Is it me or is DTS really rare?

[thewolf99]

Ok, sorry if this isn't a directly related to audio encoding but didn't know where else to put it.

Recently I ripped the DVD Predator, which has the choice of AC3 and DTS. When I tried out DTS, I was pleasantly surprised (although it could have just been psychological I admit) yet when I tried to look for more DVDs with English DTS tracks, I was stumped - there virtually weren't any. This seems bizarre to me given the zillions of arguments on the web about AC3 vs DTS - what's the point of a debate if AC3 is the only commonplace format?

Or is it just me - are DTS tracks actually on most DVDs? Its just that I have a wide array of DVDs, mostly ranging from around 1985 to 2007, and while some of the early 90s ones have DTS, none of the newer films seem to.

Thanks for your help :thanks:

[FishTank]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Theater_System

should help you understand why there arent taht many DTS
tracks on dvds.

[Bigmango]

I think that the main reasons why most DVDs don't include the DTS track is that most dvd players (almost all?) can decode AC3, but not DTS. So everyone without an external receiver can watch and hear an AC3 movie on any TV screen.

Most people don't have a receiver, so the general "mass market" can't play DTS and therefore doesn't care about DTS. Furthermore, you won't hear the difference on TV speakers, and so often the studios don't want to spend the time / dvd space to work on a DTS track.

Also, sometimes DVDs include several soundtracks, adding a DTS track which is taking more space than AC3 would take too much space on the disk.

This is very unfortunate, as everyone with a good receiver and quality speakers can tell you that most of the time DTS does have deeper basses and a more dynamic sound than AC3. The studios also sometimes work more on the DTS track to give it more life compared to the AC3 track. This results in DTS generally sounding better (on a quality system) than AC3 most of the time (but not always).

If you enjoy DTS sound, check out the "Superbit" DVD collection. For these DVDs they have removed the extras to allow a higher video bitrate and most of the time (always?) they include the DTS track.

[Hvidgaard]

I think that the main reasons why most DVDs don't include the DTS track is that most dvd players (almost all?) can decode AC3, but not DTS. So everyone without an external receiver can watch and hear an AC3 movie on any TV screen.

Most people don't have a receiver, so the general "mass market" can't play DTS and therefore doesn't care about DTS. Furthermore, you won't hear the difference on TV speakers, and so often the studios don't want to spend the time / dvd space to work on a DTS track.

Also, sometimes DVDs include several soundtracks, adding a DTS track which is taking more space than AC3 would take too much space on the disk.

This is very unfortunate, as everyone with a good receiver and quality speakers can tell you that most of the time DTS does have deeper basses and a more dynamic sound than AC3. The studios also sometimes work more on the DTS track to give it more life compared to the AC3 track. This results in DTS generally sounding better (on a quality system) than AC3 most of the time (but not always).

If you enjoy DTS sound, check out the "Superbit" DVD collection. For these DVDs they have removed the extras to allow a higher video bitrate and most of the time (always?) they include the DTS track. Afaik a DTS track are louder than AC3 and pure technically AC3 are better than DTS (DTS uses sub-band coding). But as you do say, some studios does somewhat better mastering with the DTS track, and DTS are usually a higher bitrate than AC3.

[prOnorama]

and DTS are usually a higher bitrate than AC3.

Usually? I thought a DTS track always has a higher bitrate than AC3.

AC3 max. bitrate = 448 Kbits (DVD), 640 Kbits (Blu-Ray)

DTS half-bitrate = 768 Kbits, DTS full-bitrate = 1.5 Mbits

l