DVD authoring - DTS vs. Dolby Digital

[Sycho]

Which do you prefer as a source of multichannel audio on DVD?
But before you repile read this:
http://www.homecinemachoice.com/articles/techarticles/200105SoundWars/200105SoundWars.shtml

[Awatef]

DTS with 754kbps has a 19KHz low-pass only?! what a shame, another proof that the DD-codec is much much better (20KHz low-pass already by 448kbps).

Anyone knows a DVD with 640kbps Dolby Digital soundtrack?

And is it true that there is Dolby decoders that can't process higher bitrates than 448kbps?

[Slogra]

An 128 kbps mp3 with a 20khz lowpass doesn't sound as good as a 128bksp mp3 with a 17kbps lowpass. So lowpass doesn't say much about the overall quality.

Also DTS comes in 768 and 1536 bitrates. A 768kbps DTS soundtrack sounds better than a 448kbps DD soundtrack imo. DTS sounds a lot more detailed and better controlled, if you know what i mean. Of course 1536kbps DTS kicks any DD soundtracks' ass (well, if the uncompressed source was the same. There are some DVDs with a crap DTS track that sounds much worse than thr DD track because of bad mastering).

640kbps DD is used in cinemas. Home DD decoders specs are up to 448kbps. So don't think you'll find (m)any DVDs with a 640kbps track :(. But there are some DVDs with a 448kbps STEREO track.

You can find a lot information on www.dolbydigital.com
I haven't found a DTS site yet...

btw, i would not believe anything that Dolby says about DTS like in the article. Dolby might be a bit prejudiceded. :rolleyes:

[rjamorim]

Originally posted by Slogra
You can find a lot information on www.dolbydigital.com
I haven't found a DTS site yet...

http://www.dtsonline.com/

And I agree, DTS audio quality is quite better than AC3. Channel separation is much better too (because DTS uses lossless stereo coding, while AC3 uses joint stereo)

[Sycho]

I myself do not have a DTS decoder (my reciver has a 6Ch input, I use that) so I cannot judge, but here is a comparision done unbasisly by Dolby Labs
http://www.dolby.com/tech/mp.in.0103.DigitalVsDTS.pdf

[Awatef]

@ Slogra
Do we really need 1509k to have perfect quality? I'm really surprised that DTS with 754k has a low-pass by 19KHz only and has distortions in the high frequencies >15KHz.
I mean, take MP3, it is supposed to achieve CD quality by 128k per channel, so if we would have 5.1-MP3 and won't take advantage of any joining techniques, we would need 640k for 5.1 sound in CD quality. Now we got here 754k DTS and it is still not CD quality. So DTS is real crap.

I really thought that 754k *is* perfect with at least 20KHz bandwidth, and now I'm disappointed :(

[Sycho]

here is my DTS theroy:
We can add a channel and not change the file size (DTSES)
We can double the sampling rate, potentally doulbing the size of the file, and the file size stays the same (DTS 24/96)

For those reasons and more, I will never be using DTS unless I have to, I will always stick with Dolby Digital and or Dolby Surround ProLogic II

PS: Did you know that Dolby Digital is the only format in the cinema that has a 48kHz sampling rate, all others, DTS, SDDS, CDS, have 44.1kHz. (that is another reason)