Stupid True-HD and DTS-MA questions

[phildoc]

I have a Marantz SR09600 reciever. It will accept MPCM audio. I just picked up a Sony BDP-S550 Blu-ray player to play with for a while.

When I'm using Dolby True-HD MPCM through the HDMI. What is being sent to the reciever by the player and how does the reciever handle the MPCM? I'm guessing the true-hd is being compressed to 48khz. It does say in the manual that it will only send 48khz for copy protected discs. Will it send 96khz with non copy protected discs?

I'm assuming that I'll have to use the 7.1 analog to get these formats in all of their glory? Sorry for the basic questions. I tried to read what I could find, but it still left me confused.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I know for a fact that HDMI will send at least 96 kHz/24 Bit MCh and that it will send TrueHD & DTS-HD MA via PCM without compression. However, just make sure that your HDMI Video Resolution is set to 1080i or 1080p. Otherwise, it may reduce the bandwidth for your audio.

 

[phildoc]

Thanks for the very helpful response. I have the video set at 1080p. I tried Iron Man, which is Dolby True-HD. It sent it as 5.1 MPCM audio at 48khz. It may be because the Disc is copywrite protected per the manual.

My reciever will not decode True-HD and DTS-MA. Also the the HDMI's are 1.1 spec. I hoping that I can get audio sent though the HDMI without compression and not need the Analog inputs.

 

[allargon]

Paramount uses 48/24 for their Dolby TrueHD. Warner is the only major studio AFAIK still using 48/16 on Blu-Ray. Blu-Ray (like DVD-A) will do up to 192/24. I've seen a few DTS tracks using 96/24.

 

[phildoc]

Thanks. Thanks means, at least for the time being I wont miss too much not going with the analog outs. I looked at the Panasonic players manual and it also limits the HDMI audio to 48/16 for copy protected discs. I suspect that going to be the case for most if not all of the players.

One thing I don't really know is how the sound quality would be affected having the player decode true-hd etc and then letting the DACs on the reciever doing the rest vs having the reciever doing all the decoding. In the end, I'll probably go with the least exp Panasonic blu-ray player with 7.1 outs, but I have some time to research.


On a side note. I know everyone seems to say that Marantz and Denon are still really separate, but you'd be hard pressed to tell by looking at the manuals of their blu-ray players.

 

[Seth=L]

Thanks. Thanks means, at least for the time being I wont miss too much not going with the analog outs. I looked at the Panasonic players manual and it also limits the HDMI audio to 48/16 for copy protected discs. I suspect that going to be the case for most if not all of the players.

One thing I don't really know is how the sound quality would be affected having the player decode true-hd etc and then letting the DACs on the reciever doing the rest vs having the reciever doing all the decoding. In the end, I'll probably go with the least exp Panasonic blu-ray player with 7.1 outs, but I have some time to research.


On a side note. I know everyone seems to say that Marantz and Denon are still really separate, but you'd be hard pressed to tell by looking at the manuals of their blu-ray players.

You would get the same SQ if you used HDMI sending MPCM or using analog, so you will miss nothing at all. If you happen to get a Blu-ray that has full 7.1 (there aren't many, and I don't believe that Iron Man is one of those) then the receiver will receive the full 7.1 MPCM over HDMI. You would actually put yourself at a dissadvantage by having the Blu-ray player handle both decoding TrueHD and allow it's DACs to convert the MPCM to analog. The reason being is you would have to use the analog multichannel inputs on the AVR, thus limiting yourself to whatever the Blu-ray player manufacturer has given you in the way of post processing (bass management and all that fun stuff that makes your sound system sound it's best). If you use the analog inputs no post processing can occur. Trust me, you don't need to upgrade your Blu-ray player or receiver yet if your concern is getting the most out of your system.

 

[phildoc]

Thanks Seth. Yes, that's my main concern and yes you're correct Iron Man does not have full 7.1. So you're saying there's not going to be much of a difference between the 48/16 that I'd get from the HDMI connection vs the 48/24 or 96/24 I'd get using the Analog connection. I would much rather have my reciever use its DAC's for the final decoding. As you said for the Base management etc and also for the better electronics. I did a quick A/B test and didn't really notice much of a difference. I'll get a few more Blu-rays and if it doesn't seem to be any advantage going with the analog outs, that will allow me to save a few bucks by going with a cheaper player. Thanks again.

 

[Seth=L]

Thanks Seth. Yes, that's my main concern and yes you're correct Iron Man does not have full 7.1. So you're saying there's not going to be much of a difference between the 48/16 that I'd get from the HDMI connection vs the 48/24 or 96/24 I'd get using the Analog connection. I would much rather have my reciever use its DAC's for the final decoding. As you said for the Base management etc and also for the better electronics. I did a quick A/B test and didn't really notice much of a difference. I'll get a few more Blu-rays and if it doesn't seem to be any advantage going with the analog outs, that will allow me to save a few bucks by going with a cheaper player. Thanks again.

Let me get this right....

The players can decode up to 96/24 internally, but can't decode it if it's being sent out over HDMI? This makes no sense. I wonder if that's a limitation of HDMI. I will have to do some digging on that.

Nice speakers btw, how do you like the Intermezzos? I've always wanted a pair. I really like my Interlude 10s, but they have boomy bass in certain regions.

 

[phildoc]

What the deal is when a Blu-ray is copy protected the player will automatically downgrade the output from the HDMI to 48/16. I would expect non copy protected discs to be sent at the normal rate.

I love the system. The interludes are great for HT, but they lack a little for music. So I decided to pick up the Intermezzo's, which I just bought and will be here tomorrow. I'll let you know how they sound. I've always wanted some myself, so I'm very excited about them.

 

[phildoc]

I didn't see the thing about the booming base on the IL-10's. I agree, but it depends on the AVR. With the RX-V1 I had I never heard the booming base, but with the SR9600 it can get that way. Only on music though. The Marantz is just a little on the warmer side then the Yamaha. We'll see about the Intermezzo's.

 

[bbianca1982]

What the deal is when a Blu-ray is copy protected the player will automatically downgrade the output from the HDMI to 48/16. I would expect non copy protected discs to be sent at the normal rate.

My receiver has downgraded every Bd I've watched to 48/16, and it can process True HD and DTS-MA. It pisses me off and I have no idea how to fix it. The BD player (Panny 35) is set correctly, the receiver (Onkyo 606) can process up to 192/24, but it never gets above 48.

Or, to put it another way, where the hell can you find a disc that's not copy-protected?

 

[phildoc]

Wow, I'm supprised that it does that. I would think having the reciever decode it would give you the normal rate. Are you sure your sending it to the reciever bitstream?

 

[allargon]

My receiver has downgraded every Bd I've watched to 48/16, and it can process True HD and DTS-MA. It pisses me off and I have no idea how to fix it. The BD player (Panny 35) is set correctly, the receiver (Onkyo 606) can process up to 192/24, but it never gets above 48.

Or, to put it another way, where the hell can you find a disc that's not copy-protected?

No, something is wrong with the setup of your receiver or your BD player. Pressed Blu-Ray's MUST be copy-protected. You can use a burned one or play an AVCHD disc. However, all commercial Blu-Ray's will have AACS protection--even the porn and indy filmmaker discs. It's required by the format.

I can understand your frustration, but there is way too much misinformation going on in this thread. HDMI might be a crippled, buggy, immature connectivity solution, but it can handle 7.1 channels of 192/24 PCM with ease. Obviously, bitstreaming of high res codecs requires HDMI 1.3 or later.

My LG BH200 has a setting for maximum sampling frequency. This is to prevent people from sending 192/24 to TV speakers that might not like such information. The settings are 192, 96 and 48. I

I wish I could find a copy of your Blu-Ray player's manual online.

n/m -- I found it at http://service.us.panasonic.com/OPERMANPDF/DMPBD35-MUL.PDF

Okay. I found it on page 31. PCM Down Conversion is what Panasonic refers to as dumbing down its maximum sampling frequency. I'm assuming you have PCM Down Conversion off and BD-Video Secondary Audio as Off?
Here's a Blu-Ray disc with multichannel (5.1) 192/24 audio:

http://www.2l.no/epost/news2008may.html

 

[bbianca1982]

No, something is wrong with the setup of your receiver or your BD player. Pressed Blu-Ray's MUST be copy-protected. You can use a burned one or play an AVCHD disc. However, all commercial Blu-Ray's will have AACS protection--even the porn and indy filmmaker discs. It's required by the format.

I can understand your frustration, but there is way too much misinformation going on in this thread. HDMI might be a crippled, buggy, immature connectivity solution, but it can handle 7.1 channels of 192/24 PCM with ease. Obviously, bitstreaming of high res codecs requires HDMI 1.3 or later.

My LG BH200 has a setting for maximum sampling frequency. This is to prevent people from sending 192/24 to TV speakers that might not like such information. The settings are 192, 96 and 48. I

I wish I could find a copy of your Blu-Ray player's manual online.

n/m -- I found it at http://service.us.panasonic.com/OPERMANPDF/DMPBD35-MUL.PDF

Okay. I found it on page 31. PCM Down Conversion is what Panasonic refers to as dumbing down its maximum sampling frequency. I'm assuming you have PCM Down Conversion off and BD-Video Secondary Audio as Off?
Here's a Blu-Ray disc with multichannel (5.1) 192/24 audio:

http://www.2l.no/epost/news2008may.html

Yes, I'm bitstreaming, the PCM down conversion is off and secondary audio is off as well. But everytime I hit display (on my AVR) when watching something in TrueHD or DTS-MA, it says "48khz" on the readout even though TrueHD and DTS-MA are lit as well.

The receiver and the BD player are 1.3 connectivity, as are the cords I'm using. TrueHD and Dolby Digital sound exactly the same on my receiver. Hell, sometimes the Digital sounds better!

I dunno, maybe all the Blu-Ray's I've watched are only 48Khz encoded or something. I thought Master Audio was supposed to come through at a higher rate for sure, though.

Edit: I popped in an old DTS demo disc that has a 96/24 sample cut on it and it worked fine. I couldn't get a bitrate display, but it sounded amazing. It my understanding that DTS-MA is supposed to be superior to this, but on my AVR, it's not close.

 

[phildoc]

No, something is wrong with the setup of your receiver or your BD player. Pressed Blu-Ray's MUST be copy-protected. You can use a burned one or play an AVCHD disc. However, all commercial Blu-Ray's will have AACS protection--even the porn and indy filmmaker discs. It's required by the format.

I can understand your frustration, but there is way too much misinformation going on in this thread. HDMI might be a crippled, buggy, immature connectivity solution, but it can handle 7.1 channels of 192/24 PCM with ease. Obviously, bitstreaming of high res codecs requires HDMI 1.3 or later.

My LG BH200 has a setting for maximum sampling frequency. This is to prevent people from sending 192/24 to TV speakers that might not like such information. The settings are 192, 96 and 48. I

I wish I could find a copy of your Blu-Ray player's manual online.

n/m -- I found it at http://service.us.panasonic.com/OPERMANPDF/DMPBD35-MUL.PDF

Okay. I found it on page 31. PCM Down Conversion is what Panasonic refers to as dumbing down its maximum sampling frequency. I'm assuming you have PCM Down Conversion off and BD-Video Secondary Audio as Off?
Here's a Blu-Ray disc with multichannel (5.1) 192/24 audio:

http://www.2l.no/epost/news2008may.html

I don't know about misinformation. Maybe some misunderstanding. If you're sending MPCM though the HDMI, whether its 1.3 or not, and using a copy protected disc. It will be downgraded to 48khz. From what I can tell, that's on all Bru-Ray players. It must be part of their regulation and has nothing to do with the bitrate capabilities of HDMI.

In bbianca's case. He should not be using MPCM as his reciever can decoded the high definition formats. He should be sending them bitstream.


bbianca, what type of signal does your reciever say its receiving? Does it say its receiving MPCM or one of the high definition formats?






/

 

[allargon]

Yes, I'm bitstreaming, the PCM down conversion is off and secondary audio is off as well. But everytime I hit display (on my AVR) when watching something in TrueHD or DTS-MA, it says "48khz" on the readout even though TrueHD and DTS-MA are lit as well.

The receiver and the BD player are 1.3 connectivity, as are the cords I'm using. TrueHD and Dolby Digital sound exactly the same on my receiver. Hell, sometimes the Digital sounds better!

I dunno, maybe all the Blu-Ray's I've watched are only 48Khz encoded or something. I thought Master Audio was supposed to come through at a higher rate for sure, though.

Edit: I popped in an old DTS demo disc that has a 96/24 sample cut on it and it worked fine. I couldn't get a bitrate display, but it sounded amazing. It my understanding that DTS-MA is supposed to be superior to this, but on my AVR, it's not close.

Most movie tracks are 48/24 or 48/16 (Warner). Some (especially classical) music tracks tend to go towards 96/24. If your Dolby TrueHD sounds bad, make sure dynamic range compression (aka night mode) is set to OFF (not auto) on BOTH your receiver and your player.

 

[bbianca1982]

I don't know about misinformation. Maybe some misunderstanding. If you're sending MPCM though the HDMI, whether its 1.3 or not, and using a copy protected disc. It will be downgraded to 48khz. From what I can tell, that's on all Bru-Ray players. It must be part of their regulation and has nothing to do with the bitrate capabilities of HDMI.

In bbianca's case. He should not be using MPCM as his reciever can decoded the high definition formats. He should be sending them bitstream.


bbianca, what type of signal does your reciever say its receiving? Does it say its receiving MPCM or one of the high definition formats?

/QUOTE]

It's getting bitstream--the DTS-MA and Dolby TrueHD logos are displayed when active, and the BD is outputting bitstream. The only time I've seen the PCM indicator was when watching 3:10 to Yuma, which features an uncompressed 7.1 channel PCM track.

 

[phildoc]

You have it set up right then. Like Allargon says most are using 48khz anyway and he has a good point about the DRC.

 

[bbianca1982]

Most movie tracks are 48/24 or 48/16 (Warner). Some (especially classical) music tracks tend to go towards 96/24. If your Dolby TrueHD sounds bad, make sure dynamic range compression (aka night mode) is set to OFF (not auto) on BOTH your receiver and your player.

Yeah, they're both off. It's not that Dolby HD sounds bad per se, more like there's no pop. There's just little difference between the HD and Digital, and I expected more with the bitrate increase. Perhaps its functioning properly.

 

[allargon]

Yeah, they're both off. It's not that Dolby HD sounds bad per se, more like there's no pop. There's just little difference between the HD and Digital, and I expected more with the bitrate increase. Perhaps its functioning properly.

Perhaps it's your source material. Have you heard Kung Fu Panda, yet?