DTS's Formats

[ClaytonMG]

Alright, so I couldn't find a thread about this so I decided to make one. So a DTS track on Blu-Ray is at least 1.5mbps, right? So what's the bitrate on a DTS-HD High Resolution track? Is that a viriable bitrate? And does anyone know what the bitrate is on DTS-HD Master Audio tracks are? I know so far no one's been able to decode them, but I am curious if anyone knows. I looked at DTS's site, but I got confused when they said Master Audio could acheive a bitrate of 24.5mbps. I wasn't sure if that's for the bitrate or what because PCM is only at 6.9 then.

[Zaphod]

I believe DTS-HD audio formats support data rates up to 24.5Mbps for DTS-HD Master Audio and 6.0Mbps for DTS-HD High Resolution Audio.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by Zaphod

I believe DTS-HD audio formats support data rates up to 24.5Mbps for DTS-HD Master Audio and 6.0Mbps for DTS-HD High Resolution Audio.

So then DTS-HD High Res would be better than a lot of PCM tracks (the non 24-Bit ones) and DTS-HD Master Audio would be the best, even better than PCM?

[CAB]

DTS.com info on HD format and DTS flavors.

[Zaphod]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

So then DTS-HD High Res would be better than a lot of PCM tracks (the non 24-Bit ones) and DTS-HD Master Audio would be the best, even better than PCM?

That is an interesting question. Since no player can decode these yet we will have to wait and see. But based purely on numbers...it should. But then again this is compressed so who knows, the higher bit rate may be required to compensate for compression.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by CAB

DTS.com info on HD format and DTS flavors.

Yeah that's what I was looking at... So then, in theory... DTS-HDMA should be better than PCM... it should be interesting to see when we can actually use this stuff...

[Sir Terrence]

Originally Posted by Zaphod

That is an interesting question. Since no player can decode these yet we will have to wait and see. But based purely on numbers...it should. But then again this is compressed so who knows, the higher bit rate may be required to compensate for compression.

When referring to Dts HD MA, you have to change your idea about compression. It is not like Dts core which uses data reduction to make it more efficient. Dts HD MA compresses in the form of compression/expansion via a file zipper to acheive its efficiency. That combined with VBR(variable bit rate) which codes the data with as many bits as it needs to make it lossless(which mean some channels will require more bits than others at any given time) make it a very efficient means of carrying lossless data.

Remember, these new codecs are very different than the legacy ones. The highest bitrate allows Dts to pass 24/192khz in 8 channels much more effieciently than it if was raw PCM.

[Zaphod]

Originally Posted by Sir Terrence

When referring to Dts HD MA, you have to change your idea about compression. It is not like Dts core which uses data reduction to make it more efficient. Dts HD MA compresses in the form of compression/expansion via a file zipper to acheive its efficiency. That combined with VBR(variable bit rate) which codes the data with as many bits as it needs to make it lossless(which mean some channels will require more bits than others at any given time) make it a very efficient means of carrying lossless data.

Remember, these new codecs are very different than the legacy ones. The highest bitrate allows Dts to pass 24/192khz in 8 channels much more effieciently than it if was raw PCM.

That's a good thing. Thanks for the info.

[Shadowself]

If you run through the arithmetic...

If your original data set is only 16 bit depth sampled at 48 kHz and only 5.1 channels it makes no sense (on a BD anyway) to use DTS HD MA as the raw data rate is only on the order of 4.6 Mbps.

However, if you go to the other extreme with 24 bit depth per sample with a sample rate of 192 kHz and 7.1 channels then the raw data rate is over 37 Mbps. A lossless compressed (i.e., once it is decompressed it is bit for bit exactly the same as the data was before compression) output of 24.5 Mbps or less is then very advantageous.

You would not use the highest data rate of DTS HD MA unless the situation warranted it.

[kabraal]

So lets say you use your player to decode a DTS MA track. What will the bit rate of the LPCM out be? Will it be different than passing the DTS MA via bit stream?

[JadedRaverLA]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

So then DTS-HD High Res would be better than a lot of PCM tracks (the non 24-Bit ones) and DTS-HD Master Audio would be the best, even better than PCM?

Neither Dolby TrueHD nor DTS HD-MA are "better" than PCM. They're simply PCM sound compressed within a container. The decompressed audio would be identical to a PCM track of the same bit-depth and sample rate (ignoring "features" like dialog normalization on TrueHD). What makes them "better" has nothing to do with sound quality. They simply store the same information in less space, and have some other qualities which make them useful on optical discs (such as better compatibility with branching). If you mean, that a DTS-HD 24-bit track could sound better than a 16-bit PCM track... then, yeah. Though, you'd have a hard time telling a difference even in a blind A/B test.

Originally Posted by kabraal

So lets say you use your player to decode a DTS MA track. What will the bit rate of the LPCM out be? Will it be different than passing the DTS MA via bit stream?

The LPCM output would be the same bitrate as a PCM track of the same bitdepth and sample rate would be... after all, that's exactly what you'd be expanding the DTS-HD MA track to. Output as bitstream, you would be outputting the still compressed sound, so it would be a lower variable bitrate... whatever was the necessary bitrate for the compression.

[gvortex7]

It's not so much that DTS-HD MA would sound better then LPCM, rather it would require a lot less bandwidth allowing for a better video quality on a disc.

[kabraal]

Do you think there will be a difference in quality between decoding DTSHDMA on the player or decoding it on the receiver?

[Zaphod]

Originally Posted by kabraal

Do you think there will be a difference in quality between decoding DTSHDMA on the player or decoding it on the receiver?

There would be no difference.

[JimPullan]

Originally Posted by Zaphod

There would be no difference.

In what way? There are currently two receivers that have Dolby Tru HD, Dolby Digital Plus, and DTS-HD Master Audio decoders in them, along with 5-7.1 analog uncompressed audio, and all the other audio formats, the Pioneer Elite VSX-95TXH and the Sony STRDE-5300ES (and maybe a couple others).

If the three products - the Blu-Ray Disc, the Blu-Ray Player, and the Receiver or Pre-Amp are all on the same page ie: offering DTS-HD Master Audio, where would the difference be? I look forward to your response. [Jim]

[Zaphod]

Originally Posted by JimPullan

In what way? There are currently two receivers that have Dolby Tru HD, Dolby Digital Plus, and DTS-HD Master Audio decoders in them, along with 5-7.1 analog uncompressed audio, and all the other audio formats, the Pioneer Elite VSX-95TXH and the Sony STRDE-5300ES (and maybe a couple others).

If the three products - the Blu-Ray Disc, the Blu-Ray Player, and the Receiver or Pre-Amp are all on the same page ie: offering DTS-HD Master Audio, where would the difference be? I look forward to your response. [Jim]

Think of the audio as like a file. Whether you open it on your computer, or transmit it to another computer via network cable. Where ever you open that file and use the contents of that file it is exactly the same.

Same applies to the audio codec, the information is being digitally transmitted from one place to another versus in the player so there would be no difference. You don't loose anything in the transfer. A codec decoder is no different in a Blu-ray player versus a receiver, they all do the exact same thing.

[JimPullan]

Thank you for your quick response. This stuff does get confusing !!! [Jim]

[ClaytonMG]

So really... The only time we'd see a 24.5mbps track is if every single speaker kicked in requiring the full bitrate of each channel and it's an 8 channel track, right?

[ClaytonMG]

So wait... Then wouldn't DTS-HD High Resolution be at a higher bitrate than Dolby TrueHD? On 300, the bitrate stayed around 1.5mbps-2.0mbps. So the DTS High Res track would be higher than that...