HD audio vs Dolby/DTS 5.1

[shazzed]

Problem
I have a basic 2.0 sound connected to my blu ray player and full HD LCD.
I am in Australia and HDMI receivers are way too expensive down here. A $300 US HDMI capable receiver (not pass thorugh/repeater) costs around $700aus here when the dollar conversion would actually be $350Aus... go figure

I have a PS3 so my only other option realistically is to take a tech step backwards for a decent 5.1 dolby/DTS receiver and send audio through a Optical cable (bitstream).

Question
My question is how much of a sound difference is Dolby/DTS compared to the new uncompressed HD formats?
Is it honostly a massive leap in quality ?

Thx in advance
Shazz

[allstar780]

one major difference is that in the "old" formats, the dynamic range is compressed... so you have less ability to go from really quiet to really loud... or vice-versa... it makes a big difference in the feel of the movie for me; example: Cloverfield (bad movie though) there are a lot of scenes where it is very quiet to create suspense, and then a lot of very loud scenes... i was actually showing it to my brother to show the difference between Dolby 5.1 and Dolby TrueHD, and it is a very noticeable difference... on both tracks I had it at about 4/5 of my usual movie watching volume and on the traditional dolby it was good, very quiet to pretty loud... on the truehd it was a big improvement, very quiet to very, very loud

[Canada]

It is a huge difference from Dolby Digital and DTS to Dolby True HD and DTSMA. I believe you don't need a 1.3 HDMI reciver, as far as I know you only need a HDMI receiver that amplifies the sound. How much are we talking about for a receiver that amplifies sound?


Here's the private message box for crackinhedz https://forum.blu-ray.com/member.php?u=4540

He will be able to tell you much more than I can, but I would say buy the HDMI Amp then 2yrs down the road you won't be wondering what uncompressed sounds like.

[callas01]

I cannot decode LPCM with my current receiver sony 710, so I am upgrading, but today I went to my dad's house and put in Pirates 2, set up for uncompressed and played the movie, then using the pop up menu, switch back to dolby 5.1, my wife looked at me and said, wow, your right we need LPCM..... her usual response is 'i dont really notice a difference'.... you can imagine the rise of excitement that shot through my body.

Yes there is that big of a difference.

[shazzed]

I think I will stop kidding myself and save for a HDMI audio capable receiver. I have a decent HD LCD and one of the best Blu ray players.... I might as well hold out 4 more months for something decent.
Thanks for the replys and reality check guys.

[Canada]

Good for you, wait, because if you get a Non HDMI receiver the only person you will be cheating is your self.

[R3DRUM]

Originally Posted by Canada

Good for you, wait, because if you get a Non HDMI receiver the only person you will be cheating is your self.

+1

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Canada

Good for you, wait, because if you get a Non HDMI receiver the only person you will be cheating is your self.

The simplest, yet most profoundly expressive statement that I have ever read on this site. Well said!

[shazzed]

Ok so had a little hunt on the sony website and found this new package...

Would this be suitable for my PS3 ?
http://www.sony.com.au/homecinema/ho...term=SSCRP7000

HDMI Repeater
8 ch Multi Channel Linear PCM
Dolby Pro Logic / Dolby Pro Logic II / Dolby Pro Logic IIx / Dolby Digital EX / DTS ES Decoding

If the PS3 does the decoding and I send it to this receiver via HDMI I don't need Dolby TrueHD tag on the receiver 8ch multi channel Linear PCM is all I need right ?

[WickyWoo]

yes it'll work

But I wouldn't buy that. You should consider a quality receiver by a good receiver company ,and then pair that with speakers

For $1400, you could drop $4-600 and still have plenty left over for a polk or JBL speaker package

[Big Daddy]

Originally Posted by shazzed

Problem
I have a basic 2.0 sound connected to my blu ray player and full HD LCD.
I am in Australia and HDMI receivers are way too expensive down here. A $300 US HDMI capable receiver (not pass thorugh/repeater) costs around $700aus here when the dollar conversion would actually be $350Aus... go figure

I have a PS3 so my only other option realistically is to take a tech step backwards for a decent 5.1 dolby/DTS receiver and send audio through a Optical cable (bitstream).

Question
My question is how much of a sound difference is Dolby/DTS compared to the new uncompressed HD formats?
Is it honostly a massive leap in quality ?

Thx in advance
Shazz

There is a difference between Dolby/DTS Digital and HD Audio Codecs. However, both Dolby Digital and DTS Digital will give very satisfying results. I suggest that you read this article first. A panel of experts went to Dolby Labs and DTS headquarters and after several hours of listening to audio codecs, they had a hard time distinguishing between them. If you don't have the money, wait until you have saved enough. Don't go crazy.

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby...PCM?page=0%2C0

[shazzed]

Originally Posted by WickyWoo

yes it'll work

But I wouldn't buy that. You should consider a quality receiver by a good receiver company ,and then pair that with speakers

For $1400, you could drop $4-600 and still have plenty left over for a polk or JBL speaker package

Do Sony not make good receivers ?

The PS3 does all the important stuff I thought, so then you all need is a receiver to direct the sound out to the correct channels and amplify it. The quality would ultimately come down to the speakers ?
Or is there that much difference between a $800Aus receiver compared to a $1200Aus receiver ?

@Big Daddy
That's a great article. Thanks

[callas01]

My opinion is yes sony does make good receivers, obviously the ES line is where you want to be, but the new STR-DG820 and DG920, for the price are both great. go to techdepot.com to get a really good price or CDW.com, but there may be a delay in shipping as both of these have just come out. My desire is to get the 920 and get rid of my sony 710. Onkyo's are good too and usually inexpensive (606 model), but it seems that for the same price, you get a higher watts per channel from sony and you know that sony has optimized their receivers for blu-ray.

also, I have sony speakers, the are good, but not great, Polk are nice and usually not too expensive, B&W are great, but that can get pricey. I knew eventually i would upgrade my speakers so I went cheap and figured i would piece together a really good set over time, or when I got my taxes back

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by shazzed

Do Sony not make good receivers ?

Let's just say Sony is not an audio company.

They make damn great video based products. Some of the best.

Originally Posted by callas01

Onkyo's are good too and usually inexpensive (606 model), but it seems that for the same price, you get a higher watts per channel from sony and you know that sony has optimized their receivers for blu-ray.

There's no such thing as "optimized for Blu-ray".

Onkyo receivers and Sony receivers: Wattage ratings are completely misleading here. One company's 10 watts is another company's 1000 watts. In this case SONY rates to 1kHz, which is lower than AM quality radio (AM is 5kHz), which means at full rated wattage the sound from the Sony is worse than AM radio (complete with high distortion). ONKYO rates the full bandwidth of sound, 20Hz to 20kHz, with extremely low distortion. They are also what's called high-wattage receivers, meaning they don't run out of power with sustained high output material.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by allstar780

one major difference is that in the "old" formats, the dynamic range is compressed... so you have less ability to go from really quiet to really loud... or vice-versa... it makes a big difference in the feel of the movie for me; example: Cloverfield (bad movie though) there are a lot of scenes where it is very quiet to create suspense, and then a lot of very loud scenes... i was actually showing it to my brother to show the difference between Dolby 5.1 and Dolby TrueHD, and it is a very noticeable difference... on both tracks I had it at about 4/5 of my usual movie watching volume and on the traditional dolby it was good, very quiet to pretty loud... on the truehd it was a big improvement, very quiet to very, very loud

You raised a very good point about limited dynamic range. At the height of my system (back in the DD,DTS days - the begining days) I had individual eq's and dynamic range expanders on each channel. That system that I had was the most dynamic thing that I have ever heard - It put the Polk SRT system to shame! After family illness and economic distress, I had to sell most of that system off. I like my current system but - even though my current systme has Lossless audio ect...My old system featurning the Fosgate Model 3A THX processor would give my current rig more than a run for its money (Fosgate's Analog vs Lossless Digital). The Fosgates fast steering logic (prefered it over AC3 and DTS) was uncanny. I watched Stargate in DTS HD (bitrate of 3093kbps), it didn't impress me like my older system did when I first watched Stargate on laserdisc. Was it dynamic...yes, but something was just missing. I notice the improvement of tracks with lossless audio - yes, but something that the Fosgate (and only the Fosgate and Lexicon have produced for me) had is missing with the new codecs - Kinda like when CD first came out -it sounds great - there is vast improvement but something is missing and I just can't put my finger on it. When I listen to 2 channel music on my current system - the magic is still there. Maybe I'm just Fosgate/Lexicon nostalgic. If you're out there Jim Fosgate - get it back together - you have the toughness of Bob Carver - see what you can do with the Lossless codec stuff - bring some of your "magic" to the game!

[Arecsa]

Waiting a bit longer to get a HDMI receiver is definitely the right option. Onkyo and Yamaha have excellent receivers that are absolutely perfect for what you're looking for.

[callas01]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Onkyo receivers and Sony receivers: Wattage ratings are completely misleading here. One company's 10 watts is another company's 1000 watts. In this case SONY rates to 1kHz, which is lower than AM quality radio (AM is 5kHz), which means at full rated wattage the sound from the Sony is worse than AM radio (complete with high distortion). ONKYO rates the full bandwidth of sound, 20Hz to 20kHz, with extremely low distortion. They are also what's called high-wattage receivers, meaning they don't run out of power with sustained high output material.

THanks for that, I didn't know, I though, a watt was a watt.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

The simplest, yet most profoundly expressive statement that I have ever read on this site. Well said!

Thank You

[Sith]

Originally Posted by shazzed

Problem
I have a basic 2.0 sound connected to my blu ray player and full HD LCD.
I am in Australia and HDMI receivers are way too expensive down here. A $300 US HDMI capable receiver (not pass thorugh/repeater) costs around $700aus here when the dollar conversion would actually be $350Aus... go figure

I have a PS3 so my only other option realistically is to take a tech step backwards for a decent 5.1 dolby/DTS receiver and send audio through a Optical cable (bitstream).

Question
My question is how much of a sound difference is Dolby/DTS compared to the new uncompressed HD formats?
Is it honostly a massive leap in quality ?

Thx in advance
Shazz

just save your money and wait, don't throw good money out on old technology...

[hagar852]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Let's just say Sony is not an audio company.

They make damn great video based products. Some of the best.



There's no such thing as "optimized for Blu-ray".

Onkyo receivers and Sony receivers: Wattage ratings are completely misleading here. One company's 10 watts is another company's 1000 watts. In this case SONY rates to 1kHz, which is lower than AM quality radio (AM is 5kHz), which means at full rated wattage the sound from the Sony is worse than AM radio (complete with high distortion). ONKYO rates the full bandwidth of sound, 20Hz to 20kHz, with extremely low distortion. They are also what's called high-wattage receivers, meaning they don't run out of power with sustained high output material.

Sony receivers aren't as bad as people make them out to be.. The ES models also have low distortion. 0.09% and you are not able to hear a difference below 1% anyway so the Onkyo having 0.05% doesn't mean all that much..

Problem is Onkyo's ratings are at 8ohms.. Change the impedance and their distortion hits 0.7% like any other receiver..