Why Is Lossless Sound So Important?

[drees5761]

I need to read up on the differences but some people just will not buy a Blu ray unless it has lossless sound, is it that important in a home environment?
Can you really tell the difference?
I have a DTS / Dolby Digital 5.1 Sony Amp, a few years old, but my Blu rays and dvds sound fantastic, why would i need an upgrade?...i have an average size room with 5 speakers and a sub-woofer, most of the time i dont need to have it that loud to get fantastic sound.
Grindhouse and a few other releases have been critisized for not having lossless sound.
Can someone explain to me why its so important on a Blu ray release?

[Blu-Benny]

From what I understand, a lossless track is as close as you can get to the original audio track from the studio.

I hooked up my recv’r the other night and got to experience HD audio for the 1st time last night.

I had the DTS track play 1st, and yes, it sounded good and filled the room w/sound.

When I switched over to the DTS HD-Master audio track, it sounded amazing!!! The thing I noticed was there was more specific details coming from each speaker rather than a bunch of everything all @ once.

[manicsounds]

Listening to an MP3 track through the speakers and a CD track trough the speakers, there's quite a difference.

[chip75]

The audio guys could probably explain it better but it's the true uncompressed audio track used for the film. The others have been compressed so you will loose or have some degredation in audio. Some people might not notice due to equipment etc. But I think I prefer the best quality in case I do upgrade.

The lossless tracks seem to have a lot more punch than normal DD5.1 or DTS tracks on my 6.1 Yamaha set-up as well so I imagine they can be appreciated at a higher volume.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by chip75

The audio guys could probably explain it better but it's the true uncompressed audio track used for the film. The others have been compressed so you will loose or have some degredation in audio.

Lossless and uncompressed are two different things. DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD are compressed lossless tracks that need to be decoded by the receiver to unleash the uncompressed signal, while LPCM is an uncompressed lossless format. If the process of encoding leads to loss of audio data then it is lossy regardless of whether or not the track is compressed.

[Albatross365]

This thread is so complicated I'm at a loss

[chip75]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Lossless and uncompressed are two different things. DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD are compressed lossless tracks that need to be decoded by the receiver to unleash the uncompressed signal, while LPCM is an uncompressed lossless format. If the process of encoding leads to loss of audio data then it is lossy regardless of whether or not the track is compressed.

Yes. When I posted I wasn't really aware that the the DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD were in the equivalent (or in?) of a ZIP file and extracted by the receivers.

[Tech-UK]

Originally Posted by ravenus

Lossless and uncompressed are two different things. DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD are compressed lossless tracks that need to be decoded by the receiver to unleash the uncompressed signal, while LPCM is an uncompressed lossless format. If the process of encoding leads to loss of audio data then it is lossy regardless of whether or not the track is compressed.

'Lossless' describes a type of compression, LPCM isn't compressed thus its just 'uncompressed'.

lossless and lossy tracks can be decoded within the player, receiver or display (equipment feature set dependant).

[drees5761]

Originally Posted by manicsounds

Listening to an MP3 track through the speakers and a CD track trough the speakers, there's quite a difference.

Standard DTS or DD 5.1 can hardly be compared to MP3!!

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by drees5761

Standard DTS or DD 5.1 can hardly be compared to MP3!!

It is analogous to the difference in sound quality between DD/DTS and lossless audio. At first I didn't hear much of a difference when I first got Blu-ray in 2007. After watching almost nothing but Blu-rays for a year or two I watched a DVD movie with what I remember having a good DTS track at the time. It now sounded flat and nondistinct to me.

It's like comparing LP or SACD/DVD-A to CD or (heaven forbid) an MP3. After a while you get used to the higher fidelity format and it becomes hard to go back to a lower one. I thought CDs sounded great until I started listening to good vinyl. Now I can't go back. The same is true with Dolby Digital/DTS vs. Lossless.

[Sithlord75]

Listen to any music concert blu-ray with lossless audio and then compare it with the lossy track that is usually on there, no comparison.

Utterly stunning, even CD's are redundent in my house now, if i want to listen to music then out come the blu's.

[BIslander]

Lossless audio on Blu-ray provides improved sound even if your processor can't decode the lossless tracks. Here's why: the lossless tracks include high bitrate lossy versions that get used with older equipment. The lossy DTS and DD 5.1 are less compressed than the versions on DVD and they sound great, rivalling lossless. So, you get much of the benefit of lossless, perhaps all of it, without needing to invest in new equipment.

This is a good read on the subject:

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

[Zen_Amako]

Originally Posted by Blu-Benny

I hooked up my recv’r the other night and got to experience HD audio for the 1st time last night.

I actually just purchased a receiver myself that can handle HD audio. It seemed a little silly to have almost 400 Blu-rays and an older amp only capable of Dolby Digital/DTS. The reason I didn't upgrade earlier was that my old TV, although it was an HDTV, didn't have an HDMI input (the curse of the early adopter). Now I can run my BD player/PS3 to my receiver and the reciever to the TV via HDMI.

Have I noticed a difference? YES. My receiver isn't anything fancy -- it's a Pioneer and it was on sale for around $185 USD -- but the sound is definitely punchier. It's also satisfying to finally see "DTS-MA" or "Dolby TrueHD" light up on the front panel. It means you're getting the most out of your Blu-ray purchase.

That's not to say I would boycott any release without a lossless track. The movie is the most important thing. However, lossless sound is an added bonus.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Zen_Amako

Now I can run my BD player/PS3 to my receiver and the reciever to the TV via HDMI.

I wish my TV could do this, I have a Samsung player which outputs the TV via Freeview (which I don't use) at 5.1 but if I want to route my PS3 or BD player through to my receiver through the digital output it downgrades the signal to 2.0. It would save me a lot of hassle because I only have an digital optical and a co-axial inputs on my receiver. My BD player and my PS3 only have a digital output.

On a side not does anyone know if you can send the sound to a receiver with a digital output and send audio to the TV through HDMI? There doesn't seem to be a setting to do both, as I don't always use the receiver to output sound with the Playstation sometimes the TV speakers are used. I think there's a setting to output stereo sound to the receiver through the phono leads and have TV sound as well but I can't find one to output to TV and receiver (through the digital optical).

[Bruce Morrison]

I think the difference between lossless and lossy audio is much more apparent on modern films, dating from let's say the 90's or 00's, than on older films. With a few exceptions (such as Apocalypse Now for example), most films of the 70's or earlier never had particularly sophisticated soundtracks to begin with, and will sound much the same whether they are given a lossy or a lossless track.

[Zen_Amako]

Originally Posted by chip75

I wish my TV could do this, I have a Samsung player which outputs the TV via Freeview (which I don't use) at 5.1 but if I want to route my PS3 or BD player through to my receiver through the digital output it downgrades the signal to 2.0. It would save me a lot of hassle because I only have an digital optical and a co-axial inputs on my receiver. My BD player and my PS3 only have a digital output.

On a side not does anyone know if you can send the sound to a receiver with a digital output and send audio to the TV through HDMI? There doesn't seem to be a setting to do both, as I don't always use the receiver to output sound with the Playstation sometimes the TV speakers are used. I think there's a setting to output stereo sound to the receiver through the phono leads and have TV sound as well but I can't find one to output to TV and receiver (through the digital optical).

I'm not sure if I understand your post completely. Your BD player and your PS3 should have HDMI outputs and digital optical outputs. To get lossless sound, you need to connect your BD/PS3 player to your receiver's HDMI input and your receiver's HDMI output to your TV. If your receiver doesn't have any HDMI inputs/outputs, you will need to upgrade your receiver. The digital optical cable will only give you lossy sound, although the quality should be a bit better than DVD.

When I had my old TV, I tried out a receiver with HDMI and HD audio decoding, but I didn't get a picture on my TV when going from BD player (HDMI) -> receiver (HDMI) -> TV (DVI via an HDMI-DVI adaptor). I think my TV only having a DVI input was the problem.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by Zen_Amako

I'm not sure if I understand your post completely. Your BD player and your PS3 should have HDMI outputs and digital optical outputs. To get lossless sound, you need to connect your BD/PS3 player to your receiver's HDMI input and your receiver's HDMI output to your TV. If your receiver doesn't have any HDMI inputs/outputs, you will need to upgrade your receiver. The digital optical cable will only give you lossy sound, although the quality should be a bit better than DVD.

When I had my old TV, I tried out a receiver with HDMI and HD audio decoding, but I didn't get a picture on my TV when going from BD player (HDMI) -> receiver (HDMI) -> TV (DVI via an HDMI-DVI adaptor). I think my TV only having a DVI input was the problem.

Sorry. It wasn't lossless sound I was after, if I upgrade to a HDMI receiver I'll make sure I get enough inputs/outputs. My problem is if I select to send sound to my receiver through a optical cable it cuts off the PS3-to-TV sound. I want to be able to use both the receiver and the TV to output sound but not obviously at the same time. Is there an option to do that? Is it just HDMI-to-TV and PS3-thru-phono-to-receiver that's possible? Or do I just need to change the settings back and forth?

[snowjoe]

It's always a shame when there are releases without lossless audio, it just feels like being short changed. If you're paying a premium for the blu-ray version then you should be given the best of what's available which includes audio

Warner seem to be pretty big offender in this department. there are shows I've avoided buying (Fringe, TSCC) simply because they cheaped out and slapped a plain DD track on the discs. same goes for movies like the last samurai & the prestige. too busy thinking about quantity and not quality which is costing them sales. I'd understand if they were a small studio, but it's frigging warner brothers and they should know better.

Lossloss audio should be mandatory for all blu-rays unless there is a very, very good reason.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by drees5761

I need to read up on the differences but some people just will not buy a Blu ray unless it has lossless sound, is it that important in a home environment?
Can you really tell the difference?
I have a DTS / Dolby Digital 5.1 Sony Amp, a few years old, but my Blu rays and dvds sound fantastic, why would i need an upgrade?...i have an average size room with 5 speakers and a sub-woofer, most of the time i dont need to have it that loud to get fantastic sound.
Grindhouse and a few other releases have been critisized for not having lossless sound.
Can someone explain to me why its so important on a Blu ray release?

I will be short.

Losselles does really make a big differrance but its not imprtant. Well, at least if you like the movie, I wouldnt even bother to look at sound quality.

[Papperskatt]

I don't care if the movie I buy have lossless audio or not simply because I'm tone-deaf and can't really hear the difference anyway. That, and the fact that I don't have a very fancy setup, just some 25 years old second hand speakers that I got for free...

The sound in a movie really isn't that important to me.