Dolby Digital vs DTS

[Blu-junkie]

I've tried to research an answer to this question. I'll ask it here....
After watching The Untouchables in both Dolby and DTS sound versions, I found that the DTS version was maybe more "speaker discreet" but lacked any low end other than explosions, making the soundtrack weak, IMO. The Dolby version was louder, music was glorious, with all the low end you would need making the movie more enjoyable for me.
I pose the question, Dolby Digital or DTS.... Any quality difference or just a matter of taste?
Panasonic BD-30
Bose Speakers
JBL sub
Onkyo 705

[RandDawg]

DTS is much better.

[Blu-junkie]

Originally Posted by RandDawg

DTS is much better.

Why?

[powerSURG]

This is an argument for the centuries. It's happening all over again with respect to Dolby TrueHD vs DTS-HDMA.

I personally prefer DTS-HDMA, it tends to have a higher bit-rate but it's probably just personal preference.

[JJ]

This is an interesting question, but I can only offer an opinion from a DVD-point of view, as I have not upgraded my sound on Blu-ray yet, It's still pending my speaker purchases.

But I will attempt a DVD-comparison, if you all will let me. Bitrates aside, (480 for DD, 755 kbps for DTS) - I have found that DTS soundtracks on DVDs (I used LOTR: extended editions, Master and Commander, and the Signature edition of Gladiator) - have more definition than their Dolby counterparts. The LFEs are more pronounced, surround effects a bit more clear, and the center channel dialogue more easily heard. Perhaps on Blu-rays there is a difference, but from what I've heard on these forums, DTS-HD MA beats out Dolby TrueHD, even though I could've also sworn that I've read that they're practically the same. Where's crackinhedz when you need him?!

[WickyWoo]

Completely different mixes are used on LOTR:EEs. Compare the arrows in Moria. hugely different

Gladiator is another case, and I'm guessing M&C is as well

Theatrical mixes used for DTS, Downmix friendly mixes used for DD

THD/DTSMA arguement is pointless

[JJ]

Ah, well, you see? I was right. Kind of. No, I was. Different on DVD, opinions differ on Blu-ray, but I think it's more a choice of personal preference when it comes to the two on our new format - since they are the same, aren't they?

[WickyWoo]

To be clear- It wasn't the CODEC that made it better, it was the mix

[JJ]

Yes, I took that from your statement. But I'm assuming you meant that for those not so good at reading,

[Amel]

you cant compare it

no way

DTS is running on my receiver at 1.5 while DD goes around 650kbs

[TENSE]

DOLBY TRUEHD any day baby.....
and thats how i p,ay the game baaaabbyyy..!!

[RandDawg]

Originally Posted by TENSE

DOLBY TRUEHD any day baby.....
and thats how i p,ay the game baaaabbyyy..!!

PCM baaaaabbyyy..!!

[jibucha]

Hello

I just wanted to take a moment to point out something that I have not encountered any information regarding sound formats in general.

Formats & Encoding Mix l There are the technical differences between the formats, including specifics such as bit-rates and differences of use of channels available by each format.

It is the use of channels and mixes that I think are not commonly recognized or addressed in the discussions that I have personally encountered.

It is the mixes that are encoded for each format that seem to not be recognized, There are many factors to be considered in mixes of the sound, such as the effort put into each, familiarity of each format by the sound engineer, technical aspects, and other considerations. I do believe that the mixes may be the formost consideration, although not commonly recognized.

Use of Channels l While the many progressions of the sound formats throughout the years may have changed the dynamics of each format, I do recall, that originally, the differences regarding how channels can be used was a major consideration of the sound formats.

Dolby had a fixed rate of each channel, while DTS allowed for the use of the entire available bits to be distributed among the channels completely at the discression of the sound engineer.

So; with Dolby, the use of each channel was a fixed amount that could not be changed by the sound engineer, regardless of sound requirements.

However, with DTS, the total amount of bits available, could be used entirely as the sound engineer determined, among any channel configuration. This means that all of the available bits could be used in one channel, if either required or desired, for any sound quality.

So, with DTS, having a larger number of bits available in any channel configuration, as well as a higher bit-rate, would seem a considerable advantage; which, it did commonly seem to be the case in soundtrack sound quality.

Still though, I do believe that the quality of the sound mix itself, is the consideration of paramount importance; perhaps overriding the technical aspects of the sound formats. So, it is possible for one or the other to sound better than the other; when all considerations are heard.


Thank You

[crackinhedz]

Originally Posted by jibucha

Still though, I do believe that the quality of the sound mix itself, is the consideration of paramount importance; perhaps overriding the technical aspects of the sound formats. So, it is possible for one or the other to sound better than the other; when all considerations are heard.

good point.

...and exactly the reason Transformers audio was rated top notch even though it was not even lossless.

[Blu-junkie]

Not a fan of answering my own posts, but I went back and watched key scenes of The Untouchables in Dolby Digital and in DTS formats, and Dolby Digital made it for me. The soundtrack, dialogue and sound fx were better in DD IMO. Probably the compression, I dunno.... I'm sure True HD would have been even better.