Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
3rd May 2010, 00:31 | #1 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Merging DTS Channels
I know it's probably been answered so that's why I'm posting it in this section. I want to merge an LFE channel of one DTS file with the 5 channels of another one. What's the easiest way of going about that? Could some program exist for it possibly? I wouldn't even know how to do it the following way, but is there a way without demuxing all the individual channels and merging them back together? That would certainly be preferred. Thanks guys
Last edited by Ditto666; 3rd May 2010 at 07:46. Reason: Grammar |
3rd May 2010, 02:05 | #2 | Link |
Unavailable
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: offline
Posts: 1,480
|
Hi there.
SFAIK, between "demuxing all the individual channels" and "merging them back together", one cannot avoid re-encoding, unfortunately. In theory at least, it should be possible to convert (losslessly) a multichannel DTS into a set of mono DTS files — and vice-versa —, but again, AFAIK, there are no free tools (nor commercial ones BTW) capable of the task. Sadly, even DTS, Inc. themselves have NEVER released a full-featured (specs-wise) DTS encoder... Last edited by Midzuki; 3rd May 2010 at 02:06. Reason: grammar |
3rd May 2010, 07:41 | #3 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Quote:
I understand how there can't be an official way of doing it, but since there is nothing holding the channels together (unless there's some purposely added encrypting data doing so), it's way too surprising that not a single programmer has been able to find a way to at least simply replace one specific channel/add one, if the LFE channel doesn't exist for instance... It seems like it would be simple. I'm trying to really think, but I can't see what could be in the way of making that possible. Last edited by Ditto666; 3rd May 2010 at 07:45. Reason: Grammar |
|
3rd May 2010, 13:29 | #4 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4
|
lfe and dts
@SFAIK
Actually you can ad lfe to a dts file...almost "on the fly".The resulting file will be a multichannel wave[not dts]. Do some research in foobar with channel mixer dsp plugin and dts decoder plugin. First:set the channel mixer dsp plugin: -bypass upmixing -ckeck--use lfe-- -check-create lfe from all 5 channels- -uncheck...or check[do some experiments here]--redirect lfe-- -drag channel mixer to the left window[in dsp manager] to activate it. Open the dts file in foobar. Right click the file--convert to--wave--check--use dsp--hit convert.That's it! You'll get a 5.1 multichannel uncompressed wave--fully enjoyable on your surround pc. If you want your dts:demux the multichannel wave in tranzgui,then re-encode to dts in minnetonka's surcode cd dvd pro. Alternatively do some research in nero trax. Enjoy! M |
4th May 2010, 01:51 | #5 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Quote:
|
|
4th May 2010, 03:18 | #6 | Link | |
Unavailable
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: offline
Posts: 1,480
|
Quote:
Last edited by Midzuki; 4th May 2010 at 22:41. Reason: grammar |
|
4th May 2010, 05:17 | #7 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Quote:
With compression only a small factor, what do you believe to be the most superior format then? Last edited by Ditto666; 4th May 2010 at 05:22. |
|
4th May 2010, 05:24 | #8 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,281
|
Quote:
Depends on bitrate. I've always preferred ac3 over dts. dts has more wow factor, but I've always preferred ac3 more natural sound.
__________________
http://www.7-zip.org/ Last edited by Audionut; 4th May 2010 at 05:27. |
|
4th May 2010, 05:56 | #9 | Link | ||
Unavailable
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: offline
Posts: 1,480
|
Quote:
As I had said, 2-channel MP3 @ 256kbps ~= 2-channel DTS @ 576kbps, so, 5-channel DTS @ 1440kbps ~= 5-channel MP3 @ 640kbps Also, it seems you believe "there cannot exist 2-channel-only DTS streams below 754kbps". Quote:
Last edited by Midzuki; 4th May 2010 at 06:01. Reason: typo |
||
4th May 2010, 06:18 | #10 | Link |
Advanced Blogging
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 480
|
Considering that DTS doesn't have channel coupling, it would be a hard stretch to call it a "superior" technology. In my opinion, I can't see any reason to use anything besides AAC for lossy audio (all lossless codecs are the same, obviously).
|
4th May 2010, 08:33 | #11 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Alright, let's put it this way... In terms of CLARITY, DTS is the most superior. In terms of how it sounds, that's arguable... Anyway, this is going off topic. I'm essentially sitting here with two version of a DTS album, one with retarded "surround" mixing but with good bass, and one with decent surround but without an LFE channel. Doesn't seem to be a way to satisfy the query so I'm not really sure what next... Last edited by Ditto666; 4th May 2010 at 08:36. |
|||
4th May 2010, 10:17 | #12 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,281
|
If your playing off a computer, I'd decode to wav, fix your channels and encode to flac lossless. The size might even be a little smaller than dts depending on the content.
__________________
http://www.7-zip.org/ |
4th May 2010, 14:29 | #14 | Link |
Unavailable
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: offline
Posts: 1,480
|
fact 1)
many ppl SAY, ac-3 sounds "more faithful to" the original uncompressed source; fact 2) many ppl SAY, DTS sounds... <-- ( place your preferred superlative here ) my initial conclusion) The "C.A." compression introduces some kind of "pleasing artifacts", much in the same way as the vacuum-tube amplifiers usually generate an output which is considered "superior" by certain self-entitled "audiophiles". Just my 1.99 euros. |
4th May 2010, 20:15 | #15 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Quote:
Aside from all that though, I simply don't like FLAC. I always strongly disliked it for every reason possible. It could simply partially be due to the placebo effect, but still... Quote:
I would make the analysis that DTS is a clearer sound while AC3 sounds like something of a lower bitrate (more muffled), relatively, while maintaining a more accurate representation of how whatever it was sounded like. Why I prefer DTS is because clarity feels more realistic over accuracy to me. It makes me feel more like I'm there! Quote:
I don't disagree about AC3. I don't think your take on DTS is too accurate. Thanks guys for trying to help, but it seems there's no way around DTS as the final outcome, not re-encoded. Aside from the size, even uncompressed wouldn't really do considering a different signal is being fed to the receiver which then uses a different decoding algorithm. Last edited by Ditto666; 4th May 2010 at 20:19. |
|||
5th May 2010, 01:31 | #16 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,281
|
Quote:
2. FLAC is lossless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_data_compression 3. If you think a correctly decoded DTS to PCM file sounds worse, you're kidding yourself. Time to leave this thread before I get a strike for rule 4.
__________________
http://www.7-zip.org/ |
|
5th May 2010, 21:00 | #17 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Quote:
I know what lossless means! FLAC is actually "lossless", as in, not fully. It's not the same as uncompressed but yeah, almost. Either way, I just don't like FLAC. It has to be DTS, otherwise, it changes the mixture of the sound. It's not that I'm being stubborn here - it just sorta ruins the point. It's supposed to sound better - not worse in any way. Plus, it just messes up the DTS as a collection.. If not merging into one file, maybe there's something that can take two files and play them at the same time. That way, I can simply rip the LFE channel and play it simultaneously. Or maybe there's some kind of container that can hold the two together and then play them, no? Last edited by Ditto666; 5th May 2010 at 21:04. |
|
5th May 2010, 21:13 | #19 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 115
|
Well, I've never done that, but think about it.. Imagine encoding something to MP3, and then re-encoding to MP3 again... I'm sure it would be noticeable and either way, I'd have the knowledge that it's worse >.< You mentioned I think to re-encode to a stereo DTS file at some point 0.0; I mentioned earlier that the reason I wanted to do this was because the surround mixture in the track with the LFE channel is bad, so using PLIIx would solve the issue? Plus, I hate that as well, lol. Makes the music sound so fake XD What I mentioned in the previous post must exist. There doesn't need to be a direct way to merge the channels into one DTS file. It could instead be something like I mentioned there.
Last edited by Ditto666; 5th May 2010 at 21:15. |
6th May 2010, 00:37 | #20 | Link | ||||
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,281
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Exact: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exact Quote:
__________________
http://www.7-zip.org/ |
||||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|