Press Release Shout! Studios Press Release: JFK (1991) Collector's Edition (4k UHD Combo) (1 Viewer)

[SD_Brian]

Included with each copy is one shell casing from the second gunman's rifle.

Which indicates there were WAY more than 3 shots fired! That, or Shout! doesn't expect to sell many copies...

 

[Wes Candela]

Based on the pricing, both film cuts should be in 4K.

Absolutely.

I understand. They didn’t have the money to do it however, selfishly I wish they would’ve just given us the 4K of both cuts. They could’ve made the box smaller.

and put an Atmos track on there

Even though I like having both tracks, DTS, master audio and Dolby atmos because

and I need to investigate this more which I will,

what I’ve heard, and been told, is that Dolby removes all bass under 25 Hz on their Atmos LFE tracks

I am going to do my own audio test on this using a few Atmos tracks and I will follow up with my findings.

However, DTS, master audio does not do this therefore, you may not be getting spatial audio with DTS master audio but you are getting the full soundtrack with the full bass frequencies.

Stay tuned more to come

SAME BAT time
SAME BAT station

 

[JoshZ]

what I’ve heard, and been told, is that Dolby removes all bass under 25 Hz on their Atmos LFE tracks

I am going to do my own audio test on this using a few Atmos tracks and I will follow up with my findings.

However, DTS, master audio does not do this therefore, you may not be getting spatial audio with DTS master audio but you are getting the full soundtrack with the full bass frequencies.

This is not a Dolby issue. It is not a DTS issue. It is a sound mixing issue.

The modern trend toward crushing dynamic range in movie soundtracks first starting making news in home theater circles back in 2015 with the DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 track on the Blu-ray release on Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Countless Disney Blu-ray and 4K releases with DTS audio have negligible bass and dynamic range.

Any Dolby format from 5.1 to Atmos is fully capable of delivering heavy-hitting bass. So is any DTS format. It isn't a technical problem with the delivery systems. It's fully a conscious decision made on the part of modern sound mixers to reduce bass and limit dynamic range.

 

[Mark Booth]

My wife and I have been listening to the 'Who Shot JFK?' podcast.

Who Killed JFK? | iHeart

Who Killed JFK? For 60 years, we are still asking that question. In commemoration of the 60th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's tragic assassination, legendary filmmaker Rob Reiner teams up with award-winning journalist Soledad O’Brien to tell the history of America’s greatest murder...

www.iheart.com

Very compelling.

Mark

 

[PatrickDA]

This is equally compelling

 

[Wes Candela]

This is not a Dolby issue. It is not a DTS issue. It is a sound mixing issue.

The modern trend toward crushing dynamic range in movie soundtracks first starting making news in home theater circles back in 2015 with the DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1 track on the Blu-ray release on Avengers: Age of Ultron.

Countless Disney Blu-ray and 4K releases with DTS audio have negligible bass and dynamic range.

Any Dolby format from 5.1 to Atmos is fully capable of delivering heavy-hitting bass. So is any DTS format. It isn't a technical problem with the delivery systems. It's fully a conscious decision made on the part of modern sound mixers to reduce bass and limit dynamic range

Perhaps I wasn’t clear,

What I was stating was that the word on the street I got from a few Home Theater Forum a few months back was that Dolby was compressing the base output and limiting the LFE signal by cutting frequencies 25 Hz and below on their Dolby Atmos soundtracks.

I was not saying that this is a problem with equipment or some technical issue with the soundtracks, I was saying that I heard Dolby Atmos LF tracks were deliberately being cut by Dolby

I took two Dolby Atmos soundtracks to check this.
I took the LFE track from The Doors Atmos soundtrack and I forget the second title I used.
But both yielded the same results
There is no frequency being cut by Dolby on Atmos tracks I tested.
I detected Bass signals from 200hz to 0-5Hz.

With the bass being most prominent around the 30 Hz – 100hz mark on both soundtracks I tested.

The bass frequencies did get lower closer to zero, but that’s a good thing or else your subwoofers would explode.

So this seems like a baseless statement.

although I would like to take a DTS master audio track
&
Dolby Atmos track

and compare the LLE channels frequencies on both.

As far as DTS compressing soundtracks starting in 2015 with the DTS 7.1 age of Ultron soundtrack, I have no comment on that
DTS, master audio and Dolby true HD audio were advertised as the first truly lossless audio formats to be released on a Blu-ray disc

You were supposed to be getting the complete theatrical soundtrack

Whether that’s Quote is being delivered on these desks or not is debatable

However, I have found that both DTS and Dolby provide phenomenal, lost with soundtracks and their object based audio tracks (Dolby Atmos and DTS:X) that are offerer now are stellar Achievements in sound.

 

[JoshZ]

What I was stating was that the word on the street I got from a few Home Theater Forum a few months back was that Dolby was compressing the base output and limiting the LFE signal by cutting frequencies 25 Hz and below on their Dolby Atmos soundtracks.

I was not saying that this is a problem with equipment or some technical issue with the soundtracks, I was saying that I heard Dolby Atmos LF tracks were deliberately being cut by Dolby

As far as DTS compressing soundtracks starting in 2015 with the DTS 7.1 age of Ultron soundtrack, I have no comment on that

Again, it's not Dolby or DTS doing that. These are just encoding formats. They can deliver whatever is put into them. That's a sound mixing decision.

Dolby and DTS do not mix the audio themselves. Every movie has its own sound mixing team to do that work.

 

[Wes Candela]

Again, it's not Dolby or DTS doing that. These are just encoding formats. They can deliver whatever is put into them. That's a sound mixing decision.

Dolby and DTS do not mix the audio themselves. Every movie has its own sound mixing team to do that work

I understand yes,

however, each company has its own sound signature

and again this entire conversation began with something I heard about Dolby Atmos,
object-based surround sound or spatial sound

which turned out, after I researched it, and tested it myself, to be false.

But yes, I do understand.

 

[JoshZ]

I understand yes,

however, each company has its own sound signature

That so-called "signature sound" is mostly just based upon the fact that Dolby soundtracks are authored with Dialogue Normalization to establish a common baseline volume between multiple movies, while DTS tracks don't use DialNorm. This results in most DTS tracks being encoded with a default volume 4dB louder than Dolby, which listeners unaware of that fact unfortunately perceive as being "WAY BETTER AND MORE AWESOME!!!!"

Dolby TrueHD and Atmos are lossless formats. DTS-HD Master Audio and DTS:X are also lossless formats. Once volume matched, any of these formats are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. If any of them added a "signature sound," they would not be lossless.

We are long past the analog days now. No audio engineer would use an encoding format known to skew their results. If they want to add "warmth" or whatever to their sound, they have filters that can do that in the mixing stage. They're not going to cross their fingers and hope that something out of their control downstream sounds okay.

 

[Konstantinos]

I have this item in my amazon cart, and I see every day or so, the price drops just one cent! haha.
I wonder why is that.

 

[Wes Candela]

That so-called "signature sound" is mostly just based upon the fact that Dolby soundtracks are authored with Dialogue Normalization to establish a common baseline volume between multiple movies, while DTS tracks don't use DialNorm. This results in most DTS tracks being encoded with a default volume 4dB louder than Dolby, which listeners unaware of that fact unfortunately perceive as being "WAY BETTER AND MORE AWESOME!!!!"

Dolby TrueHD and Atmos are lossless formats. DTS-HD Master Audio and DTS:X are also lossless formats. Once volume matched, any of these formats are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. If any of them added a "signature sound," they would not be lossless.

We are long past the analog days now. No audio engineer would use an encoding format known to skew their results. If they want to add "warmth" or whatever to their sound, they have filters that can do that in the mixing stage. They're not going to cross their fingers and hope that something out of their control downstream sounds okay.

OK,
I am aware of the normalization of the center channel
I am aware of the raw L PCM track being delivered to both DTS and Dolby studios

Virtually you have the same audio source being supplied to both companies, but then we should get into bit rate and transfer speed

DTS travels faster than Dolby. True HD.

Dolby also encodes at a lower bitrate, and claims It's not audible to the listener

Then we can get into the fact that DTS master audio can play back at 192 kHz 24 bit at 7.1 while Dolby true HD max is out at 96 Hz 24bit 5.1

then you have to take into account the receivers that are playing back the audio formata

and finally, you have to take into consideration what each individuals ears prefer so while you are arguing that digital audio is simply digital audio all the way through the pipeline

There's a lot of factors you are leaving out


I also want to state that this conversation began by me saying that Dolby was cutting their base off below 25 Hertz on their Dolby at most tracks and I took the time to prove that wrong. Therefore this conversation is no.

So I'm not sure what exactly the point is you are trying to make to me besides, and I hope this doesn't come off the wrong way, but demonstrating your vest knowledge of digital audio

However, you're doing it to somebody that is also well aware of digital audio and knowledgeable about the facts.
There's a lot of things that play here right down to the human ear to the speakers you're listening through to the receivers that are processing the sound the formats you're listening to them through the spatial audio 7.1 B5.1

I don't want this to become a redundant conversation, but I fear we're way beyond that now, so I just like to say I understand everything you're saying

But there is a difference between the two forays sound once played back.
depending on the equipment, you're listening to it on the speakers, you're listening to it through

The bit rate of each audio track
The sample rate if you're lucky enough to get over 48 kHz

I am going to agree to disagree with some of your statements here

 

[PMF]

I have this item in my amazon cart, and I see every day or so, the price drops just one cent! haha.
I wonder why is that.

Go for it. The 4K/UHD of The Directors Cut looks superb. Were it not for the omission of the 4K/UHD Theatrical Cut…well, it wouldn’t feel as pricey. Story told. Nonetheless, The Directors Cut is visually not to be missed. And besides, what is the other option? To wait a few more years only for something that’s 17 minutes shorter?

 

[Wes Candela]

Go for it. The 4K/UHD of The Directors Cut looks superb. Were it not for the omission of the 4K/UHD Theatrical Cut…well, it wouldn’t feel as pricey. Story told. Nonetheless, The Directors Cut is visually not to be missed. And besides, what is the other option? To wait a few more years only for something that’s 17 minutes shorter?

It's is beautiful!!!

 

[JoshZ]

I am aware of the normalization of the center channel

Dialogue Normalization does not change the center channel. It sets a default volume for the entire soundtrack. It's no different than raising or lowering the Volume setting on your recevier. It just uses the sound of dialogue as a baseline so that all movies are approximately the same loudness relative to one another.

Virtually you have the same audio source being supplied to both companies, but then we should get into bit rate and transfer speed

Lossless = lossless. Bit rate is irrelevant. One lossless format cannot be "more lossless" than another. That's impossible.

We're not talking about lossy streaming or DVD audio here, but the lossless TrueHD, Atmos, DTS-HD MA, and DTS:X on physical Blu-ray and 4K UHD.

Then we can get into the fact that DTS master audio can play back at 192 kHz 24 bit at 7.1 while Dolby true HD max is out at 96 Hz 24bit 5.1

Movie soundtracks are not recorded at 192 kHz. That's a spec DTS touts for bragging rights, but it's not actually relevant to movie reproduction. Certain high-res music, maybe.

I'm not sure why you think TrueHD is limited to 5.1. There are plenty of 7.1 TrueHD soundtracks. Off the top of my head, The Nightmare Before Christmas and Transformers: Dark of the Moon. TrueHD is also the backbone for Atmos.

So I'm not sure what exactly the point is you are trying to make to me besides, and I hope this doesn't come off the wrong way, but demonstrating your vest knowledge of digital audio

However, you're doing it to somebody that is also well aware of digital audio and knowledgeable about the facts.
There's a lot of things that play here right down to the human ear to the speakers you're listening through to the receivers that are processing the sound the formats you're listening to them through the spatial audio 7.1 B5.1

I don't want this to become a redundant conversation, but I fear we're way beyond that now, so I just like to say I understand everything you're saying

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but you keep saying that you understand what we're discussing, and then follow that up by saying something that suggests otherwise.

Anyway, the original point I wanted to make is that "Dolby" is not doing anything to change the dynamic range of movie soundtracks. That's a mixing decision. Dolby doesn't do mixing. They just provide the technology for the mixers to do their work.

 

[Wes Candela]

Dialogue Normalization does not change the center channel. It sets a default volume for the entire soundtrack. It's no different than raising or lowering the Volume setting on your recevier. It just uses the sound of dialogue as a baseline so that all movies are approximately the same loudness relative to one another.



Lossless = lossless. Bit rate is irrelevant. One lossless format cannot be "more lossless" than another. That's impossible.

We're not talking about lossy streaming or DVD audio here, but the lossless TrueHD, Atmos, DTS-HD MA, and DTS:X on physical Blu-ray and 4K UHD.



Movie soundtracks are not recorded at 192 kHz. That's a spec DTS touts for bragging rights, but it's not actually relevant to movie reproduction. Certain high-res music, maybe.

I'm not sure why you think TrueHD is limited to 5.1. There are plenty of 7.1 TrueHD soundtracks. Off the top of my head, The Nightmare Before Christmas and Transformers: Dark of the Moon. TrueHD is also the backbone for Atmos.



I'm not trying to be argumentative, but you keep saying that you understand what we're discussing, and then follow that up by saying something that suggests otherwise.

Anyway, the original point I wanted to make is that "Dolby" is not doing anything to change the dynamic range of movie soundtracks. That's a mixing decision. Dolby doesn't do mixing. They just provide the technology for the mixers to do their work.

Is this conversation still going on?
OK, so be it

hahaha

let me read what you wrote.

 

[Wes Candela]

Dialogue Normalization does not change the center channel. It sets a default volume for the entire soundtrack. It's no different than raising or lowering the Volume setting on your recevier. It just uses the sound of dialogue as a baseline so that all movies are approximately the same loudness relative to one another.



Lossless = lossless. Bit rate is irrelevant. One lossless format cannot be "more lossless" than another. That's impossible.

We're not talking about lossy streaming or DVD audio here, but the lossless TrueHD, Atmos, DTS-HD MA, and DTS:X on physical Blu-ray and 4K UHD.



Movie soundtracks are not recorded at 192 kHz. That's a spec DTS touts for bragging rights, but it's not actually relevant to movie reproduction. Certain high-res music, maybe.

I'm not sure why you think TrueHD is limited to 5.1. There are plenty of 7.1 TrueHD soundtracks. Off the top of my head, The Nightmare Before Christmas and Transformers: Dark of the Moon. TrueHD is also the backbone for Atmos.



I'm not trying to be argumentative, but you keep saying that you understand what we're discussing, and then follow that up by saying something that suggests otherwise.

Anyway, the original point I wanted to make is that "Dolby" is not doing anything to change the dynamic range of movie soundtracks. That's a mixing decision. Dolby doesn't do mixing. They just provide the technology for the mixers to do their work.

Are you a diehard audiophile?

 

[Wes Candela]

It's no different than raising or lowering the Volume setting on your recevier. It just uses the sound of dialogue as a baseline so that all movies are approximately the same loudness relative to one another.

Interesting.
I did not know that, but I don’t like dialogue normalization.

I will turn up my center channel to allow for my daughter or others watching to hear the dialogue clearer.
My speakers are very finally tuned for the “sweet spot” in my home theater, the only time I turn up at the center channel and turn on any compression is when my daughter is watching with me or when it’s very late at night and my wife is sleeping right above the basement theater room

The Denon receiver I have has a setting on it that allows me to dampen the effect of the bass so it doesn’t travel through walls on the level of 1-7

7 being no bass. 1 being a ton.

Lossless = lossless. Bit rate is irrelevant. One lossless format cannot be "more lossless" than another. That's impossible.

I disagree with this statement.
When a film is released, multiple times, different editions of the film on Blu-ray disc or 4K…

Let's just say for arguments sake it's a 5.1 lossless mix.

If you compare the bit-rate numbers between a DTS-HD MA mix and Dolby TrueHD audio mix of the exact same film in 5.1 lossless audio, those soundtracks 9 out of 10 times are most likely going to have different bit rates.

I will have to find an example, but I don't have the time right now, but I've seen it many times.

Numbers matter. Math, the universal language, matters.

Bit rate is irrelevant. One lossless format cannot be "more lossless" than another. That's impossible.

We're not talking about lossy streaming or DVD audio here, but the lossless TrueHD, Atmos, DTS-HD MA, and DTS:X on physical Blu-ray and 4K UHD.

Again,
I disagree.
Bit rate is never irrelevant when it comes to measuring Digital media.

Bit rate is a measure of the information mathematically.

The raw lossless audio file may be presented to Dolby and DTS as one lossless audio track. Ok.

(And I am not speaking about object-based audio formats such as Dolby Atmos or DTS:X) we have to stick to one format base, so what I am speaking about is 5.1 audio.

Find two releases of the same movie that have a DTS-HD MA version of the soundtrack vs. a Dolby TrueHD version of the soundtrack... the bit rate numbers on those tracks will most likely be different.

That math speaks to the fact that what you are hearing is a deviation from the master lossless file.
It's the mathematical measure of audio information.

therefore, if it does deviate between two mixes, you have to conclude, I feel like Jim Garrison here, you have to conclude that you’re listening to two different renditions of the lossless audio track. 2 distinct different mixes.

Movie soundtracks are not recorded at 192 kHz. That's a spec DTS touts for bragging rights, but it's not actually relevant to movie reproduction. Certain high-res music, maybe.

Agreed. Movie soundtracks are not recorded at 192 kHz.
But they are rendered and reproduced that way at times.
Especially overseas in Japan and Korean discs.

I offer you Akira as an example. The Blu-Ray offers a Dolby TrueHD soundtrack Dolby TrueHD 5.1 (192kHz, 24-bit)
The soundtrack is astounding.
The clarity is phenomenal, with much detail, crisper, highs and a deeper low end.

To state that DTS uses 192 kHz for bragging rights is something we are going to have to agree to disagree on.

I'm not sure why you think TrueHD is limited to 5.1. There are plenty of 7.1 TrueHD soundtracks.

I am not saying, and I did not mean to say if I did, that Dolby TrueHD does not present films in 7.1.
They do.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but you keep saying that you understand what we're discussing, and then follow that up by saying something that suggests otherwise.

I think my issue is that I do understand digital audio from a film perspective, digital media perspective and music perspective and an editing perspective.

I do find you to be a bit argumentative.

And hey, I'm not taking any offense here, but you do seem out to prove a point.
To what end, I'm still not sure

For example, I stated that I understand audio and digital audio

When you retort by saying say that “I am follow up comments that suggests otherwise” is going to come across as a bit argumentative to me

I don’t have any certificates I did not go to school for audio, design, audio, mixing, or audio mastering… But it is a passion of mine, I am on the side of wanting to see the digital audio format progress to the point where we can get it as close to analog as possible.

Your statements seem to be aimed at teaching me and arguing my knowledge.

That takes this discussion and makes it a bit of an argument instead because my defense will go up.

Anyway, the original point I wanted to make is that "Dolby" is not doing anything to change the dynamic range of movie soundtracks. That's a mixing decision. Dolby doesn't do mixing. They just provide the technology for the mixers to do their work.

You are a contradicting yourself here.

I was disturbed to hear that Dolby Atmos soundtracks we're being presented with less low end info then DTS-HD MA or Dolby TrueHD soundtracks.

But once again, I have disproven this fact.

it’s funny, because after I wrote that post, I knew all weekend I need to definitively prove whether this is true or not before I make that statement.

This is why I came back to say I tested a few Atmos tracks and the LFE channel has information ranging from above 200hz to almost 0 hz.

What it seems you are claiming from all of the posts I've read is that lossless audio is lossless audio.

I am not arguing this. I am not debating your comments here.

what I do disagree with is the fact that a DTS master audio track is identical to a Dolny TrueHD Track.

I have heard with my own ears the difference between Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD MA, and there are times I have noticed more robust sound comparing both.

then, looking at the bit rate numbers, I can see different levels of information between the two 5.1 lossless audio mixes.

I can only tell you what I know. I am not a professional in this area.

But I do disagree with some of the statements you are making.
it doesn't mean I don't like you or that I don't like this conversation

I just find this to be less of a conversation, and more of a battle of knowledge, which I have no desire to engage in

(I write this as I engage further)

maybe it’s because I’m detecting some condensation in your tone however, I’m never very good at reading peoples tones that I don’t know.

 

[JoshZ]

Interesting. Did not know that but I don’t like dialogue normalization I will turn it up so I can hear the dialogue louder.

As well you should. Turn up the volume as loud as you like.

The point is that DialNorm is not a dynamic range filter and does not change the mix in any way. It is a global volume setting, the purpose of which is to start all movies at a similar default volume.

Beause DTS doesn't use DialNorm. DTS tracks are almost always set 4dB louder than Dolby. Unfortunately, many listeners confuse "louder" with "better," and don't know enough to level match the two formats.

I disagree with this statement.
When a film is released, multiple times, different additions on Blu-ray disc or 4K
let's just say it's a 5.1 lossless mix if you compare the numbers between a DTS master audio mix and Dolby TrueHD audio mix of the exact same film in 5.1 lossless audio

those films are most likely going to have different bit rates.
I will have to find an example, but I don't have the time right now, but I've seen it many times

and to me...Numbers matter. The math matters.

Bit rate is never irrelevant when it comes to Digital media.
bit rate is a measure of the information mathematically.
The raw lossless audio file may be presented to Dolby and DTS
But I am not speaking about object-based audio formats, we have to stick to one format base, so what I am speaking about is 5.1 audio Lossless audio
so if we just take DTS, master audio and Dolby, true HD audio

Find two releases of the same movie that have a DTS master audio version of the soundtrack vs. a Dolby true HD version of the soundtrack... the bit rate number will most likely be different

and that math speaks to the fact that what you are hearing is a deviation from the master lossless file.

That's not how lossless compression works.

Dolby TrueHD is a lossless compression format.
DTS-HD Master Audio is a lossless compression format.

Lossless = no loss.

Dolby and DTS use different compression algorithms. Dolby is more efficient than DTS and does not require as high a bit rate. However, once decoded, both formats are bit-for-bit identical to the studio master.

If either one were not 100% identical to the studio master, it could not be classified a lossless compresssion format.

for example, by stating that, I understand audio and digital audio, and then to have you say that I am making a comment that suggests otherwise is in fact, going to be a bit argumentative to me

You are a contradicting yourself here.
I was disturbed to hear that Dolby atmos soundtracks we're being presented with less low end info then DTS, master audio or Dolby true HD soundtracks

but once again, I have disproven this fact. And after I wrote this post, I had a sneaking suspicion. I never should have said it here.

which is why I came back to say I tested it and that statement is false

I appreciate this and apologize if I came across as argumentative. I think we're actually on the same page in the end. I was just trying to clarify some points.

what you are claiming from all of the posts I've read is that lossless audio is lossless audio

And whether it is Dolby or DTS both soundtracks are identical

I Disagree with this statement.

I have heard with my own ears the difference between Dolby TrueHD and DTS master audio, and there are times I have noticed more rust sound coming from one of the company's soundtracks than the other.

Were you comparing the same movie soundtrack in both formats? Did you level match their volumes? Are you certain it was the same mix on both?

These are all things to take into consideration. You may often find that even listening to the same movie, the soundtrack may have been remixed by the studio between editions - in which case, it's not possible to make an apples-to-apples comparison.

For example, the original Top Gun Blu-ray had a DTS-HD MA 6.1 soundtrack that was pretty famous for having some rockin' deep bass. The 4K UHD edition has a Dolby Atmos track with noticeably less bass. Some viewers have watched this and instinctively leapt to the conclusion that Dolby sucks and doesn't have any bass. But no, the whole movie soundtrack had been completely remixed, and for whatever reason the mixers made a decision to reduce some of the bass. That has nothing to do with Dolby. It was a mixing decision.

 

[Wes Candela]

Beause DTS doesn't use DialNorm. DTS tracks are almost always set 4dB louder than Dolby. Unfortunately, many listeners confuse "louder" with "better," and don't know enough to level match the two formats.

many listeners don’t know what dynamic range means. Many listeners. Don’t know what compression means.

they don’t understand, half of the buttons on the receiver

Dolby TrueHD is a lossless compression format.
DTS-HD Master Audio is a lossless compression format.

Lossless = no loss.

yes
understood
Got.it.

I appreciate this and apologize if I came across as argumentative. I think we're actually on the same page in the end. I was just trying to clarify some points

No, I apologize. Also, listen.

I'm trying to exclude audio formats from this conversation.

I will say this, the bit rate on Dolby Atmos tracks, the numbers the amount of megabytes per second that are being processed for us to hear those beautiful soundtracks is phenomenal

so usually when I do the comparisons, I'm comparing what a DTS-HD MA or Dolby true HD 5.1 soundtrack bit rate was

then I'm comparing it to the overall bit rate of dolby atmos Track. the technology has advanced so much it's exciting and it's beautiful to listen to

and I think we are both audio nuts here so we should be on the same side

also, for the record, I should say I'm used to analyzing high resolution music

I cannot stand MP3s
. I'm glad we have moved away from that, but not enough people realize what they're listening to when they still listen to this crap over streaming networks

I think super audio CD is the closest to Digital, audio replicating analog that there is

Digital being lines turned into curbs by samples analog being curves.

The higher, the sample rate, the closer, the dots get, and the more of a curve we get in the sound, Signature

The higher, the sample rate, the closer, the dots get, and the more of a curve we get in the sound, Signature

it's so much easier to appreciate and understand lossless audio music, because flac or .wav or .aiff or even Apple lossless Can reproduce, high, resolution , audio Dsd files.

personally, I would just like to see it evolve more and come more acceptance so there Hass to be a better way to get this across to the consumer.

let them know that they are listening to compromised versions of their music, but they don't care

The loudness wars, most people think brick wall music sounds better because it's louder. They don't understand the dynamic range loss the impact of music going from quiet and subtle to louder. We're losing the impact of dynamic range in music

going from quiet and subtle to louder. We're losing the impact of that I could go on for days, so I'm gonna stop myself..

for example:
look at this from Nirvana: Smells Like Teen Spirit

this first image is the waveform from the original release with the dynamics preserved

The second image is from the newly released 30th anniversary disc.

Seeing this troubles me so much people don't realize how much is being cut off

The music is clipping all the way through the track

Were you comparing the same movie soundtrack in both formats? Did you level match their volumes? Are you certain it was the same mix on both?

These are all things to take into consideration. You may often find that even listening to the same movie, the soundtrack may have been remixed by the studio between editions - in which case, it's not possible to make an apples-to-apples comparison.

when I did do comparisons, it was more of a one release was Dolby HD and one was DTS master audio

and decisions were made

personally, I am a Dolby audio fan. always will be.

They were at the forefront, and while DTS master audio may have taken over Blu-ray discs, I was sad to see Dolby not as prevalent, and I am overjoyed to see Dolby Atmos now dominating again

they were at the forefront, and while DTS master audio may have taken over Blu-ray discs, I was sad to see Dolby not as prevalent and am overjoyed to see Dolby Atmos now dominating again to see Dolby where it should be at the top

the original Top Gun Blu-ray had a DTS-HD MA 6.1 soundtrack that was pretty famous for having some rockin' deep bass. The 4K UHD edition has a Dolby Atmos track with noticeably less bass. Some viewers have watched this and instinctively leapt to the conclusion that Dolby sucks and doesn't have any bass. But no, the whole movie soundtrack had been completely remixed, and for whatever reason the mixers made a decision to reduce some of the bass. That has nothing to do with Dolby. It was a mixing decision.

i've watched top gun in both formats. I enjoy the Atmos mix.

I find it engaging and enveloping

I did not realize there was more bass in the original DTS mix, haven't comoared.

but I would take the Atmos track any day over the 6.1 DTS mix


on that note, I would love to upgrade my ceiling speakers to a set of six, but my receiver will only support 4…
end of those 4

I only have one pair hooked up

I only have one pair hooked up. UGG.

 

[Neil S. Bulk]

I miss JFK conspiracy theories.