Uncompressed sound

[Micker]

I have a PS3 and sony Str-dg1000 receiver on the way!! I have a 5.1 setup right now that is pretty good. I have never heard an uncompressed blu-ray yet and wonder how much better it will sound over dvd DD tracks?? Is it a big difference or just noticable here and there??

[scatcher]

Originally Posted by Micker

I have a PS3 and sony Str-dg1000 receiver on the way!! I have a 5.1 setup right now that is pretty good. I have never heard an uncompressed blu-ray yet and wonder how much better it will sound over dvd DD tracks?? Is it a big difference or just noticable here and there??

Unless you build a theatre room where you control all sound, drop thousands on your speaker/amplifier combo, and are under 30 (and haven't spent a lot of time in loud clubs and concerts), the difference isn't significant.

A decent 5.1 DTS sound system is enough for a non-dedicated watching environment.

[oscar_in_fw]

It'll sound way better than DD for most stuff but just remember: Garbage In, garbage out. The better your surround setup is, the more likely it is you will really benefit from uncompressed audio. Typically more dynamic, better separation, clearer/"cleaner"-sounding.

Try posting this relatively innocuous question on AVSForum or Highdefdigest and see what happens.

Hint. Not for the faint of heart. You can stir up a whole lot of impassioned discussions on the relative merits of lossy audio (e.g. DD) vs. lossless audio simply because it's an advantage point for Blu-ray.

[welwynnick]

Always a subject I'm willing to tangle with. I wouldn't say LPCM was necessarily a format descriminator in the long term, as HD will adopt Dolby THD and or DTS MA, which should be more space efficient, but with comparable quality.

I think this is more likely a willy waving competiton about wealth and hearing. It's the sort of thing that's been debated in hifi circles for decades. Some maintain you shouldn't spent barrow loads of cash because you can't hear the difference, while others say every component and connection makes a difference and is worth pursuing to the nth degree.

While 1.5 Mbps DD+ audio is probably very good, I'm pretty convinced of the benefits of uncompressed (or lossless compressed) digital audio. this is what I posted somewhere else recently:

Thought it might be time to recount some recent listening, and its bearing (and confusion) on digital audio. I built up a big pile of kit recently, and can test many different configurations. Firstly I compared spdif, toslink, i-link and hdmi interfaces when playing CDs. The first two were quite similar, and the differences were more of character than quality. I knew that i-link would be a big step up, and so it was.

HDMI was the interesting one for me, as before now, I hadn’t had an amp that accepted it. I heard people say it wasn’t as good as spdif, but this didn’t prepare me for how bad it was. It was very disappointing, as one connection would have been so convenient; but it won’t do. Difficult to say what it was doing wrong, but it just sounded a mess, and easily worse than everything else. It was difficult to keep the differences in perspective, as many manufacturers and consumers presumably think that audio over HDMI is the best they can get, yet it was hard to think of anything good to say about, or even continue listening.

Then I tried playing Blu-ray LPCM soundtracks over HDMI, and compared analogue and down-converted spdif connections. That might seem like an unequal comparison, as LPCM was 24 bit/48kHz, but my experience above suggested that HDMI itself may be the quality bottleneck. Where spdif sounds better when carrying the very same 16/44.1 stereo audio bits, I can only assume that hdmi has too much noise, jitter or interference to recover the audio faithfully. And that would also apply to HD audio.

Well, no. LPCM over HDMI simply blew spdif out of the water. I was kind of hoping that spdif might have been close, and then I could justify selling the HDMI receiver that I didn’t really want to keep. But I simply couldn’t turn my back on the difference that was available for the want of an interface. While I willingly rubbished HDMI with stereo, I wouldn’t do that with spdif here, as it still sounded fine in isolation. There wasn’t much wrong, it was just that LPCM was just so much more transparent. I even hoped that my Sony BDP-S1 might have decent analogue outputs, and I compared them. While they were a bit better than spdif – smoother, sharper, cleaner and a bit brighter – the difference wasn’t great, and the gap to HDMI was still considerable.

Since the HDMI amp also has an i-link input, I have a straightforward way forwards, but this has now asked many new questions about how the different digital audio interfaces work (or don’t). Looks like it’s not a simple subject.

Nick

[jdsanko]

What were you using to play the CD's?

[paulyg]

I think the difference in uncompressed and DD is a lot more noticeable on newer movies. You would have to hear them for your self. Casino Royal and Black Hawk Down are awesome in pcm. For me sound is just as important as PQ.

[welwynnick]

Originally Posted by jdsanko

What were you using to play the CD's?

Pioneer DV79AVi.

That's got pretty much every output under the sun. I forgot to mention that I used a glass toslink cable - I heard they sound better than plastic, but I must get round to doing a comparison. It goes without saying that I hope BD players will one day have I-Link outputs as well. Rumours are that the Pioneer BDP-LX90 will, but that might be above my pay-grade for a while, yet.

Nick

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by scatcher

Unless you build a theatre room where you control all sound, drop thousands on your speaker/amplifier combo, and are under 30 (and haven't spent a lot of time in loud clubs and concerts), the difference isn't significant.

A decent 5.1 DTS sound system is enough for a non-dedicated watching environment.

What are you basing this off of, since, unless your hearing is quite poor, it's completely incorrect?

[Sir Terrence]

Originally Posted by BStecke

What are you basing this off of, since, unless your hearing is quite poor, it's completely incorrect?

I am a bit confused at this comment myself. I am not 30, and can hear the difference between PCM and DD+ on a klipsch quintet system in my best friends living room. When you know what to listen for, the hearing the difference becomes pretty easy.

[shock_terminal]

Originally Posted by Micker

I have a PS3 and sony Str-dg1000 receiver on the way!! I have a 5.1 setup right now that is pretty good. I have never heard an uncompressed blu-ray yet and wonder how much better it will sound over dvd DD tracks?? Is it a big difference or just noticable here and there??

I have an STR-DG1000.
I think you'll be happy.

[scatcher]

Originally Posted by BStecke

What are you basing this off of, since, unless your hearing is quite poor, it's completely incorrect?

Let's see... I bought my first pair of Wharfedale's in 1986 at the age of 16, and a Nakamichi cd player in 1988. Since then I've gone through seven generations of sound gear. Add 25 years mixing music, fifteen of them seriously (I'm surrounded by rack recording gear and instruments as I type this).

I've been the audiophile route. I could have bought a brand new 2006 Corvette for the money I've spent on audio in my lifetime.

And yes, my hearing has deteriorated somewhat, partially due to age, but abuse played a big role. Spend enough time in front of mixing monitors, wearing headphones for hours on end, and in loud clubs (two years of heavy partying that contributed greatly), and you pay the price. But my hearing is still good enough to spot the differences between varying audio sources.

I didn't say there was no difference. I said the difference wasn't significant. You can A/B it and hear the difference, but unless you were just moments ago listening to the "better" audio you'd never miss it.

If there's one lesson I learned, it's that your memory of your sound experiences is dodgy at best.

[jdc115]

Nick,

Do you mean to say that listening to LPCM over HDMI was that much better then listening to the same track decoded and played over 5.1 Analog outputs? If so, does the receiver convert the analog back to digital and analog again or do anything else that may account for the difference?

I would have thought the 2 should be very similar and possible would have thought the analog output would be better.

I can not duplicate your tests but in my setup, I prefer the 5.1 output (or 2 channel for CDs) coming from analog to my processor. My processor just simply acts as a pass through with volume knob then going over Toslink or Coax. The one difference is that either the DVD player (Denon) does the decoding or the processor (Rotel) does the decoding.

As I probably will not change my processor anytime soon, I am planning to let the Blu-ray player do the decoding and pass through via the analog outputs but you think that passing it over HDMI gives you much better results (as LPCM, not Bitstream).

Thanks

Originally Posted by welwynnick

Always a subject I'm willing to tangle with. I wouldn't say LPCM was necessarily a format descriminator in the long term, as HD will adopt Dolby THD and or DTS MA, which should be more space efficient, but with comparable quality.

I think this is more likely a willy waving competiton about wealth and hearing. It's the sort of thing that's been debated in hifi circles for decades. Some maintain you shouldn't spent barrow loads of cash because you can't hear the difference, while others say every component and connection makes a difference and is worth pursuing to the nth degree.

While 1.5 Mbps DD+ audio is probably very good, I'm pretty convinced of the benefits of uncompressed (or lossless compressed) digital audio. this is what I posted somewhere else recently:

[mastertang]

It may have been said already, but only HDMI can carry LPCM, and the Dolby Digital and DTS 'master' formats. Optical can't do it. I'm sure that the direct sound output is sufficient (if you have it) but I would personally go with HDMI. One other great thing besides the sound is the fact that PCM does not need to be processed like the other formats. Sound goes in, sound goes out. Crank up Dead Man's Chest on Blu-ray with a PCM setup (especially the battle sequences and the opening with the rain) and tell me there is no difference.

PCM sound is the second best reason to go with blu-ray.

[jdc115]

Originally Posted by mastertang

It may have been said already, but only HDMI can carry LPCM, and the Dolby Digital and DTS 'master' formats. Optical can't do it. I'm sure that the direct sound output is sufficient (if you have it) but I would personally go with HDMI. One other great thing besides the sound is the fact that PCM does not need to be processed like the other formats. Sound goes in, sound goes out. Crank up Dead Man's Chest on Blu-ray with a PCM setup (especially the battle sequences and the opening with the rain) and tell me there is no difference.

PCM sound is the second best reason to go with blu-ray.

Yes, Optical and Coax won't cut it, but I am curious about the comment the PCM over HDMI sounding better then 5.1 analog output of the same soundtrack? I would think that they should be very close and would have given a slight edge to the analog output unless the receiver did some extra processing to mess it up (converted the analog to digital and back to analog). In my case, the processor would keep the analog strictly in the analog domain and just pass it through to the amps.

[DragonSarc]

I dont know I have a Denon AVR-5803A and my sony BDP-S1 is connected through the 5.1 Coax - 5.1 separate inputs, when Im switching from Dolby and PCM I think Dolby is adding more to it than just the PCM track, the Dolby Track is Louder and more dynamic sound stage than the PCM (playing Chris Botti Live) using my DefTech Procinema 800 ( cuz my HT is not done yet BP7000sc CLR3000 and BPVX/P x4 for surround) might sound different when I get the big ones set up.

[T-Town Oil]

Originally Posted by scatcher

Unless you build a theatre room where you control all sound, drop thousands on your speaker/amplifier combo, and are under 30 (and haven't spent a lot of time in loud clubs and concerts), the difference isn't significant.

A decent 5.1 DTS sound system is enough for a non-dedicated watching environment.

thats about the most untrue statement ive read this morning. there is a very noticeable difference between dts 5.1 and pcm.

[monochromeguy]

Originally Posted by T-Town Oil

thats about the most untrue statement ive read this morning. there is a very noticeable difference between dts 5.1 and pcm.

I agree with you. I'm not a videophile nor an audiophile, and I don't know much about home theatre setups. But from my experience watching movies in cinemas, the difference between lossy compression like Dolby Digital, DTS, and lossless audio (on digital 2k/4k projection) are more than noticeable.

The first time I listened to lossless surround sound in cinema, it felt strange (in a positive way). I wasn't used to everything sounding so transparent and clear. Dolby Digital, DTS are both great, both original lossless audio is way awesome.

[vanstone]

Originally Posted by paulyg

I think the difference in uncompressed and DD is a lot more noticeable on newer movies. You would have to hear them for your self. Casino Royal and Black Hawk Down are awesome in pcm. For me sound is just as important as PQ.

I agree with paulyg I only have a HTIB (Onkyo S-790) and unless i am doing something wrong with my setup, LPCM sounds much better to me.

I have a HTPC and am using PowerDVD ultra, with the DD setting I get 640 Kbps with LPCM I get anywhere from 2000 to 4800 Kbps. I hear a lot more background sound like wind blowing through grass and rain etc...etc..

[MacDaddyOJack]

The sound is incredible, way better than DD. I also get more excited about hi-def audio than video anyways, but I think that anyone can tell the difference. I notice much more in terms of ambient sounds and overall it plays much cleaner over a more broad range and at higher sound levels than traditional DD or DTS. I consider the new audio formats just as much of an achievement as 1080p.

[alain turgeon]

If you want to hear what uncompressed sound can do i suggest you to pick up Dave Matthews and Tim reynolds live at Radio City Music Hall. It is just the best sounding concert on disc i have ever listened to.Try the True Hd soundtrack and you'll know what i mean.