DTS vs Dolby Digital 5.1

[AndrewLyles]

So I know this is kind of a noob question, but I'm rewatching all of my DVD's now that I've got my new setup installed... mostly . For the first time I"m noticing a difference between DTS encoded and Dobly digital 5.1 encoded movies. DTS encoded movies tend to have more ambient noice going on in the surround channels, like there is more total information throughout the entire audio track, while for the most part DD-5.1 seems to be used just for main effects.

Can somebody fill me in as to what exactly the difference is? The one exception to this I've noticed was the new Special edition of Gladiator (3-disc widescreen version) which claims is only encoded in DD-5.1. THis movie did a spectacular job of ambiant sount comming through the surround channels, though not as well as some of the Better DTS movies I"ve watched recently.

Quick recap... whats the difference between DTS and Dobly Digital 5.1?
Thanks All.

 

[MACCA350]

Read this

cheers

 

[Sheep]

Read this

cheers

Is that the shortest article you can find?

SheepStar

 

[MACCA350]

Oh, come on, a little reading never hurt anyone It may not be the shortest, but it's a well defined explanation of the differences between the formats

cheers

 

[mfabien]

Am I right to say that the article tells us that lossless audio with the new DD Plus and DTS-HD for the new HD DVDs and BR DVDs is equivalent to the present DVD-A sound?

 

[Nick250]

It's my experience that the sound from my surrounds is dependent on how the movie/music is mixed, not whether on not it's a Dobly or DTS.

Nick

 

[ruadmaa]

DTS vs Dolby Digital

So I know this is kind of a noob question, but I'm rewatching all of my DVD's now that I've got my new setup installed... mostly . For the first time I"m noticing a difference between DTS encoded and Dobly digital 5.1 encoded movies. DTS encoded movies tend to have more ambient noice going on in the surround channels, like there is more total information throughout the entire audio track, while for the most part DD-5.1 seems to be used just for main effects.

Can somebody fill me in as to what exactly the difference is? The one exception to this I've noticed was the new Special edition of Gladiator (3-disc widescreen version) which claims is only encoded in DD-5.1. THis movie did a spectacular job of ambiant sount comming through the surround channels, though not as well as some of the Better DTS movies I"ve watched recently.

Quick recap... whats the difference between DTS and Dobly Digital 5.1?
Thanks All.

DTS is very data intensive. Theoretically it should sound better than Dolby Digital. Does it??? In a nutshell, sometimes. I have heard DVD’s that had better sounding Dolby Digital soundtracks than the DTS tracks on the same disk. As always, it depends on the person who engineered the track in the first place. Personally, I wouldn’t go out of my way just because a disk touts a DTS track although there are many that would. I imagine where it might matter most is concert DVD’s.

 

[MACCA350]

mfabien wrote:

Am I right to say that the article tells us that lossless audio with the new DD Plus and DTS-HD for the new HD DVDs and BR DVDs is equivalent to the present DVD-A sound?

DD Plus is a similar to current Dolby Digital but runs at higher bitrates and more features.

Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD are Lossless Formats

cheers

 

[mfabien]

My question was does DVD-A's high resolution compare with DD Plus and DTS-HD. Is the answer strictly a difference in audio bitrates but same principal of no audio data exclusion like is the case for the present DD and DTS?

 

[MACCA350]

As far as the audio is concerned there is no difference between MLP(DVD-A), Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD, they are all Lossless Formats(ie they are identical to the studio digital masters). Where they differ is in the side information and their compatibility and capabilities(one example is Dolby TrueHD offers dynamic compression whereas DTS-HD does not)

Dolby Digital Plus is still a lossy format although better quality then current DD it is not as good as the Lossless Formats MLP(DVD-A), Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD

cheers

 

[mfabien]

Thank you. Exactly what I wanted.

 

[Pyrrho]

DTS is very data intensive. Theoretically it should sound better than Dolby Digital. Does it??? In a nutshell, sometimes. I have heard DVD’s that had better sounding Dolby Digital soundtracks than the DTS tracks on the same disk. As always, it depends on the person who engineered the track in the first place. Personally, I wouldn’t go out of my way just because a disk touts a DTS track although there are many that would. I imagine where it might matter most is concert DVD’s.

If you read the article mentioned above:

http://www.spannerworks.net/reference/10_1a.asp

You would read that DTS uses more of its data as instructions for decoding than DD uses. In other words, if both contained the exact same amount of audio data, the DTS signal would be bigger, because of the instructional data contained within the signal. (Both offer variable compression, and may never actually contain the exact same amount of audio data; the point is, some of the extra data of DTS isn't audio information at all.)

 

[Pyrrho]

So I know this is kind of a noob question, but I'm rewatching all of my DVD's now that I've got my new setup installed... mostly . For the first time I"m noticing a difference between DTS encoded and Dobly digital 5.1 encoded movies. DTS encoded movies tend to have more ambient noice going on in the surround channels, like there is more total information throughout the entire audio track, while for the most part DD-5.1 seems to be used just for main effects.

Can somebody fill me in as to what exactly the difference is? The one exception to this I've noticed was the new Special edition of Gladiator (3-disc widescreen version) which claims is only encoded in DD-5.1. THis movie did a spectacular job of ambiant sount comming through the surround channels, though not as well as some of the Better DTS movies I"ve watched recently.

Quick recap... whats the difference between DTS and Dobly Digital 5.1?
Thanks All.

If you are hearing more stuff in the surrounds with one format than the other, it is ENTIRELY due to being different mixes, not which format is employed. MACCA350 provided an excellent link in the first reply you received. You should read it in its entirety if you are interested in the real differences between the formats, rather than the imagined ones that many people have that are based upon listening to different mixes under inappropriate conditions in which no effort has been made to level match or do any kind of blind protocol, which, of course, presupposes one is certain that both soundtracks were mixed in precisely the same way, which one generally has no reason whatsoever to believe. If you listen to two different mixes, they may sound different, regardless of the format, so most listening that people do to try to compare these formats is completely useless for determining which, if either, is better than the other.

 

[AndrewLyles]

If you are hearing more stuff in the surrounds with one format than the other, it is ENTIRELY due to being different mixes, not which format is employed. MACCA350 provided an excellent link in the first reply you received. You should read it in its entirety if you are interested in the real differences between the formats, rather than the imagined ones that many people have that are based upon listening to different mixes under inappropriate conditions in which no effort has been made to level match or do any kind of blind protocol, which, of course, presupposes one is certain that both soundtracks were mixed in precisely the same way, which one generally has no reason whatsoever to believe. If you listen to two different mixes, they may sound different, regardless of the format, so most listening that people do to try to compare these formats is completely useless for determining which, if either, is better than the other.

Pyrrho I read the above link and it was a good and interesting read. I will admit that I probably didn't get everything out of the article that was in there but I learned a lot from it. Essentially what I took away from it was that the track differences have more to do with the engineer/producer who is making the movie than the format it is in. Though I do have one question then, the article mentionted that DTS was sometimes more popular with the audiophile crowd... and this is a marketing question I suppose.... could one assume that if a publisher wanted to attract that crowd its easier for them to put a DTS logo on the box rather than try to explain the audio mixes?

I realize its a somewhat subjective/rediculous question, but the majority of movies I have listened to that support DTS do have better audio quality than those that don't. Just becasue two things are present doesn't mean there is correlation... that I understand.... just sort of thinking out lould.

 

[MACCA350]

but the majority of movies I have listened to that support DTS do have better audio quality than those that don't

This is most likely because most movies that have a DTS track are big budget films and the audio engineers have made a great mix for that release, also many of the re-release ones have had the audio/video remastered and great care is taken to give the audience a good quality and well mixed audio track.

cheers

 

[korgoth]

dts uses almost twice as much memory as dd

its just mixed different and with more information.. usually sounds much better.

 

[mtrycrafts]

its just mixed different and with more information.. usually sounds much better.

Read pyrrho's post and the links. DTS has the algorithm in the data stream, that is why it needs more bits of info, not because it carries more audio data info.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... in which no effort has been made to level match or do any kind of blind protocol, which, of course, presupposes one is certain that both soundtracks were mixed in precisely the same way, which one generally has no reason whatsoever to believe. .

Unfortunately it is next to impossible to level the channels or level match the two formats as DTS has/had different levels throughout their mixes as well.
This was brought out in one of the audio mags some years ago.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

I agree with a lot of the above comments. While there are plenty of good soundtracks in each format, both can have stinkers too. However, on average..... I prefer DTS tracks. I instinctly read the box to see which format is employed whenever I buy a DVD, and whenever I see DTS, my internal response is always.......... "oh goody".

 

[AndrewLyles]

I agree with a lot of the above comments. While there are plenty of good soundtracks in each format, both can have stinkers too. However, on average..... I prefer DTS tracks. I instinctly read the box to see which format is employed whenever I buy a DVD, and whenever I see DTS, my internal response is always.......... "oh goody".

Ditto! 100%