DTS MA-HD: What's the big deal?

[un4gvn94538]

Originally Posted by MarekM

DTS-HD MA = DoblyTrue HD = PCM, bit for bit

which doesnt matter when i titled has one or the other. and when it has dts ma, a lot of us only get dts 5.1

[bbrown5222]

Originally Posted by xman

So dose DTS-HD MA sound better than PCM?

DTS-HD MA is an awesome sound, at this time most people can not use it so they knock it, I have a sample disc from CES that has a sample of all of the major sounds and when you listen to them you can clearly hear the DTS-MA HD is the best. so if you get a chance to go listen to all of the sounds and you will understand.

[surfdude12]

these may be dumb questions but:
(1) if a movie was released on DVD w/ DTS, is it destined to a DTS-HD MA? more cost efficient to process,etc?
(2) does fox/newline have exclusive agreement with DTS, or were all fox/newlines DVD's in DTS?

[Nooff]

Originally Posted by bbrown5222

DTS-HD MA is an awesome sound, at this time most people can not use it so they knock it, I have a sample disc from CES that has a sample of all of the major sounds and when you listen to them you can clearly hear the DTS-MA HD is the best. so if you get a chance to go listen to all of the sounds and you will understand.

I highly doubt that. It's just your personal preference for sound. Also, was it the same clip with different soundtracks?

First off, you can't compare a DTS HD-MA with a True HD movie if they're not the same movie. Second, True HD, PCM and DTS HD-MA are exactly the same in terms of sound quality, so unless you prefer for example, enormous bass, then yes, DTS HD-MA could be better suited for you.

[bassbone57]

Originally Posted by bbrown5222

DTS-HD MA is an awesome sound, at this time most people can not use it so they knock it, I have a sample disc from CES that has a sample of all of the major sounds and when you listen to them you can clearly hear the DTS-MA HD is the best. so if you get a chance to go listen to all of the sounds and you will understand.

+1. DTS HDMA is better sounding than Dolby TrueHD IMHO. The reason DTS HDMA can sound better than PCM is DTS can make minor adjustments to levels to tweek things a little where PCM is just as the studio left it. While PCM with the true mix is ideal and great, don't knock DTS HDMA until you have heard it. I have access to all surround sound codecs and I must say that DTS Master is my personal favorite.

-K

[MarekM]

Originally Posted by un4gvn94538

which doesnt matter when i titled has one or the other. and when it has dts ma, a lot of us only get dts 5.1

yes, but I was writing that sencence because of this :

I'm expecting DTS-HD MLA to blow PCM and Dolby TrueHD out of the water

Marek

[bbrown5222]

Originally Posted by Nooff

I highly doubt that. It's just your personal preference for sound. Also, was it the same clip with different soundtracks?

First off, you can't compare a DTS HD-MA with a True HD movie if they're not the same movie. Second, True HD, PCM and DTS HD-MA are exactly the same in terms of sound quality, so unless you prefer for example, enormous bass, then yes, DTS HD-MA could be better suited for you.

yes: it was the same music clip for each sound type.

[savage1984]

Originally Posted by MarekM

yes, but I was writing that sencence because of this :



Marek

You ever watch Boston Legal. You remind me of Denny Crane. All he has to do to win a case is say his name... Denny Crane. The show is fantastic . James Spader and William Shatner have phenomenal chemistry. anyways, that's what it reminds me of.

[Alan Gordon]

All FOX/MGM (with the exception of the few MGM titles released by Sony) titles have DTS-HD MA.

All New Line titles have DTS-HD MA.

Lionsgate occasionally uses DTS-HD MA.

~Alan

[btf1980]

Originally Posted by jaukerma

All I can say is that in theory, yes, DTS-HD Master Lossless Audio should be better than PCM and Dolby TrueHD.

What theory would that be? Whatever it is, that person is clearly wrong.

I really don't know why these things get mucked up all the time. PCM is lossless in its raw form. DTS MA-HD and Dolby True HD are lossless compressed.

OK, think of it this way. We all know how the program Winzip works. Imagine 10 individual Microsoft Word documents. Now imagine those same documents zipped into one file with Winzip. The documents are still the same and nothing has changed about them. Winzip just compressed them without any data loss, and saved spaced in the process.

PCM = 10 Individual Microsoft Word Documents

Dolby True HD and DTS MA-HD = Winzip File

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by bassbone57

+1. DTS HDMA is better sounding than Dolby TrueHD IMHO. The reason DTS HDMA can sound better than PCM is DTS can make minor adjustments to levels to tweek things a little where PCM is just as the studio left it. While PCM with the true mix is ideal and great, don't knock DTS HDMA until you have heard it. I have access to all surround sound codecs and I must say that DTS Master is my personal favorite.

-K

Absolutely ridiculous. It should be transparent to the original master. DTS, nor Dolby for that matter, should "tweak" anything. Should compressionists "tweak" a movie so it looks "better" than what was intended by the filmmakers? Let's colorize Schindler's List while we're at it!

Originally Posted by unreal1080p

Both Lossless, therefore both sound the same but DTS-HD MA takes less space since it's a compressed format vs. LPCM. Also, the DTS-HD MA contains within it a regular DTS soundtrack for those who only have legacy A/V receivers and takes up even less space since there is no need to provide a seperate legacy audio track because it's included "built-in". DTS-HD MA is superior to Dolby TrueHD because it does'nt use Dialog Normalization + Dolby TrueHD does not contain Dolby Digital built-in and therefore the legacy soundtrack must be provided seperately requiring more waste of space on the Blu-Ray disc.

Untrue. Dolby TrueHD uses the MLP codec, which is more efficient and compresses better than DTS-MA (think WinZip vs WinRAR), and the legacy Dolby track uses 640kbps, vs DTS' 1.5Mbps. TrueHD frequently dips below 1.5Mbps on a lot of titles, whereas DTS-MA can never do this because of their core track. ALL studios, even Fox, want a Dolby track on there for compatibility with the millions of TVs & processors that cannot handle DTS in any form...and for functional reasons, like Night Mode, which DTS has yet to provide.

Originally Posted by jaukerma

All I can say is that in theory, yes, DTS-HD Master Lossless Audio should be better than PCM and Dolby TrueHD.

No, it should sound THE SAME.

I'm expecting DTS-HD MLA to blow PCM and Dolby TrueHD out of the water when I can actually hear it, but even if it is simply on par with the other next gen audio tracks, then it'll be a very worthwhile upgrade.

Don't mistake the MIX for the CODEC. Most of the Fox releases have been titles that stress both stellar video *and* audio mixes. Rest assured, if Fox had used TrueHD, those mixes would have been equally dynamic and enveloping.

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Untrue. Dolby TrueHD uses the MLP codec, which is more efficient and compresses better than DTS-MA (think WinZip vs WinRAR), and the legacy Dolby track uses 640kbps, vs DTS' 1.5Mbps. TrueHD frequently dips below 1.5Mbps on a lot of titles, whereas DTS-MA can never do this because of their core track. ALL studios, even Fox, want a Dolby track on there for compatibility with the millions of TVs & processors that cannot handle DTS in any form...and for functional reasons, like Night Mode, which DTS has yet to provide.

The Dolby TrueHD compression scheme might be more efficient then the one used by DTS-HD MA but is'nt that nullified by also having to include a seperate Dolby Digital legacy soundtrack in the case of Dolby TrueHD?

Thank God DTS does'nt have "Night Mode" which is similar to Dialog Normalization.

As for FOX using Dolby Digital... not according to the specs on the High Def Digest reviews (except for foreign language tracks).

I'm limiting myself to 4 examples... their probably all the same:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1083...nbreak_s1.html

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/613/irobot.html

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/565/iceage.html

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/627/...fandirene.html

And then there's this release from New Line:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/994/hairspray2007.html

The ONLY audio codec on this high profile release is DTS-HD MA 7.1

If the details provided by HDD above are wrong... then please correct me.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by unreal1080p

The Dolby TrueHD compression scheme might be more efficient then the one used by DTS-HD MA but is'nt that nullified by also having to include a seperate Dolby Digital legacy soundtrack in the case of Dolby TrueHD?

As I said, TrueHD frequently dips below DTS' constant 1.5Mbps. You also have the HD extensions plus the MA extensions which makes it a decoding nightmare. Imagine DD and DD+ and TrueHD all piled on one another. How is that more efficient? Why do you think PCs still can't decode it after nearly 2 years when they've had TrueHD since day one of BD's release?

Thank God DTS does'nt have "Night Mode" which is similar to Dialog Normalization.

In no way shape or form are they remotely similar. Fact is that Night Mode is a godsend for those wishing to watch their films in full surround at all times of day or night without waking the neighbors/other family members. People complain all the time about having to constantly turn the volume up or down. When you turn down the volume, you LOSE envelopment.

That is why both Dolby Volume and THX are introducing technologies that can enable night mode for all sources this year. DTS is the one left out once again.

Need I also remind you Dialog Norm is optional? Or that DTS included it in THEIR HD spec because program producers demanded it???

As for FOX using Dolby Digital... not according to the specs on the High Def Digest reviews (except for foreign language tracks).

Mostly on older titles, but newer ones such as Die Hard 4, Fantastic Four 2, Sunshine, Juno, etc all include DD tracks (@448kbps). Again, because of demand. Ever try to play a DTS track into your TV? TVs will decode DD or PCM thru HDMI.

Plus HDD is frequently wrong anyway (listing 16 bit titles as 24 bit, etc)

[Canada]

The full bitrate DTS MA-HD would meen better audio. They better make a firmwire update for this before Aliens come to Blu.

[savage1984]

Originally Posted by Canada

The full bitrate DTS MA-HD would meen better audio. They better make a firmwire update for this before Aliens come to Blu.

I predict MAY

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As I said, TrueHD frequently dips below DTS' constant 1.5Mbps.

I fail to see how that's an advantage (being able to use a lower bitrate)

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

You also have the HD extensions plus the MA extensions which makes it a decoding nightmare.

AFAIK, the track is either DTS-HD or DTS-HD MA... NOT both (both would also contain legacy DTS but not each other... AFAIK). If that's not the case then please provide proof (link).

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

In no way shape or form are they remotely similar. Fact is that Night Mode is a godsend for those wishing to watch their films in full surround at all times of day or night without waking the neighbors/other family members.

I don't care about "gimmicks" All I want is the original master track in all of it's glory.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Need I also remind you Dialog Norm is optional? Or that DTS included it in THEIR HD spec because program producers demanded it???

There is a HUGE difference in including a feature as a bullet point marketing strategy to prevent people from saying "the other guy has it" vs. actually using the feature in REAL LIFE.

Unlike Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD MA has the Dialnorm option turned "OFF" by default.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Mostly on older titles, but newer ones such as Die Hard 4, Fantastic Four 2, Sunshine, Juno, etc all include DD tracks (@448kbps).

Except for Prison Break, the titles I mentionned (I Robot, Ice Age, Me Myself & Irene) are newer then the ones you mentionned. And JUNO does'nt have Dolby Digital 5.1 in English... only in French:

http://bluray.highdefdigest.com/juno.html

I think it has more to do with available space. If they can spare it they'll include it (Legacy Dolby Digital 5.1) otherwize it will be cut (IMHO).

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Ever try to play a DTS track into your TV? TVs will decode DD or PCM thru HDMI.

Why would anybody with a Blu-Ray player try to play sound through their TV speakers People like that would'nt be upgrading to Blu-Ray... they would be sticking to good old DVD (if not VHS).

[PeterTHX]

[QUOTE=unreal1080p;732635]I fail to see how that's an advantage (being able to use a lower bitrate) [quote]

Because lower bitrate (more efficient) plus DD @640kbps = less space than DTS-MA.

AFAIK, the track is either DTS-HD or DTS-HD MA... NOT both (both would also contain legacy DTS but not each other... AFAIK). If that's not the case then please provide proof (link).

Umm, how about engineers at DTS themselves (talked to a few at CES, including the guys from Ireland)? Every DTS-MA track is DTS-HD as well.

I don't care about "gimmicks" All I want is the original master track in all of it's glory.

Being able to play the track at any time under any conditions is not a "gimmick".

There is a HUGE difference in including a feature as a bullet point marketing strategy to prevent people from saying "the other guy has it" vs. actually using the feature in REAL LIFE.

Then why did DTS add it?

Unlike Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD MA has the Dialnorm option turned "OFF" by default.

Yet (despite DTS zealot FUD) DialNorm has no appreciable difference in the sound quality anyway!

Except for Prison Break, the titles I mentionned (I Robot, Ice Age, Me Myself & Irene) are newer then the ones you mentionned. And JUNO does'nt have Dolby Digital 5.1 in English... only in French:

As I said, HDD gets it wrong almost as often as they get it right. Juno will have a DD 5.1 English track.

I think it has more to do with available space. If they can spare it they'll include it (Legacy Dolby Digital 5.1) otherwize it will be cut (IMHO).

They include it because it's needed in more cases than you're willing to acknowledge.

Why would anybody with a Blu-Ray player try to play sound through their TV speakers People like that would'nt be upgrading to Blu-Ray... they would be sticking to good old DVD (if not VHS).

Happens all the time! Not everyone has a HDMI ready receiver, and they have an optical cable going to a standard (DD/DTS/PCM) receiver. You think those 6 million PS3s are all hooked up to HDMI receivers???

Reality is, DTS-HD MA was late to the game, they offer no advantage over TrueHD and Fox should have not taken the offer from them. Otherwise the VAST majority of BD owners could have heard their soundtracks in lossless for well over a year now. Even when the PS3 gets it, when will PC owners get it? How about everyone else with a standalone BD player that doesn't stream HDMI 1.3a?

[bajor27]

I wish I could remember where I read it, but I remember reading an article from Dolby about the normalization. When they explain what it did, it really seemed like everyone was blowing things way out of proportion as it didn't really alter the audio in any way (from what I could tell, but I'm not an audiophile by any means).

I can't imagine one lossless track sounding any better than the other, but I'm excited for the PS3 patch because some titles only have DTS tracks. Once everything goes that way, I'd like to see more titles use it if it meant space savings over Dolby.

Can't go wrong with saving space and not losing quality.

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Because lower bitrate (more efficient) plus DD @640kbps = less space than DTS-MA.

I still don't see how lower bitrates are an advantage:
DD 640kbps is inferior to DTS 1.5mbps. Why would it be desirable for a Lossless soundtrack to go below 1.5mbps

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Umm, how about engineers at DTS themselves (talked to a few at CES, including the guys from Ireland)? Every DTS-MA track is DTS-HD as well.

Thank you for that info... was'nt aware that it also included it.
However, if I'm understanding the way DTS does their soundtracks, the DTS-HD soundtrack would be embedded within the DTS-HD MA soundtrack and not be over and above it... thefore space is not wasted... just needs a powerfull brain/processor to be able untangle/process the elaborate codec.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Being able to play the track at any time under any conditions is not a "gimmick".

To each his own

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Then why did DTS add it? (DialNorm)

I allready answered that in my previous post: purely for marketing purposes.

Borat --> "I get window from a glass... he get's window from a glass... he's pain in my *******s"

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Yet (despite DTS zealot FUD) DialNorm has no appreciable difference in the sound quality anyway!

Reviews of the movie "300" comparing the HD DUD Dolby True HD soundtrack vs. the Blu-Ray version's LPCM soundtrack would PROVE otherwize.

DialNorm has no appreciable difference in sound quality... when it's TURNED OFF!

If there truly was no apprecialble difference with DialNorm... then there would be no need for it to exist

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As I said, HDD gets it wrong almost as often as they get it right. Juno will have a DD 5.1 English track.

Sadly that may be true (it would be nice to have a 100% solid authority for Disc Specs ).

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Not everyone has a HDMI ready receiver, and they have an optical cable going to a standard (DD/DTS/PCM) receiver. You think those 6 million PS3s are all hooked up to HDMI receivers???

No... they don't necessarily need to have an HDMI receiver... they just need a receiver equipped with optical (or coaxial) so they can get the legacy DTS soundtrack embedded in the DTS-HD MA soundtrack.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Reality is, DTS-HD MA was late to the game, they offer no advantage over TrueHD and Fox should have not taken the offer from them. Otherwise the VAST majority of BD owners could have heard their soundtracks in lossless for well over a year now. Even when the PS3 gets it, when will PC owners get it? How about everyone else with a standalone BD player that doesn't stream HDMI 1.3a?

1) Late to the game they may have been but they should'nt be punished or shunned because of it.

2) Offer no advantage? For every person that thinks that I will find you someone that thinks otherwize. Not being plagued with DialNorm is a HUGE advantage. The maximum bitrate for DTS-HD MA is also higher then the one for Dolby TrueHD (18mbps vs. 24.5mbps). Not sure if it's an advantage any of us will ever benefit from but generaly speaking the higher the better.

3) PC owners and owners of BD players that aren't "fully featured" can (and probably will) purchase new equipment. This is the way the wheel turns(companies need to sell new stuff). Same thing happened with DVD players: single layer, dual layer, DTS, progressive scan, upconversion (720p/1080i) and now we have SUC

I personally purchased a PS3 because of it's future compatibility advantages. The upcoming Panasonic BD50 player will be the FIRST stand alone player that I will seriously consider purchasing.

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by bajor27

I remember reading an article from Dolby about the normalization.

If it's an article from Dolby, obviously they are going to paint a rosy picture

I would'nt put too much stock into it. An impartial article is what's needed.