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.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > General > Audio encoding

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 23rd October 2009, 08:42   #21  |  Link
Ryu77
Registered User
 
Ryu77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 246
So what are you saying? Those articles don't compare Dolby 640 against DTS 1536. One did mention that they are both considered "excellent" in this bitrate range. Hardly a concise scale of performance. Back to the previous post...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tebasuna51
BTW, I don't know for what you need a encoder less efficient and compatible than AC3. If you need encode is better AC3 448 than DTS 768, and AC3 640 better than DTS 1536
This statement says to me that you are implying that DTS is less efficient than Dolby Digital, and that Dolby at 640 Kbit/s is better than DTS at 1536 Kbit/s.

For my previous post, a simple yes or no answer would have suffice. I am extremely sorry to challenge you on this on your own thread as it seems like you put together a nice GUI...

However, there is no way that Dolby at 640 Kbit/s sounds better than DTS at 1536 Kbit/s. Unless you are using equipment that can't reproduce the differences. I can easily hear the difference every, single time.

Different codecs are obviously designed differently and some have sweet spots at different bitrates. If you were to say that Dolby at 640 Kbit/s performs better than DTS at 768 Kbit/s, this might indeed be possible. I just find the level of detail and clarity in DTS 1536, almost as good as it's lossless counterpart.

Last edited by Ryu77; 23rd October 2009 at 09:33.
Ryu77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd October 2009, 11:38   #22  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryu77 View Post
This statement says to me that you are implying that DTS is less efficient than Dolby Digital, and that Dolby at 640 Kbit/s is better than DTS at 1536 Kbit/s.
Yes.
Quote:
For my previous post, a simple yes or no answer would have suffice. I am extremely sorry to challenge you on this on your own thread as it seems like you put together a nice GUI...
Don't worry, is only a copy-paste.
Quote:
However, there is no way that Dolby at 640 Kbit/s sounds better than DTS at 1536 Kbit/s. Unless you are using equipment that can't reproduce the differences. I can easily hear the difference every, single time.
I never say "sounds better".

The test is: listen the original uncompressed, the DTS encoded and the AC3 encoded.
Maybe for you the DTS sounds better than original uncompressed, but is not the question.
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd October 2009, 13:10   #23  |  Link
shon3i
BluRay Maniac
 
shon3i's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryu77
there is no way that Dolby at 640 Kbit/s sounds better than DTS at 1536 Kbit/s
How hell no? like comparing simple algo (DTS) with some hevy efficient algo (AC3). Like comparing MPEG2 and MPEG4 and say that MPEG2 still better. AC3 @ 640kbps clearly produce higher sound quality than DTS @ 1536kbps, even AC3@448kbps can be comparable to DTS 1536kbps.
I proved to myself several times on different equipment, even now when I had access to the DTS-HD MA Encoding Suite, which mean i encode my samples with up to date DTS encoding tool.
shon3i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd October 2009, 22:43   #24  |  Link
honai
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I guess he's refering to bass response with AC3 vs DTS, i.e. due to higher attenuation of low-level frequencies before encoding AC3 does not sound as "bass-rich" as DTS. This is especially true with on-the-fly AC3 (Dolby Digital Live) and DTS solutions on mainboards and soundcards. However, concerning overall faithfulness to the master I'd say AC3 is able to achieve much better replication than DTS, even when comparing 640kbps AC3 to 1536kbps DTS.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th October 2009, 00:48   #25  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by honai View Post
I guess he's refering to bass response with AC3 vs DTS, i.e. due to higher attenuation of low-level frequencies before encoding AC3 does not sound as "bass-rich" as DTS.
This is especially true with on-the-fly AC3 (Dolby Digital Live) and DTS solutions on mainboards and soundcards.
Please, can you explain this. I don't understand...
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 24th October 2009, 08:18   #26  |  Link
Ryu77
Registered User
 
Ryu77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by honai
I guess he's refering to bass response with AC3 vs DTS, i.e. due to higher attenuation of low-level frequencies before encoding AC3 does not sound as "bass-rich" as DTS.
This thread is going off topic, but no I wasn't only referring to bass response. I can actually hear finer details and more presence with DTS @ 1536 over Dolby @ 640. I can see that a few of you don't agree here which is fine but I can only go with what my ears tell me.

However, I have noticed bass heavy DTS tracks present on quite a few DVD's but for some reason this seems to be different on Blu-ray discs. Whether it is because most DVD's used 768 Kbit/s instead of 1536 Kbit/s or they used an older encoder, I am not sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shon3i
How hell no? like comparing simple algo (DTS) with some hevy efficient algo (AC3). Like comparing MPEG2 and MPEG4 and say that MPEG2 still better. AC3 @ 640kbps clearly produce higher sound quality than DTS @ 1536kbps, even AC3@448kbps can be comparable to DTS 1536kbps.
I proved to myself several times on different equipment, even now when I had access to the DTS-HD MA Encoding Suite, which mean i encode my samples with up to date DTS encoding tool.
Comparing MPEG2 and MPEG4 (AVC) to Dolby and DTS is nowhere near a similar comparison. There has got to be at least a decade between MPEG2 and MPEG4 (AVC). Computing power and technology has had a quantum leap since then. I believe there was only about a year difference between the first commercial use of Dolby and DTS. I understand what you meant by this in terms of codec efficiency but I really don't think it's as clear cut as that.

Just out of curiousity, what sort of equipment are you comparing these on?

Looks like I am not alone on these thoughts...

http://www.audioholics.com/education...of-the-formats
http://www.practical-home-theater-gu...by-vs-dts.html
http://ezinearticles.com/?Dolby-vs-D...ter?&id=553768

As I mentioned above, all these reference the fact that you need the right equipment to hear the difference.
Ryu77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th October 2009, 12:52   #27  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
@Ryu77
Your links don't say "DTS is better than AC3" only:
"you need a thoroughly refined audio playback setup to bring out that subtle difference in sound quality between these two formats."

And I agree with this. My audio equipment, or my human ears I don't know, can't distinguish between them.

For that I need trust in blind test with professional audio equipment.
My first link say: DTS 1500 is best than AC3 448 but very close
My second link (not sctrict blind test but also with professional audio equipment) conclude:
"The lossless, Dolby Digital Plus, and DTS-HD High Resolution compressed tracks were just a little more open and airy. I hate to say it, but they just sounded more realistic and transparent. The 448 kbps Dolby Digital and standard DTS tracks were less so, a little more closed off. Between the 640 kbps Dolby Digital and the uncompressed, the difference was even less noticeable."

If most of the people can't distinguish between them (by audio equipment or human ears) and some experts prefer AC3 640 Kb/s over DTS 1500, for what we need spend bytes and select a format less compatible?

If you prefer DTS, use it, but I can't accept DTS is better than AC3 without probe it.
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 25th October 2009, 22:04   #28  |  Link
raquete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by tebasuna51 View Post
...but I can't accept DTS is better than AC3 without probe it.
me too!
edit: please, read the next post.
tebasuna,
first thank you for the new UsEac3to.

you know, i'm horrible in command lines.
can i ask how to 5.1 96/24 multichannel waves to flac without change sample rate, etc...only compression?
thanks.
__________________
search raquete

Last edited by raquete; 26th October 2009 at 01:09.
raquete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 01:16   #29  |  Link
raquete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 741
now i know why "was so hard" to encode 5.1 96/24 multichannel waves to flac. lol
in my system(win2000) the down arrows on the right to select formats, parameters, etc are not working, i need to click until the output format(for example) be blue and use the arrows of the keybord to select the desired adjust.(flac, wave, waves,pcm,etc)
i can't say that is a GUI's problem, must be my old system. (?)
__________________
search raquete
raquete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 04:10   #30  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
I think Autoit ( http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/ ) support Win2000, but I can test it.
Try download the Autoit software and run the .au3 file instead the .exe.
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 26th October 2009, 23:14   #31  |  Link
raquete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by tebasuna51 View Post
I think Autoit ( http://www.autoitscript.com/autoit3/ ) support Win2000, but I can test it.
Try download the Autoit software and run the .au3 file instead the .exe.
yes, Autoit works in win2k.
i download, run Autoit and open the UsEac3To.au3.
just the same, i can't chose options in "Track Input and Output format" and others (is "combo"? editing the file i saw "GUICtrlCreateCombo")
but works with the "trick" like i wrote before.

thanks for the link and hints.
__________________
search raquete
raquete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th November 2009, 02:44   #32  |  Link
raquete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 741
tebasuna51,
i'm lost ...
how can i load lots of wavs with differents names from the same folder to encode as flac as the "+ Sources" buttom don't work in this case?
__________________
search raquete
raquete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th November 2009, 12:51   #33  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
The button '+ Sources' is only to concatenate sources like .VOB or .m2ts.
Isn't a batch process.

To convert to flac all the wav in a folder use this con2flac.bat file (put your correct path to eac3to) in the same folder and double click:
Code:
@echo off
for %%a in (*.wav) do "z:\path\eac3to.exe" "%%a" "%%a.flac"
pause
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.

Last edited by tebasuna51; 6th November 2009 at 14:02. Reason: typo
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 6th November 2009, 13:13   #34  |  Link
raquete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 741
i did a copy of the lesson and is saved.

i never saw the word "do" in command lines before.

thanks so much.
__________________
search raquete
raquete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th November 2009, 17:54   #35  |  Link
raquete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by tebasuna51 View Post
To convert to flac all the wav in a folder use this con2flac.bat file (put your correct path to eac3to) in the same folder and double click:
Code:
@echo off
for %%a in (*.wav) do "z:\path\eac3to.exe" "%%a" "%%a.flac"
pause
command line(.bat) absolutely perfect, works from waves to flacs and adjusting the .bat is perfet from flacs to waves too!
i did dozen files.

regards tebasuna51!
__________________
search raquete
raquete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd January 2010, 04:58   #36  |  Link
MuLTiTaSK
Registered User
 
MuLTiTaSK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 668
@tebasuna51

feliz ano nuevo

thank you so much for UsEac3to it sure is the best eac3to GUI i tried so far any chance on making it more awesome with some batch job features thanks anyway if not for sharing you are helping many unleash the powers of eac3to

Last edited by MuLTiTaSK; 4th January 2010 at 02:23.
MuLTiTaSK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2010, 06:47   #37  |  Link
DLynch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 30
Thanks! This program is exactly what I need.
DLynch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2010, 01:31   #38  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
New version to add Chapters and Timecodes extraction using MkvExtract.
Split m2ts in 4GB fragments is now optional.

UsEac3to05.7z
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 15th February 2010, 01:43   #39  |  Link
MuLTiTaSK
Registered User
 
MuLTiTaSK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 668
@tebasuna51

amigo thank you very much for the update i'am a very happy UsEac3to abuser i always recommend it over all other eac3to GUI's good stuff
....
MuLTiTaSK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2010, 02:38   #40  |  Link
tebasuna51
Moderator
 
tebasuna51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,351
New version
Changelog v0.6 2010-03-06
- Improved command line parse (external programs 'pipe')
- Decode with NeroAacDec and Lame
- Time change also in XML and CUE
- Workaround to change ANSI chars to OEM ASCII for cmd's

Now work with more than one 'pipe'.
Example for a simple stereo downmix:
stdout.wav | Sox --ignore-length - -t wav - remix -m 1v0.3694,3v0.2612,5v0.3694 2v0.3694,3v0.2612,6v0.3694 norm | Lame -b 128 - %_.mp3

UsEac3to06.7z
__________________
BeHappy, AviSynth audio transcoder, in Doom9 forums. NicAudio, BassAudio, audio decoders.
tebasuna51 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:26.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.