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

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Why not just ditch TruHD for DTS-HD MA? Unless you have stock in Dolby or something.

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Since you're a supporter of the idea of changing settings on equipment to get the desired sound, why do you have a problem with this?

Please stop trolling.

I do not believe the Dolby implementation is perfect. Dialnorm should probably go away because it failed in its stated purpose. The Auto setting on DRC creates opportunities for errors, which do seem to happen. But, all of that can be avoided by changing one setting when setting up a player or receiver. And, DRC has a value for people who need it.

DTS-HD decoding has its own set of problems, some of which I find more significant than changing the DRC setting one time and one time only. And, some of these DTS issues cannot be overcome by the user.

I voted that it doesn't matter to me. And, it doesn't. I am not affected by any of these problems. But, I think accurate information is of some value.

[davcole]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Yes, that's the issue. DVDs with ES and 96/24 tracks. Discs like LOTR and Gladiator. The Essential decoders in many BD players don't decode them properly. So, you need to use a seperate player that can or run a second connection to a receiver that can . Turning off DRC in my player when I first set it up seems a bit easier than that.

Ok, i've got the an Oppo 980 DVD player and it decodes in player dd, dd ex, whereas i'm not sure if it decodes DTS in player to analog but it passes it. I've got an HDMI connection so i'm no sure of that.

[stargazeruk]

I prefer Dolby TrueHD tracks for night time since they are quiter but I will admit at daytime I prefer DTS HD MA overall since the track volume is higher.

To be honest with some titles in the past on dvd with dolby digital and DTS I found the DTS I prefered more so I kept my preference with DTS since.

But thats just me.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Yes, that's the issue. DVDs with ES and 96/24 tracks. Discs like LOTR and Gladiator. The Essential decoders in many BD players don't decode them properly. So, you need to use a seperate player that can or run a second connection to a receiver that can . Turning off DRC in my player when I first set it up seems a bit easier than that.

Meanwhile tracks flagged as Dolby TrueHD 5.1 EX bitstream just fine.

Studios mandate the DialNorm level.

DTS has DialNorm.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BStecke

I'm still failing to see what the big deal is. You turn the setting off once and you're done.

Try that with Dialnorm and see how far you get.

Further: I've owned a Sony BDP-300, which got the Tru-HD firmware upgrade about seven or eight months back, and I didn't know Dolby was pulling this stunt. My receiver doesn't decode; I had no idea why lossy DTS sounded better than Tru-HD. To me, that's a big deal.

Some other joker questioned the intelligence of people who weren't aware of this. I question my intelligence in even discussing the topic with people like that. Has nothing to do with you, but perhaps you can see why I'm about fed up with Dolby's configurations.

Originally Posted by BStecke

Secondly, I can process a lossless signal down to one channel and to where the processing makes it sound like garbage. That doesn't change the fact that it's still lossless, and the processing has no bearing on the quality of the original, unprocessed signal. DRC doesn't compress the actual source, making it un-lossless, merely the dynamic range. It's still a lossless signal.

"...merely the dynamic range..." Are you serious?

Do you think I went out and got Mythos, Sonus Faber, Pioneer Elite, and JL Audio equipment to have the dynamic range of my source material attenuated? The volume amputated? The calibration of my equipment compromised by some whisper mode stuff I don't even need?

Maybe I should have gotten a pair of earbud headphones instead of all that stuff. What difference does it make?

[Hunter]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Interesting if true. But more to the point: why invoke Dialnorm at all?

I'm not entirely sure but is a good question, but this poll is asking if Sony should keep using TrueHD or switch to DTS-HD MA, since they don't use Dialnorm we shouldn't worry about debating about it here.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Please stop trolling.

Don't interrupt me while I'm beating my wife.

Originally Posted by BIslander

I do not believe the Dolby implementation is perfect. Dialnorm should probably go away because it failed in its stated purpose. The Auto setting on DRC creates opportunities for errors, which do seem to happen. But, all of that can be avoided by changing one setting when setting up a player or receiver. And, DRC has a value for people who need it.

Let them invoke it, when they need it, and make it simple for them. Most folks don't need it.

You've never explained why an "opt-in" method for controlling DRC isn't your preference. I'd be glad to hear your reasons.

Originally Posted by BIslander

DTS-HD decoding has its own set of problems, some of which I find more significant than changing the DRC setting one time and one time only. And, some of these DTS issues cannot be overcome by the user.

This type of pot-kettle-black discussion doesn't add up; the davcole poster made a very good point about hardware issues, and I previously noted that the DTS-MA Essentials mode was a reason to avoid purchasing certain manufacturer gear if playing DVD's was something that was a priority for Blu player owners.

More interesting, your very cite showed that it doesn't prevent the older codecs from being used; I wasn't aware of that. Your cite shows that the same practice you advise for DRC control could be used for the Essentials situation.

Perhaps my pointing out that fiddling with controls makes little sense has irked you in some way.

I'd apologize - I really would - if I could see any reason that you'd take offense to following your own advice.

Originally Posted by BIslander

I voted that it doesn't matter to me. And, it doesn't. I am not affected by any of these problems. But, I think accurate information is of some value.

Thanks for providing it. Oddly enough, it supports my point.

The truth never hurts.

[BStecke]

Are you serious? Turn the setting off!!!! And as far as the fix for DialNorm, its called the volume control.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Meanwhile tracks flagged as Dolby TrueHD 5.1 EX bitstream just fine.

Studios mandate the DialNorm level.

DTS has DialNorm.

Three questions:

1. Were you aware that 96/24 and Neo:6 can also stream just fine? It's just a simple setting on the player, it says, right there on the website cited by home boy.

2. Why do studios need to set the Dialnorm level, and where do they notify users of what the reduction levels are? (For bonus points, do the settings vary within a track, or between different releases?)

3. Does DTS invoke Dialnorm to vary the level from the baseline volume in the original PCM track?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Hunter

I'm not entirely sure but is a good question, but this poll is asking if Sony should keep using TrueHD or switch to DTS-HD MA, since they don't use Dialnorm we shouldn't worry about debating about it here.

I'm not questioning your knowledge of this, but how would someone know this? I just watched Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans, and then the original Underworld.

Different films, obviously - but here's the point: Lycans was muted pretty badly. I added 6DB to the volume to get the same approximate volume level between the two films.

I'm not being scientific about it; it's subjective. But the difference was real, and unless Dialnorm was the culprit, there should not have been that big a difference.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BStecke

Are you serious? Turn the setting off!!!! And as far as the fix for DialNorm, its called the volume control.

Yes, I'm serious. And don't call me Shirley...

The setting IS off. Now, anyway. Tell me why I need to turn it off, instead of Dolby turning it off for me, and I'll vote the other way in this poll.

Finally: Why the heck to I need to fix Dialnorm? What's broken in the first place?

sheesh

[davcole]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Meanwhile tracks flagged as Dolby TrueHD 5.1 EX bitstream just fine.

Studios mandate the DialNorm level.

DTS has DialNorm.

Absolutely correct that TRUEHD EX flags just fine. To my Onkyo it takes about a minute for the receiver to identify the flag and for a period of time i'd have lost audio while it searches for it, but like you said, it bitstreams just fine.

Curious that it's the studio's that mandate that for Dolby but not DTS?

Can you name the films with DTSMA than invoke Dialnorm?

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by davcole

Absolutely correct that TRUEHD EX flags just fine. To my Onkyo it takes about a minute for the receiver to identify the flag and for a period of time i'd have lost audio while it searches for it, but like you said, it bitstreams just fine.

One of the things I find odd about this entire discussion is that Sony is the studio - and I have Sony players.

Here's the weirdness:

Even on my ancient BDP-S300, it decodes Dolby and lossy DTS internally, and sends it to my receiver as PCM.

On the BD-550, it internally decodes the hi-def modes and sends them to my receiver - as PCM. So it's no wonder I was laboring under the impression that I was getting the original PCM audio stream - not knowing that all this Dialnorm and DRC stuff was coming along for the ride.

Oddly enough, it does not internally decode the lossy modes like my older unit did.

I think that if Dolby were to drop the bells and whistles, they'd have a lot more fans. Barring that, it's no wonder DTS is winning this poll at about 2:1; with Dialnorm throttling their equipment, why would they choose Dolby?

[Hunter]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I'm not questioning your knowledge of this, but how would someone know this? I just watched Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans, and then the original Underworld.

Different films, obviously - but here's the point: Lycans was muted pretty badly. I added 6DB to the volume to get the same approximate volume level between the two films.

I'm not being scientific about it; it's subjective. But the difference was real, and unless Dialnorm was the culprit, there should not have been that big a difference.

I can't find any reviews that support your findings, the reviews that I've read give the sound high marks, so most likely it's due to being different mixes.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Does anyone in this thread know if there is anything that would force the PS3Dynamic Range Control setting to be turned off? As in, the setting becomes turned off for all future applications until the user themselves goes back into the XMB menu system to turn it off again?

[davcole]

Originally Posted by BIslander

I do not believe the Dolby implementation is perfect. Dialnorm should probably go away because it failed in its stated purpose. The Auto setting on DRC creates opportunities for errors, which do seem to happen. But, all of that can be avoided by changing one setting when setting up a player or receiver. And, DRC has a value for people who need it.

DTS-HD decoding has its own set of problems, some of which I find more significant than changing the DRC setting one time and one time only. And, some of these DTS issues cannot be overcome by the user.

I voted that it doesn't matter to me. And, it doesn't. I am not affected by any of these problems. But, I think accurate information is of some value.

I really respect that you conceded that. In fact both codecs are imperfect from a software/hardware implementation. Yes DTSMA had it's problem with the "bomb" issue that was later corrected for receivers with the faulty hardware (hey i've yet to have my 705 upgraded and its' one of the faulty receivers and have never experienced it once). It definitely is having an issue with certain receiver's cause they don't have an ES decoding built-in for DTSMA. I'm not familiar with the channel duplication but i'll take that it's a real problem.

But as you stated, there are some issues with the Dolby implementation so far as inconsistent dialnorm and the "auto" default to most players/receivers for DRC (and in my case the gruesomely slow implementation of TRUEHD-EX) so neither codec is without flaws in implementation.

I do think the strongest argument for TRUEHD is from a legacy standpoint it offers more compatability for those who have receivers that actually don't decode DTS (we are talking ancient receivers) or for those who connect directly to their televisions. The key is will enough of those people in those situations speak to this thread and voice their concerns. From a lossless perspective, it will affect those with early models that can only decode TRUEHD (of course most first generation BD's couldn't decode or bitstream TRUEHD). For those players it was PCM or legacy only.

As I stated, I voted "It doesn't Matter" and in the end it doesn't. I prefer DTSMA for it's implementation and one stream advantage but i'm just as happy with TRUEHD that has been properly flagged. Both are incredible codecs, and great substitutes to PCM.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Hunter

I can't find any reviews that support your findings, the reviews that I've read give the sound high marks, so most likely it's due to being different mixes.

It did sound good - at 6DB higher than equivalent DTS-HD and PCM mixes on other movies. I just thought it was odd.

I really hope it was the original mix.

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

...we can discuss which format is better until we are blu in the face, but the MOST important part of your system is your speakers...immediately following this is your amplification. True and Master will sound identical on about 98%of your systems on this forum, only because I doubt your systems are up to par with the reference studios that mixed the tracks. How may of you guys have seperate amplifiers and full range speakers?...or how about a subwoofer that can play below 20hz? All of this equipment is necessary in order to hear the full capabilities of a Lossless track.
The bottom line is that if you haven't invested in a " high end " surround system, you will not be able to hear a diiffernce between any of the new formats.
I'd define " high end " as a system worth $10,000 or more for just the audio components. If you are working with a " budget system " then don't expect to hear anything better than what you are accustomed to with a superbit DVD.

Anyone else on the same page as me??

Bri

No, I'm certainly not on the same page as you.. You should just speak for yourself about not being able to hear the difference. Many others and myself can discern the difference on systems with budgets under 1/10th of the budget you've suggested.

[srrndhound]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

...we can discuss which format is better until we are blu in the face, but the MOST important part of your system is your speakers...immediately following this is your amplification.

Where do room acoustics fit in the equation? They have a bigger effect than the amplifier.

True and Master will sound identical on about 98%of your systems on this forum, only because I doubt your systems are up to par with the reference studios that mixed the tracks.

Regardless of the quality of the playback system, they will sound identical given the same source because they are both identical to the source.

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by Monkey

No, I'm certainly not on the same page as you.. You should just speak for yourself about not being able to hear the difference. Many others and myself can discern the difference on systems with budgets under 1/10th of the budget you've suggested.

I am not just speaking for myself, but for all the people who have invested a good deal of money and time on this wonderful hobby!

I'm curious, what $1000 system will allow you to enjoy blu ray and all its glory? The cheapest pre/pro will run at least $600 if you want to decode master. Then add another $400 for the blu-ray player ( capable of DTS-MA )
and all the cables and wires for the system.
A new set of speakers will run about $1000, which includes fronts, center,and rears. Then a capable subwoofer will cost at minimum $650. This brings you to $2650 for a new system.

If you can build a decent setup for under $1000, then I'd love to hear your ideas....otherwise your statements are a slap in the face to those who saved up, and paid the piper, for seperate amplifiers and high fidelity speakers. The bottom line is you pay for what you get my friend...

Bri