Dolby TrueHD is it being over-hyped?

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by GasCat

Thanks HDJK. I think I have it down now.

Something occurred to me, TrueHD is mostly needed for M$'s VOD and HD-DVD due to bandwidth and limitations on diskspace. I find this fairly amusing.

They use their in-house WMA-Pro codec for losslessly compressed audio.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Steeb

The first Pioneer doesn't either. I don't know about the Sharp player or the LG combo player.

Edit - I meant Philips, not Sharp. Thanks, dobyblue.

There's a firmware update either en route or already released for the first Pioneer player as well.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Memnoch

Onkyo 605 and 805 are supposed to process DolbyTrueHD. But this is kind of in debate. I have a PS3 that decodes it, then sends it via PCM to the receiver. I think that is how it works. So the 605 isn't really decoding anything. But supposedly, one of these days, there will be BD players that would send an undecoded source to the 605 to decode. I frankly don't give a shit how it works. My 605 sounds awesome and better than my last av receiver. NIN: BYIT BD is DolbyTrueHD and it sounds amazing on it. That's all that matters to me. All these nerds can argue back and forth until they are blue in the face about this crap. I did a lot of research on HDMI v1.3 before I bought any of my stuff and I feel I did the best I could with everything on the market at the time. Everything looks and sounds flawless, so I'm happy.

Samsung HL-T6189S
Onkyo 605
PS3
Wii

Damn skippy.

We should see the first players to natively pass through TrueHD AND DTS-HD Master Audio before Christmas.

Personally I think if the option is there to pick up a good HDMI 1.3 receiver like the Onkyo 605, 675, 805, 875, or 905, Pioneer Elite's upcoming series 9 receivers or the upcoming Denon receivers, you should go for it. Why not match HDMI ports?

I'd rather have the option to let my designated receiver do the processing especially with the money I'll be spending on it, but in the case of the PS3 I don't think it's a big concern. They've managed to let the cell process DSD into PCM at 24/176.4 and at that sort of rate I'm pretty sure any audio processing they do inside the PS3 for Blu-ray is going to be top of the line also.

DTS expects DTS-MA decoding to be enabled on the PS3 through software before the end of the year.

[Maximus]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

We should see the first players to natively pass through TrueHD AND DTS-HD Master Audio before Christmas.

Personally I think if the option is there to pick up a good HDMI 1.3 receiver like the Onkyo 605, 675, 805, 875, or 905, Pioneer Elite's upcoming series 9 receivers or the upcoming Denon receivers, you should go for it. Why not match HDMI ports?

I'd rather have the option to let my designated receiver do the processing especially with the money I'll be spending on it, but in the case of the PS3 I don't think it's a big concern. They've managed to let the cell process DSD into PCM at 24/176.4 and at that sort of rate I'm pretty sure any audio processing they do inside the PS3 for Blu-ray is going to be top of the line also.

DTS expects DTS-MA decoding to be enabled on the PS3 through software before the end of the year.

I don't think we will see players that pass packed lossless until SI fix their HDMI 1.3a chipset, which might take longer than that.

Player decoding really is the way forwards though, all of the BDA hardware is of very high quality so the DACs and DSPs will likely rival those of Denon/Marantz for a while yet until they get their super-high end stuff out, but then a Pio Elite or Sony ES BD player will have similar quality anyway.

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

DTS expects DTS-MA decoding to be enabled on the PS3 through software before the end of the year.

Is this a fact? That would be great news. I'm trying to decide on a receiver myself right now; still not sure wether to go with a 605 or a Denon 3806. The Denon would allow DSD streaming over Denonlink, so there would be no need for analog cabling from my 2930 to the receiver. A direct comparison would be nice...

[Algernon]

This is purely my 2 cents, but from what I've (literally!) heard so far, anything beyond "normal" Dolby Digital 5.1 won't make a difference, unless you got excellent hardware (including cable AND speakers!) as well as source material AND (!) the right room - incredible how much the wrong furniture can take away ... there's an incredible leap from Dolby Surround to DD 5.1, but more is luxury imho ...

[Steeb]

Originally Posted by HDJK

Well, actually they have: Identity

Yep, I forgot about that one (even though I own it I haven't had a chance to watch it yet.) It has both English and German PCM tracks. I'm glad I qualified my statement above with "they could probably squeeze in a second one..." Still, using an advanced audio codec would have allowed them to include a French PCM track (for the Canadians) as well. Note that while highdefdigest claims that the disc includes a French PCM track in addition to the English and German tracks, the cover says differently (and highdefdigest is notorious for getting audio specs wrong on these reviews.)

Originally Posted by dobyblue

There's a firmware update either en route or already released for the first Pioneer player as well.

I wasn't aware of that - thanks for pointing it out. That's great news for those that own the Pioneer and even more reason why DTHD should be more common on BD.

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by Steeb

Yep, I forgot about that one (even though I own it I haven't had a chance to watch it yet.) It has both English and German PCM tracks. I'm glad I qualified my statement above with "they could probably squeeze in a second one..." Still, using an advanced audio codec would have allowed them to include a French PCM track (for the Canadians) as well. Note that while highdefdigest claims that the disc includes a French PCM track in addition to the English and German tracks, the cover says differently (and highdefdigest is notorious for getting audio specs wrong on these reviews.)

Ah, I didn't know. I just remember it was on the news section on here that there will be 3 PCM tracks for Identity. Anyway, DolbyTHD or DTS HD-MA will be adopted by the studios in the long run (for the reason you stated).

[Steeb]

Originally Posted by HDJK

Ah, I didn't know. I just remember it was on the news section on here that there will be 3 PCM tracks for Identity. Anyway, DolbyTHD or DTS HD-MA will be adopted by the studios in the long run (for the reason you stated).

I just checked the disc to see what options would show up. The cover is correct and highdefdigest is wrong - there are only two PCM tracks: one in English, one in German.

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by Steeb

I just checked the disc to see what options would show up. The cover is correct and highdefdigest is wrong - there are only two PCM tracks: one in English, one in German.

Oh well, who cares about French anyway... j/k

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by Algernon

This is purely my 2 cents, but from what I've (literally!) heard so far, anything beyond "normal" Dolby Digital 5.1 won't make a difference, unless you got excellent hardware (including cable AND speakers!) as well as source material AND (!) the right room - incredible how much the wrong furniture can take away ... there's an incredible leap from Dolby Surround to DD 5.1, but more is luxury imho ...

Not to sound rude, but didn't you say your reciever doesn't decode anything higher than Dolby 5.1? So how could you possibly know if uncompressed audio sounds the same as regular Dolby 5.1? I have done many tests and you can tell a major difference between the 2, and I don't even have top of the line stuff. I have all Klipsch Synergy speakers, a Yamaha HTR-5990 and 2 Sony subs. One of the simplest movies to tell the difference on is Click. If you watch the end sequence, you'll hear how much better even just the bass sounds on PCM.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by HDJK

Is this a fact? That would be great news. I'm trying to decide on a receiver myself right now; still not sure wether to go with a 605 or a Denon 3806. The Denon would allow DSD streaming over Denonlink, so there would be no need for analog cabling from my 2930 to the receiver. A direct comparison would be nice...

That's the response I got from them. They said they expect the first BD players that decode DTS-MA inside to be out within three months and the PS3 to get decoding within six months.

Hopefully this comes to light. The PS3's abilities as a Blu-ray player would really be unquestionable with this.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Algernon

This is purely my 2 cents, but from what I've (literally!) heard so far, anything beyond "normal" Dolby Digital 5.1 won't make a difference, unless you got excellent hardware (including cable AND speakers!) as well as source material AND (!) the right room - incredible how much the wrong furniture can take away ... there's an incredible leap from Dolby Surround to DD 5.1, but more is luxury imho ...

I'm sorry that you feel this way because it's just not trrue and there's likely something wrong with your set-up if you don't find the difference between DD 5.1 and lossless audio to be night and day.

It's literally like a smack in the face it's so much more visceral, discreet and clear.

[GTP]

Just did my first comparison on the Ghost Rider disc, and if anything, the fixed rate 16 bit PCM was slightly better than the variable rate 24 bit DD -THD.

Having said that, there are many PCM tracks on BD that are better sounding than GH's.

[Steeb]

Originally Posted by GTP

Just did my first comparison on the Ghost Rider disc, and if anything, the fixed rate 16 bit PCM was slightly better than the variable rate 24 bit DD -THD.

Did you level-match? This is a big one - different tracks on any given disc are routinely mixed at different levels. This was why highdefdigest mistakenly thought that the PCM version of The Departed's soundtrack was superior to the (audibly) identical DTHD version. There's absolutely no reason why a 16bit PCM track would sound superior to a 20bit lossless track, assuming you've level-matched properly.

To eliminate bias and possible placebo effect, the test should really be double-blind as well.

[GTP]

Originally Posted by Steeb

Did you level-match? This is a big one - different tracks on any given disc are routinely mixed at different levels. This was why highdefdigest mistakenly thought that the PCM version of The Departed's soundtrack was superior to the (audibly) identical DTHD version. There's absolutely no reason why a 16bit PCM track would sound superior to a 20bit lossless track, assuming you've level-matched properly.

To eliminate bias and possible placebo effect, the test should really be double-blind as well.

I switched on the fly several times and there was no perceived difference in level , and just a slight difference in the two at times as I said.
There is no reason for PCM to sound better at all except that the 16 bit is fixed , and the DD-THD is variable rate....and not a fixed 24 bits.

The Departed was compared from two discs on two formats....and I highly doubt there is even a smidge of level difference in these two tracks on the same disc....but I will get my Rat Shack meter out before I return GH to Blockbuster...just to make sure.

[Steeb]

Originally Posted by GTP

I switched on the fly several times and there was no perceived difference in level , and just a slight difference in the two at times as I said.

Without checking it with a sound level meter, there's no way to know for sure. If I still had my meter, I would check Ghost Rider myself. The Departed tracks ended up being off by about 4 db, if memory serves.

Originally Posted by GTP

There is no reason for PCM to sound better at all except that the 16 bit is fixed , and the DD-THD is variable rate....and not a fixed 24 bits.

You were right up until the the word "except." DTHD is lossless - the audio is bit-for-bit identical to the master. There's no reason why PCM would sound superior to a losslessly compressed track when at the same bit depth, let alone when the lossless track is higher.

Lossless codecs have variable bit rates, not variable bit depths.

Originally Posted by GTP

The Departed was compared from two discs on two formats....and I highly doubt there is even a smidge of level difference in these two tracks on the same disc....but I will get my Rat Shack meter out before I return GH to Blockbuster...just to make sure.

I look forward to your findings. As to you doubting that there will be a difference because they're on the same disc, you should try comparing different soundtracks on any given disc (SD DVD or BD) using your meter. I'll bet that more often than not, the different tracks are slightly off from one another. Remember, the studios aren't making these discs for geeks like us to compare one soundtrack to the other. There's no motivation (that I'm aware of) for them to spend the time and effort ensuring that each track on a given disc is set at the same level.

When it's all said and done, there's obviously an issue somewhere. The 16bit PCM track should never sound superior to the 20bit DTHD track.

[LembasBread]

Originally Posted by GTP

I switched on the fly several times and there was no perceived difference in level , and just a slight difference in the two at times as I said.
There is no reason for PCM to sound better at all except that the 16 bit is fixed , and the DD-THD is variable rate....and not a fixed 24 bits.

The Departed was compared from two discs on two formats....and I highly doubt there is even a smidge of level difference in these two tracks on the same disc....but I will get my Rat Shack meter out before I return GH to Blockbuster...just to make sure.

The Dolby TrueHD on Ghost Rider is 20-bit, not 24-bit. And the bit depth has nothing to do with the bit rate. I'm not too keen on the nuts and bolts about TrueHD, but I don't think it works like AC-3 DD where bit-depths are allocated to the channels that require greater bit depth. TrueHD is, afaik, like LPCM in that it's full bit, full channels, all time.

As to the comparison, after a little level matching with GR on my system (and even on my crap headphones) there were a few ever so slight difference in favor of the 20-bit TrueHD track. The title sequence at the beginning with the crumbling titles sounds a little fuller and rich in TrueHD and the "slappy" drum beat during the transition from the night desert scene between Blackheart and Mephistopheles to J.B.'s helicopter jump - the decay of the toms sounds more natural and the kick feels more dynamic and present. SPHE did an awsome job with this one., imo.

[Steeb]

Originally Posted by LembasBread

And the bit depth has nothing to do with the bit rate.

Exactly. I just edited that into my post after realizing that's what he was getting at.

Originally Posted by LembasBread

As to the comparison, after a little level matching with GR on my system (and even on my crap headphones) there were a few ever so slight difference in favor of the 20-bit TrueHD track. The title sequence at the beginning with the crumbling titles sounds a little fuller and rich in TrueHD and the "slappy" drum beat during the transition from the night desert scene between Blackheart and Mephistopheles to J.B.'s helicopter jump - the decay of the toms sounds more natural and the kick feels more dynamic and present. SPHE did an awsome job with this one., imo.

Thanks for taking the time to compare. Your findings gel with what most of us would expect. Out of curiosity, how much of a difference was there between the two tracks, level-wise?

[LembasBread]

Originally Posted by Steeb

Exactly. I just edited that into my post after realizing that's what he was getting at.



Thanks for taking the time to compare. Your findings gel with what most of us would expect. Out of curiosity, how much of a difference was there between the two tracks, level-wise?

On my reciever it was about a 5-8dB difference, with the LPCM being the louder.