IMAX Enhanced

[sapiendut]

Uhmm no. The difference is in the mix. Lossless is lossless

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

LMAO 5.1 MA sounds better than TrueHD Every time. DTS has always done Dolby, but better.

Sounds like someone doesn't know how to use their volume control...

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Sounds like someone doesn't know how to use their volume control...

Volume control works fine...I just don't suck on the Dolby teet

[Sky_Captain]

You've your bake clamped firmly around the DTS one.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by Sky_Captain

You've your bake clamped firmly around the DTS one.

Ah yes I cannot defend its merits without sucking the teet as well

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

LMAO 5.1 MA sounds better than TrueHD Every time. DTS has always done Dolby, but better.

Avengers Age of Ultron is DTS Master HD / 1st Transformers is Dolby TrueHD

Age of Ultron mix is a joke. Transformers will test your system.

There are several other examples to dismiss your claim.

Lossless is lossless. It is all in the mix.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by gotmule

Avengers Age of Ultron is DTS Master HD / 1st Transformers is Dolby TrueHD

Age of Ultron mix is a joke. Transformers will test your system.

There are several other examples to dismiss your claim.

Lossless is lossless. It is all in the mix.

When has anyone been impressed with a MCU audio track? Bad comparison imo

Literally not every time but have you compared MI 1 and 2 TrueHD vs DTS MA?? its mixed better, it sounds better.

I will admit Dolby invents and brings new innovations to the table, but DTS executes it better.

[idlebrain]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

When has anyone been impressed with a MCU audio track? Bad comparison imo

Literally not every time but have you compared MI 1 and 2 TrueHD vs DTS MA?? its mixed better, it sounds better.

I will admit Dolby invents and brings new innovations to the table, but DTS executes it better.

If you are referring the DTS MA tracks on swedish BDs, definitely no. TrueHD tracks of UHD are incredibly superior.
If I want to defend DTS, I will refer the first two films of TDKT mixes in DTS MA or superior Casino royal DTS track over Dolby.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by idlebrain

If you are referring the DTS MA tracks on swedish BDs, definitely no. TrueHD tracks of UHD are incredibly superior.
If I want to defend DTS, I will refer the first two films of TDKT mixes in DTS MA or superior Casino royal DTS track over Dolby.

The Blade Runner Final Cut 5.1 is incredibly better mixed than the Atmos track. And is not Swedish but Italian and no the DTS does sound better and is mixed better UHD or Blu-ray (both formats handle lossy) is irrelevant especially when comparing the BR 5.1 vs Atmos. (these comparisons were not made on my soundbar)

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

The Blade Runner Final Cut 5.1 is incredibly better mixed than the Atmos track.

A matter of opinion, except for a couple here and there the Atmos mix has been widely praised.

And is not Swedish but Italian and no the DTS does sound better and is mixed better UHD or Blu-ray (both formats handle lossy) is irrelevant especially when comparing the BR 5.1 vs Atmos. (these comparisons were not made on my soundbar)

We're talking about the lossless tracks, not the lossy.
Paramount went to the source for the TrueHD encodes on their M:I UHDs.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

When has anyone been impressed with a MCU audio track? Bad comparison imo

Age of Ultron and the first Avengers Atmos tracks are big improvements over the originals.

I will admit Dolby invents and brings new innovations to the table, but DTS executes it better.

No they don't. The only advantage they've ever had was encoding time on Blu-ray which saved money. Performance wise it cost more decoding horsepower and larger file sizes - for example the DTS-MA 5.1 file on Warner discs has been shown to be *larger* than the 7.1 TrueHD with Atmos objects. Even during dead silence a DTS track will be 1.5Mbps at minimum.
In the computer world that is a huge waste of bandwidth and data space.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

A matter of opinion, except for a couple here and there the Atmos mix has been widely praised.

We're talking about the lossless tracks, not the lossy.
Paramount went to the source for the TrueHD encodes on their M:I UHDs.

The DTS has also been widely praised and sorely missed by most on BR UHD. And well that's nice and all but that does not change the quality. Mixes and encodes are handled by different groups. the MI DTS is lossless as well so would that not be the source?

Also IMO DTS X downmixes better than Atmos as well.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Age of Ultron and the first Avengers Atmos tracks are big improvements over the originals.

No they don't. The only advantage they've ever had was encoding time on Blu-ray which saved money. Performance wise it cost more decoding horsepower and larger file sizes - for example the DTS-MA 5.1 file on Warner discs has been shown to be *larger* than the 7.1 TrueHD with Atmos objects. Even during dead silence a DTS track will be 1.5Mbps at minimum.
In the computer world that is a huge waste of bandwidth and data space.

Yes. They do. DTS has better bit rates and has practically since existing. DTS was first to release lossless 5.1 audio tracks before Dolby?

Old but still relevant.

http://www.blu-raystats.com/NewsLog/...-ray-standard/

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

The DTS has also been widely praised and sorely missed by most on BR UHD. And well that's nice and all but that does not change the quality. Mixes and encodes are handled by different groups. the MI DTS is lossless as well so would that not be the source?

There can be multiple sources for audio tracks, particularly those from the early days of digital sound.

Also IMO DTS X downmixes better than Atmos as well.

Atmos starts out as a 2.0 mix and builds from there.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There can be multiple sources for audio tracks, particularly those from the early days of digital sound.

Atmos starts out as a 2.0 mix and builds from there.

That's a big AND........your point is???? Atmos was the first on the scene. I'm sorry but the early Atmos mixes are riddled messes. They have gotten noticeably better. Practically every Atmos track (beyond Disney releases) this year killed it (that I own or listened to). But IMO every DTS X track from Universal etc so far on UHD that I have listened to has been quality and consistent.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

Yes. They do. DTS has better bit rates and has practically since existing. DTS was first to release lossless 5.1 audio tracks before Dolby?

"Better" bitrates? You mean larger. The whole point of compression is to get the lowest possible bitrate. Do you think MPEG2 video is better because it uses higher bitrates than MPEG4 AVC?
The first lossless 5.1 audio tracks were MLP, which is the codec TrueHD is based on - on the DVD Audio format (SACD uses DSD). For video they were PCM 5.1 on Blu-ray. The first lossless compressed 5.1 tracks were TrueHD on HD DVD.

Old but still relevant.

Irrelevant. It's an opinion piece, not an informed one.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

That's a big AND........your point is???? Atmos was the first on the scene. I'm sorry but the early Atmos mixes are riddled messes. They have gotten noticeably better. Practically every Atmos track (beyond Disney releases) this year killed it (that I own or listened to). But IMO every DTS X track from Universal etc so far on UHD that I have listened to has been quality and consistent.

You're equating your opinion for fact.
FACT is that the industry knows Atmos is a better format and has overwhelmingly embraced it. It's supported by every studio. If it wasn't for Universal, which has a financial stake in DTS, there wouldn't be much (if any) DTS:X releases. Even then, a prestige title like Schindler's List is in which format again?

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

You're equating your opinion for fact.
FACT is that the industry knows Atmos is a better format and has overwhelmingly embraced it. It's supported by every studio. If it wasn't for Universal, which has a financial stake in DTS, there wouldn't be much (if any) DTS:X releases. Even then, a prestige title like Schindler's List is in which format again?

DTS DOMINATED BLU-RAY and nearly still does. Atmos is new and exciting sure. We are only still year 3 (end of) and you think Dolby will stay king, most old movies do not even have Dolby TrueHD on them? There are almost as many DTS 5.1 and X tracks as Atmos on UHD so your point is irrelevant.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

"Better" bitrates? You mean larger. The whole point of compression is to get the lowest possible bitrate. Do you think MPEG2 video is better because it uses higher bitrates than MPEG4 AVC?
The first lossless 5.1 audio tracks were MLP, which is the codec TrueHD is based on - on the DVD Audio format (SACD uses DSD). For video they were PCM 5.1 on Blu-ray. The first lossless compressed 5.1 tracks were TrueHD on HD DVD.

Irrelevant. It's an opinion piece, not an informed one.

Dolby=Economy

DTS=Fidelity

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

When has anyone been impressed with a MCU audio track? Bad comparison imo

Literally not every time but have you compared MI 1 and 2 TrueHD vs DTS MA?? its mixed better, it sounds better.

I will admit Dolby invents and brings new innovations to the table, but DTS executes it better.

Incredible Hulk
Thor
Captain America
Captain America Winter Soldier
Doctor Strange
Spider-Man Homecoming

Just off the top of my head, these MCU Blu-ray’s were certainly impressive from an audio standpoint. Granted, the majority have disappointed, but there have been some standouts.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

DTS DOMINATED BLU-RAY and nearly still does. Atmos is new and exciting sure. We are only still year 3 (end of) and you think Dolby will stay king, most old movies do not even have Dolby TrueHD on them? There are almost as many DTS 5.1 and X tracks as Atmos on UHD so your point is irrelevant.

Standard Blu-ray is the ONLY format where DTS had the advantage, which it lost with UHD Blu-ray. Every Disney release is Atmos. Almost every Sony release is Atmos. Warner is mostly Atmos, and if they remix it is in Atmos (Harry Potter is the only discs in X), Lionsgate is almost completely Atmos. Shout Factory. Paramount is mostly Atmos or TrueHD 5.1. Universal is the only studio that consistently releases in X and even then multiple titles are in Atmos.


That still doesn't account for DVD, HDTV, streaming, video games...even phone devices and Amazon devices tout Atmos capability. For ATSC 3.0 DTS withdrew with their tail between their legs after seeing what Dolby AC-4 could do. Have they even gotten DTS-HR DTS:X decoding to work yet? DD+ with Atmos launched the same time Atmos with TrueHD did.

Dolby=Economy

DTS=Fidelity

It's not fidelity when DTS 768kbps rolls off starting at 15kHz, unlike Dolby Digital 448kbps.
Or limiting the output of all your immersive mixes to 7.1.4

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Standard Blu-ray is the ONLY format where DTS had the advantage, which it lost with UHD Blu-ray. Every Disney release is Atmos. Almost every Sony release is Atmos. Warner is mostly Atmos, and if they remix it is in Atmos (Harry Potter is the only discs in X), Lionsgate is almost completely Atmos. Shout Factory. Paramount is mostly Atmos or TrueHD 5.1. Universal is the only studio that consistently releases in X and even then multiple titles are in Atmos.


That still doesn't account for DVD, HDTV, streaming, video games...even phone devices and Amazon devices tout Atmos capability. For ATSC 3.0 DTS withdrew with their tail between their legs after seeing what Dolby AC-4 could do. Have they even gotten DTS-HR DTS:X decoding to work yet? DD+ with Atmos launched the same time Atmos with TrueHD did.

It's not fidelity when DTS 768kbps rolls off starting at 15kHz, unlike Dolby Digital 448kbps.
Or limiting the output of all your immersive mixes to 7.1.4

It is only this way because Dolby wants it this way same with vision. Again not even in the 3rd year and you arrogantly believe it's going to be Atmos or bust from here the competition and thank God there is, is a little late to the party but the DOMINANCE you tout is gone. Fox is already...slowly again is the important word moving away from Vision and based on more recent announcements of IMAX enhanced and Warner going into support 10+ in 19 as well. Yes they are dominant now but as always DTS will come in and dominate the format just like bluray by innovating what Dolby does.