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

[Blu-Dog]

(on the topic of when the moving target of "reference level" can be set with Dolby)

Originally Posted by BIslander

This was answered many times in the thread.

Bollocks.

The only answer provided was, "at the beginning of the movie". I also received humorous advice to check the name of the releasing studio to alter the baseline reference level by +4 or -4 or something, it was all too nebulous to take seriously.

Originally Posted by BIslander

Your questions demonstrate a lack of understanding about dialnorm.

From the comments on Dolby's website about the scattershot implementation of this woeful audio standard, it appears to be a weakness shared by countless broadcast engineers actually paid to mudwrestle this pig of a codec. I'm not paid to understand it ,though I have some inkling of what it does; I've read the same material you have, I believe.

My main bone of contention is that:
- I"m paying for it
- I don't want it
- I don't need it
- I can't tell when it's implemented with any degree of reliability
- It's creating a subjective preference for DTS, based on its stealth-mode implementation, which I find ludicrous

Originally Posted by BIslander

The DN offset happens once and only once. It lowers the master volume out of the decoder at the start of playback.

Well, I'll be dipped. I thought it was constantly implemented, so that volume spiraled down by -4db with each processed bit, acting like a giant Mute button! Boy, am I dumb. Thanks for bringing me up to speed.

Originally Posted by BIslander

DN has nothing to do with peaks and valleys along the way.

That's DRC, right? Dynamic Range Compression? With a value I can't manage, or even detect, and which I need to alter my player, or receiver, or both, to control? Did I pass the quiz?

Originally Posted by BIslander

If you need adjust the volume, that's a problem with the mix that will be there regardless of dialnorm. DTS is no more or less susceptible to internal volume variations than TrueHD or PCM.

I have no clue why you're bringing up DRC unless you're responding to the Scorpion fellow. I'm under no such illusions.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by ps3andlovinit

Here is what my Anthem manual has to say...

"as long as the soundtrack contains dynamic scaling information and at least 5.1 speakers are used"

Dolby provides "dynamic scaling information" in the metadata. I'm not aware that it's provided in any other source.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Wow... so you're still not understanding DRC?

I think that is a statement, not a question. But let's not take chances here.

If it's a question, I've never not understood dynamic range compression; it's more than probable that I have a better understanding of it than you do.

If it's a statement: The mods have requested we keep this civil

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

Again, this clearly shows that you don't understand the effects of DialNorm. The volume doesn't constantly fluctuate throughout the film.

Let us see if we can agree on what Dialnorm is, and what DRC is.

Dialnom attenuates the baseline PCM signal by -4DB. Maybe. You can decide what the attenuation level is; it doesn't say anything about it on the box. Or on Dolby's website. Or anywhere. In fact, in a whimsical moment, someone (was it you?) advised reading the studio's label on the box to decide what the offset should be.

More interesting, I'm told to recalibrate this unquantified offset at the beginning of the film, to my comfort level. Unfortunately, films vary in volume (at least the ones I watch do; you may enjoy watching Buddhist monks droning Om Mane Padme Om for a couple of hours straight, not my cup of tea). So I"m wondering when the mystery offset can be compensated for. The suspense is palpable; do I wait for a noisy scene? A quiet scene? During the studio blare at the beginning of the film? During the now-rare Dolby Audio Orgasm prefacing the film? Help me out here.

DRC, the cheerful acronym for Dynamic Range Compression, is to audio what a Marine Corp barber is to a wild hairstyle; it removes - actually attenuates - significant spikes in volume. I don't know specifically how this algorithm is applied, so I don't know what the points in the audio curve are shaved, or how far.

DRC may or may not be applied on top of Dialnorm, but I'll assume it is. So Dialnorm has already lopped 4db off the overall signal. All other audio bits that DRC is busy trimming should be audio spikes that exceed some limit - what is that limit, by the way? Do you know? Is it documented somewhere that I missed?

Is it a stepped mode algorithm, with differing levels of attenuation based on some volume level over a baseline - so that a jackhammer, for instance, is less attenuated than a jet airplane at takeoff? A pistol shot is more attenuated than a slap to the face? I really don't know.

Also, has Dolby attenuated more than just amplitude with DRC? Have they lopped off extremes in frequency with it, chopping down low or high frequencies, so that it's less piercing for the neighbors to deal with?

But here's my real question about DRC. When, exactly, is it implemented? I know Iron Man had the fully circumsized version of DRC pranged into my receiver; are there other levels of it? Would that, or would Dialnorm, and not fanboy excess, be the real reason most folks get a better dynamic feel from DTS than Dolby?

Anyway, since you profess to have real knowledge and insight into these modes, perhaps you can assist.

Or perhaps not.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

The only teeth-knashing over DialNorm is in these types of threads online.

It seems to come from Dolby proponents mangling their dentalwork when the average Joe says, "funny, DTS always sounds better to me".

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As far as the professional community goes, it's a non-issue, save for the fact that the studios want that option, and DTS had to add it to their spec because so.

Then nobody used it. Probably because it isn't a default mode, or a baseline spec some engineer adheres to so he or she will be seen as pure and orthodox, in the Dolby pantheon.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

As far as those complaining about DRC being flagged as "On" for those decoders set to "Auto", I find the fact I can't get sound bitstreaming Die Hard 2 because of a flagging issue a lot more troublesome. FOX has yet to reissue the disc properly.

Correct me if I'm wrong - most Dolby proponents think that setting DRC modes is something everyone should do, and is no big deal. In fact, the intelligence of those who haven't done so is often brought into question. I don't think you've been one of those types, but truly, should that be common knowledge for all folks who buy a Blu player, or something that's set on the disc itself during the encode?

Side note: Bislander tipped me off about the screwy DTS 7.1 encodes on several of my discs, including Shoot 'Em Up and Hellboy 2, and I share your dismay at goofed up encodes. Doesn't matter who does them.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Or the fact that devices with "Essentials" decoders aren't labeled as such, nor will they decode the ES extension, meanwhile TrueHD decoders in the same devices have no trouble with the "EX" flag.

I do not like the "essential" nonsense and can't figure out where that turd came from. It was my primary reason for getting my Sony BDP-550 over the later 360 and 560 models - I didn't know what it was, it didn't smell right, and those models are stuck with it. Along with Panasonic and Pioneer's latest offerings. What's up with that.

It should not affect new Blu releases at all, and I use another player for older DTS DVD's, but it's still not making sense.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ps3andlovinit

Thanks. Here is what my Anthem manual has to say...

"as long as the soundtrack contains dynamic scaling information and at least 5.1 speakers are used"

It has 3 modes .. Normal, Reduced, Late Night.

This is really odd. I can attenuate even 2 channel material, for 2 channel playback. Or mono material for TV viewing.

Maybe there is a specific chip that manufacturers are using, with the type in Anthem and Onkyo using the algorithm supplied by the encoder - Dolby or DTS, I would imagine - and another type used and/or developed by Pioneer.

That's all I can think of.

[ClaytonMG]

Blu-Dog, we have all tried to help you with facts. Good job trying to make fun when I tried to help you adjust for DialNorm, by the way. We have pointed out errors with your thoughts but you still will not listen. I am now joining BIslander and will no longer be responding/listening to you as it does absolutely no good.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Night mode can be applied by a playback device independent of the encoding process and many receivers and players offer that feature for all types of encodes.

Yes

However, those devices have to make an assumption about the level of average dialog because they don't rely on the Dolby metadata.

yes, the assumption should be, that it is at the appropriate level. Same with Dolby, DN just forces it if it is not

If the assumption is wrong, night mode doesn't work very well. Many receiver and player manuals with independent night mode options include an advisory saying it may not make much difference with some discs.

No, Night mode should more or less always work well. The effect may (but possibly won't) be a bit different, like I pointed out already, even with DN and embeded DRC most of the times the DN will be wrong and so end up with the exact same default effect (i.e if like all Sony titles DN is set to 0 or if on other titles the average sound is below reference). The only times the effect could end up real different is if the DN value is extremely small (i.e. DN=-1) but then the range will more likely not be there to begine with so all it does is apply the DN (and you could do that by lowering the volume by 30dB

[cembros]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Yes I made a test at home, but that is why I said YOU need to test it out for YOURSELF. Your post is already dismissing everything because you decided there is no difference even though you did not test anything.

You can't test any movie on your BD player because
1) DN is always applied
2) You don't know the DN number

So this is the test I did: loud for a long time, soft for a short time, loud for a short time. PCM and DTHD with DN. Then I did three streps
1) can I see a difference. Without listening, I compared the two wave forms as raw data. There was a difference, there was the truncation
2) numerical analysis (one of the reasons the first loud is long) with an SPL meter have both playing and switch back and forth until the louds are level matched (I ended up with a 26db difference), then look at the SPL meter to see if there is a difference (and yes there was)
3) listened and paid attention if there is a difference and there was.

You can dismiss it as much as you want. In the end there are too many variables (what is the DN difference -1db is not the same as a 30db; how good is your hearing, what is the noise floor in the room....) to stipulate what would be the general effect. Like I said my issue is not how important of an issue it is but with people stating mater of factly that DN has no effect and all you need to do is turn up the volume to get back the exact same thing.

ok but if you were doing the switching then the test is meaningless, you must have some one else switching so you do not have a bias as to which track is playing. I will do this with the aussie true hd incredable hulk and the us dts hdma hulk once i can borrow my brothers ps3 and ill have my girlfriend do the switching

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

No, Night mode should more or less always work well. The effect may (but possibly won't) be a bit different, like I pointed out already, even with DN and embeded DRC most of the times the DN will be wrong and so end up with the exact same default effect (i.e if like all Sony titles DN is set to 0 or if on other titles the average sound is below reference). The only times the effect could end up real different is if the DN value is extremely small (i.e. DN=-1) but then the range will more likely not be there to begine with so all it does is apply the DN (and you could do that by lowering the volume by 30dB

Allow me to restate what you've said to see if I understand your point. Please correct any restatement errors.

You are saying DRC works fine without reference to DN as long as the average dialog level is near the assumed average dialog level. Yes, that is true. I would also add that since movies are usually recorded and encoded with average dialog in a fairly narrow range, night mode will usually work pretty well, with or without the DN value as a reference point. Non-movie source material tends to vary more widely and it stands to benefit more from an accurate center point. And, of course, the Dolby structure is designed for use with all sorts of material beyond movies.

Entering invalid DN values during encoding undermines the entire system. If Sony is entering a DN of -31 for a movie that was recorded with average dialog at -27, that's an invalid entry. Again, with movies where the actual dialog level is close to Dolby's -31, the difference probably doesn't make much difference. But, I think it's a practice that should be discouraged.

Now, you made a statement that the DN value is wrong most of the time. What's the basis for that claim?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BIslander

So, please help me out here by explaining what your test establishes and why. It doesn't look like you tested what we are talking about. As I understand it, you've taken the position is that lowering PCM and then raising the master volume produces a different result. To test that hypothesis, don't you need to lower the PCM output? How'd you do that? What PCM and TrueHD sources did you use? Was the source the same for both? This test really needs to be done using only a single TrueHD source, with and without DN. And, then there's the business of self-administered tests, which cannot control for bias by the tester.

the DN difference lowers the loudness (let's keep volume for what it is actual sound) of the PCM value in the DTHD. We level matched it after the fact to the original PCM (which I did point out in my previous thread with the SPL meter), since the comments are that DN does not do anything and if it lowers by X all you need to do is raise by X on the receiver to get the same as the PCM back that is what we recreated, obviously if I did the opposite and lowered the PCM to match the DTHD then the audio effect would be less. Yes they where the same exact same source, the PCM was the same as the DTHD because it was the uncompressed version of it. My friend set it all up since I did not have the needed equipment at home (and he works in audio, so he has professional grade equipment for the creation of it). The audio was simple mostly different test tones (since we react differently to different tones and some sound louder then others) and at the end some more normal complex audio (just to make it more "real life"), after all we wanted to keep the test simple, precise and easy to test. Though I do agree with you, we should have done it with DN=0 instead of PCM, but if DN=0 did not give us the same as the PCM then that would open a whole other can of worms (i.e. DTHD is not at all lossless). As for self administering it 1) that is why we had three phases, if the data was not getting destroyed in the first place then there would be nothing to test and people that say "just turn the dial up" would be 100% right and I would agree with them. If the playback (SPL meter in the low parts) ended up the same then it would not matter if the playback is the same (but we would need more tests to see if other equipment would have reacted differently), the third part is almost useless, the reason being that it will always be bias, let me ask you this, if a deaf person where to judge the difference, then he would not be able to hear the difference between no matter what was played (even completely different sound tracks), so a negative could depend on the acuity of the listener, the room environment and equipment. The test is barely good for a positive (it just means under the right conditions there will be an issue for the right people), and not at all for a negative (except if you know for certain you have the best ears and the best room set-up and no one listens to it any louder).

By way of comparison, similar types of tests will prove there's a data difference between dts-MA and the DTS core at 1509kbps. But, does that data difference mean dts-MA sounds better than the core? I think the results of controlled listening tests and the opinions of audio professionals pretty well establish there's little or no audible difference associated with the data difference. Isn't that what this discussion is about?

but there is a difference between lossy and lossless (what ever the codecs may be) and the studies have shown it, I can't believe you are now pretending there is none. Obviously it would depend on the mix, for such a test I would go with real complex audio (and not the same thing we created for this test) something like a big band or orchestra to push the lossy encode to the limits, after all I am sure even over compressed MP3 can reproduce absolute silence perfectly so what would that prove.

I'm more than happy to grant the obvious - that dialnorm reduces PCM by 4db. I have yet to see anything to indicate that it matters.

can you tell me why you are so convinced it does not? and can you tell me why you keep on talking about 4 db? With Dolby DN can have a 0 to 30 dB difference from what it should, if you are thinking of some receivers that say +4 when it is Dolby, then that has nothing to do with the DN value and all to do with the reference for DTS being 4 dB louder then Dolby and the receiver manufacturer picking to "go" with DTS's reference and augmenting all Dolby tracks to level match.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by cembros

ok but if you were doing the switching then the test is meaningless, you must have some one else switching so you do not have a bias as to which track is playing. I will do this with the aussie true hd incredable hulk and the us dts hdma hulk once i can borrow my brothers ps3 and ill have my girlfriend do the switching

there is no switching, Think of it this way, let's say we had a loudness meter through the whole track and the graph looked something like this
-------------------____---
A) listen to PCM can ____ be heard (this is a simple- and in this case extremely simple) yes/no

B) then switch back and forth with -------- to level match

c) can you hear ____ with DN? here it barely needs testing, why? because ___ was not there in phase 1 and 2, there is nothing there to test, it is a control, if I did hear something like in a, then it would indicate there was something odd in the two previous phases.

The bigger question was could I hear the tones in A (PCM, or would they be so low that I cannot, for that switching would not help because if one assumes phantom hearing, then it would happen no matter what because we all knew they where there.

we did not do ___ at the same time, there is no need for it.


As for your test, the issues are
1) unless you are 100% that it is the same master and same conditions then the difference (if you hear one could have nothing to do with DN)

2) if DN = 0 or DN = -31 (and you can't know what it is) then DN should not play a role

3) the DN will have a bigger (closer to 0) or smaller (closer to -31) effect depending on the DN value, there is no way of you knowing what the DN value actually is (at least I don't know of any player/receiver that will give it).

[BIslander]

I'll take some time to digest the first part of your post re: your test. But it did bring a smile to my face thinking back to your suggestion that I do this test myself at home.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

but there is a difference between lossy and lossless (what ever the codecs may be) and the studies have shown it, I can't believe you are now pretending there is none.

I hesitated about using that example for exactly this reason - that someone might conclude I was saying there is no difference. Of course there's a difference between lossy and lossless. It's definable and measurable. My point here is different. The measurable difference does not necessarily translate to an audible difference. The DTS core at 1509 sounds just about as good as lossless dts-MA, many would say just as good.

can you tell me why you are so convinced it does not?

Mostly because professionals say it doesn't make a difference. So, when posters start making claims about it, I tend to be skeptical and ask for substantiation.

and can you tell me why you keep on talking about 4 db?

Shorthand. Movies are usually encoded with a DN value of -27, which translates to a 4db offset with a Dolby decoder. My posts make it clear I understand how dialnorm works and that any value from -1 to -31 is valid, with 0 producing a -31 output. But, I will take care to avoid that shorthand when communicating with you.

With Dolby DN can have a 0 to 30 dB difference from what it should, if you are thinking of some receivers that say +4 when it is Dolby, then that has nothing to do with the DN value and all to do with the reference for DTS being 4 dB louder then Dolby and the receiver manufacturer picking to "go" with DTS's reference and augmenting all Dolby tracks to level match.

Onkyos seem to do that, which merely adds to the confusion about dialnorm. I say "seem" because I've never seen anything in an Onkyo manual or posted on the Onkyo website explaining what they do. It sort of looks like Onkyo takes the DN value and boosts the master volume back up after the decoder drops it down.

I was not aware that DTS has a reference. I thought DTS decoders simply output the PCM at whatever level it was input, with no adjustments. Why are you saying DTS is 4db louder than Dolby? Is that shorthand for the usual difference in movie encoding, where Dolby takes a -27 value and lowers it to -31 while DTS does not?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BIslander

Allow me to restate what you've said to see if I understand your point. Please correct any restatement errors.

You are saying DRC works fine without reference to DN as long as the average dialog level is near the assumed average dialog level. Yes, that is true. I would also add that since movies are usually recorded and encoded with average dialog in a fairly narrow range, night mode will usually work pretty well, with or without the DN value as a reference point. Non-movie source material tends to vary more widely and it stands to benefit more from an accurate center point. And, of course, the Dolby structure is designed for use with all sorts of material beyond movies.

Entering invalid DN values during encoding undermines the entire system. If Sony is entering a DN of -31 for a movie that was recorded with average dialog at -27, that's an invalid entry. Again, with movies where the actual dialog level is close to Dolby's -31, the difference probably doesn't make much difference. But, I think it's a practice that should be discouraged.

almost there.

1) this, I did not get into, but it would depend on the algorithm used by the device, for example, if the device uses linear compression then DN even if it is -1 will have no effect what so ever (i.e. 0.5(X-30)= 0.5x -15 and so DN=-1 would give the same result (assuming 2:1 compression) of no DN using the reference and then putting up the volume down by 15 dB on the device instead of the 30 done by DN before the compression) obviously, this does not take acount of any DN issues there may be. I know that in the past some devices used linear compression, not sure if they use other ones as well. but if we just look at functions the compression (x)^(1/3), (X+30)^(1/3) would be off (this would commpress edges more while leaving the centre a bit more normal) and cannot fully be corrected with adjusting the volume after the fact

2) dB is an odd measurement, it is the only one with no real existence, what I mean is temperature is absolute we all know what 0C or 0F feal like, with distance it is semy absolute we all know what a foot, metere… are but they can still be relative (X is 1000m from here if I am going towards X and you ask me in a few seconds it might be 800m away) dB needs a 0 (like 1000 m away) but most times it is not mentioned and it can be anything so 1dB can be real loud (like when 0dB= reference level) or real low (0dB= threshold of hearing- which in itself is not an absolute). If I remember correctly for Dolby 0 dBr (reference volume)=~ 85 dBa (absolute volume where 0= thresh hold of hearing) so -31 DN=85dBa average (or less) over the movie and -1 DN=115dBa average, 16 bit PCM can't even go that far and 24 bit PCM will go to 144dBa but no one goes past 120dB (equipment limit) and most don’t go past 115, so a 115dBa average means there can’t be many places where it goes real low, so no matter what algorithm is used, such an extreme example will more or less just turn down the volume
3) real DN values are –31 to 1 if the 85 dBa was right, then any movie that averages less 85 dBa will automatically get DN –31 even if the average is 25 dBa (and 25dBa is no where near 85 dBa) and any movie that averages too high (i.e. 120 dBa) will be DN=1 so if the 85dBa was right, it would act as if it was at 115dBa and not 120 dBa.

4)there is also DN=0 which means no DN, read the specs, PM said Sony does not use DN (ask him if you don’t believe me) that means the system is set up for DN=0 (not DN = -31), but for DRC your device will act as if the DN=-31 and use the centre point of 85 dBa to compress around.

Now, you made a statement that the DN value is wrong most of the time. What's the basis for that claim?

agree, “most” is a poor choice of words, that would imply some sort of research on everything out there, and I have not done that. The point was DN=0 is the same as no DN (so it will be as wrong as what you call a guess) and DN=-31 DN=-1 will happen when the DN it should give (to centralize correctly) could be outside the range.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BIslander

I hesitated about using that example for exactly this reason - that someone might conclude I was saying there is no difference. Of course there's a difference between lossy and lossless. It's definable and measurable. My point here is different. The measurable difference does not necessarily translate to an audible difference. The DTS core at 1509 sounds just about as good as lossless dts-MA, many would say just as good.

agree, but like the above example just because someone is OK with something does not make the person who is not OK with it anymore wrong. Like with this example there is a measurable and definable difference, like with this example what it is would depend on several factors, DN = -31 should have 0 difference just as absolute silence will have none between lossy and lossless, DN = -1 will have a big difference just as encoding some extremely complicated sounds will have between lossy and lossless.

Mostly because professionals say it doesn't make a difference. So, when posters start making claims about it, I tend to be sceptical and ask for substantiation.

what professionals and what tests have they done? all I have seen are other posters making claims of lossless is lossless and DN does not change anything

Shorthand. Movies are usually encoded with a DN value of -27, which translates to a 4db offset with a Dolby decoder. My posts make it clear I understand how dialnorm works and that any value from -1 to -31 is valid, with 0 producing a -31 output. But, I will take care to avoid that shorthand when communicating with you.

but if all movies are 4db too loud why have DN at all? why didn't Dolby just do it right from the get go? Why force manufacturers to add a 4db boost to output because they want metadata that kills those 4db.

Dolby considers -31 is the normal DN value not -27

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...es#post2037187


here are some important facts
"The scale used in the Dialogue Level setting ranges in 1 dB steps from –1 to –31 dB"

"When a decoder receives an input signal with a Dialogue Level setting of –31, it applies no level shift to the signal because this indicates to the decoder that the signal already matches the target level and therefore requires no shift. In contrast, a louder program requires a shift to match the –31 dB standard."

"to –31 dBFS (31 dB below 0 dB full-scale digital output)"


[/quote]
Onkyos seem to do that, which merely adds to the confusion about dialnorm. I say "seem" because I've never seen anything in an Onkyo manual or posted on the Onkyo website explaining what they do. It sort of looks like Onkyo takes the DN value and boosts the master volume back up after the decoder drops it down.[/quote]

then why not just build your decoder to not pay attention to DN, and what happens if you decode it outside of those receivers and PCM to the receiver? My guess the +4dB is an assumed value based on history, has anyone seen any other values like +15 or 0 (on devices that show +4 when it is Dolby?)

I was not aware that DTS has a reference. I thought DTS decoders simply output the PCM at whatever level it was input, with no adjustments. Why are you saying DTS is 4db louder than Dolby? Is that shorthand for the usual difference in movie encoding, where Dolby takes a -27 value and lowers it to -31 while DTS does not?

I don't know DTS-HD MA that well, my guess a lot of it had to do with DD vs DTS and that complicates matter (because they where not lossless) also straight feeds (no PCM intermediary might have been a bit different) as well as from what Peter pointed out DTS-HD MA also has the option of DN now and that DN could be different then Dolby’s DN.


PS the article also has
"to –31 dBFS (31 dB below 0 dB full-scale digital output)"
so, what I was pointing out before is even more so (i.e. a small number like -1 will not need DRC, just lower the volume, -1 means that there is only 0 above it (that is what full scale means 0= loudest noise acceptable/measurable) so if the average is -1 then there is not much room for sounds that are much less then –1


Let’s see if we can agree on this stuff
For DN

1) saying DN has no effect and is the same as PCM is wrong
2) the closer DN is to –31 the lest effect it will have
3) for extreme DN (i.e. the closer to –1 that it is) some people in some set-ups might have some effect (I am more convinced then that then you).

For any range control
1) it needs a 0 (centre point that remains stable) anything below moves up anything above moves down
2) the 0 needs to be somewhat reasonable (real stupid 0 will not have desired effect, if we take 0=threshold of hearing then everything becomes more silenced and if it is 0 dBFS then everything just gets louder)
3) DN helps having an accurate 0 (it is one of its jobs)
4) Having an accurate 0 can help (look at 2 for an example)
5) DN is not mandatory for RC but is important for DRC (i.e. metadata in Dolby)
6) If the 0 changes (i.e. using a different 0) then there can be a difference in playback
7) DRC in Dolby is more then just DN

[Canada]

I may have posted this before but I think DTS MA is better just for the fact that it has a 1.5 MBPS core in it, for those people who haven't upgraded the receiver yet.

[BIslander]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

agree, but like the above example just because someone is OK with something does not make the person who is not OK with it anymore wrong. Like with this example there is a measurable and definable difference, like with this example what it is would depend on several factors, DN = -31 should have 0 difference just as absolute silence will have none between lossy and lossless, DN = -1 will have a big difference just as encoding some extremely complicated sounds will have between lossy and lossless.

what professionals and what tests have they done? all I have seen are other posters making claims of lossless is lossless and DN does not change anything

but if all movies are 4db too loud why have DN at all? why didn't Dolby just do it right from the get go? Why force manufacturers to add a 4db boost to output because they want metadata that kills those 4db.

Dolby considers -31 is the normal DN value not -27

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread...es#post2037187


here are some important facts
"The scale used in the Dialogue Level setting ranges in 1 dB steps from –1 to –31 dB"

"When a decoder receives an input signal with a Dialogue Level setting of –31, it applies no level shift to the signal because this indicates to the decoder that the signal already matches the target level and therefore requires no shift. In contrast, a louder program requires a shift to match the –31 dB standard."

"to –31 dBFS (31 dB below 0 dB full-scale digital output)"


then why not just build your decoder to not pay attention to DN, and what happens if you decode it outside of those receivers and PCM to the receiver? My guess the +4dB is an assumed value based on history, has anyone seen any other values like +15 or 0 (on devices that show +4 when it is Dolby?)

I don't know DTS-HD MA that well, my guess a lot of it had to do with DD vs DTS and that complicates matter (because they where not lossless) also straight feeds (no PCM intermediary might have been a bit different) as well as from what Peter pointed out DTS-HD MA also has the option of DN now and that DN could be different then Dolby’s DN.


PS the article also has
"to –31 dBFS (31 dB below 0 dB full-scale digital output)"
so, what I was pointing out before is even more so (i.e. a small number like -1 will not need DRC, just lower the volume, -1 means that there is only 0 above it (that is what full scale means 0= loudest noise acceptable/measurable) so if the average is -1 then there is not much room for sounds that are much less then –1


Let’s see if we can agree on this stuff
For DN

1) saying DN has no effect and is the same as PCM is wrong
2) the closer DN is to –31 the lest effect it will have
3) for extreme DN (i.e. the closer to –1 that it is) some people in some set-ups might have some effect (I am more convinced then that then you).

For any range control
1) it needs a 0 (centre point that remains stable) anything below moves up anything above moves down
2) the 0 needs to be somewhat reasonable (real stupid 0 will not have desired effect, if we take 0=threshold of hearing then everything becomes more silenced and if it is 0 dBFS then everything just gets louder)
3) DN helps having an accurate 0 (it is one of its jobs)
4) Having an accurate 0 can help (look at 2 for an example)
5) DN is not mandatory for RC but is important for DRC (i.e. metadata in Dolby)
6) If the 0 changes (i.e. using a different 0) then there can be a difference in playback
7) DRC in Dolby is more then just DN

Wow. That’s a lot of verbiage. I’m not sure why you included all the stuff about dialnorm specifications. Dolby’s implementation is quite clear and we have no disagreement about it. How could we? We also agree that DN is useful in setting the average dialog level for DRC, although you don’t think it matters much most of the time. But, you also agree there’s no downside to using DN in conjunction with DRC, only upside.

The only thing I would add as a point of clarification is that DTS does not use DN values. We’ve both read that DN has been added as a metadata element on the encode side. But, it’s not processed on the decode side, which is where adjustments are made. So, the encode data, if it is even entered, seems to be irrelevant for now. DTS tracks often end up 4db louder than Dolby tracks simply because movies are often recorded and encoded, when using Dolby, with a DN of -27. DTS will be louder by the DN offset, whatever that amount happens to be.

With all of that out of the way, we end up back where we began. You maintain that audio quality suffers because of dialnorm adjustments. You claim that raising the master volume by the amount of the DN offset produces an inferior result. And as proof, you offer only your personal test results. I neither accept nor reject those results for now, although I can say I am skeptical of the methodology. But, if your position is true, it seems to me you should be able to point to credible, independent evidence – both properly controlled studies and expert opinions from audio professionals. DN has been part of the Dolby system for a long time. If it produces meaningful and verifiable reductions in audio quality, that would be pretty big news. DTS would certainly make sure that was known. Some studio would use it as a marketing tool to help sales. But, I’ve never seen even a hint of anything like that, except in threads like these.

It's probably best to leave it here. I'm not in a position to prove something doesn't happen, or at least doesn't matter, which is what you seem to be asking.

[lgans316]

As the poll has been running for quite sometime, would like to know if Sony is seriously considering switching to DTS-HD.

[saprano]

See my post here

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=1329

Seems like they are.

[ganthc]

I will comment that Dialnorm is noticeable and that it causes me to turn up the volume on Dolby TrueHD tracks to balance them to what a DTS-HDMA or PCM track would be. That said, after I have leveled the audio as best I can, rarely am I forced to have to fiddle with the volume after that. I have DRC turned off, so I think that I haven't had as many issues as some.