will produce the same PCM. There is no debate there.
That being said, there are factors related to bitstream vs MPCM that could result in differences -
* Jitter (personally I suspect this is a non issue)
* Bass management (e.g. there's was a theory that some receivers had low LFE over PCM because they should have boosted the LFE by 10 dB - I am not sure whether this is a real problem or not)
* Secondary audio (Not available with bitstream as far as I know)
* Inability of some receivers to apply Dolby Pro Logic IIx to PCM for Dolby EX soundtracks or to create 7.1 from 5.1
Joined
·
6,288 Posts
We need fewer posts on "beliefs" and more on data. Blind tests, "jitter" measurements...something to move beyond the realm of anecdote.
We need fewer posts on "beliefs" and more on data. Blind tests, "jitter" measurements...something to move beyond the realm of anecdote.
No, IT'S NOT MY OPINION. IT'S FACT. GET THAT STRAIGHT ALREADY. IT'S SIMPLE DAMN MATH.
These lossless codecs are nothing but simple math where what comes out is exactly what was put it. If people want to keep arguing that 1+1=3, great, but that means they are wrong.
Now if people want to argue over what specific receiver do and don't do, then that too is a valid discussion. But don't blame the PS3 for receiver bugs/limitations.
No, IT'S NOT MY OPINION. IT'S FACT. GET THAT STRAIGHT ALREADY. IT'S SIMPLE DAMN MATH.
These lossless codecs are nothing but simple math where what comes out is exactly what was put it. If people want to keep arguing that 1+1=3, great, but that means they are wrong.
Now if people want to argue over what specific receiver do and don't do, then that too is a valid discussion. But don't blame the PS3 for receiver bugs/limitations.
I can practically see the responses to this already. It will never be enough to some that the PS3 doesn't bitstream. It doesn't matter what is said and from who. It's not a conspiracy folks. It's just a feature you want that the PS3 doesn't have and in all likelyhood won't.
+1 Million.
There is no opinion here. If your receiver and player are working correctly, both will decode DTs- HD MA, etc, into exactly the same, bit for bit, PCM.
The only reasons that Bitstreaming will improve sound is that one of your components does not properly support PCM, or one of your components is broken. Those are the only plusses for Bitstreaming at this point.
LPCM has a major advantage in that if the player is doing the decoding, it can include extra streams from things like menus, PiP, etc, whereas with bitstreaming, these are just lost.
+1 Million.
There is no opinion here. If your receiver and player are working correctly, both will decode DTs- HD MA, etc, into exactly the same, bit for bit, PCM.
The only reasons that Bitstreaming will improve sound is that one of your components does not properly support PCM, or one of your components is broken. Those are the only plusses for Bitstreaming at this point.
LPCM has a major advantage in that if the player is doing the decoding, it can include extra streams from things like menus, PiP, etc, whereas with bitstreaming, these are just lost.
1 - 20 of 136 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!