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

[D]

Originally Posted by CAB

I don't assume, rather, I know Doby knows what he's talking about.

And I do as well. Respectfully, db01.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by db01

And I do as well. Respectfully, db01.

Then you clearly know there is no sonic advantage to one over the other! Hence you voted for dts-ma for some other reason, perhaps you like the 1.5 Mbps core?

[MacDaddyOJack]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

They'll probably read through some of it as well and realize that most people don't know what they're talking about, render the poll useless and move on.

That's what I was hoping at this point! There are some good references in here but I think that most of what is flying around is nothing more than opinionated jibber-jabber that isn't really based off of anything factual.

[D]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Science doesn't assume. You can prove it for yourself: 1) Take a CD and use EAC to get a 100% copy of a single track. 2) Note the checksum. 3) Convert it to .shn and back to .wav using MKV 4) Convert it to .flac and back to .wav using FLAC Frontend 5) Convert it to .ape and back to .wav using Monkey's Audio 6) Look at the checksum, does it match the original checksum of the file? #6 is rhetorical if you did everything correctly - the answer is YES. The same exact audio file is there. Do you know why? Because FLAC, SHN and APE are all lossless encoding schemes just like TrueHD and dts-ma. Due to the fact that MOST people are suggesting Sony should adopt dts-ma due to sonic/aural reasons then there is nothing to assume - those people don't know what they're talking about. For the minority that have other reasons - built in dialogue normalization, better legacy support, efficiency, etc., those are all valid reasons to have an opinion, but those reasons are completely in the minority, hence MOST people don't know what they're talking about.

I have never referenced that dtsMA was sonically superior, and I am in the minority in my reasons and opinion. I just take offense to the fact that people are belittled and talked down to because of their opinions, whether or not they are based on scientific fact or not.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by db01

I have never referenced that dtsMA was sonicallx superior, and I am in the minority in my reasons and opinion. I just take offense to the fact that people are belittled and talked down to because of their opinions, whether or not they are based on scientific fact or not.

This is a place where people should be able to come and learn facts about technology, primarily Blu-ray related. When the same people steadfastly refuse to budge on their incorrect opinion then I make no apologies if they are offended by my blanket statement. This discussion has gone on long enough in several different threads and the same misinformation keeps being perpetrated and the same tired old incorrect arguments keep being made.

So if anyone is offended by me saying that they "don't know what they're talking about" they're just going to have to deal with their own tender sensibilities.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by db01

I have never referenced that dtsMA was sonicallx superior, and I am in the minority in my reasons and opinion. I just take offense to the fact that people are belittled and talked down to because of their opinions, whether or not they are based on scientific fact or not.

Seriously. im mean how times are people going to keep saying "its the same thing, lossless is lossless" they sound like a broken record. we know its all the same but does that stop my ears from hearing a difference?

And im sure a studio like sony knows more about these codecs than any of us do, so why are they even considering changing to DTS-MA? its the samething......right? please dont tell me its money.

People are always getting called crazy, or we dont what were talking about, when we prefer DTS. but never the other way around.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by db01

I have never referenced that dtsMA was sonicallx superior, and I am in the minority in my reasons and opinion. I just take offense to the fact that people are belittled and talked down to because of their opinions, whether or not they are based on scientific fact or not.

The problem here is the large number of people who reject science - and do so rather vehemently - and then say there has to be a sonic difference because they hear a difference. There are many legitimate explanations for why they may be hearing differences - none of which have anything to do with differences in the decoded output. But, many posters here simply reject alternative explanations. It's almost as bad as claiming the earth has to be flat because that's the way it looks to me.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by saprano

Seriously. im mean how times are people going to keep saying "its the same thing, lossless is lossless" they sound like a broken record. we know its all the same but does that stop my ears from hearing a difference?

And im sure a studio like sony knows more about these codecs than any of us do, so why are they even considering changing to DTS-MA? its the samething......right? please dont tell me its money.

People are always getting called crazy, or we dont what were talking about, when we prefer DTS. but never the other way around.

If it was the other way around it would be the exact same thing from just about everyone that understands 0's and 1's.

See if someone like Sir Terrance can arrange for a double blind listening test for you with something like the 2L recording that has both dts-ma and TrueHD of the same track. I would wager $1,000 you wouldn't pick one over the other when level matched with anything resembling consistency.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by BIslander

The problem here is the large number of people who reject science - and do so rather vehemently - and then say there has to be a sonic difference because they hear a difference. There are many legitimate explanations for why they may be hearing differences - none of which have anything to do with differences in the decoded output. But, many posters here simply reject alternative explanations. It's almost as bad as claiming the earth has to be flat because that's the way it looks to me.

Exactly.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by saprano

And im sure a studio like sony knows more about these codecs than any of us do, so why are they even considering changing to DTS-MA? its the samething......right? please dont tell me its money.

It will be a business decision. Preferences for dts-MA definitely exist among consumers, for whatever reasons. If those preferences translate into improved sales and if there aren't other off-setting considerations, then Sony will likely make the switch. But, how many people who say they prefer dts-MA are not buying Sony releases right now because they use TrueHD? I suspect that's not a very big number.

[Damage Inc.]

Originally Posted by BIslander

It will be a business decision. Preferences for dts-MA definitely exist among consumers, for whatever reasons. If those preferences translate into improved sales and if there aren't other off-setting considerations, then Sony will likely make the switch. But, how many people who say they prefer dts-MA are not buying Sony releases right now because they use TrueHD? I suspect that's not a very big number.

Yeah, that would be a little extreme.
Personally I'm a little disappointed that for example the 'Batman'-films don't have DTS.
Compared to most Disney-films having DTS, even in 7.1. :S
It's a bit overkill to be honest, at least the 7.1-part, but that's fine...
Just to show the difference though.
But yeah, I don't refuse to buy a good BD with Dolby if it's been reviewed as good audio.
However it would have been great if they used DTS, for films like that.

Also, we might even see Sony end up with using both formats.
That would probably be the nicest solution.
I'm not pessimistic about that, I could see that happen, if space allows.

[ClaytonMG]

I am curious, how many of you have heard a poor Dolby TrueHD track from Sony?

[saprano]

None that i have. but were given a choice and we want DTS.

[Scorxpion]

Originally Posted by Damage Inc.

Yeah, that would be a little extreme.
Personally I'm a little disappointed that for example the 'Batman'-films don't have DTS.
Compared to most Disney-films having DTS, even in 7.1. :S
It's a bit overkill to be honest, at least the 7.1-part, but that's fine...
Just to show the difference though.
But yeah, I don't refuse to buy a good BD with Dolby if it's been reviewed as good audio.
However it would have been great if they used DTS, for films like that.

Also, we might even see Sony end up with using both formats.
That would probably be the nicest solution.
I'm not pessimistic about that, I could see that happen, if space allows.

it could be happened we have before multiple movies including both PCM and Dolby True HD.As we know PCM is a hungry space but DTSHD master audio is not like PCM taking too much.it can be true and exists in reality we have some dont remember it exactly.this can be lead to omit some other dub languages found on BD now like french,spanish,or Italian and some of the subtitles.Honestly i dont care about other languages maybe other want them.All i care about is the English surround track where the movie originally pictured.So it can be true and everybody enjoy the loosless he desires at first sight

[darkblueme]

Originally Posted by saprano

Exactly. as i said sony knows more about this stuff than we do. they just want to know what we want. and according to the poll we all want DTS-MA. [/thread]

[Scorxpion]

Hello DobyBlue,

You know i respect you a lot and all of the insiders here including Peter THX.

i want from you to do a ratio or probability calculation and you did it in the past remember the fight with the failure format about PQ and AQ.Blu-ray always wins with a margin of percentage overall.

i will not go far away and choose 50 discs containing DolbyTHD and 50 containing DTSHD master audio from this site ,do the math calculation and tell me if DTSHD master audio will not win with a slightly margin overall.

whatever is the result i will accept it.


Thanks,

[SBrooks1]

At the end of the day Sony cares about sales. And judging by the poll numbers they can logically assume that more people may buy their Blu-ray's if they release them with DTS-HD MA. Regardless if their opinion is based on science or not.

[trans22]

Originally Posted by BIslander

It will be a business decision. Preferences for dts-MA definitely exist among consumers, for whatever reasons. If those preferences translate into improved sales and if there aren't other off-setting considerations, then Sony will likely make the switch. But, how many people who say they prefer dts-MA are not buying Sony releases right now because they use TrueHD? I suspect that's not a very big number.

i don't buy sony blu-rays because they are dolby, compared to 20th century fox and universal the sony blu-rays just sound like dvd

[trans22]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I am curious, how many of you have heard a poor Dolby TrueHD track from Sony?

the UK disc of TERMINATOR 3, sounds no different to the dvd

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by BIslander

It will be a business decision. Preferences for dts-MA definitely exist among consumers, for whatever reasons. If those preferences translate into improved sales and if there aren't other off-setting considerations, then Sony will likely make the switch. But, how many people who say they prefer dts-MA are not buying Sony releases right now because they use TrueHD? I suspect that's not a very big number.

Originally Posted by trans22

i don't buy sony blu-rays because they are dolby, compared to 20th century fox and universal the sony blu-rays just sound like dvd

OK. That's one.