High Definition Audio is misunderstood!

[jsteinhauer]

Hey, I want to talk about something different.

The news has been great, and the CES announcements have too, but it's dizzying.

Every so often, I get lucky and the topic of discussion with my colleagues in the lunch room drifts to home high-definition media. I get continual arguments from the know-it-all types that once we reach a certain age (to be debated, and depending on how you play your headphones and car stereo) we no longer have the anatomic ability to appreciate high-definition sound. Given the nature of these guys, they are difficult to argue with, but it is hard to get past them that what HD audio provides is not an extreme range of frequencies, but a level of detail, background sounds, conversations and surround effects, that is not possible with lossy audio. Analogies would be an abridged book and an unabridged book.

Do you find this same type of misunderstanding when trying to explain that there really is a detectable difference between compressed audio and lossless audio for home cinema?

[Robmx]

Yes I agree with what you are saying, Alot of others feel that Linear PCM is just a louder version of sound.....

[I Bleed Blu]

Kinda off topic but maybe you guys can explain this to me a little better. If PCM is better then Dolby True HD & DTS HD Master (because the latter two are compressed if what I read on another thread is true) then why dont we see more titles with PCM?

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

Given the nature of these guys, they are difficult to argue with, but it is hard to get past them that what HD audio provides is not an extreme range of frequencies, but a level of detail, background sounds, conversations and surround effects, that is not possible with lossy audio. Analogies would be an abridged book and an unabridged book.

Exactly. To me the difference is primarily the immersiveness of the surround for lossless or uncompressed.

Apocalypto's opening scene is a great example. Close your eyes and you're in the jungle. It's freaky.

Someone else do an A/B on A Clockwork Orange in the scenes of extreme echo inside the prison. The difference is striking. I find even the dialogue is harmed under plain DD.

Gary

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by I Bleed Blu

Kinda off topic but maybe you guys can explain this to me a little better. If PCM is better then Dolby True HD & DTS HD Master (because the latter two are compressed if what I read on another thread is true) then why dont we see more titles with PCM?

Almost every Sony and Disney title has PCM.

There should not be a difference between PCM and lossless. If there are, then something is wrong with the encoding because then it is NOT lossless.

Gary

[Luis_A51]

Originally Posted by I Bleed Blu

Kinda off topic but maybe you guys can explain this to me a little better. If PCM is better then Dolby True HD & DTS HD Master (because the latter two are compressed if what I read on another thread is true) then why dont we see more titles with PCM?

The majority of Sony, Disney and Lionsgate movies have PCM (all 3 studios are Blu exclusive) They did so because they could optimize their releases for blu-rays added space.

Warner and Paramount could not (usually) because they didnt always make BD-optimized versions.

Now that Warner is exclusive, I assume most if not all their new releases will have PCM. That being said if a movie has TrueHD atleast then im happy.

[I Bleed Blu]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

Almost every Sony and Disney title has PCM.

There should not be a difference between PCM and lossless. If there are, then something is wrong with the encoding because then it is NOT lossless.

Gary

So are you saying that True HD & DTS Master HD are just as good as PCM? Because I dont know and this is something ive been trying to understand sense I purchased the Onkyo 805. Thanks for your help.

[Kristin Simard]

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

Given the nature of these guys, they are difficult to argue with

And how! I was just talking a few minutes ago with a manager of a video rental store who said that Paramount earlier went HD DVD exclusive and now all the publicity is about Warner going Blu-ray exclusive, but "the studios are really split about fifty-fifty between Blu-ray and HD HVD" !

Of course I couldn't get a word in edgewise because I'm a girl and he had to be right.

Originally Posted by jsteinhauer

Analogies would be an abridged book and an unabridged book.

Yes, this reads to me. Or like subtitles to the dialog in the original language.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by I Bleed Blu

So are you saying that True HD & DTS Master HD are just as good as PCM? Because I dont know and this is something ive been trying to understand sense I purchased the Onkyo 805. Thanks for your help.

There are still arguments about this.

What I am saying is, that to be considered truelly lossless, the encoding should be able to take the PCM and restore an exact copy of it. If something has changed, then it is NOT lossless.

And if the PCM and its decoded lossless are IDENTICAL, how can there be any difference?

Gary

[seto]

Unfortunately it is all moot when a majority of people are still without a basic surround setup.

[Kratos3]

Originally Posted by I Bleed Blu

Kinda off topic but maybe you guys can explain this to me a little better. If PCM is better then Dolby True HD & DTS HD Master (because the latter two are compressed if what I read on another thread is true) then why dont we see more titles with PCM?

I think the issue is space. An Uncompressed PCM track takes up a little more space than TrueHD or dts-MA. From what I understand, TrueHD and dts-MA are "losslessly compressed," if that makes any sense. I think you could somewhat compare it to iTunes with the Apple Lossless codec and AIFF uncompressed codec.

Can someone back me up on this, or am I making this up?

[Gremal]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

Almost every Sony and Disney title has PCM.

There should not be a difference between PCM and lossless. If there are, then something is wrong with the encoding because then it is NOT lossless.

Gary

Theoretically, of course, you're right. But my experience with audio is that any step in encoding/decoding and each connection potentially degrades some quality of the sound. The less processing the better, and TrueHD requires an extra step, even if it is technically lossless. I also attended a Sony demo at Dolby Labs and there was an audible difference between TrueHD and PCM which several of us in attendance were able to perceive.

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by seto

Unfortunately it is all moot when a majority of people are still without a basic surround setup.

Really, I know!

But let me tell you, I used to use a JVC HTiB that I got free with credit card points. It was 5.1, tiny bookshelf speakers and a SW. When I first bought my Bravia, S1 and A20, I thought about going with the Bravia speakers, but the absence of what even the meager HTiB provided is what convinced me to go out and get the rest of the gear. I encourage anyone on a limited budget who loves watching movies at home to get a HTiB, because it really does make a huge difference.

Furthermore, I wish I had spent more money on my speakers. At the time, I was already having sticker shock (I grew up very low half-middle class). But now knowing how much I can really tell the difference, I would gladly have purchased a full set of large speakers for the 7. contribution. While I could easily splurge on a more expensive SW, I don't want my birds to start feather plucking from my movie watching habits.

[ResOGlas]

There is often a difference between the uncompressed PCM and lossless codecs such as TrueHD. TrueHD codecs can have dialog normalization applied, which IMO sucks.

I don't want gunshots and explosions to be the same volume as a quiet conversation, I'll take uncompressed PCM any day, thanks

[jsteinhauer]

Originally Posted by ResOGlas

There is often a difference between the uncompressed PCM and lossless codecs such as TrueHD. TrueHD codecs can have dialog normalization applied, which IMO sucks.

I don't want gunshots and explosions to be the same volume as a quiet conversation, I'll take uncompressed PCM any day, thanks

There are lots of debates on this subject, but if you consult the DTS website, they clearly explain that a player that decodes master audio will peform "mixing" after decoding and prior to the PCM being sent to the reciever. They also show master audio that is bitstreamed to the AVR being "post-processed" in the receiver, prior to being output. Either of these scenarios will lead to differences in PCM vs. DTSHD master audio. I'm sure the same applies to Dolby True HD.

[Shawn1080p]

Okay I can't decode (or encode :S) the high def audio, but wouldn't even normal Dolby Digital and DTS sound better? I'm just thinking that its similar to MP3s; how a 256 kbps file would sound better than a file with 192 kbps. So a regular DD or DTS track that is encoded at a higher rate, would sound better on Blu-Ray correct?

[jrrosas]

Hi all,
I just bought an Onkyo 705 to go with my Panny 10AK. After a sales pitch to my wife about the great sound that we would here with the new amp, I honestly couldn't tell the difference between the DD 5.1 and PCM 5.1 when switching back and forward the audio. Perhaps I need to hear a specific scene to tell, I wonder if you have any recommendation for a demo.

Also, I have a small room that has Polk audio 6700 satellite speakers, could it be more noticable if I upgrade my speakers?

Thanks a lot, this new high definition world is a whole new ball park!

[I Bleed Blu]

Upgrading your speakers wouldnt hurt im sure

[jrrosas]

I know but it's been an expensive road to get here I just want to know so I plan my next upgrade hehe

[I Bleed Blu]

Yeah I understand, I still havent completed my setup. Ive been buying speakers one by one haha...I'm sure someone else will chime in and maybe give you some more advice tho.