Quote:
|
Because in *all* cases DTS does something that 16/44.1 has never done...it delivers a silky-smooth midrange that sounds very "analog" to my ears. All the typical "digital criticisms" we hear from audiophiles like the "harsh" highs etc. seem to vanish with DTS recordings. They sound more like master-tapes or like reel-reel. The only CDs that come close are HDCD decoded discs.
|
All DTS recordings (I see no qualifications here)? Including the numerous recordings that used 16-bit masters? If a 16-bit PCM (master) recording has these "harsh" highs, then how can DTS encoding of this recording transform them into something "silky smooth"? This seems to suggest that DTS isn't in fact accurately reproducing the source, but actually improving it. That's an argument I've never heard before (at least not one seriously mooted)!
I'm not touching the use of analogue "smoothness" vs. digital "harshness" in a DTS vs. Dolby Digital discussion with a ten foot pole. I don't have a set of bass-enhancing crystals or audiophile-grade masonry bricks, so I'm not qualified to comment.
Quote:
|
Does anyone know of any 2.0 DVD that used this bit-rate [384kbps] with an LD counterpart to do some back-forth listening?
|
Try
Labyrinth (original release), but this sort of comparison wouldn't reveal much I suspect.
Quote:
|
Most DTS-loving HTF folks feel so strongly because at one time they too were very skeptical about the whole thing until one day they *heard* a DTS soundtrack that, in their experience, made a significant advance for them beyond what DD was capable of delivering.
|
And some also heard DTS with no pre-conceived expectations (this was at a time when virtually no-one had even heard of it) and thought to themselves "That's it?". This was also at a time when genuine comparisons were difficult, and when they did occur notions such as mastering differences, re-equalisation or dialog normalization weren't even a consideration.
Quote:
|
Well sorry folks, but not to offend anyone I think we can all safely agree with each other that a 4x3-limited display (no 16x9 squeeze) ain't deliverin' all the goods.
|
This is certainly true, but it has no bearing on a DTS discussion. The comparative scale in the DTS debate is much smaller.
I can respect your opinion and preference for DTS, and it's clear these opinions are strongly held. However the basis of this opinion, other than your own ears, seems to be pure (and often uninformed) speculation and invalid/inappropriate comparisons on your part.
As for the original question, given the current mastering norms and assuming a properly prepared Dolby Digital soundtrack is provided, I would be perfectly willing to lose a DTS soundtrack. Not so I don't have to change a disc (a few seconds to change a dics is nothing really), but to ensure picture quality wasn't unnecessarily compromised by redundant data consumption.
Adam