Does PCM Sound Better Than Dolby THD On Your Setup?

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by krinkle

So I have noticed when directly comparing DTHD tracks to PCM on my Blu-rays that the PCM sounds slightly louder and clearer, while the DTHD sounds slightly muted in comparison.

My setup is a PS3 connected to a Yamaha RX-V2700. All the decoding for the DTHD tracks is done in the PS3.

The difference is small but seems noticeable to me.

Anyway just curious.

A few reviewers (Chad from the Spot among them) have notived the same thing. It will be interesting to hear the first DTS-HD MA discs.

[Zaphod]

Originally Posted by HDJK

It will be interesting to hear the first DTS-HD MA discs.

I am very excited and can't wait to hear the difference if any.

[HDJK]

Originally Posted by HDJK

It will be interesting to hear the first DTS-HD MA discs.

Of course I meant to say it will be interesting to finally hear a ll the DTS-HD MA discs

[Algernon]

My two cents :

Unless you got expensive speakers, decent amp, good cable AND a good room for listening, you won't notice anything beyond "normal" compressed DD 5.1 ...

I really don't care about the "extra" audio on BD ... all I want is the HD image

[stofferdk]

Originally Posted by Algernon

My two cents :

Unless you got expensive speakers, decent amp, good cable AND a good room for listening, you won't notice anything beyond "normal" compressed DD 5.1 ...

I really don't care about the "extra" audio on BD ... all I want is the HD image

freak

[dobyblue]

The TrueHD track on Spider-man 3 will sound better than the PCM track.


24/48 TrueHD vs. 16/48 PCM = TrueHD winner every time.

[Rup_Muk]

As of now, with the optical digital output, I have to say that uncompressed PCM sounds better on my setup. I guess I will have to upgrade to HDMI 1.3 in the near future.

Rup.

[Danno]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

The TrueHD track on Spider-man 3 will sound better than the PCM track.


24/48 TrueHD vs. 16/48 PCM = TrueHD winner every time.

Not necesarily. If the source audio was only 16/48 PCM (which it probably is, as that was the standard up until recently, then the added headroom with 24/96 won't make much of a difference. It'll just add more depth to the noise floor of the track, and add in all the little imperfections of the disc mastering process.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Danno

Not necesarily. If the source audio was only 16/48 PCM (which it probably is, as that was the standard up until recently, then the added headroom with 24/96 won't make much of a difference. It'll just add more depth to the noise floor of the track, and add in all the little imperfections of the disc mastering process.

The source on Spider-man 2 and 3 is 24/48, which is why I made my comment.

The source for Spider-man 1 is 16/48.

24/48 has been the standard for a few years now.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Algernon

My two cents :

Unless you got expensive speakers, decent amp, good cable AND a good room for listening, you won't notice anything beyond "normal" compressed DD 5.1 ...

I really don't care about the "extra" audio on BD ... all I want is the HD image

I strongly disagree with this statement as it was $259 JBL 5.1 satellites that first allowed me to hear how much better 24/48 DVD-Audio was over CD.

Now I have floorstanding Paradigm's as my fronts AND rears and DD 5.1 sounds better than DVD-A did on my JBL's and DVD-A now really kicks ass.

You do not need an expensive system to appreciate lossless audio and high resolution audio.

Enjoyment of ALL audio codecs on DVD and Blu-ray and CD/SACD/DVD-A is proportional to your system.

[Danno]

Originally Posted by Algernon

My two cents :

Unless you got expensive speakers, decent amp, good cable AND a good room for listening, you won't notice anything beyond "normal" compressed DD 5.1 ...

I really don't care about the "extra" audio on BD ... all I want is the HD image

The thing is, most early-adopter Blu-Ray owners DO have all of this. You're in the minority here.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Algernon

Unless you got expensive speakers, decent amp, good cable AND a good room for listening, you won't notice anything beyond "normal" compressed DD 5.1 ...

I don't agree. It isn't all about resolution and fidelity, it's also about sufficient bits to represent ALL the surround ambiance. Lossy gets it's high compression by throwing away stuff, and a lot of the time it clearly is the subtle stuff on the surround.

I suspect even a modest setup would allow you to experience the stunning immersion that lossless allows. Lossless IS the way people should hear the audio.

It's one of those TRY IT before you knock it things. Pop in Apocalypto. Close your eyes. And tell me you're not in the jungle.

Gary