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

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by trans22

This poll has been a waste of time by the look of things, NIGHT OF THE CREEPS has been announced on october 20th by SONY with DOLBY TRUEHD.

Special delivery.........
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...=1#post2156785

[Uncle Leo]

Originally Posted by BozQ

C is a whole load of rubbish, and I think (or hope) most here knows why.
As for A and B, that is only if all three uses the same PCM master.

You completely missed the point of my post.
Of course the producers care! They are the ones who gather all the money to produce the film. And they have to watch every single cent being spent.
It's the Executive Producers, the STUDIOS that I'm talking about that don't give a toss!

The person I was quoting earlier thought that the studios actually CARE about the sonics of a soundtrack, which I find it hardly true. The studios, if anything, only cares about their investments and returns in a film. And they will make certain choices as long as they're convinced it will bring them a significantlly higher amount of returns.

I have no reason to believe Sony in this case actually thinks they are offering a better quality soundtrack by encoding it in DTS-HD MA. If they were really concerned by offering the BEST audio soundtrack on Blu-ray, then they'd have easily ditched Dolby TrueHD RIGHT NOW and just release all future BDs in LPCM. There is ZERO licensing fees to be paid, there is ZERO amount of dollars to spend on either Dolby's or DTS' encoders. And the remaining disc space, even on a BD25 is more than enough to offer a killer video encode.

WHY do you think this thread was created? Of course to see if by investing in a DTS-HD Encoder and license, and releasing in DTS in the future will make their products more marketable to consumers. And the response to this thread? Quite remarkably in favor of DTS.

That is why my original response to this thread, to Sony was "just do it". This thread alone has proven that there are many people here who have been (sadly) fooled (by DTS nontheless) to believe that DTS equals better quality. And even though experts have already explained time and again, that TrueHD is exactly the same as Master Audio and LPCM, they still won't buy into it.

This arguement will sadly stick out like a blister forever. It is almost as disappointing as many people who believed 2.35 aspect ratio movies are 'smaller', and that they've been shortchanged after investing on that expensive HDTV, that expensive Blu-ray player, and the expensive Blu-ray movies itself.

Ok totally get you man! Yes They are the same Master audio. This is a political money hungry war and has nothing to do with quality. And this thread will prove to be a waste in the end. I would like to put some people in a blind test and see what happens. If the choice was so obviously different, this would not even be an issue. Right now DTS is banking on 7.1. Did you see their 7.1 day on July 1st? Come on??!!

This is not about sound its about money!


Ya know just give me lossless and i'll be fine!

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

B of course, if they use the same exact master/mix. Were you expecting something else?

I did not know, I was thinking you would go with A but C was just for fun and in order to eliminate it from the discussion from part2 of my response

So let me ask you this. We all know that DTS (to switch the focus a bit and not repeat ourselves and since I am sure some of you guys think I have an issue with Dolby which I don't) can have speaker placement in the encode and if the 7.1 set-up in your home does not match the 7.1 set up in the encode it will down convert and send a 5.1. Are you saying (you picked b) it is impossible that the down converted 5.1 would sound different the 7.1 (which would have played if it was PCM or DTHD which does not have that feature)

if no one could tell the difference then no one would have noticed which players and titles playback as 5.1 even though they should be 7.1

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

So let me ask you this. We all know that DTS can have speaker placement in the encode and if the 7.1 set-up in your home does not match the 7.1 set up in the encode it will down convert and send a 5.1.

1. Speaker remapping only works if the decoder knows the speaker layout in use. As far as I know, there is no way at this time to give the decoder that information.

2. When actually implemented, speaker remapping will not downmix to 5.1 on a 7.1 system. Rather, it will use metadata to remix for the different 7.1 layouts. To date, some 7.1 discs from Mi Casa have downmixed with some DTS Master Audio decoders. But, I believe that is a bug, not the proper output. It goes back to the first point - there's currently no way for the decoder to know where you've placed your speakers.

3. TrueHD also supports multiple 7.1 configurations. I haven't seen any descriptions of the supported Dolby layouts, though.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BIslander

1. Speaker remapping only works if the decoder knows the speaker layout in use. As far as I know, there is no way at this time to give the decoder that information.

2. When actually implemented, speaker remapping will not downmix to 5.1 on a 7.1 system. Rather, it will use metadata to remix for the different 7.1 layouts. To date, some 7.1 discs from Mi Casa have downmixed with some DTS Master Audio decoders. But, I believe that is a bug, not the proper output. It goes back to the first point - there's currently no way for the decoder to know where you've placed your speakers.

3. TrueHD also supports multiple 7.1 configurations. I haven't seen any descriptions of the supported Dolby layouts, though.

don't get it wrong, my issue is this belief that lossless is lossless. Both DTS and Dolby can change what is played back. I don't care if we assume it is good or bad (or for the good or bad). But the minute we realize that lossless is not necessarily an exact audio replay of the original PCM, this whole discussion becomes a hell of a lot more complicated. I think most DTS (or Dolby) sounds better are from ignorant people, but we can't assume it. What is played back can be a bit different and so if they are different someone can have a preference.

Let's bring it back to this topic, one can obviously make the case that a proper 5.1 or remix by the player of 7.1 is better then a wrongly set-up 7.1. On the other hand someone else can have the opposite opinion since there could be a mistake (i.e. like in this case where it does not know your real set-up but assumes it is wrong) or that a player won't have the "intelligence" of the audio tech and you are not guaranteed that it will be any more correct then the original 7.1 it is trying to correct.

[Uncle Leo]

The fact that Dolby TrueHD only has like seven titles in 7.1 mean anything?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Uncle Leo

The fact that Dolby TrueHD only has like seven titles in 7.1 mean anything?

no

[Uncle Leo]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

no

My point exactly

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Uncle Leo

My point exactly

I see a question but I have no idea what point you are trying to make

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Uncle Leo

The fact that Dolby TrueHD only has like seven titles in 7.1 mean anything?

The fact that the film masters are 5.1 mean anything?

EX material is encoded as TrueHD EX.

[Blu Titan]

I think that the discussion is mute by this point, but the debate will continue . Sony has made its move.

[davcole]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I think that the discussion is mute by this point, but the debate will continue . Sony has made its move.

Warner next? Or will it only be on certain marquee titles?

[Uncle Leo]

My point was that I think that Dolby already thought a while ago the point was moot

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

don't get it wrong, my issue is this belief that lossless is lossless. Both DTS and Dolby can change what is played back. I don't care if we assume it is good or bad (or for the good or bad). But the minute we realize that lossless is not necessarily an exact audio replay of the original PCM, this whole discussion becomes a hell of a lot more complicated.

Quite true, but only meaningful if you establish that playback is actually changing the output. Are you saying that the differences people in this thread have described can be attributed to those types of playback alterations? If so, how did you come to that conclusion? If not, what is your point?

[trans22]

Originally Posted by davcole

Warner next? Or will it only be on certain marquee titles?

I hope WARNER do change to DTS, it's better for the format that there's one universal soundtrack.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by Uncle Leo

Ya know just give me lossless and i'll be fine!

Actually, I'm not exactly sure of this line myself.
For the most part, I agree.

BUT there is the issue of just what was the original project specifications?

You see, for a sound engineer (actually I think Sound Mixer is the correct title) to put together a soundtrack, he has to first decide what will be the specifics of his project before he starts putting in the first piece of audio file.

Things like

Bit depth: 16-bit? 20-bit? 24-bit?
Sample Rate: 44100 Hz? 48000 Hz? 96000 Hz?
Channels? 5.1? 6.1? 6.1 Matrix? 6.1 Discrete? 7.1 FLC/FRC (SDDS 8-Channel)? 7.1 Side Left/Right?

Let's say the decision was made first to project everything at 5.1 16-bit/48 KHz. This will be the final LPCM soundtrack that will be used to encode in all the various formats for cinemas, BDs, DVDs. (Eg. SDDS, Dolby Digital, DTS, TrueHD, Master Audio, MLP, etc.)
Changing this specifics midway through the project WILL mess up everything the guy has created. Introducing lots of horrible unwanted artifacts and it takes a very long time to repair the damage and it might even be easier to start over.


Now to shift focus a little. Let's take a look at Ghost Rider BD, ironically a Sony title here. It comes with LPCM 16-bit, which the TrueHD track is in 20-bit.
Now let's have a little more fun with Sony titles, check out Spider-Man 3. LPCM in 16-bit, TrueHD in 24-bit.

Do not automatically assume that the higher bit depth is the master track. It's not neccessarily so, because there is an equal chance that the 16-bit could very well be the actual master track used for all releases.

So what is my point after all this babbling? The master could also very well be in 24-bit, but was downrezzed to 16-bit or 20-bit when it comes to authoring it on Blu-ray. Be it LPCM or TrueHD.

So what exactly is the mastered specifications? We will never know, unless I'm working for them or someone working inside tell us more. Also, each film will have its own different set of specifics. And it also largely boils down to the budget the post production audio facility is given.

While yes, theoratically your statement is about right. Lossless is lossless. BUT if we're given 16-bit audio on BD, when the master is 24-bit, the quality has already been tampered and has deteriorated (although, very slightly), irregardless of LPCM, Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA. And the same can be said the other way round when 16-bit master is released as 20-bit. It offers no benefit and if not done right, it will introduce unwanted artifacts and waste unneccessary disc space than it should.

Btw, I saw your reply about the whole 6.1 soundtrack issue in the Gladiator thread.
You can actually take what I've said here and apply it to the whole 5.1/6.1 release. But like the bit depth and sample rate, it's very hard to know what was the original specifications. Unless a classic film has gone through a deliberate and delicate remastering and remixing stage for 7.1 soundtrack (eg. Disney classic animation), it is better to 5.1 or in whichever format it for cinema release.

[Scorxpion]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Special delivery.........
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...=1#post2156785

Thanks Penton Looking forward for Sony engineers Doing DTSHD master audio.

But one question more their soundtrack is going to be in 24 bit or 16 bit ,i guess how many lossless Sound is going to exist on one disc.

[davcole]

Originally Posted by Scorxpion

Thanks Penton Looking forward for Sony engineers Doing DTSHD master audio.

But one question more their soundtrack is going to be in 24 bit or 16 bit ,i guess how many lossless Sound is going to exist on one disc.

That's my question too! I do hope that Sony ups the bitrate to 24bit.

[Scorxpion]

Originally Posted by trans22

I hope WARNER do change to DTS, it's better for the format that there's one universal soundtrack.

They are going to do it ,i'm sure Watchmen is breaking records and i hope Terminator Salvation does include DTSHD master audio.

[Stephan.klose]

Originally Posted by Scorxpion

They are going to do it ,i'm sure Watchmen is breaking records and i hope Terminator Salvation does include DTSHD master audio.

Still, I don't get this whole discussion. There are no notable differences between DTS HD MA and TrueHD..

Someone else said it would be better for the format to have a universal Soundformat. If so, it should be True HD because virtually every player out there can also decode it into pcm. While almost none can decode DTS HD by themselves. So for all those with an older receiver True HD would be better.

But since you mentioned "Watchmen".. Any idea why Warner included a DTS HD Soundtrack on that one? It was only the second time I saw a Warner Disc with DTS HD Master Track. The first one being the German BD of "Surveillance".