a sound test DTS vs DOlby Digital

[phildog33]

im offering an ATTEMPT to find the differences between DD and DTS here

i record using some nice equipment but my original output from the reciever was so so. i wanted to hear MAJOR differences and i am asking you guys if you hear those MAJOR differences. when i switch from dts to digital on MOULIN ROUGE i hear a HUGE difference between DTS and Dolby and DTS always wins.

then i read somewhere that maybe its just because DTS is louder and we percieve that as better. so i recorded some samples back to back after adjusting the volume difference... DTS was 5 dB louder than DD!

http://phil.phreedom.net/dts_vs_dolby_tests.htm

please respond, but be friendly. i know this is a bad set up to run for such a test or maybe the test isnt even possible. i was just trying to find MAJOR differences
-phil
p.s. what do ppl prefer DD or DTS? because when i make backup movies and have the option of DD or DTS i always choose DD. i then tried to keep DTS and DD and the video quality went to hell. i might redo all my discs so i have one copy with DD and one copy with just DTS

[MackemX]

this will probably get moved but here's my opinion b4 it does

DTS is louder and gives a better sensation of surround by far but you pay for it regarding the loss of quality

it just depends what you value the most

you could adjust your DD to have a louder setup or like you said

is the extra sound worth the 10% or so sacrifice for video space?

some say yes some say no, but in the end it's upto the user

simple answer is like you said, just do both versions

I always watch the original initially anyway so I at least hear it in DTS but repeat playings I ain't as fussed but if I am, I'd just put on the original again so I don't really require 2 copies

[Speeder]

DTS has higher bitrate than Dolby Digital.

In most cases, it's accepted that DTS > DD in sound quality, but DD takes up less space.

[fusion007]

read it! http://www.dvdangle.com/dvd_tech/explanation/dts.html

[mpucoder]

Whoever wrote that article seems to be unaware that there are 2 forms of DTS. DVDs use Coherent Acoustics, while theaters use Audio Processing Technology's apt-X. They are both ADPCM encoded, but Coherent Acoustics uses subband perceptual modeling (much like Dolby).
DTS is technically superior to Dolby Digital, but any claims or inferences that the DTS on DVDs is the same as that used in theaters are false.

[GMH]

http://www.dolby.com/tech/mp.in.0103.DigitalVsDTS.pdf

Worth a look.

[mrbass]

If you spent more than $5,000 or so on audio theater setup in your home then by all means use DTS.

[rubberman]

DTS files are always almost twice as much as DD5.1. Like on DIe Another Day. DD5.1= .3xgigs and DTS= .6x gigs.

[biggy7]

id choose dts over dd5.1 anyday :cool: if you have the equipment and right set up, then dts is the way to go (imo)

[drpaulng]

Our ears can tolerate a very wide distortion spectrum. DTS actually wins a little bit more than Dolby Digital for the golden ears on mars but not the ordinary ears like everybody else here on earth. Don't be shame to admit that you hear no big difference between dts and DD! An uncompressed stereo (48kHz/16bit) track's size equals the 6-channel dts track, while a reasonably good sounding Dolby Digital 6-channel track only occupies about 1/3 size of the uncompressed stereo track. The Visual and audio balance is a compromise between the size occupied. With multiple tracks (different languages) simultaneously placed within a DVD, Dolby Digital is the best choice while there is little room for multi-language for dts DVD. However, I should remind people out there. Most commercial DVDs are not mentioned about the dts resolution because most dts tracks are encoded with half-sized (768kb/sec) method instead of full 1.536MB/sec, so that the dts track is small enough to fit together with the Dolby Digital track into the DVD. "Saving Private Ryan" is put together with a dts track with Dobly Digital 2.1 (not 5.1) to keep up with video quality.
96kHz/24bit dts track is the highest resolution "lossy" econding method placed in a DVD Audio album for comparison to the MLP (lossless) tracks. Video size is reduced to minimal with slide-show/menu to compromise for the total visual/audio size of 10MB/sec bitrate.

[NaN]

You did really listen to the sample? I don't understand that because I clearly hear the difference - dts with more clarity probably due to better spectral resolution in the high frequency range (aka better treble).

I don't own a x000 dollars home theater setup, I listened with my AKG K 501 headphones.

Thanks for the sample, cheers, NaN

[Jester700]

One problem is, if these are the tracks ripped from a DVD we don't know if or how they were mixed differently, and I'd bet that would have a MUCH greater effect on the final result than any differences in coding.

Someone would have to get hold of a PCM original and code it both ways for a good comparison.

[KpeX]

Originally posted by Jester700
One problem is, if these are the tracks ripped from a DVD we don't know if or how they were mixed differently, and I'd bet that would have a MUCH greater effect on the final result than any differences in coding.

Someone would have to get hold of a PCM original and code it both ways for a good comparison. Precisely my thoughts on the DTS vs DD issue. And I don't know too much about the process chain in which movie audio is processed and mastered.

For me, it comes down to the fact that DD's filesize is much more sane, and I don't have an extremely high quality home theater setup (yet ;)).