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

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by saprano

Finaly a final confirmation from somebody, an actual somebody. i dont know why people kept saying it didn't matter.

Filmmixer says it doesn't matter.

Even Sir Terrance is saying that it doesn't matter when it's lossless.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Blu-Curry

I'm currently using an older receiver that can only perform Dolby Digital, no DTS, so i went with no.

There are many, many people like you my friend.

Not to mention all that have their BD players hooked to their TVs, or small HTIBs, or PC/laptops, etc.

Or the thousands of TrueHD-only ready BD players out there. You're going to tell someone who plunked down $1k on a Sony or Pioneer first gen player that they're going to lose they ability to play Sony titles in lossless?

[Squozen]

Lossless is lossless to me, but I guess that 1.5Mbps DTS could potentially sound better on a legacy receiver. I voted 'don't care either way', and I'd actually have preferred an, 'I don't care either way, and I wish people would buy sound meters and learn to turn DRC off before calling TrueHD crap' option.

[njay3]

I love Sony! They've always pushed the envelope with the technology to value ratio (just look at the PS3 vs. 360), and they got it right with Blu-Ray, however, they they're dead wrong wtih TrueHD! Listen to any DTS-MA sound track vs. nearly all TrueHD and there is no comparison! DTS-MA is the better format, handsdown! Sony...do your biggest fan a favor and make the switch! I'm tired of second rate, quiet and muffled audio! DTS-MA Rocks!

-Nate

[Forrestandjen07]

DTS. I allways seem Dts Master sounds better than TruHd.

Also, My big complaint is with the lack of 7.1 movies. I mean really, Way more movies should be having this option these days

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Forrestandjen07

DTS. I allways seem Dts Master sounds better than TruHd.

Also, My big complaint is with the lack of 7.1 movies. I mean really, Way more movies should be having this option these days

Originally Posted by njay3

I love Sony! They've always pushed the envelope with the technology to value ratio (just look at the PS3 vs. 360), and they got it right with Blu-Ray, however, they they're dead wrong wtih TrueHD! Listen to any DTS-MA sound track vs. nearly all TrueHD and there is no comparison! DTS-MA is the better format, handsdown! Sony...do your biggest fan a favor and make the switch! I'm tired of second rate, quiet and muffled audio! DTS-MA Rocks!

-Nate

Name the disc with BOTH FORMATS that the DTS-HD MA version sounds better than the TrueHD? (Same disc, same MIX).

Or to play it your way <insert name here> thinks TrueHD is wayyyy better because:

Transformers sounds better than Edward Scissorhands.

The Hunt For Red October sounds better than Patton.

Grease sounds better than South Pacific.

Iron Man sounds better than RoboCop.

Coach Carter sounds better than Hoosiers.

Cloverfield sounds better than The Fly.

Casino Royale sounds better than Moonraker.

Superman Returns sounds better than The 40-Year Old Virgin.

Star Trek VI sounds better than the 1950's version of The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Enchanted sounds better than Sleeping Beauty.

The Dark Knight sounds better than Fantastic Four.

The Nightmare Before Christmas sounds better than Pinnochio...and that one's 7.1!!!

See how ridiculous it looks?

[BD_BD]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

There are many, many people like you my friend.

Not to mention all that have their BD players hooked to their TVs, or small HTIBs, or PC/laptops, etc.

Or the thousands of TrueHD-only ready BD players out there. You're going to tell someone who plunked down $1k on a Sony or Pioneer first gen player that they're going to lose they ability to play Sony titles in lossless?

Disagree w/PeterTHX - i think the number of people who have a 10 year old AVR still in use with their $1000 1st gen player is slim to none, especially when you can buy a kickass Onkyo AVR for $350 and great Sony player for $250, both with MA and THD. (and that disc wont take 5 minutes to load on the new player like it did with the $1k player ;-)

I think these folks are interested in the Millions of BD players out there that have DTS-HD, not the 1st gen thousands that didn't (which are probably all on ebay right now along with mine)! And clearly FOX, Disney, LnsGate, Uni, and all those other folks are doing it - so it must be working out alright.

And with regards to this line...."Not to mention all that have their BD players hooked to their TVs, or small HTIBs, or PC/laptops, etc."

Get your facts straight:
1. A BD player connected dirctly to a TV: The TV is not an audio decoder in this case - it plays back stereo audio (PCM) from the player. Every player at minimum supports DTS and Dolby Digital (by BD spec) so there is no playback issue here(works for me!). And if you're going to tell me you can hear lossless vs lossy audio through a pair of 1" TV drivers - well, I'd have no response - knock yourself out.

2. small HTIB? Last I checked, my local Best Buy had a small Samsung HTiB for $500 with DTS-HD MA (was thinking of that one for the bedroom)

3. "BD players hooked to their ...PC/laptops". Ummm how many people out there connect their BD players to their PC/Laptops? I guess 1? PCs/Laptops have optical drives with software that plays back both hi def codecs.

+1 for DTS

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by BD_BD

Get your facts straight:
1. A BD player connected dirctly to a TV: The TV is not an audio decoder in this case - it plays back stereo audio (PCM) from the player. Every player at minimum supports DTS and Dolby Digital (by BD spec) so there is no playback issue here(works for me!). And if you're going to tell me you can hear lossless vs lossy audio through a pair of 1" TV drivers - well, I'd have no response - knock yourself out.

You would be surprised, and no TV on the market supports internal DTS decoding, but they support DD 5.1 and PCM 2 channel.

2. small HTIB? Last I checked, my local Best Buy had a small Samsung HTiB for $500 with DTS-HD MA (was thinking of that one for the bedroom)

There are still millions of systems out there that don't support full range playback.

3. "BD players hooked to their ...PC/laptops". Ummm how many people out there connect their BD players to their PC/Laptops? I guess 1? PCs/Laptops have optical drives with software that plays back both hi def codecs.

I was talking about optical drives. And the software supports TrueHD more readily (DTS in any format is often an add-on purchase, or 7.1 isn't supported).

Disagree w/PeterTHX - i think the number of people who have a 10 year old AVR still in use with their $1000 1st gen player is slim to none, especially when you can buy a kickass Onkyo AVR for $350 and great Sony player for $250, both with MA and THD. (and that disc wont take 5 minutes to load on the new player like it did with the $1k player ;-)

Well. as long as you're volunteering to buy everyone new electronics to support your preference I could use a new XBOX 360...you can even have my old one.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Filmmixer says it doesn't matter.

Even Sir Terrance is saying that it doesn't matter when it's lossless.

Why did you bring filmixer in this? what......is sir terrance's credibility not good enough?

Anyway i never heard sir terrance say mbps doesn't matter with lossless.

[pdawg2003_03]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Name the disc with BOTH FORMATS that the DTS-HD MA version sounds better than the TrueHD? (Same disc, same MIX).

Or to play it your way <insert name here> thinks TrueHD is wayyyy better because:

Transformers sounds better than Edward Scissorhands.

The Hunt For Red October sounds better than Patton.

Grease sounds better than South Pacific.

Iron Man sounds better than RoboCop.

Coach Carter sounds better than Hoosiers.

Cloverfield sounds better than The Fly.

Casino Royale sounds better than Moonraker.

Superman Returns sounds better than The 40-Year Old Virgin.

Star Trek VI sounds better than the 1950's version of The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Enchanted sounds better than Sleeping Beauty.

The Dark Knight sounds better than Fantastic Four.

The Nightmare Before Christmas sounds better than Pinnochio...and that one's 7.1!!!

See how ridiculous it looks?

hate to break it to ya, but you listed movies that are old to the newer movies. Of course they're gonna sound better, but compare them to the newer releases that just came out. The studios are getting better with the codecs and the add-on's as they're maturing in the blu-ray format & yes we need to see more movies with 7.1 surround sound, even if you have a 5.1/6.1 surround sound it will still work it's way back down with more sound for those surround sound systems. I think that all movies should be in 7.1 surround because the studios are advertising it in their commercials on TV & Movie Trailers saying up to 7.1, but really they need to so that more customers/people can see and say it is TRUE HIGH DEF. so my vote for SONY to dump Dolby TrueHD for DTS-HDMA is YES THEY NEED TO CAUSE DTS-HDMA is digital rather than Dolby TrueHD which is analog. So YES, YES & YES SONY NEEDS TO BE IN DTS-HDMA. Why is Dolby so easy to use cause it's analog, rather than DTS-HDMA being more precised with more sound and clarity. DTS (DIGITAL THEATRE SYSTEM) key word DIGITAL. If DOLBY TRUEHD is digital then they need to recall it Dolby Digital TrueHD so it can be DIGITAL, not by calling it Dolby TrueHD.

I THINK ALL BLU-RAY MOVIES SHOULD BE IN 7.1 DTS-HDMA with a dvd copy of the film being in 5.1 DOLBY DIGITAL.

[Minimejer05]

I havent been able to experience both of them. Only listened to lossless once...not sure what it was. Anyone care to explain the exact difference? Like noticeable difference?

[Thomme]

PeterTHX: If you're going to cite Sir Terrence to back up your Dolby bias (post 341), then allow me to respond:

Originally Posted by Sir Terrence

DTS was able to demonstrate time and time again high bitrate DTS (1509kbps) was indistinguishable from the master. Dolby cannot say the same thing about DD at 448kbps or 640kbps, and they have never attempted to do so.

[JAKLIZT]

Titles like Ultimate Matrix VS Fast and the Furious Trilogy winner Fast and the Furious, The Incredible Hulk VS Iron Man winner The Incredible Hulk, Hellboy 2 vs The Dark Knight winner Hellboy 2. Now I wouldn't mind both to compare but I cant stand that the bass and center dialogue in a Dolby True HD track yes it is good but its not as deep and rich as in a DTS HDMA soundtrack at regular volumes. It doesn't matter some companies will release multiple sku's to keep honest consumers paying 3 times for the same movie. Warner Bros enjoys this remember High picture and high def surround sound Speed Racer Dolby Digital 640kbps man Best Buy wants 34.99 for this title and you only get high def picture and basic surround sound. DTS HDMA = memorable - Dolby True HD = faint memory.

[saprano]

Damn were getting new members because of this? haha look what you done did sony.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by pdawg2003_03

so my vote for SONY to dump Dolby TrueHD for DTS-HDMA is YES THEY NEED TO CAUSE DTS-HDMA is digital rather than Dolby TrueHD which is analog. So YES, YES & YES SONY NEEDS TO BE IN DTS-HDMA. Why is Dolby so easy to use cause it's analog, rather than DTS-HDMA being more precised with more sound and clarity. DTS (DIGITAL THEATRE SYSTEM) key word DIGITAL. If DOLBY TRUEHD is digital then they need to recall it Dolby Digital TrueHD so it can be DIGITAL, not by calling it Dolby TrueHD.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Thomme

PeterTHX: If you're going to cite Sir Terrence to back up your Dolby bias (post 341), then allow me to respond:

AGAIN, we are talking the LOSSLESS tracks here.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by JAKLIZT

Titles like Ultimate Matrix VS Fast and the Furious Trilogy winner Fast and the Furious, The Incredible Hulk VS Iron Man winner The Incredible Hulk, Hellboy 2 vs The Dark Knight winner Hellboy 2. Now I wouldn't mind both to compare but I cant stand that the bass and center dialogue in a Dolby True HD track yes it is good but its not as deep and rich as in a DTS HDMA soundtrack at regular volumes. It doesn't matter some companies will release multiple sku's to keep honest consumers paying 3 times for the same movie. Warner Bros enjoys this remember High picture and high def surround sound Speed Racer Dolby Digital 640kbps man Best Buy wants 34.99 for this title and you only get high def picture and basic surround sound. DTS HDMA = memorable - Dolby True HD = faint memory.

This is precisely why it's useless to argue sometimes.

ALL the films you cite as better would have sounded the same in TrueHD.

Sony should keep things the way they are.

[Thomme]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

AGAIN, we are talking the LOSSLESS tracks here.

But WAY more consumers (myself included) are still using receivers that can only decode lossy, a fact that I'm sure Sony is aware of.

Like Sir Terrance said, DTS's lossy track sounds better than Dolby's. Good enough for me.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

If Sony wants to keep their reputation as a company with informed consumers then they should keep things the way they are.

WTF was that about!? do you even know why sony is even considering changing codecs? you need to watch what you say.

[the Bass Mechanic]

This is almost beyond absurd. Any difference one might hear is due to different mixes on the associated movies. Only ONE(1) movie on Blu-ray so far has both a Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio encode ("The Final Countdown") for a driect comparison, and I listened to a copy a friend had,... no audible difference between the codecs, just what one would expect!!! These are lossless codecs and there is no reason to expect to hear any difference bewteen them (assuming of course that the same source material is used, levels are matched, DRC is 'off', and all other bias controls are in place, ie. 'double blind testing').

I've been involved in a number of double blind evaluations of older 'lossy' codecs in the past, and I for one am glad that we finally have lossless codecs, so I don't have to listen for very small and subtle (but real) audible differneces anymore (some lossy codecs are better than others, but they all had some audible codec errors, given the right program material or test tone, and an experienced trained listener). I don't care which lossless codec is used, it's far more important that a good mix is used in the first place. 'Nuff said!