dolbydigital5.1 downmix or dolbydigital2.0 directly to mp3

[Apu]

Hi,

if I got 2 audio streams, one in dd5.1 and one in dd2.0 an I want to make an mp3, which one should I choose. Is it better to downmix the 5.1 with Azid and then encode in lame or just should I take the 2.0 one and keep the tweo channels as they are?

best regards

Apu

[LigH]

Hopefully, the included DD 2.0 track already has an optimised Dolby Surround downmix (professional audio studios shall have the better, officially licensed equipment to do that); however, it this is wrong in your case, it's just your "bad luck"...

If you know it better, or if you have special preferences, decide for yourself. Else I'd suggest to trust the 2.0 track.

[MaTTeR]

Good question Apu.

Personally I always downmix the 5.1 to an ABR 140 MP3. The MP3 file still maintains the Dolby Pro Logic information and sounds just as good as the Dolby 2.0 track yet takes up much less space. Perhaps you could do a listening test.

I second what LigH says though. Hopefully the 2.0 sndtrk is optimized but in some Hong Kong martial arts flicks this isn't the case;)

[Slogra]

DD 5.1 downmixes sound much worse to me that native dolby surround sound. DD downmixed sounds more like some bad echo in stead of surround sound.
As you say that some DVD have DD AND dolby surround tracks, the dolby surround track is especially for people with a dolby surround equitment, so use it when you're gonna encode your sound to 2 channels (you can always reencode it to a lower bitrate if it's too big).

[Apu]

as the Dolby 2.0 track yet takes up much less space

you got me slightly wrong. i would make a mp3 in both cases.

Hopefully, the included DD 2.0 track already has an optimised Dolby Surround downmix

that's what I thought.

so I'm gonna take the 2.0 one.


thx