noticeable difference?

[Blus Brother]

I have a 6.1 receiver that is not HD, my question is how noticeable is the difference in audio compared to an HD 7.1 rcvr on blu rays? I have never watched a movie with an HD rcvr hooked up

[ryoohki]

Originally Posted by Blus Brother

I have a 6.1 receiver that is not HD, my question is how noticeable is the difference in audio compared to an HD 7.1 rcvr on blu rays? I have never watched a movie with an HD rcvr hooked up

Depend on you're system and room really. it's yes in my case..

[progers13]

This is a very subjective question that depends on a lot of variables including receiver, speakers, and room conditions and acoustics. As such, YMMV. However, it was a noticeable improvement in my case. Some people will still dispute this claim, but I can hear a difference between the HD codecs and the lossy codecs. Lossless just sounds fuller, more natural, and less "tinny" in my setup.

[tilallr1]

Personally I noticed a big difference ... so much so that when I accidentally forget to switch from lossy to lossless (HD) audio on the Blu-ray menu options, I immediately now notice it. The sound is much more detailed and fuller. Plus the surround sound is more encompassing.

[Fors*]

IMO, the HD sound is more dynamic, it has a greater depth of detail and has a larger surround presence enveloping the listener, thus creating a much more satisfying audio experience. This of course would be subjective to equipment and would applies as to whether you listened to a lossy tract on the same set-up versus a lossless one.

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by Blus Brother

I have a 6.1 receiver that is not HD, my question is how noticeable is the difference in audio compared to an HD 7.1 rcvr on blu rays? I have never watched a movie with an HD rcvr hooked up

FYI, I moved from the exact same setup as you. 6.1 Lossy to 7.1 lossless. So yah you will notice a big difference IMO.

[BIslander]

Allow me to offer a contrary view. The lossy codecs on Blu-ray are less compressed than they are on DVD and they sound great, rivalling lossless. Here's an interesting read on the subject:

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby...compressed_PCM

Unfortunately, there are no rigorous studies comparing these higher bitrate lossy encodes with lossless. But, the linked article has a better test environment than any of us can do in our homes.

[cdot2four]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

Personally I noticed a big difference ... so much so that when I accidentally forget to switch from lossy to lossless (HD) audio on the Blu-ray menu options, I immediately now notice it. The sound is much more detailed and fuller. Plus the surround sound is more encompassing.

+1 movies like austin powers and black hawk down I have to turn on the hd audio and its night and day difference. For the OP just move that 6.1 to the bedroom and get the 7.1 HD for your main viewing

[progers13]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Allow me to offer a contrary view. The lossy codecs on Blu-ray are less compressed than they are on DVD and they sound great, rivalling lossless. Here's an interesting read on the subject:

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby...compressed_PCM

Unfortunately, there are no rigorous studies comparing these higher bitrate lossy encodes with lossless. But, the linked article has a better test environment than any of us can do in our homes.

The problem I see with this analysis is in the highlighted section above. In a better test enviroment with better equipment, lossy may very well sound great, rivalling lossless. However, in our homes with the equipment that most of us have, it doesn't come close. And, frankly, that is all that any of us has to go on.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by progers13

The problem I see with this analysis is in the highlighted section above. In a better test enviroment with better equipment, lossy may very well sound great, rivalling lossless. However, in our homes with the equipment that most of us have, it doesn't come close. And, frankly, that is all that any of us has to go on.

You misunderstood the point. The Dolby and DTS testbeds allowed for blind testing with seamless transitions among the selections, two important criteria for making valid comparisons.

I am not aware that the quality of the equipment will make a difference either way. It's funny that you would take the position that better equipment masks differences between lossless and lossy. Most people usually make the opposite claim. But, I've never seen a technical explanation as to why better or worse equipment even matters here. Besides, the equipment used in those facilities wasn't all that high end.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by cdot2four

movies like austin powers and black hawk down I have to turn on the hd audio and its night and day difference.

I agree that the PCM track on Black Hawk Down sounds significantly better than the DD 5.1 track. But, it's one of the few where I hear that kind of difference on my equipment in my room. I've always been curious about that.

[Fors*]

BIslander, are you suggesting that a lossy track on a set of Sony speakers would sound as well or possibly better than with a set of B&W's playing lossless? I think any mention of the difference in equipment is actually referencing this point, and that some would think that the B&W's would sound better because it was playing the lossless track, not to mention the quality of the speakers themsevles.

I can't say I completely understand what you actually mean by "I am not aware that the quality of equipment will make a difference either way", which is probably just me not reading your post correctly. But please feel free to elaborate further, so I can understand things more clearly, thanks.

[progers13]

Originally Posted by BIslander

You misunderstood the point. The Dolby and DTS testbeds allowed for blind testing with seamless transitions among the selections, two important criteria for making valid comparisons.

I am not aware that the quality of the equipment will make a difference either way. It's funny that you would take the position that better equipment masks differences between lossless and lossy. Most people usually make the opposite claim. But, I've never seen a technical explanation as to why better or worse equipment even matters here. Besides, the equipment used in those facilities wasn't all that high end.

I wasn't disagreeing with the article, only the implication that lossy sounds nearly identical to lossless in a perfect test environment, which none of us can achieve in our homes. This fact can very well explain why so many of us hear a difference, despite some claims to the contrary. What I was getting at, and I'll admit I am a layman in this field, is that lossy may require higher-end equipment and gear to sound better, whereas lossless achieves that fuller and cleaner sound on its own without the specific need for expensive gear to accomplish better sound. In other words, would higher-end gear provide greater marginal return for the lossy codec than it would for lossless, because lossless is already achieving a high level of quality on its own merit? I don't have high-end gear, and I stand by the statement that I can always tell a lossy track when I hear it.

[NorCo_1806]

Originally Posted by tilallr1

FYI, I moved from the exact same setup as you. 6.1 Lossy to 7.1 lossless. So yah you will notice a big difference IMO.

I too moved from DD and DTS 6.1 to DD-HD & DTS HDMA.....and notice a significant difference.

When I watch any SD now, the audio just isn't as full. Tho I guess I haven't compared lossy on a Blu to the lossless track. I'm gonna watch the movie, not test the audio comparison. Maybe the lossy track on the Blu is fuller??

My set-up is also 7.1, but I prefer the Front-Height channels to the Back Surround. My room isn't perfectly shaped for back surround, but worked ok. I just preferred the Front Heights, feel they offer more atmosphere than the extra rears.

[tilallr1]

Originally Posted by BIslander

You misunderstood the point. The Dolby and DTS testbeds allowed for blind testing with seamless transitions among the selections, two important criteria for making valid comparisons.

I am not aware that the quality of the equipment will make a difference either way. It's funny that you would take the position that better equipment masks differences between lossless and lossy. Most people usually make the opposite claim. But, I've never seen a technical explanation as to why better or worse equipment even matters here. Besides, the equipment used in those facilities wasn't all that high end.

Originally Posted by NorCo_1806

I too moved from DD and DTS 6.1 to DD-HD & DTS HDMA.....and notice a significant difference.

When I watch any SD now, the audio just isn't as full. Tho I guess I haven't compared lossy on a Blu to the lossless track. I'm gonna watch the movie, not test the audio comparison. Maybe the lossy track on the Blu is fuller??

My set-up is also 7.1, but I prefer the Front-Height channels to the Back Surround. My room isn't perfectly shaped for back surround, but worked ok. I just preferred the Front Heights, feel they offer more atmosphere than the extra rears.

Well, personally my blind test was putting in a disc not knowing that lossy was set as default and telling it isn't a loseless track a minute or so into it. This is comparing lossy and lossless on a blu track too. So I think that proves, at least with my setup, that there is a big difference.

Please keep in mind though, sound is extremely important to me and I do have an ear for music as well.

[Warjack Prime]

I can't tell the difference between DTS or DTS-MA on a bluray or HDDVD with casual listening. If I really concentrate on it I think I can perceive a difference during certain scenes but I don't want to sit there and really focus on the sound.

I don't know why some folks hear such a difference. This is just my experience. For reference, I'm using:

Denon 3808CI ($1600)
Infinity Alpha 50 front/left ($350 each)
Infinity Beta C360 Center ($350ish I think)
Infinity Beta ES250 for rears. ($250 each)
SVS PB10 sub ($450ish)
PS3 slim (bitstreaming) and Toshiba HD DVD player (PCM)


For comparison, I could hear a minimal difference between SACD and normal CDs, so maybe I don't have an ear for it.

[Buddy Christ]

Ask Big Daddy!

[Fors*]

Originally Posted by Blu2U

Ask Big Daddy!

...or just read this sticky from him on the subject.....

https://forum.blu-ray.com/audio-theo...io-codecs.html

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by NorCo_1806

When I watch any SD now, the audio just isn't as full. Tho I guess I haven't compared lossy on a Blu to the lossless track. I'm gonna watch the movie, not test the audio comparison. Maybe the lossy track on the Blu is fuller??

Yes, it is.

DVD:
DD 5.1 is limited to 448 kb/s and often less.
DTS is usually 754 kb/s

BD:
DD 5.1 is usually 640 kb/s
DTS is 1509 kb/s

So, the audio on Blu-rays generally sounds better than the audio on DVDs, even when using an optical connection.