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

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Have you tried the dts-MA 7.1 track on Hell Boy 2 on your S550? Other S550 owners report getting a 5.1 downmix - the same problem that cropped up with six other titles with the initial PS3 dts-MA decoder.

Checking now...

Interesting. It's playing in 5.1 in Pure Direct mode.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

BINGO!

I don't own stock in Dolby. If they'd set up their primary purpose of unfiltered, unmodified, pure compression, I'd buy some; I think they'd be way more popular.

Dolby does, they've been doing it for ten years with MLP, the basis for TrueHD. It's pure compression, just in the same way that WMA lossless and FLAC is. They also allow for metadata independant of the audio (just like an id tag) in the same way that DTS does. There's no difference, the only difference is whether or not the studio implements it. So when you say "BINGO!" it's incongruent as you still don't seem to get that DN can be applied with either Dolby or dts.

From a pure performance standpoint, it appears that DTS encodes don't have that junk bolted on at all.

You didn't read this post? - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=738

The problem with your point is, we know Dolby does it; and we can hear the result.

It's Dolby doing it?

If you know of DTS doing it, I'd like to know. It hasn't obviously manifested itself to this point.

Apparently it has, but again I have no idea whether it's dts themselves doing it in the encoding or whether it was at the discretion of the studio.

If both codecs can do DN and it's in the hands of the studios as to whether or not DN is used than I fail to see where your argument has legs.

[davcole]

Originally Posted by Blu Titan

I'll have to admit that "Blu-Dog" is tenacious. At this point in the poll: DTS-HD MA has almost a 7-1 advantage over Dolby True HD, and I don't think there are enough votes "out there" to change that ratio significantly.

He's not so much tenacious as he knows what he wants and what he doesn't want. He doesn't want to adjust the volume because Dolby/Studio wants to apply dialnorm. He doesn't want to have to go into his menu to insure he won't get a film defaulting to DRC. That's the crux of his own argument. What the other side continues to do is suggest what he needs to compensate for it.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Good question. Try plugging in the speakers, it worked for me.

Do you work for dts by any chance? Because you are coming across as or someone who has a financial interest in which codec is used.

And BTW I have dedicated 1080p FP setup with an Ultra2 certified receiver feeding a 7.1 speaker system setup.

dts-MA and DolbyTrueHD and PCM all deliver identical performance in my dedicated room.

Again my point is that dts has options in their encoders that many current up-to-date decoders do not know how to handle.

Like I said I don't care which one is used and I don't want to see both used since it is a waste of space/bandwidth.

dts has a history of coming up short and if it was not for Blu their exsistence in the consumer market is pretty much nil anymore. dts DVDs are pretty much dead... dts is never going to be used for broadcast and the time for need for lossy codecs for theatrical exhibit is ending since digital cinema is just using lossless PCM. I suspect that dts knows that there only hope left is to corner the Blu-ray audio market.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Apparently it has, but again I have no idea whether it's dts themselves doing it in the encoding or whether it was at the discretion of the studio.

If both codecs can do DN and it's in the hands of the studios as to whether or not DN is used than I fail to see where your argument has legs.

I think the issue is more that Dolby's toolset has DN default to +4dB and dts' toolset it is set to 0dB.

Most of us realize that many of these tools are just used in their default configuration since there is more of chance to muck things up by tinkering with the settings. I suspect that the studios are just using the default settings of the tools. Basically no one wants to be the one who has to go the boss saying the encode has to be redone because some parameters were changed on the tool that made the track unusable.

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Checking now...

Interesting. It's playing in 5.1 in Pure Direct mode.

Would you like to apologize now for your harsh response

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Checking now...

Interesting. It's playing in 5.1 in Pure Direct mode.

Thanks for checking.

That unexpected downmix is likely caused by the Speaker Remapping metadata flag that's part of the DTS-HD specification. If the content provider uses a non-standard speaker position flag, then some DTS decoders downmix to 5.1. In the case of the other disks I mentioned, the disks were authored with the flag set to pull the surrounds back a bit from the usual side positioning. (The surrounds were mixed at 120 degrees instead of 90-110.) I suspect Hell Boy 2 has the same problem.

If you (or someone else) has any of these discs, could you check them as well? They're the ones that the PS3 downmixed prior to a firmware fix. I'm curious whether the S550 handles them properly.

Hairspray
Pan's Labyrinth
Shoot 'Em Up
Rush Hour 3
The Condemned

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by dobyblue

It's the "monkey with a pistol" situation. I don't know why Dolby encodes have all this junk imbedded; it appears, from this discussion, that it's from Dolby's default setups. Give a production engineer the task of encoding a mix, and they'll either take care to turn off these flags for Dialnorm and DRC, or just flip the switch and go back to watching the Lakers game for a couple of hours or so.

Look, I don't know why it's happening, and (insert famous Clark Gable quote here). It doesn't happen with DTS, so I go with DTS.

Originally Posted by dobyblue

Dolby does, they've been doing it for ten years with MLP, the basis for TrueHD. It's pure compression, just in the same way that WMA lossless and FLAC is. They also allow for metadata independant of the audio (just like an id tag) in the same way that DTS does. There's no difference, the only difference is whether or not the studio implements it. So when you say "BINGO!" it's incongruent as you still don't seem to get that DN can be applied with either Dolby or dts.

Look, maybe some chief engineer someplace pulled out his bourbon IV long enough to shout "Darn right! Most people live ten to a room in cardboard condos, and need to have DRC, so slam it on every track, got DAM!" and then lapsed into a coma.

I don't know. I don't care. I know Dolby is fully capable of delivering what I, and most other folks that have plunked down one heck of a lot of cash for; high end, uncompressed, unfiltered sound.

Too often, it doesn't happen.

Originally Posted by dobyblue

:You didn't read this post? - https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=738

In full, and I agreed with it, though I didn't answer it on the board. In fact, that's my point; the original mix can be a complete cock-up, or a sublime audio experience, but I'd rather get it straight than mixed.

Originally Posted by dobyblue

It's Dolby doing it?

It ain't the clerk at Best Buy.

Look, I've cited their website; they're trumpeting this foolishness like it's the best thing since circular wheels. I couldn't give a wet fart about broadcast audio; I leave that to Dolby's other customers, who may be sweating profusely about streaming video or Hulu or satellite hi-def being as good as Blu-ray and all this daft clatter.

Their "standard" must cross too many venues, and perhaps some folks want to have a seamless Dolby experience across all these platforms. That's fine with me. Have at it. Blu is different, and if the engineers are worried about just plunking in a Blu disk for streaming broadcast, without worrying about changing sound codecs for the "I don't gots no receiver, my 27 inch TV has some good sound" crowd, then we have a bigger problem.

Originally Posted by dobyblue

:Apparently it has, but again I have no idea whether it's dts themselves doing it in the encoding or whether it was at the discretion of the studio.

It's the studios, and for the last time, I know that Dolby can deliver the goods. I also get the distinct impression that they are not inclined to do so, and that the studios may have the same motives - the eventual seamless, low cost delivery of on-line content to the masses, in Dolby, squashed to a thin puddle of sound for folks who say, "Dang, that's too loud" except when the Sham-Wow dudes starts hawking hearing aids or food choppers or something.

If Dolby won't step up for high end audio, delivered straight, with no chaser, then I have an issue with Dolby, and the horse they rode in on.

Originally Posted by dobyblue

If both codecs can do DN and it's in the hands of the studios as to whether or not DN is used than I fail to see where your argument has legs.

Look, I'll say it one more time. If Dolby can deliver lossless, unfiltered, unmodified PCM encodes, without me re-swizzling my gear, I don't have a problem.

Up to this point, that has not been the case.

DTS doesn't have this issue, so I prefer DTS.

[srrndhound]

Thank you, Blu-Dog, for the detailed comments. I appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

I see where you're going with this, but while music volume does vary - movies should not.

I’m not sure why it’s OK for music to vary in loudness but it's not not OK for films. At least if I set a movie’s (or concert’s) playback volume it will last the full two hours. Song to song loudness changes across CDs every few minutes is much more annoying to me.

I understand your point, and agree that modification of the playback may be desirable sometime. My point is, that should not be a function of the codec; as has been stated many times, the playback system has a volume knob, and various sound modes that can be implemented as needed. If someone screws it up, it should be the sound engineer that gets blamed.

I don't expect every film to sound the same - but I do expect that I won't be cranking my system up to compensate for an arbitrary alteration of the original track. Even more important, I do expect the sound engineer to leave alteration and processing selections, from volume to range compression, to the sound designer and the end user.

Before setting DRC to "wide" on my player, Iron Man was virtually unlistenable. It was no reference grade product after I "disabled" DRC, either, and still had to be cranked up.

That's what concerns me - the lack of an identifiable baseline. I've seen broadcast dialnorm notifications, that show anywhere from -4 to -6db

Yes, it was unfortunate that Iron Man forced DRC on. That is a rare problem, though, and I suspect it won’t happen again.

As for “arbitrary” alterations, dialnorm is not arbitrary, and it has an identifiable baseline—dialog level—but it is certainly an alternative paradigm to the one you (and THX) prefer: reference playback volume. No question that these are two very different things, and I respect your preference for reference volume playback.

One reason your AVR displays the DN offset value is so you can a) know the amount of gain offset, and b) adjust it if you so choose. A manual DN defeat, if you will. Someone else mentioned that DN has failed to achieve its intended goal of normalizing loudness across programs, and I do not dispute that. That’s why we’re now seeing things like Dolby Volume being introduced. It’s a much better solution that was not available in the early 1990s when DN was devised due to DSP limitations—a 30 MIPs DSP was a big deal back then, now 10x that is routine. (It’s still not an easy pill to swallow in cost-constrained set-top boxes and TVs, though, but some TVs are now doing it, and thanks to Moor's law more will undoubtedly follow if consumers feel it solves a problem.)

I had to ramp up Rise of the Lycans by +6db for clarity of sound, which was still middling at best (it wasn't terrible by any means; but definitely not reference grade, not even close).

Understood. But I hope we can agree that’s not a codec issue, but the quality of the mix.

Please realize that I'm not a sound engineer, but as an audio aficiando, I've sought good sound for over three decades. I've also sought information about audio creation and playback, and it was almost by accident that I found out the implementation of crippling sound modes was negating much of the value of my playback equipment.

I've heard facile "can't you find your volume knob, dude" comments when I mention this - along with contempt for users who aren't aware of what's on the discs they purchase - and I'm really at the point where any audio compression technique that interferes with the original PCM mix set up by the engineer is just plain suspect.

Dolby can deliver, and has done so for me. In the hands of some thumb-fingered compression tech, it no longer delivers. Perhaps Dolby can release audio tracks similar to the SuperBit DVD's that came out back in the day; with a solemn promise to simply compress the original track, no games, no piledrivers to the mix, just straight decompress and enjoy.

Until then....

Yes, forced DRC on Iron Man can be described as crippling, and while other movies such as Rise of the Lycans do not meet your standards for sound quality even when DN is compensated, I do not think a 6 dB change in your master volume setting will contribute any audible degradation to the source's sound quality—certainly nothing that can be described as crippling. If it does, then the AVR is suspect. An inconvenience it may well be for you to have to adjust the volume, I grant that.

And while I no longer work for Dolby and cannot speak to their future plans, this DN issue was on the table just before I left, and the final chapter has not yet been written. The input from folks here is thus very useful and is being heard. I thank you for taking the time to reply.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by CraigW

Do you work for dts by any chance?

Heck no, I don't work for DTS. I'm a computer guy. What I don't spend on audio, my kids will inherit, and so far, all they'll get is audio equipment.

Originally Posted by CraigW

Because you are coming across as an a-hole fanboy or someone who has a financial interest in which codec is used.

I am usually referred to as, "that motherf*****", and is actually a nickname I picked up a few years back. For some reason, the people who issued it to me actually like me quite a bit.

I can tell, because the way they're always leaving blindfolds and cigarettes on my desk is quite endearing. Anyway, going forward, please use that term to describe me to others. I'm more comfortable with it.

And I take offense to that "fanboy" remark.

Originally Posted by CraigW

And BTW I have dedicated 1080p FP setup with an Ultra2 certified receiver feeding a 7.1 speaker system setup.

Did you inherit it? Or perhaps you got it at gunpoint. Just curious.

Originally Posted by CraigW

dts-MA and DolbyTrueHD and PCM all deliver identical performance in my dedicated room.

Mine too, when I finish dicking around with it before watching most Dolby stuff.

Originally Posted by CraigW

Again my point is that dts has options in their encoders that many current up-to-date decoders do not know how to handle.

Like I said I don't care which one is used and I don't want to see both used since it is a waste of space/bandwidth.

Why are you worried about bandwidth? This poll isn't about how many "making of" junk files are on your Blu discs, in any case.

Originally Posted by CraigW

dts has a history of coming up short and if it was not for Blu their exsistence in the consumer market is pretty much nil anymore. dts DVDs are pretty much dead... dts is never going to be used for broadcast and the time for need for lossy codecs for theatrical exhibit is ending since digital cinema is just using lossless PCM. I suspect that dts knows that there only hope left is to corner the Blu-ray audio market.

Based on these poll results, I think they've got maybe 7:1 odds of sitting up and taking a little broth before long.

[BIslander]

Despite the rather loud voices in this thread, I’ve found some value here in that it’s led me to a better understanding of how Dialog Normalization works. One good reference is an article in hometheaterhifi.com dating back to 2001.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volum...on-6-2000.html

A bit old, perhaps. It is discussing lossy encoding, of course. But, I don’t know that there are any differences in the application of dialnorm offsets to lossless content. The principle seems to be the same – dialnorm uses the “proper” volume of dialog to set the overall volume level of the soundtrack.

This excerpt from the article appears to apply to the on-going discussion in this thread:

Myth #2: Dialnorm reduces everything by 4 dB, altering reference level playback of a movie.

A common criticism is that Dialogue Normalization "normally" reduces the level of the soundtrack by about 4 dB. Reduces it as compared to what? You have to compare it to something else first, and then the question becomes: is the Dolby Digital soundtrack 4 dB too low, or is the other material 4 dB too high? Follow me on this one.

A lot of home theater enthusiasts are concerned with what is called "reference level playback". In a nutshell, you use test-tones (as may be found on such DVDs as AVIA) to set the volume to the same standard levels used in cinemas. The reason to do this is to hear the soundtrack at the level the movie makers intended. A concern naturally arises that if volume is being altered by Dialnorm, the sound engineer's vision is compromised. Reference level playback is in practice very very loud in the relatively small acoustic spaces of home, and we must caution you against it at this point. Not only do most find it uncomfortably loud, but as we noted in our article explaining the LFE channel, it can quickly bring a subwoofer to its knees. But for the record, let's press on.

The default power-on setting for Dialnorm on Dolby's professional AC-3 encoder, the DP569, is -27 because as we noted, that value is a perfect fit for movie soundtracks. True, this value calls for your decoder to attenuate its output by 4 dB. Fact is, the two most common reference DVDs, Video Essentials and AVIA, were encoded with the same -27 Dialnorm value, so their test noises are also being attenuated by 4 dB, making them a perfect reference for Dolby Digital movies. If you've set-up a system with either of these tools, then any movie you play will not be "reduced" by 4 dB as compared to the reference.

DTS soundtracks, unlike Dolby Digital, are not attenuated by 4 dB by your decoder. This means that if you've set up your system using AVIA or Video Essentials, the DTS soundtrack is actually going to play 4 dB too high. Yes, that's right. You read it right: On a system calibrated for reference level playback with Video Essentials or AVIA, DTS soundtracks play 4 dB too loud. Conversely (and to be fair), if you set up a system using DTS test noise, the Dolby Digital soundtrack will be 4 dB too low. Yet what is important here, and what I really want you to take away from this, is that regardless of what actual level you watch a movie at, relative to one another, there exists this 4 dB difference between DTS and Dolby Digital movie soundtracks played over consumer equipment. If at any time you are comparing soundtracks, you must turn your volume down when listening to the DTS track and/or raise it when listening to the Dolby Digital track (as the case may be) in order to hear the same level from both.

We should note that most THX-certified receivers and processors address this by attenuating DTS material by 4dB after the decode stage, effectively putting everything on level ground.

I bolded the last part myself because, if true, I believe it says THX certified equipment adjusts DTS playback to add the 4db dialnorm offset. If I am reading this correctly, it says THX believes average dialog in a movie belongs where Dolby puts it. Since DTS places dialog 4db higher, THX equipment brings it down.

Perhaps I do not understand what I’ve read. And perhaps THX does not do what the author says. On the other hand …

Also, this article suggests neither dialnorm level is correct or incorrect. Rather, if you calibrate for one, the other will be wrong. Or, put another way, they are simply different based on the reference point used for the initial calibration. If you calibrate for Dolby, DTS tracks are 4db hot. If you calibrate for DTS, Dolby tracks are 4db too low. So, make your choice when you calibrate and adjust for the other by turning the volume up or down a few dbs when you pop in the disc.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by CraigW

Would you like to apologize now for your harsh response

Maybe after I push my eyes back into my head.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Thanks for checking.

That unexpected downmix is likely caused by the Speaker Remapping metadata flag that's part of the DTS-HD specification. If the content provider uses a non-standard speaker position flag, then some DTS decoders downmix to 5.1. In the case of the other disks I mentioned, the disks were authored with the flag set to pull the surrounds back a bit from the usual side positioning. (The surrounds were mixed at 120 degrees instead of 90-110.) I suspect Hell Boy 2 has the same problem.

If you (or someone else) has any of these discs, could you check them as well? They're the ones that the PS3 downmixed prior to a firmware fix. I'm curious whether the S550 handles them properly.

Hairspray
Pan's Labyrinth
Shoot 'Em Up
Rush Hour 3
The Condemned

I'll check Shoot 'Em Up in a bit...it's the only one I have on hand.

Interesting...good info, thanks.

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by CraigW

I think the issue is more that Dolby's toolset has DN default to +4dB and dts' toolset it is set to 0dB.

So that explains why the other day when I tossed in Spiderman 3 I saw a +4 dialnorm pop up for a second on my pre-amp when the Dolby TrueHD started. I was testing my new JL F112's.

Like I said many pages ago, I always pay attention to the dialnorm setting that flashes up, so I can adjust the volume accordingly to get to a baseline.

In that sense, I agree with Blu-dog, it's a pain in the arse every time I pop in a Dolby TrueHD track. Step 1, "what is the dialnorm adjusting, if any, I have to do to get to my reference level Step 2, after the Iron Man fiasco, check to make sure I have manually turned off "Late Night" mode just in case some weird combo of how the disc was made and how it "talks" to my preamp cause it to turn on.

Whatever, to me, I love my lossless audio in any incarnation. I voted DTS for a few reasons. But I do think that the people have spoken here, and it would seem Sony risks annoying 10% to make 60% happier. What they do with that information is entirely up to them...

[Tok]

Originally Posted by Esox50

Whatever, to me, I love my lossless audio in any incarnation. I voted DTS for a few reasons. But I do think that the people have spoken here, and it would seem Sony risks annoying 10% to make 60% happier. What they do with that information is entirely up to them...

True. I believe many more Blu customers gage a possible purchase if a lossless audio option is on the disc, not which codec was used. I really doubt Sony would see a significant uptick in sales if dts was their default lossless option.

Warner gets flogged all the time for inconsistent use of lossless audio options. At least every other major content provider realizes that the typical Blu customer expects more.

Again I don't really care which route Sony goes, but from an innovation standpoint, Dolby Labs has a much more impressive resume.

And the last thing I would like to point out that this is an enthusiast site. You can't take the results of the poll here and extrapolate it to the overall Blu consumer. Viral marketing runs rampant at message board sites and I really question if many of the loudest dts proponents are just fans or if they have some sort of vested interest in the codec wars.

If a codec is lossless by definition, the end result of any competing lossless systems is the same as the original input. Never mind if one is more or less efficient. INPUT = OUTPUT

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Esox50

So that explains why the other day when I tossed in Spiderman 3 I saw a +4 dialnorm pop up for a second on my pre-amp when the Dolby TrueHD started. I was testing my new JL F112's.

We need to talk. I'm ready, at a moment's notice, to trade my F113 for those F112's. Think it over.

On second thought, don't think it over. Follow your impulse.

(i don't think this is gonna work, but it's worth a shot)

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

We need to talk. I'm ready, at a moment's notice, to trade my F113 for those F112's. Think it over.

On second thought, don't think it over. Follow your impulse.

(i don't think this is gonna work, but it's worth a shot)

Let me think for a second...

NO!!!! Wouldn't trade my two F112's for one F113. Nope. :P

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Except they have done these tests, and audiences (audiophiles mind you) could not reliably tell the difference between sources.


Some people are just easily amused I guess.

Maybe the guys with the lab coats were gagged.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Esox50

Let me think for a second...

NO!!!! Wouldn't trade my two F112's for one F113. Nope. :P

Have a heart. I had to swear a holy oath to the wife to pick up all the dog poop for a year to get the one I got. Since then, we got two more dogs.

Do you know what you're putting me through to get another F113? In that one second, did you take the time to care about a fellow Fathom owner?

(this ain't gonna work either, i'm afraid)

[Esox50]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Have a heart. I had to swear a holy oath to the wife to pick up all the dog poop for a year to get the one I got. Since then, we got two more dogs.

Do you know what you're putting me through to get another F113? In that one second, did you take the time to care about a fellow Fathom owner?

(this ain't gonna work either, i'm afraid)

Ask the wife nicely, I'm sure she'll let you get another F113.