Quote:
Originally Posted by Tech-UK
Both are lossless compression, which means they will sound identical to the original audio mix which will be in PCM format.
DTS-HD Master Audio does not provide better quality sound over TrueHD (remembering that you cannot compare different sound tracks (films) and come to the conclusion that DTS-HD MA sounds better).
Dolby TrueHD has always been accompanied with an embedded lossy DD track, so backwards compatibility is a none-issue, what the difference is, is the feature set and how the encoder/decoder is incorporated in the equipment, for example both codecs have their problems. DTS have a cut down version which is called DTS-HD Master Audio Essentials which a lot of BD players and some receivers have, this doesn't support all DTS technologies i.e. it does not support DTS 96/24, ES information, will output 5.1 tracks at 7.1 without choice and I believe it doesn't support 192kHz sampling rate at any channel number, thus it outputs 96kHz when decoding. Bitstreaming to a component with full DTS-HD MA decoding capability will avoid this.
The reason I believe that DTS-HD MA is found on more disc's maybe down to cost and that studio's have cottoned on to the fact that the majority of people think DTS is better and will base their purchases on this.
|
You're correct that there's no difference between DTS-HD MA, TrueHD & LPCM, all things being equal (i.e., same soundtrack, no dialnorm). However, the earliest TrueHD tracks weren't configured properly for full compatibility; the studios tended to reuse their old DVD-quality DD 5.1 tracks (not even full 640 kbps DD bitrate) and authored their discs to default to those even on TrueHD-capable players (much like the early LPCM discs). DTS-HD MA's default setting has always been full compatibility -- full 1.5 Mbps DTS core plus MA extensions to lossless quality, with the latter as default if the decoder supports it.
Bringing up DTS-HD MA Essentials is a red herring. First, that's a limitation on
decoders, not discs. Second, all that means is the player doesn't support DTS extensions between core and MA, which frankly has more impact on DVD than BD; DTS-ES tracks play as core DTS, but DTS-HD MA tracks play with full fidelity. (Edit: I also don't think there's many 192 kHz tracks out there, especially with DTS-HD MA.)
DTS-HD MA pulled in front because it was seen as providing the best of both worlds -- lossless audio for those with the appropriate decoders (including Essentials), with full-bitrate DTS for everyone else. Now that it's clear TrueHD can provide virtually the same thing -- with
more backwards compatibility since more legacy equipment supports DD than DTS -- it's more a matter of DTS inertia vs. Dolby marketing (i.e., sweetheart deals on TrueHD when bought together with Atmos).