Why no DD+

[sinister184]

since the beginning of blu-ray, if the studio opted not to put a lossless audio track on the disc, it was always just left standard DD. Yet the same discs on HD always got DD+ treatment, which is still better than standard DD. I mean every blu-ray player out, even the first BD players, had the capability to decode DD+ so why isnt it ever used? im mean Warner just released 'The Bucket List' with a standard DD track. So its not like it still couldnt be used. thoughts?

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by sinister184

since the beginning of blu-ray, if the studio opted not to put a lossless audio track on the disc, it was always just left standard DD. Yet the same discs on HD always got DD+ treatment, which is still better than standard DD. I mean every blu-ray player out, even the first BD players, had the capability to decode DD+ so why isnt it ever used? im mean Warner just released 'The Bucket List' with a standard DD track. So its not like it still couldnt be used. thoughts?

While Paramount and Universal offered Dolby Digital Plus on HD DVD at 1.5 mbps bitrates, WB's HD DVD releases with Dolby Digital Plus were always 640k bitrates. What bitrates does Warner Bros offer Dolby Digital on Blu-ray? You got it... 640k.

HD DVD made Dolby Digital Plus mandatory... but Blu-ray did not... so while earlier Paramount Blu-ray films sometimes got the shaft compared to their HD DVD counterparts, the lack of Dolby Digital Plus on WB's Blu-ray titles doesn't matter.

~Alan

[fitprod]

Originally Posted by sinister184

since the beginning of blu-ray, if the studio opted not to put a lossless audio track on the disc, it was always just left standard DD. Yet the same discs on HD always got DD+ treatment, which is still better than standard DD. I mean every blu-ray player out, even the first BD players, had the capability to decode DD+ so why isnt it ever used? im mean Warner just released 'The Bucket List' with a standard DD track. So its not like it still couldnt be used. thoughts?

DD+ was created specifically for HD DVD since the bit packet structure was limited to the old DVD specs, which could not do 640Kbps. (Blu-ray could handle the different structure...) You should be able to find some notes about it from Roger Dressler in the AVS forum.

Dolby is looking to adapt DD+ for use in HD broadcasts down the line, but since Blu-ray discs generally have either Dolby True HD or DTS MA, there is no real need for DD+.

fitprod

[WriteSimply]

To use DD+ effectively on BD is to go 6.1 or 7.1. Otherwise 640kbps DD is enough. Of course, we always hope for PCM, DD TrueHD or DTS HDMA.


fuad

[The Lurker]

I've read that Dolby Digital Plus at 1.5mbps offers little improvement over standard Dolby Digital at 640kbps. I think that even Roger Dressler, who's a representative of Dolby, even admitted as much over at AVS awhile back. Which should surprise no one, since Dolby Digital Plus is basically nothing more than a core standard Dolby Digital track plus extensions. The extensions are basically there to add additional channels if wanted, and the core is there to provide backwards compatability. Read this whitepaper from Dolby for more info: http://www.dolby.com/assets/pdf/tech...whitepaper.pdf

[MOONPHASE]

i personally think they should just drop compressed audio on blu-ray forever and vc-1 video encoding

[davcole]

Originally Posted by fitprod

Dolby is looking to adapt DD+ for use in HD broadcasts down the line, but since Blu-ray discs generally have either Dolby True HD or DTS MA, there is no real need for DD+.

fitprod

Agree fully!!

In the HD DVD's I have I can honestly say I don't notice a qualitative difference between 1.5 DD+ and 640k DD or DD+. DD+ would need to either be decoded by the player or sent via HDMI bitstream for decoding, which would basically negate the need if you have legacy equipment.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by davcole

Agree fully!!

In the HD DVD's I have I can honestly say I don't notice a qualitative difference between 1.5 DD+ and 640k DD or DD+. DD+ would need to either be decoded by the player or sent via HDMI bitstream for decoding, which would basically negate the need if you have legacy equipment.

Agree also!

There are still some yahoos over at AVS along with Amir trying to claim that 1.5mbps DD+ is as good as lossless. At least we can laugh at them behind their back.

[jkwest]

Originally Posted by The Lurker

I've read that Dolby Digital Plus at 1.5mbps offers little improvement over standard Dolby Digital at 640kbps. I think that even Roger Dressler, who's a representative of Dolby, even admitted as much over at AVS awhile back. Which should surprise no one, since Dolby Digital Plus is basically nothing more than a core standard Dolby Digital track plus extensions. The extensions are basically there to add additional channels if wanted, and the core is there to provide backwards compatability. Read this whitepaper from Dolby for more info: http://www.dolby.com/assets/pdf/tech...whitepaper.pdf

whoa buddy....easy on the font...

[CptGreedle]

I think they just port over the sound from the DVD. If they can not be bothered to put HD sound on, why bother with anything at all. Just put the DVD sound on it.
Sucks I know... but I could really care less. I prefer lossless, but I can live with lossy.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by MOONPHASE

i personally think they should just drop compressed audio on blu-ray forever and vc-1 video encoding

I 2nd that! The BDA should implement a must have PCM, TruHD or DTS-HDMA audio track along with AVC encoding . Just like all BD players have to be profile 1.1 . I think it would be great & I know Warner is the last Major studio to release new movies with DD & that will prolly change , but then again it might not I just feel shafted now when I see a new WB title come out that I would buy & BOOM!!! I look on the back & "low & behold" Dolby frickin Digital & DD+ would not make me any happyer....

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by CptGreedle

I think they just port over the sound from the DVD. If they can not be bothered to put HD sound on, why bother with anything at all. Just put the DVD sound on it.
Sucks I know... but I could really care less. I prefer lossless, but I can live with lossy.

For the record...

WB's 640k Dolby Digital Blu-ray releases are NOT DVD ports. DVD's have lower Dolby Digital bitrates (blanking on the number).

Second of all, I have NO doubt that Universal's and Paramount's 1.5mbps soundtracks were better than what a 640k soundtrack would have sounded like.

~Alan

[coolmilo]

I think the problem has taking care of itself now that HD DVD is dead.

Of the big 6:
Universal and Fox release using DTS-HD MA
Paramount, Disney, Sony release using True-HD
Warner...well not sure what the official word but hopefully they will release all future using one of the HD audio codecs.

PCM seems to be on its way out for some reason.

[BStecke]

DVD is usually 448 kbps.

[Anthony P]

Yet the same discs on HD always got DD+ treatment, which is still better than standard DD.

DD+ was created to go beyond DDs limits (like 7.1) a DD+ track that is 24/48 5.1 has no benefit over DD. The only time DD+ has a benefit over DD is when we are talking way over compressed sound because the new DD+ encoders have a filter that reduces "noise" (hard to encode sounds) and then as DD+ they can be added later. so you could hear a difference between a 200kbps DD+ and a 200kbps DD. Studios used DD+ on HD DVD instead of DD because they where more or less forced to. When DVD was created they decided that the main audio should be encoded in cadance with the mpeg2 stream. This meant that DD was capped at 448kbps. When Toshiba through together HD DVD they used most of the same specs as DVD and so again DD on HD DVD was capped, but due to the different structure it was now at 504kbps. The only way to offer 640kbps DD on HD DVD was to move it to DD+ and up the BW (because of the extra overhead of DD+).

On BD DD+ would be a bit different. DD+ chas a DD core and then extra (what we can call) DD+ info. On BD because DD+ is not mandatory a BD player that supports DD+ must take the DD copanion and merge it with the DD+ track and then the decoder can decode it. So if it is (for example) 24/48 7.1 DD+ what it means is that you in essence have a 24/48 5.1 (DD) and a 24/48 2.0-side (which is the extra in DD+). Becaus the DD+ is split from the DD core it does not make sense to add files that basicly say "we do nothing".

That is why Fuad said you need to go to 6.1 or 7.1. DD could cover the rest of the scenarios (DD+ is also limited to 24 bits but it can reach a higher sampeling frequency)