Poll: Should Sony use DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby TrueHD?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BIslander

As you know, dialnorm serves a couple of purposes. You may not personally perceive their value, but that hardly means dialnorm "serves no purpose".

According to Dolby's own whitepaper (easily found on the Web), both Dialnorm and DRC are so often misconfigured that they're not useful at present.

These were broadcast standards, not recorded media standards.

If you see a purpose for Dialnorm, would you care to share it? Please describe a purpose other than Dolby's original intent of setting a volume standard for all broadcast media - where the original purpose was to prevent volume spikes between disparate media sources (programs and commercials, for example).

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by cembros

it seems to have nothing to do with the codec wheather or not dialnorm is applied, but instead the studio. Look at titles such as the watchmen by warner and transformers imax by paramount. Both studios applied dialnorm to thei true hd tracks and have continued the trend. Now look at sony, they did not apply dialnorm to their true hd and have done the same with the dts tracks

With Dolby it's the default setting; with DTS, it's not.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I ask a question:

How many tracks are dialnormed by Dolby themselves?

Answer: ZERO:

Since it is the default setting for Dolby, the correct answer is, 100%.

It has to be turned off - an "opt-out", and there's no way you're not aware of this.

I'm sure you knew that.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

The industry wanted it, they got it, they are using it, and because of this DTS added it.

Lets look at a few other things Dolby has created...

Who created the market for home surround? Dolby.

Who was the first to deliver home theater 5.1? Dolby.

Who brought compressed lossless audio home first? Dolby.

Who created 5.1 output for media devices like camcorders, XBOX and PCs first? Dolby.

Who created a system where digital TV and cable could deliver great sounding 5.1 soundtracks? Dolby.

Who (with LucasFilm Skywalker sound & THX) created soundtracks with a center surround channel? Dolby.

Who brought 35MM surround tracks mainstream? Dolby.

Who brought 70MM soundtracks 5.1 surround? Dolby.

Who brought noise reduction to improve fidelity of home cassettes? Dolby.

Any more questions?

You're the one asking them. I have no idea why - to this point, no serious questions about Dolby's ability to perform have been raised.

There are the usual "DTS rules, FTW" posts, but the main contention of most who prefer DTS is this: they don't like their signal being attenuated, either by arbitrarily applied Dialnorm, or sloppily applied DRC. Who did what, back in the day, is as irrelevant as who developed fuel injection for automobiles when you're buying a car.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Again, this "one volume setting fits all" attitude is ridiculous. Shakira: Oral Fixation Tour (5.1 PCM) is soooo much louder than many of my other PCM sources, yet you're basically saying I should listen to them all at the same volume.

I have never said that. I have said, repeatedly, that the production's engineers are to take the credit or the blame for the mix and output - NOT the encoding format. Once the encoder gets in there and start pitching, who's to blame?

Mentioning a specific disc is pretty interesting. If this Shakira disc had been done in Dolby, would you like it better because it was attenuated by 4db?

[saginawjuggalo]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Like I said, if you release a poor audio track that's encoded with Dolby TrueHD, it's automatically Dolby's fault. If you release a poor track that's encoded with DTS-HD MA, it's the fault of the mix. Same goes for video codecs. If a film looks poor and it's a VC-1 encode, that means it's the fault of VC-1. If a film encoded with AVC looks poor, it's the transfer.

Well said

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Since it is the default setting for Dolby, the correct answer is, 100%.

It has to be turned off - an "opt-out", and there's no way you're not aware of this.

I'm sure you knew that.

There's no "on and off", only a level. Same with DTS.

I have never said that. I have said, repeatedly, that the production's engineers are to take the credit or the blame for the mix and output - NOT the encoding format. Once the encoder gets in there and start pitching, who's to blame?

Mentioning a specific disc is pretty interesting. If this Shakira disc had been done in Dolby, would you like it better because it was attenuated by 4db?

I'd like it better in TrueHD because when I had a friend over with her toddler son I had to switch over to the lossy DD track to keep it from getting too loud for them. Speaking of her and the Shakira disc, it was also the title that convinced her BD was much more impressive than DVD, other stuff she had seen hadn't at that point in 2007.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

According to Dolby's own whitepaper (easily found on the Web), both Dialnorm and DRC are so often misconfigured that they're not useful at present.

That's not what it says. Please quote and provide links to the relevant parts of the Dolby white paper that support your claim.

These were broadcast standards, not recorded media standards.

No. Again, please document this claim.

If you see a purpose for Dialnorm, would you care to share it? Please describe a purpose other than Dolby's original intent of setting a volume standard for all broadcast media - where the original purpose was to prevent volume spikes between disparate media sources (programs and commercials, for example).

Dialnorm is a number used to identify the level of average dialog below full scale. Full scale is 0dB. Dialnorm values are negative numbers ranging from -1 to -31. Dialnorm is just a number in a field in the metadata of encoded Dolby and DTS tracks.

Decoders make use of dialnorm values in two ways. (1) When a dialnorm value other than -31 is entered, they attenuate the overall playback volume so that average dialog is -31dBFS. That's the volume leveling function of dialnorm. (2) They also use the dialnorm value to implement Dynamic Range Control. DRC works best when the processor knows the actual level of average dialog.

With Dolby it's the default setting; with DTS, it's not.

Yes, but in both cases, the party responsible for the encoding determines whether to use the default or to enter a valid number if the default is not valid.

It has to be turned off - an "opt-out", and there's no way you're not aware of this.

There's no opting in or out with dialnorm.

[cembros]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

With Dolby it's the default setting; with DTS, it's not.

That's not true at all, you just made that up.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by cembros

That's not true at all, you just made that up.

Dolby encoders have a -27 default for DN. DTS encoders have a -31 default. If the person doing the encoding leaves the defaults, the end result is a Dolby track that triggers a 4dB attenuation by the decoder and a DTS track that produces no attenuation by the decoder.

[PeterTHX]

Uh oh.

Forrest Gump has DTS...

...and DialNorm!

Must be Dolby's fault, eh?

[cjones235]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Uh oh.

Forrest Gump has DTS...

...and DialNorm!

Must be Dolby's fault, eh?

Yes

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There's no "on and off", only a level. Same with DTS.

Understood, but my point is, there's a default level that attenuates sound with Dolby.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I'd like it better in TrueHD because when I had a friend over with her toddler son I had to switch over to the lossy DD track to keep it from getting too loud for them. Speaking of her and the Shakira disc, it was also the title that convinced her BD was much more impressive than DVD, other stuff she had seen hadn't at that point in 2007.

I have to ask why you didn't simply lower the volume...

[ClaytonMG]

Could someone tell me how many titles had DRC accidently applied? And then also let me know how many of these titles made it so that no matter what, you couldn't turn of the DRC? Also, let me know how many DTS decoding errors there have been since Blu-ray started. Wether it's incorrect channel mapping, bitstream bombs, or players possibly not decoding right (like what is apparently happening with the IMAX version of Transformers 2)... And no, dialnorm doesn't count as a problem as it doesn't degrade the sound quality in anyway so don't list those titles.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BIslander

That's not what it says. Please quote and provide links to the relevant parts of the Dolby white paper that support your claim.

Do your own homework. Dolby states clearly what their reasons are for including Dialnorm and DRC; and as I recall, you're not willing to discuss issues with me. For that reason, I really don't feel like getting assignments from you for easily accessible information or quotes.

It's there; go look.

Originally Posted by BIslander

There's no opting in or out with dialnorm.

There's no avoiding sophistry with some people. Dialnorm can be set to a level that does not alter the original "metadata" (I have no idea why that word impresses you so), and as such, is essentially turned off. It performs no functions that alters the original mix, as it were.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Could someone tell me how many titles had DRC accidently applied?

I really don't know how such a thing could be easily determined. It's not something that's obvious at first, and some players don't invoke DRC as a default in any case. The only "someone" would be the studios themselves, I would think.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

And then also let me know how many of these titles made it so that no matter what, you couldn't turn of the DRC?

That's not a "title" issue; it's a hardware issue. To come close to answering your question, not a single title I know of has a selection to turn on, adjust, or remove any features associated with either Dialnorm or DRC, like you would select a codec.

Why is that, by the way?

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Also, let me know how many DTS decoding errors there have been since Blu-ray started.

As an absolute number, or as a percentage of total DTS releases? By level of severity? Is there a quantifiable level of outrage associated with a specific type of problem?

Looks like you don't want information; you're making a rhetorical point.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Wether it's incorrect channel mapping, bitstream bombs, or players possibly not decoding right (like what is apparently happening with the IMAX version of Transformers 2)... And no, dialnorm doesn't count as a problem as it doesn't degrade the sound quality in anyway so don't list those titles.

First off, I've seen multiple posts from you saying there is no problem with the IMAX Transformers 2 disc; why the change of opinion?

Incorrect channel mapping is an error with the encoder, not the codec, as you're well aware. Bitstream bombs, again, were a failure in implementation that seems to be restricted to Onkyo, and perhaps some Denon models - not DTS itself.

As for Dialnorm not being a "degrade of the sound quality", that's an opinion, not a stated fact. If the source is X, and after Dialnorm, is X-4, that's a classic degrading of the source material (let's say "metadata" so the Bislander fellow feels included). It may be a perfectly acceptable degradation for some; but degredation, it most certainly is.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Uh oh.

Forrest Gump has DTS...

...and DialNorm!

Must be Dolby's fault, eh?

Well, Dolby is the one who designed the cursed thing, and the studios demanded DTS include it, so some engineer at the local TV station in some small town could play a movie from a source disc using the same kneecapped sound level Dolby uses.

I'd blame Dolby, absolutely.

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I really don't know how such a thing could be easily determined. It's not something that's obvious at first, and some players don't invoke DRC as a default in any case. The only "someone" would be the studios themselves, I would think.



That's not a "title" issue; it's a hardware issue. To come close to answering your question, not a single title I know of has a selection to turn on, adjust, or remove any features associated with either Dialnorm or DRC, like you would select a codec.

Why is that, by the way?



As an absolute number, or as a percentage of total DTS releases? By level of severity? Is there a quantifiable level of outrage associated with a specific type of problem?

Looks like you don't want information; you're making a rhetorical point.



First off, I've seen multiple posts from you saying there is no problem with the IMAX Transformers 2 disc; why the change of opinion?

Incorrect channel mapping is an error with the encoder, not the codec, as you're well aware. Bitstream bombs, again, were a failure in implementation that seems to be restricted to Onkyo, and perhaps some Denon models - not DTS itself.

As for Dialnorm not being a "degrade of the sound quality", that's an opinion, not a stated fact. If the source is X, and after Dialnorm, is X-4, that's a classic degrading of the source material (let's say "metadata" so the Bislander fellow feels included). It may be a perfectly acceptable degradation for some; but degredation, it most certainly is.

So, just to clarrify, when an irreversable problem happens with channel mapping on a DTS title, you're saying it's an encoding error so it's OK.

But the DRC error that happed on Iron Man and only Iron Man (which you fix by turning off DRC) is not OK because it's the codec?

Bitstream bombs happened on Pioneer and I believe Yamaha receivers as well.

Now when more Paramount DTS-HD MA titles come out and they're dialnormed, are you going to being bashing DTS like you bash Dolby? Because, again, it's the STUDIO doing the encoding so there's no reason to blame Dolby for it. You can say "oh, but the TrueHD encoding program has dialnorm enabled by default" if you want, but don't you think the person doing the encoding knows how to use the program enough to turn off dialnorm if they wanted? I would say so... Which leaves it to the studio, which is also why you will be seeing more dialnormed DTS-HD MA titles.

If you're curious about Transformers 2, I recommend following the audio thread where we've been working to figure out why some people are experiencing problems while others aren't.

But I'll bring up dialnorm again, you said there's nothing wrong with the sound on the IMAX version of Transformers 2. But dialnorm was applied so the sound was "degraded." Wouldn't that qualify as a problem?

And yes, it was a rhetorical point that I was making. Neither codec is perfect, but to claim one has no problems or to give them excuses for their problems while saying the other one is bad is not acceptable in my opinion.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I have to ask why you didn't simply lower the volume...

Because then I'd be constantly alternating the sound level, something I have to do with Transformers now. We watched the first one, no problem leaving the volume at a set level. Second one...

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Well, Dolby is the one who designed the cursed thing, and the studios demanded DTS include it, so some engineer at the local TV station in some small town could play a movie from a source disc using the same kneecapped sound level Dolby uses.

I'd blame Dolby, absolutely.

Like I said with my above questions...

Dolby invented home 5.1 surround and lossless home 5.1 so take the good with the bad.

Or would you rather be stuck with PCM stereo? A little DialNorm is a tiny price to pay, eh?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

So, just to clarrify, when an irreversable problem happens with channel mapping on a DTS title, you're saying it's an encoding error so it's OK.

In the sentence above, please cut off everything after the word "error".

Remember, we are both paying real dollars for what we see and listen to; my problem is, I want value for my dollar, and no error is "OK".

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

But the DRC error that happed on Iron Man and only Iron Man (which you fix by turning off DRC) is not OK because it's the codec?

This is why using semantics is such a chore, and so tiresome.

You do not "fix" the Iron Man DRC issue. You treat a symptom, that's all. That disc is forever compromised, and buyers are forced to tweak, adjust, and at the outset, somehow become aware of this problem. Some may never know about it; just that Iron Man sounds like crap. I didn't know about it until I read about it on this forum.

Don't tell me Iron Man is "fixed", and if it isn't, it's my fault. I'm just not interested in that kind of nonsense.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Bitstream bombs happened on Pioneer and I believe Yamaha receivers as well.

They didn't happen on Pioneer; I checked. I have a variety of Pioneer receivers.

I don't know about Yamaha, but the Onkyo and Denon problems happened to folks on this board. Pretty easily fixed, and it appears that whoever supplied the firmware for the decoders in the receivers got bad info from DTS for a period of time. I'd blame DTS for this screwup.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Now when more Paramount DTS-HD MA titles come out and they're dialnormed, are you going to being bashing DTS like you bash Dolby?

Nope. DTS didn't design Dialnorm, and doesn't invoke it as a default in their encoding schema. Dolby does, and I want them to change it.

If DTS movies are Dialnormed, my ire will be directed at the studio or engineers doing it, since they'd have to intentionally do it - DTS doesn't do it by default.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Because, again, it's the STUDIO doing the encoding so there's no reason to blame Dolby for it.

That's your opinion, and you're sticking to it. Fine with me; we disagree.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

You can say "oh, but the TrueHD encoding program has dialnorm enabled by default" if you want, but don't you think the person doing the encoding knows how to use the program enough to turn off dialnorm if they wanted? I would say so... Which leaves it to the studio, which is also why you will be seeing more dialnormed DTS-HD MA titles.

To answer your question, I don't know if they know how to use the encoder or not - or even if they give a damn. I really don't. I'm afraid you don't, either, unless you're familiar with every studio and their practices.

From the earlier times in this thread, when more real engineers were participating, several mentioned that it's safest to go with defaults, so that a uniform standard for encodes is set. If Dolby says, clip 4db off the mix, that's our baseline, that's what is done. If DTS says, it is what is is, encode it, that's what is done.

I don't think that much care is being taken, unfortunately. At least with Dolby releases. There are some notable exceptions - I can name quite a few astonishingly good Dolby mixes, and at least two where I can't find Dialnorm attenuation - but for the most part, it's done shake-n-bake style.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

If you're curious about Transformers 2, I recommend following the audio thread where we've been working to figure out why some people are experiencing problems while others aren't.

I have, and I think it's a tempest in a teapot. I'm also very skeptical about Oppo having a problem, and other brands not having a problem.

I have the IMAX version of the film, and I didn't see or hear any issues. But I'm not doing comparisons, so I'll just lurk for now.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

But I'll bring up dialnorm again, you said there's nothing wrong with the sound on the IMAX version of Transformers 2. But dialnorm was applied so the sound was "degraded." Wouldn't that qualify as a problem?

Get this - my receiver is not on an open rack; I have a granite cabinet with all my gear concealed. So I adjusted the sound for Transformes 2 IMAX to the level I thought was reference, and found that it was set at +7 - and all other films are at zero, on my receivers.

I was astounded.

I'm not happy about it, and I consider that to be a serious degrade in audio performance. Watching the film, I saw no problem; but I will not watch it again like that. I have some testing to do, which I don't have time for, and I resent the fact that studios using Dialnorm require this kind of useless knob-dicking just to get reference level sound.

Maybe some folks like it; I don't. It's like having to check a calculator to see if it adds 2+2 the same way other calculators do.

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

And yes, it was a rhetorical point that I was making. Neither codec is perfect, but to claim one has no problems or to give them excuses for their problems while saying the other one is bad is not acceptable in my opinion.

Who said DTS doesn't have problems? I certainly didn't.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Dolby invented home 5.1 surround and lossless home 5.1 so take the good with the bad.

I stopped taking the good with the bad when I moved out of Compton. It's best not to compromise, in my experience. The bad can go screw.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Or would you rather be stuck with PCM stereo? A little DialNorm is a tiny price to pay, eh?

Not with my money! In a world where King Dolby levies a Dialnorm Tax, I'll be fomenting revolution, full time.

[PeterTHX]

As I said (and many others), studios decide the actual DialNorm level. Don't like it? Complain to the studios. In the meantime, bumping up the volume a few notches shouldn't be the exercise in agony you make it to be, unless you have one of those cheesy HTIBs with a low max volume.

For m, not having any kind of DRC is a far more egregious error, and companies like THX, Dolby, and Audyessy have to come out with solutions for DTS' mistake. Plus nobody has the to label something "DTS Essentials" so you can know which decoding solution you're getting. I'm not about to replace my $2500 receiver I got in 2007 but the ONLY problems I've had are with DTS and to a lesser extent PCM...and at least all the PCM discs I own also have a 640kbps DD track.