what's the big deal with DTS-HD MA??? L-PCM is the way to go... - Blu-ray Forum

jon s · 02-26-2008, 03:25 PM

I think a lot of people think that DTS-MA will be superior to Dolby True-HD (or LPCM) becuase of how much better DTS was compared to DD on regular DVDs.

Regular DVD DD was 448kbps, DTS was 1.5Mbps. NO contest, DTS was a higher quality soundtrack (but the loss of disc space resulted in poorer video quality). So a lot of users think that DTS-HD MA will be better than DD True HD along the same lines.

But DTS-MA and DD True HD are both considered to be lossless codecs. i.e. what goes in is what comes out. no difference... nada.

But this is where I think that LPCM is better. DD and DTS in any form or flavor is a codec. Compression, encoding and decoding is in the pot. Anytime there is a conversion going on, you never will get 100% back. There's going to some errors somewhere along the line. Just like converting a photo TIFF file to JPEG format. No matter if you set the JPEG to lossless quality, pixel by pixel the file looks a bit different from the TIFF file, but overall it looks identical. It's the subtle details that get changed.

LPCM is just a bit by bit file of the original soundtrack. No conversions, no compressions. So it is supposed to be a more faithful signal than any DD or DTS format.

stockstar1138 · 02-26-2008, 03:31 PM

because not all studios will use PCM. Fox only uses DTS-HD MA and therefore, if PS3 can't decode it, we get stuck with Dolby Digital on all Fox movies.

you are right though if all studios used pcm, dts-hd ma would mean jack crap.

BStecke · 02-26-2008, 03:32 PM

It's my understanding that DTS HDMA does not use Dial Norm, which is used on quite a few TrueHD tracks.

Also, IMO, DTS HDMA is a better audio format for everyone. For those who cannot decode the lossless track, it still provides a 1.5 mbps audio track, which still gives you a significant audio upgrade over DVD, where with TrueHD it's kind of all or nothing.

FilmmakingFiasco · 02-26-2008, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

because not all studios will use PCM. Fox only uses DTS-HD MA and therefore, if PS3 can't decode it, we get stuck with Dolby Digital on all Fox movies.

you are right though if all studios used pcm, dts-hd ma would mean jack crap.

You can also get the DTS core. No?

Woody · 02-26-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FilmmakingFiasco

You can also get the DTS core. No?

THAT is the reason DTS HDMA even exists IMO. For people who can't decode the lossless track, a kick-ass 1.5 track is included without adding a seperate track.

(ie: Dolby THD and DD+ on the same disc are 2 seperate tracks)

MacDaddyOJack · 02-26-2008, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BStecke

It's my understanding that DTS HDMA does not use Dial Norm, which is used on quite a few TrueHD tracks.

Cha-ching! No dial-norm is the main reason it is better than TrueHD. It is also a big deal because some people can't decode it and it is found on a lot of releases. I have the ability to decode both and while TrueHD is very comparable, I still think DTS-MA is better. The difference is nothing like what it was on DVD though. That being said, I still prefer uncompressed LPCM over both.

Sonny · 02-26-2008, 03:48 PM

DTS-core is 1.5 & DD+ is 1.5...

foots · 02-26-2008, 03:50 PM

DTS-MA and TrueHD take up less space and require less bandwidth allowing for higher video bitrate and special features. It also allows a studio to put more language tracks on a disc. They provide this while sounding identical to L-PCM.

Why is it so hard to understand? It has been discussed repeatedly here.

BStecke · 02-26-2008, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by foots

DTS-MA and TrueHD take up less space and require less bandwidth allowing for higher video bitrate and special features. It also allows a studio to put more language tracks on a disc. They provide this while sounding identical to L-PCM.

Why is it so hard to understand? It has been discussed repeatedly here.

Not 100% accurate.

Blu-ray has a set bandwidth for video and audio so one does not interfere with the other. Disc space is the only issue, not bandwidth.

glenn22 · 02-26-2008, 03:52 PM

I prefer Mono sound.... nothing like low-fi to make your day.

Bobby Henderson · 02-26-2008, 04:43 PM

A DTS-HD MA track or Dolby TrueHD track are lossless compressed at a 2:1 ratio. They will consume only half the disc space of a LPCM track of the same bit depth and channel layout.

In addition, both DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD offer some backward compatibility with older decoders. DTS does a bit better by outputting a 1509kb/s lossy "core" track. You're usually stuck with a stereo 2.0 track when playing a backward compatible core from Dolby TrueHD.

LPCM Multichannel consumes more disc space. In addition to that, any BD movie with LPCM Multichannel must also provide additional audio tracks in Dolby Digital and/or DTS for backward compatibility with older sound systems. Not everyone has a HDMI-equipped audio video receiver.

I don't mind the use of LPCM 5.1/7.1 on BD movies, but don't agree that it is "better" than DTS-HD or DD-THD.

Because of all the extra disc space LPCM Multichannel must consume, in the long run we may see much more in the way of DD-THD and DTS-HD tracks as more customers gradually upgrade to systems that can handle it.

JadedRaverLA · 02-26-2008, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BStecke

Not 100% accurate.

Blu-ray has a set bandwidth for video and audio so one does not interfere with the other. Disc space is the only issue, not bandwidth.

Except that if you're dealing with multiple lossless audio tracks (multiple languages, etc) you can quickly go over the set bitrate for audio data and start eating into video bitrate. You cannot do the reverse, however (go over the video bitrate and eat into the audio bitrate... as that would place the video encode out of spec).

Quote:

Originally Posted by glenn22

I prefer Mono sound.... nothing like low-fi to make your day.

As long as its lossless mono.

sowecrazy · 02-26-2008, 05:35 PM

i have to say that LPCM is my favorite of the three , to me its a night and day diference on movies like ghost rider and spider-man 3 compared to DD THD

Cambrian · 02-26-2008, 05:59 PM

The OP just contradicts himself. You're saying dtsma and truehd are lossless and yet you say they are worse than pcm. Taking post processing aside, lossless is lossless dude. See you are still thinking in terms of jpeg. You have to think in terms of winzip or winrar. When you rar a bunch of files and extract them, do the contents, quality of those files you extracted change? I don't think so. The same can be applied here. In fact, you might be better off using dtsma as pcm are more prone to hdmi jitter. How much of an effect on audible listening level is debatable. Linear PCM 7.1 takes up a huge amount of space. If we can save some space my using dtsma, then why not? You can use the extra space for highdef features, interactive contents, etc.

DTSMA is here to stay, get used to it.

Tok · 02-26-2008, 06:19 PM

dts also offers its own variation of dialog normalization. dts it is just off by default on most encoders.

I think more studios are aware that physical media does not need DN applied and Sony has started to make a habit of NOT applying it. And it is still debateable if its use impacts sound quality. I think it really comes down to how manufacturers implement their volume control.

Lossless is lossless. In the end the legacy support is just a stopgap. I don't really care if the lossy track is DD or dts. I just care if a lossless option is on the disc.

Elandyll · 02-26-2008, 06:34 PM

The problem here is that the OP assumes that compression = destruction of signal.

Thing is, some codecs are destructive, some are not, just like TGA or TIFF will compress an image without information loss while Jpeg will achieve greater compression at the cost of information loss...

krazeyeyez · 02-26-2008, 06:40 PM

the reason we will see less of the pcm and more of the compression codecs was mentioned, eventually blu's will have many lossless tracks for all the languages contained instead of a pcm english and dolby 5.1 french etc...

The Lurker · 02-26-2008, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CraigW

dts also offers its own variation of dialog normalization.

Yep. Here's the relevant PDF from DTS itself. Check page 8 and page 9.

devils3023 · 02-26-2008, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jon s

Regular DVD DD was 448kbps, DTS was 1.5Mbps. NO contest, DTS was a higher quality soundtrack (but the loss of disc space resulted in poorer video quality). So a lot of users think that DTS-HD MA will be better than DD True HD along the same lines.

DTS is only 640kbps on DVD. You only get the full bitrate of 1.5mbps for DTS on blu-ray. And if all studios put an LPCM track on each title then nobody would be worrying about when the ps3 will support dts-hd ma.

Nathan P · 02-26-2008, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by devils3023

DTS is only 640kbps on DVD. You only get the full bitrate of 1.5mbps for DTS on blu-ray. And if all studios put an LPCM track on each title then nobody would be worrying about when the ps3 will support dts-hd ma.

Are u sure on that - i was watching a DVD the other day with a DTS track and i'm sure the bit rate was 754kbps

02-26-2008, 03:25 PM	#1
jon s Active Member Member since:May 2007 Blu-ray reviews:3	what's the big deal with DTS-HD MA??? L-PCM is the way to go... I think a lot of people think that DTS-MA will be superior to Dolby True-HD (or LPCM) becuase of how much better DTS was compared to DD on regular DVDs. Regular DVD DD was 448kbps, DTS was 1.5Mbps. NO contest, DTS was a higher quality soundtrack (but the loss of disc space resulted in poorer video quality). So a lot of users think that DTS-HD MA will be better than DD True HD along the same lines. But DTS-MA and DD True HD are both considered to be lossless codecs. i.e. what goes in is what comes out. no difference... nada. But this is where I think that LPCM is better. DD and DTS in any form or flavor is a codec. Compression, encoding and decoding is in the pot. Anytime there is a conversion going on, you never will get 100% back. There's going to some errors somewhere along the line. Just like converting a photo TIFF file to JPEG format. No matter if you set the JPEG to lossless quality, pixel by pixel the file looks a bit different from the TIFF file, but overall it looks identical. It's the subtle details that get changed. LPCM is just a bit by bit file of the original soundtrack. No conversions, no compressions. So it is supposed to be a more faithful signal than any DD or DTS format.

02-26-2008, 03:32 PM	#3
BStecke Blu-ray Knight Member since:Jun 2007 4K collection:182 Blu-ray collection:567 DVD collection:1 Digital collection:1 iTunes collection:1 Blu-ray reviews: 1 Trading Score:6	It's my understanding that DTS HDMA does not use Dial Norm, which is used on quite a few TrueHD tracks. Also, IMO, DTS HDMA is a better audio format for everyone. For those who cannot decode the lossless track, it still provides a 1.5 mbps audio track, which still gives you a significant audio upgrade over DVD, where with TrueHD it's kind of all or nothing. Last edited by BStecke; 02-26-2008 at 03:49 PM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
DTS or downmix PCM??	Blu-ray Players and Recorders	link_of_hyrule	3	03-26-2009 04:56 PM
PCM vs DTS HD-MA	Home Theater General Discussion	Giyomu	43	09-10-2008 11:03 AM
PCM DTS-MA with PS3	Audio Theory and Discussion	Macca78	5	03-29-2008 02:31 PM
DTS MA-HD: What's the big deal?	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	Maxell	71	03-23-2008 12:29 AM
PCM 2.0 with Prologic II/DTS Neo6 or regular DTS/Dolby 5.1?	Audio Theory and Discussion	Paganmoon	5	03-07-2008 02:28 PM

02-26-2008, 03:31 PM	#2
stockstar1138 Banned Member since:Apr 2007	because not all studios will use PCM. Fox only uses DTS-HD MA and therefore, if PS3 can't decode it, we get stuck with Dolby Digital on all Fox movies. you are right though if all studios used pcm, dts-hd ma would mean jack crap.

02-26-2008, 03:48 PM	#7
Sonny Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Aug 2007 Home Theater Gallery:8 Blu-ray reviews:6 Trading Score:1	DTS-core is 1.5 & DD+ is 1.5...

02-26-2008, 03:50 PM	#8
foots Expert Member Member since:May 2007 Blu-ray collection:98 Trading Score:17	DTS-MA and TrueHD take up less space and require less bandwidth allowing for higher video bitrate and special features. It also allows a studio to put more language tracks on a disc. They provide this while sounding identical to L-PCM. Why is it so hard to understand? It has been discussed repeatedly here.

02-26-2008, 03:52 PM	#10
glenn22 Power Member Member since:Aug 2007 Location:Vancouver, Canada	I prefer Mono sound.... nothing like low-fi to make your day.

02-26-2008, 04:43 PM	#11
Bobby Henderson Power Member Member since:Jan 2008 Location:Oklahoma Blu-ray collection:96 Blu-ray reviews: 12	A DTS-HD MA track or Dolby TrueHD track are lossless compressed at a 2:1 ratio. They will consume only half the disc space of a LPCM track of the same bit depth and channel layout. In addition, both DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD offer some backward compatibility with older decoders. DTS does a bit better by outputting a 1509kb/s lossy "core" track. You're usually stuck with a stereo 2.0 track when playing a backward compatible core from Dolby TrueHD. LPCM Multichannel consumes more disc space. In addition to that, any BD movie with LPCM Multichannel must also provide additional audio tracks in Dolby Digital and/or DTS for backward compatibility with older sound systems. Not everyone has a HDMI-equipped audio video receiver. I don't mind the use of LPCM 5.1/7.1 on BD movies, but don't agree that it is "better" than DTS-HD or DD-THD. Because of all the extra disc space LPCM Multichannel must consume, in the long run we may see much more in the way of DD-THD and DTS-HD tracks as more customers gradually upgrade to systems that can handle it.

02-26-2008, 05:35 PM	#13
sowecrazy Active Member Member since:Dec 2007 Location:illinois Blu-ray collection:250	i have to say that LPCM is my favorite of the three , to me its a night and day diference on movies like ghost rider and spider-man 3 compared to DD THD

02-26-2008, 05:59 PM	#14
Cambrian Member Member since:Jan 2008	The OP just contradicts himself. You're saying dtsma and truehd are lossless and yet you say they are worse than pcm. Taking post processing aside, lossless is lossless dude. See you are still thinking in terms of jpeg. You have to think in terms of winzip or winrar. When you rar a bunch of files and extract them, do the contents, quality of those files you extracted change? I don't think so. The same can be applied here. In fact, you might be better off using dtsma as pcm are more prone to hdmi jitter. How much of an effect on audible listening level is debatable. Linear PCM 7.1 takes up a huge amount of space. If we can save some space my using dtsma, then why not? You can use the extra space for highdef features, interactive contents, etc. DTSMA is here to stay, get used to it.

02-26-2008, 06:19 PM	#15
Tok Blu-ray Guru Top contributor Member since:Oct 2007 4K collection:1009 Blu-ray collection:1821 DVD collection:1 Blu-ray reviews:5	dts also offers its own variation of dialog normalization. dts it is just off by default on most encoders. I think more studios are aware that physical media does not need DN applied and Sony has started to make a habit of NOT applying it. And it is still debateable if its use impacts sound quality. I think it really comes down to how manufacturers implement their volume control. Lossless is lossless. In the end the legacy support is just a stopgap. I don't really care if the lossy track is DD or dts. I just care if a lossless option is on the disc.

02-26-2008, 06:34 PM	#16
Elandyll Blu-ray Knight Member since:Aug 2007 Location:MD Blu-ray collection:188 Trading Score:1	The problem here is that the OP assumes that compression = destruction of signal. Thing is, some codecs are destructive, some are not, just like TGA or TIFF will compress an image without information loss while Jpeg will achieve greater compression at the cost of information loss...

02-26-2008, 06:40 PM	#17
krazeyeyez Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Dec 2007 Location:the guy on the couch Home Theater Gallery:18 Blu-ray collection:287 Blu-ray reviews:4	the reason we will see less of the pcm and more of the compression codecs was mentioned, eventually blu's will have many lossless tracks for all the languages contained instead of a pcm english and dolby 5.1 french etc...

Best Blu-ray Movie Deals