Is there a noticable real difference in audio formats (dd5.1, dts, etc)?

[Maxell]

All things equal, can you really tell the difference between all types of audio formats? Wouldn't it have more to do with your receiver/system rather than the audio from the disc? I'm sure a 5.1 dolby would probably sound great on a great audio system. I can definitely tell the difference between 1080p and dvd 480p, or from dolby 2.0 and dolby 5.1. But is there really a big difference between the other formats?

And yes, I really need to upgrade my receiver situation.

[BStecke]

There's a huge difference between the lossless/PCM tracks vs. DD5.1 or DTS. Between standard DTS and 5.1, there's a difference, but not nearly as big as the jump to lossless/PCM.

[theknub]

honestly, the lossless codecs and pcm are a huge upgrade over dts and dd.

[Footloose301]

Originally Posted by Maxell

All things equal, can you really tell the difference between all types of audio formats? Wouldn't it have more to do with your receiver/system rather than the audio from the disc? I'm sure a 5.1 dolby would probably sound great on a great audio system. I can definitely tell the difference between 1080p and dvd 480p, or from dolby 2.0 and dolby 5.1. But is there really a big difference between the other formats?

And yes, I really need to upgrade my receiver situation.

I've noticed a large difference between the DD5.1 vs DTS 5.1, the DTS has a much fuller surround usually. I always check a movie's details before loading it into the player. Always check to see if theres a DTS track avaiable and use that before Dolby tracks.

And then going from a DD5.1 or DTS to a PCM is a difference too. The PCM track sounds much clearer.

[scragham]

between DD5.1/DTS (never tested the difference between these two) and PCM, there's a HUGE difference. i upgraded my receiver from some crappy generic to the onkyo 605, and wow, i never knew what i was missing when i was listening to crappy old DD5.1/DTS.

[fronn]

DTS is pretty convincing. I'd not feel too bad if all we ever got was 1.5mb/s DTS... Although I'd certainly prefer lossless (I just wish DTS was standard instead of Dolby -- I'm quite happy that Fox went with it!).

Normal DD5.1 isn't as good, but can still be pretty respectable. I'd say the jump from 640k DD to 1.5mb DTS is about as big or bigger than 1.5mb DTS to lossless. Especially if it's 16bit lossless.

[Footloose301]

Originally Posted by scragham

between DD5.1/DTS (never tested the difference between these two) and PCM, there's a HUGE difference. i upgraded my receiver from some crappy generic to the onkyo 605, and wow, i never knew what i was missing when i was listening to crappy old DD5.1/DTS.

Remember to compare Apples to Apples. Meaning that, Of course your new receiver is going to sound better with PCM..... it also sounds better playing DD/DTS than your older receiver. I bet if you compared your old receiver to your new TX-SR605 with DD5.1 vs DD5.1 tracks and DTS vs DTS tracks it would sound better also. So buying a new receiver is probably what made such a huge difference for you. However I'm not disagreeing with you. I know for a fact PCM sounds much better anyways.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by fronn

DTS is pretty convincing. I'd not feel too bad if all we ever got was 1.5mb/s DTS... Although I'd certainly prefer lossless (I just wish DTS was standard instead of Dolby -- I'm quite happy that Fox went with it!).

Normal DD5.1 isn't as good, but can still be pretty respectable. I'd say the jump from 640k DD to 1.5mb DTS is about as big or bigger than 1.5mb DTS to lossless. Especially if it's 16bit lossless.

I completely agree. Until support for DTS-HDMA arrives for the PS3, the DTS core on Fox's releases is still pretty damn good, and worlds better than standard 640 DD.

[nails]

I don't really have a trained ear, so I have no clue what to listen for. I have a 7.1 DTS system, I don't think it supports TrueHD or any of the higher audio formats like that. However even with it set to HD sound my speakers are still lighting up like a xmas tree. I honestly didn't really notice too much speaker play with previous blu-ray titles till I got Resident Evil Apoc. Those things in the church that were jumping around everywhere. My speakers were going nuts, and the sound was pinpointing my perception exactly where the beasties were. In some instances I was actually looking to the left or right of the screen lol. Surround sound has never fooled me before, but I caught myself doing it. Freaky stuff!

[ra1024]

If you want to hear the difference between DD5.1 and PCM, buy or rent XXX (Vin Diesel action flick). Go to the chapter where the evil guy is breaking out of his hideout on the river as XXX and the cops are assaulting the compound. Listen to it first set on DD5.1 and then rewatch it set to PCM.

The difference is very noticeable even with an older reciever. I don't have an HDMI receiver so my PCM is going over optical (not optimal) and the difference is very dramatic and I don't even have a trained ear.

The gunshots sound a lot more realistic and the shot of the big steel door closing is very pronounced when listening to PCM but they all sound flat with just the DD5.1.

You won't hear as big a difference with just dialogue but any sort of action sequence really shines with PCM. Of course HD DVD fans don't care about this as they feel DD5.1 is good enough but once you know the difference, it's hard to be happy with just DVD quality audio.

[Footloose301]

Originally Posted by ra1024

The difference is very noticeable even with an older reciever. I don't have an HDMI receiver so my PCM is going over optical (not optimal) and the difference is very dramatic and I don't even have a trained ear.



.

You are only getting 2ch PCM over optical. Anything more than 2ch is not possible for PCM over optical. You need either 5.1/7.1 analog outs on the blu-ray player with the 5.1/7.1 analog inputs on the receiver OR HDMI connection.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Footloose301

You are only getting 2ch PCM over optical. Anything more than 2ch is not possible for PCM over optical. You need either 5.1/7.1 analog outs on the blu-ray player with the 5.1/7.1 analog inputs on the receiver OR HDMI connection.

HAHAHA... you beat me to it!

[Anthony P]

huge difference between lossless and not

[scragham]

Originally Posted by Footloose301

Remember to compare Apples to Apples. Meaning that, Of course your new receiver is going to sound better with PCM..... it also sounds better playing DD/DTS than your older receiver. I bet if you compared your old receiver to your new TX-SR605 with DD5.1 vs DD5.1 tracks and DTS vs DTS tracks it would sound better also. So buying a new receiver is probably what made such a huge difference for you. However I'm not disagreeing with you. I know for a fact PCM sounds much better anyways.

hehe without question, the receiver makes a big difference. i did think about that though - for movies that had PCM (namely my sony/disney movies) i tested out dd5.1 vs pcm by flipping between the two audio tracks (on the new receiver minutes after i set it up!) and even my loud music-damaged ears could definitely appreciate a difference. crisper, fuller sound, etc etc etc.

[ra1024]

Originally Posted by Footloose301

You are only getting 2ch PCM over optical. Anything more than 2ch is not possible for PCM over optical. You need either 5.1/7.1 analog outs on the blu-ray player with the 5.1/7.1 analog inputs on the receiver OR HDMI connection.

Hence the reason I said "not optimal". My point was that even without true 5.1 PCM, the difference was quite noticeable so an HDMI receiver should be even better. I believe the PS3 mixes the 5.1/7.1 into basically stereo and with Dolby ProLogic, you get a pseudo surround sound. I think the main difference is that the bitrate is reduced over optical so you're not getting the full spectrum that you would with HDMI. Even with that, the XXX section I referenced was much improved with even my older receiver when using PCM.