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

[unreal1080p]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Industry pros would disagree that DD @640kbps is inferior. Dolby's codec is vastly more efficient. That's why DTS never bothered with theirs @448kbps (or even 384kbps for that matter). They probably could have been on a lot more releases if they did. For the record, Dolby @576kbps (the D-VHS rate) matches DTS @1536kbps.

I don't wish to further discuss legacy lossy codecs so I'll leave this one at that... even though DD5.1 has DialNorm and DTS does'nt...

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

It's meaningless when it's not decoded by the same hardware.

How do we know the HDD guys did not use a LG combo player for the review?
But of course, you are correct that the reviews should be between the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack and LPCM soundtracks that are both available on the Blu-Ray release and done on the same player of course. When I reffered to the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack for 300 as being "HD DUD's", I meant that the both the Dolby TrueHD soundtracks on both 300 releases are identical and that the best the Dudders could get was Dolby TrueHD vs LPCM for the Blu-Ray. Sorry for the confusion.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Yes, and Sony does this. Warner does not. You can bet your bippy they would turn it ON for a DTS-MA encoding too.

Not necessarily because Warner would have to make a CONSCIOUS decision to turn DialNorm "ON" for DTS-HD MA (since the default is "OFF").
IMHO, they make no such conscious decision when it comes to the audio encoding of their movies and they simply go with the default which is why their Dolby TrueHD releases are with DialNorm (since with that codec the default is "ON").

SONY actually made a conscious decision to disable DialNorm on their Dolby TrueHD releases as their earlier movies had it and, after receiving numerous complaints, they listened to their public and decided to turn it OFF
They are to be applauded for this

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

But that still doesn't help the thousands (millions?) that have their PS3's or standalones going straight to the TV.

Between you and me... I doubt those thousands would have any use for a Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack either... but, if you say that DTS will not play via left/right "RCA" connections to the TV and Dolby Digital 5.1 will... i'll take your word for it (I've never tried it myself and not about to either).

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Since TrueHD is more efficient 18Mbps TrueHD = 24.5Mbps DTS-MA. Even Disney realizes that they don't have disc space to burn at the expense of video and have started to offer TrueHD instead of PCM. Sony too.

I have ZERO problems with Dolby TrueHD as long as DialNorm is turned OFF

Since there is no easy or reliable way to find this out... I prefer DTS-HD MA or LPCM but will gladly take Dolby TrueHD when no other option is available.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Note that the diagram says "7.1, 96kHz". TrueHD spec can go to 192kHz for 7.1.

The Masters are 96. I think we can both agree we will NEVER see 192kHz for a 5.1 or 7.1 movie soundtrack mix on a Blu-Ray from either codec.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

In the end I don't understand why anyone would not pick the more efficient, less CPU-intensive lossless codec, other than the specter of the DN bogeyman.

Because there will always be a "Coke" and a "Pepsi" in the audio codec world.
It's best to accept it and provide for yourself players and receivers that can handle both.