DTS just hype???

[darien87]

One of the reasons I bought my Denon 2805 was to upgrade to DTS from my old Yamaha Dolby Digital receiver. Yet, when I listened to the few DVD's that I have that actually have a DTS soundtrack, I didn't really notice any difference. The salesman at Magnolia kept telling me how much better DTS is that Dolby because of less compression and all that.

But just recently I was at another store and picked up a brochure that was published by Rotel. It stated that DTS's argument for better sound is basically nullified by the fact that soundtracks are compressed when they are put onto the DVD's themselves. This would seem to explain why I don't really hear a difference. About the only difference I hear, is that the DTS track is louder than the Dolby track. Big deal. I turn the Dolby track up a little bit and it sounds the same.

So is DTS not all it's cracked up to be?

 

[MACCA350]

Read this article

cheers

 

[JAD2]

Short version, Hype.

Some many say they can Hear differences between the 2 5.1 system, but I think their hearing the footsteps of fall nearing!!

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

It really depends on the movie. I personally go out of my way to find DTS films. I had misplaced my Gladiator DTS ES dvd, and purchased another one - not knowing they came out with a non-DTS version. Something sounded off with the movie. Sure enough, it wasn't the DTS version (no wonder it was $9.99 at the time).

Pick up a few DTS demo discs, and you'll hear some better recorded movies.
Also check out the DTS ES Discrete 6.1 dvd's if you really want to hear a difference. Make sure you're chosing the DTS mode at the setup page (languages) on the dvd disc.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ALIVE-DTS-DVD-DEMO-DISC-10_W0QQitemZ250029353546QQihZ015QQcategoryZ617QQtcZphotoQQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://www.spannerworks.net/reference/10_6a.asp

 

[tbewick]

Read this article

cheers

I've referred to that article before but I do think it's a bit anti-DTS. It does somewhere make the point that the way decoding works for DTS leaves less scope for performance variation between decoders. In other words, DTS should sound more similar on a mid-range decoder versus a high-end one compared to Dolby Digital. www.dvdscan.com is a site that does technical reviews of DVD's and compares DTS and Dolby Digital where the two formats are available. I believe these comparisons are made with reference to the digital master tape/35 mm prints. Most of the time DTS does better. I've certainly noticed more noise with Dolby Digital on some discs, particularly with dialogue.

 

[mtrycrafts]

One of the reasons I bought my Denon 2805 was to upgrade to DTS from my old Yamaha Dolby Digital receiver. Yet, when I listened to the few DVD's that I have that actually have a DTS soundtrack, I didn't really notice any difference. The salesman at Magnolia kept telling me how much better DTS is that Dolby because of less compression and all that.

But just recently I was at another store and picked up a brochure that was published by Rotel. It stated that DTS's argument for better sound is basically nullified by the fact that soundtracks are compressed when they are put onto the DVD's themselves. This would seem to explain why I don't really hear a difference. About the only difference I hear, is that the DTS track is louder than the Dolby track. Big deal. I turn the Dolby track up a little bit and it sounds the same.

So is DTS not all it's cracked up to be?

Both DD and DTS is a lossy perceptual coding system.
One cannot make a statement that because on is at a higher rate than the other, it is and must be better, closer to the master tape.
It depends on the implementation of the algorithm that matters.
One reason DTs has a higher bit rate is because the implementation info is part of the bit rate and those bits are not carrying sound information.

I seriously doubt Rotel is correct either.
In the end, the two formats tend to be implemented differently and certainly in the past, DTS was playing games by varying the volume levels of certain channels and, levels were varied even on a channel as the audio progressed.
Without proper comparison that also includes the master being processed without any monkey business, comparing the two is unreliable at best.

 

[Nick250]

My experience is that it does not much matter if it's DTS or DD. What does matter is how well the sound is mastered in the studio. A well master recording will sound great be it DTS or DD. If I have a choice I get DTS because it's "supposedly" better, but I have not noticed any predictable pattern to substantiate one is better than the other.

Nick

 

[Sheep]

For me, the Surrounds seem to be louder then DD, and the bass is more inline (not 6dB above everything else). I have heard good DD mixes, but they are few and far between.

SheepStar

 

[MACCA350]

Here's how I see it. Both DD and DTS are very good and very different encoding systems. Under clinical conditions both should be indistinguishable from each other, and please remember that you can't compare the DVD versions(for starters you have to turn up the DD version by 4db-8db or more depending on the release)

My opinion is that DD and DTS have different objectives, DD tries to be a transparent transport for the master track, whereas DTS tries to up the ante and give a 'better' presentation of the master(similar to the "Disney Enhanced Home Theater Mix" on some of the Disney SE DVD's like 'Aladdin'), whether thats a good thing or not and whether they achieve their objectives or not is up to the individual.

cheers

 

[Jack Hammer]

It depends

Here's how I see it. Both DD and DTS are very good and very different encoding systems. Under clinical conditions both should be indistinguishable from each other, and please remember that you can't compare the DVD versions(for starters you have to turn up the DD version by 4db-8db or more depending on the release)

My opinion is that DD and DTS have different objectives, DD tries to be a transparent transport for the master track, whereas DTS tries to up the ante and give a 'better' presentation of the master(similar to the "Disney Enhanced Home Theater Mix" on some of the Disney SE DVD's like 'Aladdin'), whether thats a good thing or not and whether they achieve their objectives or not is up to the individual.

cheers

IMO DTS was better on older soundtracks where they took the time to really do a good mix. On some of those the DD seemed kind of slapped together to me. On more recent dvd's it seems kind of hit or miss to me as to which is better. Generally I've found DTS plays around 4db higher than DD. If you drop the volume and re-listen to a passage you'll probably find they are fairly comparable these days. In my experience it really depends on the sound engineer. Personally, i usually go for DTS first and if I'm not happy I try the DD soundtrack. It's a personal preference issue on many movies, switch between your soundtracks and decide which you like better. Just make sure you adjust the volume to compensate for recording levels to make an apples to apples comparison (hint:soundlevel meter can help).

Jack

 

[shokhead]

I enjoy DTS music discs over reg cds and consider it a plus if a movie is DTS.
I guess this is the same thing as higher priced cables sound better but i think more of us hear the difference in DD to DTS{good,bad or whatever} as far less hear anything in more pricey cables.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

If anyone here uses surround processing when watching 2.0 tv, which do you choose?

DPLIIx cinema
DPLIIx music
DTS neo 6 cinema
DTS neo 6 music

I use DPLIIx cinema for standard tv, and DTS neo 6 music for our digital music station as well as concerts. The center channel seems a bit smoother in DPLIIx cinema compared to its neo 6 counterpart (all things set equal).

 

[shokhead]

If anyone here uses surround processing when watching 2.0 tv, which do you choose?

DPLIIx cinema
DPLIIx music
DTS neo 6 cinema
DTS neo 6 music

I use DPLIIx cinema for standard tv, and DTS neo 6 music for our digital music station as well as concerts. The center channel seems a bit smoother in DPLIIx cinema compared to its neo 6 counterpart (all things set equal).

Dont use any for cinema and havent found which one works best for nascar. I started with IIx but now use DTS music but after all the threads on 2ch i've found myself just going to stereo more now.

 

[tbewick]

My opinion is that DD and DTS have different objectives, DD tries to be a transparent transport for the master track, whereas DTS tries to up the ante and give a 'better' presentation of the master(similar to the "Disney Enhanced Home Theater Mix" on some of the Disney SE DVD's like 'Aladdin'), whether thats a good thing or not and whether they achieve their objectives or not is up to the individual.

cheers

I'm not sure I agree with this. I think that in the theatre where the movie is mixed, everything will be done uncompressed, probably in six or seven channels PCM. Once the mix is complete, the uncompressed PCM channels are then fed into an encoder to convert it into the Dolby Digital, DTS. format etc. In whatever format it ends up in, the director will have final say as to how it sounds, whether it's DTS or Dolby Digital.

I guess this is the same thing as higher priced cables sound better but i think more of us hear the difference in DD to DTS{good,bad or whatever} as far less hear anything in more pricey cables.

I do remember seeing somewhere that an AES paper was submitted which showed how Dolby Digital is not transparent. Unfortunately I don't know the reference.

If anyone here uses surround processing when watching 2.0 tv, which do you choose?

DPLIIx cinema
DPLIIx music
DTS neo 6 cinema
DTS neo 6 music

I use DPLIIx cinema for standard tv, and DTS neo 6 music for our digital music station as well as concerts. The center channel seems a bit smoother in DPLIIx cinema compared to its neo 6 counterpart (all things set equal).

I use DPLII too and have recently been using the music mode a lot. Of course it's personal preference which one you choose, but my guess would be that most TV stations would use DPL/DPLII encoders.

 

[tbewick]

I've found an Audio Engineering Society convention paper which is relevant to this topic:

'Subjective Consumer Evaluation of Multi-channel Audio Codecs', by Jim Barbour (presented at the AES 119th. Convention, New York October 2005)

You can read it at Jim Barbour's own website:

- http://www.swin.edu.au/sbs/radio/jbhome/jbhome.htm

 

[jafo_91]

As mention earlier, DD and DTS will both sound good. You could argue indefinately about compression and formats. I believe the reason why DTS tends to sound better is simply because of the amount of time and effort the Sound Engineer, Studio, Director, ect... put into the DTS movie soundtrack.

I always go with the DTS track when it is available.

Bottom line go with what you like best...

 

[Jack Hammer]

If anyone here uses surround processing when watching 2.0 tv, which do you choose?

DPLIIx cinema
DPLIIx music
DTS neo 6 cinema
DTS neo 6 music

I use DPLIIx cinema for standard tv, and DTS neo 6 music for our digital music station as well as concerts. The center channel seems a bit smoother in DPLIIx cinema compared to its neo 6 counterpart (all things set equal).

Not sure if it counts but I usually use 7ch stereo. It plays louder, clearer, and in my setup I get better "surround" sounds than with DPLIIx, especially when watching motorcycle racing.

 

[darien87]

Thanks for all the responses guys. Man, some of you guys really seem to know your stuff.

Anyway, I agree that I have heard good and bad examples of both formats. It just kind of bothers me that one of the big selling points for my receiver seems to have been a moot point. That said, I still LOVE my 2805.

 

[majorloser]

I too go out of my way to buy DTS discs. I especially look for DTS-ES discs.

Once you've heard a good DTS-ES discrete disc, it's hard to go back to just plain old DD 5.1

The "Lord of the Rings - Special Extended Edition" sets were also in DTS-ES discrete.

 

[tbewick]

There's one more paper which has a great deal of information on perceptual coders like Dolby Digital and MPEG:

'Perceptual Coding of Digital Audio', by Ted Painter and Andreas Spanias. Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 88, No. 4, April 2000.

- www.eas.asu.edu/~spanias/papers/paper-audio-tedspanias-00.pdf