dts cd vs. sacd

[zacjones]

I'm hesitant to drop big bucks on a universal player at this time. How does the audio quality compare between these (dts cd) and (sacd/dvd-a). I can't seem to find a whole lot of comparisons on this matter. If it's obvious that dts cd's sound terrible compared to the sacd's, I'll just hold out starting a collection until I can get a universal player to play sacd's and dvda's. But if the dts cd's sound pretty good and are not too far off from sacd quality, then I'll consider starting up a collection as they can be had pretty cheap anyway. I have a sherwood-newcastle R-956 receiver that I'm very happy with that supports 6ch input and dts/dd. I've heard that Sherwood-Newcastle may be coming out with a universal player in the near future.

 

[Hawkeye]

Zacjones,
I had the same questions as you and deciced to get the Pioneer 563A, for now, as a low-cost alternative to explore high resolution discs. I picked up a reconditioned unit for US$99, and to me, even at this entry level price, when listening to DVD-A's and SACD's, most redbook cds are left in the dust. I'm holding off investing on a more substantial player until (and if) the dust settles and things move in a more clear cut direction. I don't wish to be strapped with an expensive beta-max player, if you know what I mean.

To answer your question, in general I think you'll hear a very noticable difference between DTS and DVD-A/SACD....BUT not on all discs. There are good recordings in all formats, and there are not so good recordings in the various formats. I think in a well engineered DVD-A/SACD you'll hear a marked improvement over a well engineered DTS disc. YMMV, IMHO, and all the other disclaimers apply here.

 

[FallenAngel]

I have 2 DVD-A with additional DTS track: Eagles - Hotel California and Queen - The Game. Beyond doubts, even Mrs. Layne pleads for switching bach to DVD-A.

On the other hand, there is an improved DTS (96/24). Cannot reach DVD-A technically, but maybe good enough for you. Cannot say myself, my receiver reads it as standard DTS only.

Cheers
FA

 

[Unregistered]

DTS CD's are in the decline for the most part.

I rarely if ever see them anymore. I have two, one by Sting and one by Alan Parsons Project.

As to the difference between DTS cd's and DVD-A or SACD.

It will all depend on your system.

I am convinced that on most systems the difference between all of these formats is subtle at best (multi channel vs. 2ch the difference is obvious).

Focus more on who has the content you want versus any possible technical superiority. At this moment...CD is still king of the hill by a long shot.

-T

 

[kwankung]

zacjones,

here's my 2 (1.5 CDN) cents on your concerns/questions on dts/dvd-a/sacd audio dics and players.

To all, please feel free to correct me or comment on technical specs/numbers-I am going strictly by memory here.

1. dts cd's are based the on the original red book standard (44.1 kHz)using a regular cd to play back on. The most of the dts cd's were initially done by dts entertainment. Interestingly enough, the dts cd' are NOT authorized to use the "compact disc" logo.( at least to the best of my knowledge). Most, at least the one's I own, are all 5.1 multi-channel cd's.

2. DVD-Audio is based on the red book II standard (48kHz) using a DVD disc to play back on. DVD-A comes in 3 possible flavours-1. Hi Res + DD + dts; 2. Hi Res + DD ; 3. Hi Res + dts. In order to listen to the Hi Res "track" you must have a DVD-Audio enabled DVD player otherwise you can only access either the DD or dts "tracks". Since I don't have a DVD-A enabled DVd player I can't tell how much better a disc will sound. What I can say is that I have The Eagles Hotel California-which has all 3 formats-I've listened to the DD which sounds somewhat better than regular cd but the dts track sounds much, much better than the DD tack!

3. SACD threw the red book standard out the window and uses DSD-Direct Stream Digital- as their recording format using a DVD disc to play back on. Quite simply, instead of having 16, 20 or 24 bits, Sony and Philips the co-creator of SACD and the CD, just made the signal into a 1 bit stream that is sampled at a very high rate. When analyzed, the signal resembles an analogue wave form closely matching the beloved LP signal. The original SACD's could only be played on a SACD player-this is still true if you wish to listen to the SA portion of the disc-more recently hybrid SACD's have become available. But again, no SACD player, then you can only listen to the DSD red book layer of the disc, which is better than the old red book standard.
I have an Sony SACD player and a few titles, all I can say is WOW! I listened the to Stones Honky Tonk Woman and you would think that the Stones were right there in the living room. Pink Floyd DSOTM-double WOW!

I can hardly wait to do my upgrade to a Denon universal dvd player. BTW, Denon is the only universal player that uses a Sony DSD chip all others converts the DSD signal to something else(MPEG), which defeats the purpose of Hi Res audio, IMHO, prior to sending the signal to your receiver.

Again, just my 2 cents.

kwankung

 

[Colonel_Tomb]

This may be a bit confusing, so . . .

dts cd's are based the on the original red book standard (44.1 kHz) using a regular cd to play back on.

DTS and Dolby Digital are compressed audio formats that were developed to allow multichannel digital sound to be squeezed onto a DVD along with the video content. DTS's compression format, in theory, is less "lossy" than that of Dolby Digital. But DTS is not "red book" CD, which is uncompressed 16-bit/44.1-KHz PCM. DTS and Dolby Digital are inferior to CD, but they do offer surround sound, which CD doesn't.

2. DVD-Audio is based on the red book II standard (48kHz) using a DVD disc to play back on.

Well, no. DVD-Audio uses "high-resolution PCM" that supports up to six channels. This means word lengths can be 16, 20 or 24 bits, and sampling rates vary from 44.1 KHz all the way up to 192 KHz. (The highest combinations eat up lots of storage and are limited to two channels.) I think most multi-channel DVD-A disks are 24-bit/96-KHz.

3. SACD threw the red book standard out the window and uses DSD-Direct Stream Digital- as their recording format using a DVD disc to play back on. Quite simply, instead of having 16, 20 or 24 bits, Sony and Philips the co-creator of SACD and the CD, just made the signal into a 1 bit stream that is sampled at a very high rate.

1-bit/2.8224-MHz

But again, no SACD player, then you can only listen to the DSD red book layer of the disc, which is better than the old red book standard.

Again, not really. The "red book" standard has not changed, and the CD layer of a hybrid SACD is same as always, and has nothing directly to do with DSD (although it could be mastered from a DSD master tape, but that's true of any CD). In fact, most classic rock and jazz titles are digitally mastered from the analog master tape, so DSD would be irrelevant to the CD layer. The CD layers on many hybrid SACDs I own use Sony's 20-bit Super Bit Mapping, which yields very high quality, but, again, that could apply to any CD and has nothing to do with DSD or SACD.

The reason the CD layer on many SACDs sounds so good is simply because "red book" CD mastering has matured and it's gotten to be very good.

 

[kwankung]

it took me a while but i found an article that i had previously read:

courtesy of home theatre magazine

Even with DST compression, Sony and Philips knew that more-advanced disc technologies would be needed to take full advantage of SACD's potential and included three disc varieties in the Scarlet Book specification (which covers all aspects of SACD, just as the Red Book covered CD). The most common SACD is a dual-layer hybrid disc with a semitransmissive layer (4.7 GB) and a reflective outer layer (780 megabytes). The semitransmissive layer holds the high-resolution tracks (six-channel, two-channel, or both) and also has an outer layer that can house video extras like menus, liner notes, etc. The reflective layer holds a downmixed DSD-to-16/44.1-PCM track that boasts compatibility with all existing CD players—which may give SACD a major advantage in the high-resolution format war, if this track is included on all SACD releases. Whereas DVD-As are at best compatible with existing DVD-video players, SACDs are theoretically compatible with anything that can play a CD, including car systems, portable players, and so on. The SACD camp is also trying to convince retailers that this compatibility means that they only need to carry the SACD version of an album, rather than both CD and SACD versions, which will allow them to avoid double stocking.

Finally, as far as I know 44.1 kHz pcm can NOT be burned/used on a dvd for audio purposes. One must have access to a 48kHz pcm in to be able to burn and listen to your audio dvd.

 

[Colonel_Tomb]

The reflective layer holds a downmixed DSD-to-16/44.1-PCM track

A hybrid SACD with surround sound has three programs: an SACD surround mix, an SACD stereo mix and a CD stereo mix. The three are independent, and maybe the stereo programs are "downmixed," and maybe they're not. It doesn't make any difference, though, because the CD layer of an SACD is just that -- a CD layer. It's in no way superior to any other CD, because it's still "red book" CD.

Many hybrid CDs will tell you how the two layers were mastered, such as "Direct Stream Digital (SACD) and Sony 20-Bit Super Bit Mapping (CD)," and some are from completely different sources. For instance, on the Derek and the Dominos "Layla" SACD, the 5.1 mix is all-new, of course, but the two stereo mixes (SACD stereo and CD stereo) are obviously from the original (and lousy) mix from 1970.

 

[jerwgar]

Analog, vinyle, sacd vs dvd-a

Thought you might enjoy this link as it gives a very good explanations beyond the ordinary explanations, about the difference between sacd and dvd-a. http://www.diamondcenter.net/AR-HumanStress.html

 

[MDS]

...and the punch line is:

After many years of research I have at last formulated a supplement combination called LIFE ENERGY PLUS™ which appears to alleviate many of the effects of PCM – it still doesn’t sound like music nor fully act like it, but this formulation does overcome what in the recording industry is now called "digital fatigue." It also demonstrably alleviates some of the negative EMF effects of, for example, computers, TV, and mobile phones, all so much now a very large part of our daily lives.

However, most important of all is that it helps with deep problems of personal identity, the overcoming of which is the basis for all Healing.

Sure sounds like B.S. doesn't it? PCM based music causes all kinds of ills like loss of 'Life Energy' and leads to problems of personal identity, but the author can cure all of that with a little magic pill. I'm sure if he went on a late-night infomercial he could sell millions of bottles to the gullible and naive.

 

[shokhead]

Well i have all this astuff. First its not DTS cd's as i was saying the same thing. They are DTS music disc's. Whatever. Of all the stuff i play,reg cd's,hdcd,remastered cd's,SACD and DVD-A along with concerts on DVD. What sounds the best? Well i know because of the spec's,its suppose to be DVD-A and SACD but i enjoy the sound of my DTS music disc's the most. Fuller,richer sound. Why? The only thing i can think of is the poorer bass management in DVD players compared to the bass management in recievers. I dont know about the rest of you but i always think my multi-audio disc's lack some bass. Yes its maxed out in the sub volume setting and in the player and the sub volume is maxed out and in the reciever, its maxed for EXT. in sub,+15db i think.

 

[Rob Babcock]

I think you nailed it, Shokhead. Even years after the first SACD & DVD-A players came out, most players still have incomplete or incorrect bass management, and a lot of reviews don't even discuss it. Amazing.

 

[shokhead]

About the time i dropped out of the A/V stff for awhile was when multi-channel audio was just talked about and that was the big thing,bass management,thats all you heard. I figured by now it had to be worked out better so i jumped back in to update my A/V stuff and do the multi-channel audio thing but seeing where the bass management is in dvd players,i kinda dont get it. It should be equal or more then recievers and i dont know,maybe it is in the very top end stuff.

 

[pieroxy]

Just to add my 2 cents:

There are two things to consider when trying to compare the technical merits of music media:
1. Quality of the tracks. Reference will be CD, with 44.1KHz and 16bit samples. DTS-CD is superior in one way (24 bit, 48KHz) and inferior in another (compressed stream). DVD-A is superior, but depending on the DVD-A it could be the same. SACD is based on a very different approach, so it is not easy to compare. dts 96/24 is even greater than dts.
2. Multi-channel sound. DVD-A, SACD and dts-cd are all three on a par here, with up to 5.1 surround sound (maybe 7.1?). CD is far behind with its stereo tracks.

With most home theater systems or amp/speaker systems, I seriously doubt one could make a big difference btw DVD-A, SACD and dts-cd.

But there is a third factor that is completely unrelated to any technical factors: The mix. On most dts DVDs I have noticed the dts track to be much better mixed and encoded than the ac3 one. This might be to push dts by pro-dts producers or anything else, but I seriously doubt this would be related to any tech difference btw ac3 and dts.

The same as some CD being much lower quality (to my ears) than some old tapes that had a much better mix.

When comparing two different tracks (DVD-A and dts for example), one should make sure they were mixed the exact same way and encoded with the same care. Of course, this is utterly impossible unless you can make the mix and encoding stages yourself.

 

[Mega2000]

i just got a SACD/DVD-A player and i notice a difference between the dolby digital 5.1 Beck - Guero album and the DVD-A. The DVD-A version sounded so crystal clear from every speaker. the dolby dig sounded great too but the dvd-a version just seemed a little beter.

 

[rgriffin25]

Well i have all this astuff. First its not DTS cd's as i was saying the same thing. They are DTS music disc's. Whatever. Of all the stuff i play,reg cd's,hdcd,remastered cd's,SACD and DVD-A along with concerts on DVD. What sounds the best? Well i know because of the spec's,its suppose to be DVD-A and SACD but i enjoy the sound of my DTS music disc's the most. Fuller,richer sound. Why? The only thing i can think of is the poorer bass management in DVD players compared to the bass management in recievers. I dont know about the rest of you but i always think my multi-audio disc's lack some bass. Yes its maxed out in the sub volume setting and in the player and the sub volume is maxed out and in the reciever, its maxed for EXT. in sub,+15db i think.

I don't think DTS is better, its just different. On a couple of the DTS discs I own its almost like I have my receiver in 5 channel stereo. While I do agree that it sounds good, it lacks the clarity and dynamic range the other formats have.
It took me quite a while to get everything tweaked just right for SACD and DVD-A. Now there are times when I am listening to music and I think to myself this isn't that loud. But when I talk its so loud I cannot even hear a word come out of my mouth. My vote goes to SACD and DVD-A.

 

[Hawkeye]

I don't think DTS is better, its just different. On a couple of the DTS discs I own its almost like I have my receiver in 5 channel stereo. While I do agree that it sounds good, it lacks the clarity and dynamic range the other formats have.
It took me quite a while to get everything tweaked just right for SACD and DVD-A. Now there are times when I am listening to music and I think to myself this isn't that loud. But when I talk its so loud I cannot even hear a word come out of my mouth. My vote goes to SACD and DVD-A.

I think a lot of it still comes down to the quality of the recording/mixing. IMO, Alan Parsons "On Air" in DTS sounds as good or better than many of the DVD-A and SACD's I own.

 

[rgriffin25]

I think a lot of it still comes down to the quality of the recording/mixing. IMO, Alan Parsons "On Air" in DTS sounds as good or better than many of the DVD-A and SACD's I own.

I totally agree with the quality of mastering or mixing. I have approx 50 Hi-rez audio discs and 8 of them are dts cds. I think the ones I own that are not classical music sound really good (Eagles, Police, BoysIIMen, Everclear, Queen). I have 3 dts discs that are classical, and for me they just aren't clean enough, almost muddy. One of them is a Karajan/ Berlin Phil which was performed quite well. It doesn't compare to the SACD Karajan recordings I have in clarity or dynamics. Maybe I don't have a large enough sample to make a fair decision?

I am in no way knocking dts, thanks to them I really got into MC music. They had some promotion 3 or 4 years ago and I bought a couple of their sampler discs for like $5 each and from that point on I was hooked. Definitely for movies I chose dts when available.

 

[mfabien]

"Hell Freezes Over" by the Eagles in DTS music disc gets my vote for the pleasure of listening.

So does "Everything Must Go" by Steely Dan in DVD-A but played with an ordinary DVD player in DD Surround format.

With these two examples (very good music mixing) I am not missing the use of a Universal DVD player plus the addition of 6 more analog cables in the jungle of cables already present.

 

[shokhead]

I don't think DTS is better, its just different. On a couple of the DTS discs I own its almost like I have my receiver in 5 channel stereo. While I do agree that it sounds good, it lacks the clarity and dynamic range the other formats have.
It took me quite a while to get everything tweaked just right for SACD and DVD-A. Now there are times when I am listening to music and I think to myself this isn't that loud. But when I talk its so loud I cannot even hear a word come out of my mouth. My vote goes to SACD and DVD-A.

Didnt say better,said sounds best to me. DTS music like 5 channel stereo? You can say that about DVD-A and SACD to,for sure. All those formats are using all the speakers. I still say alot of this has to do with bass management and the mixing of the disc.