[Camper]

I have a Denon reciever that is pre HDMI & pre True DD.

I have my Toshiba A2 hooked to the reciever with an optical cable and I get good sound. It shows on my reciever as 'DTS' as I was told it would, by a knowledgeable person here before I hooked it up.

My Question:

Using this set-up, which will give me better sound the 'DD Plus' or the 'True DD'?
Or does it make any difference? Is there someting lost if I chose True DD from the disc or will both sound formats sound the same in this set-up?

Thanks to anybody who can explain this to me!
You guys never fail to impress me with your knowledge.

[Jeff Adkins]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camper

My Question:

Using this set-up, which will give me better sound the 'DD Plus' or the 'True DD'?
Or does it make any difference? Is there someting lost if I chose True DD from the disc or will both sound formats sound the same in this set-up?

Either way you are downrezzing to DTS and result *should* be about the same (except on Warner titles). I had originally thought with my A2 that DD+ would convert to DTS without any quality loss (the bitrate is the same), but the owner's manual indicates otherwise. Whether or not it's an audible difference is debatable.

With Warner titles, if it were me, I'd select the TrueHD track since on Warner titles the DD+ bitrate is only 640kbps and the A2 is capable of 1.5m/s out of the optical cable. The TrueHD track downrezzed to 1.5m/s will sound better than upconverting DD+ 640kbps to 1.5m/s.

I hope that wasn't too confusing!

[Camper]

Thank you so much for that fast response.

I will use the TrueHD for Warner titles and either for other titles.

Thanks again!

[Nelson Au]

I am using optical as well for audio. On my A35, I have found that if I select TrueHD, the audio sounds much "stronger", audio levels are higher too.

It appears the A35 down revs to Dolby Digital, not DTS. I was trying Top Gun for the first time last night and it sounded a lot louder and better when TrueHD was selected! Same with Warner titles.

[DaViD Boulet]

TrueHD is "lossless".

Regular Dolby and Dolby Plus are both "lossy". Basicaly Dolby Plus is a higher-bit-rate-version of regular Dolby. But Dolby TrueHD is the only lossless-quality version and should always be used when available.

[JediFonger]

this will help you:
http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/sh...._Reality/1096

[DaViD Boulet]

Quote:

The disc's audio being indistinguishable from its studio master is "irrelevant"? Even with just a Dolby Digital Plus track, the 'Transformers' disc rated the highest score for audio quality that we can give. What more could we demand from it? It's absolutely terrific, but it's just not absolutely terrific enough if the packaging doesn't have a listing for TrueHD or PCM, even when it's likely impossible for human ears to tell the difference? What kind of argument is that?

This article follows a circular argument. Without the lossless soundtrack to compare, we'll can't conclude that we wouldn't hear an improvement, despite how "good" the lossy soundtrack sounds on its own. Even the 448 kbps DD on the DVD sounds "excellent" and rates 5 stars. Does that mean that the high-bit-rate Dolby on the HD DVD doesn't sound even better? Nope... the high-bit-rate Dolby sounds better still. Why then should we assume that full lossless couldn't sound better as well?

Folks at one time said that 720p was "good enough" and that "your eye couldn't see the difference between 720p and 1080p". Until, of course, we had 1080p to compare.

Taking the position that lossless is "good enough" doesn't fly with me. Sure, one sound mixer says he can't hear the difference. Guess what, we had sound mixers saying that they couldn't hear the difference between the master and compressed soundtrack with the 448 kbps Dolby Digital on DVD. However, my ears (and many others) hear a world of difference. With lossless audio, you're not relying on someone else's ears to decide what you can and can't hear. You just get it all.

There should be no reason on HD media why lossless can't be offered EVERY time. Period.

[Michael Reuben]

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Boulet

This article follows a circular argument.

Only because you've grossly misrepresented it by quoting a single snippet out of context. The context includes statements such as the following:

Quote:

I would not claim that all DD+ tracks are flawless or transparent to their masters; it does take some effort to encode them properly. But to dismiss the format out of hand simply because the soundtrack isn't labeled as lossless or uncompressed demonstrates an ignorance of the technology being used.

I suggest people read the entire article (which isn't long) rather than rely on someone else's characterization.

That being said, I agree with the advice previously given to the original poster: With the A2's trans-coding for the optical digital output, choose the lossless track, if one is available.

M.

[DaViD Boulet]

The writer was suggesting that we would probably not hear an improvement with lossless over the lossy encoding of Transformers based on the praise afforded to the lossy track and the perception of one sound mixer that his ears can't hear the difference between lossy Dolby at the 1500 kbps data rate and the lossless master. How did I misrepresent that?

[Mark Zimmer]

Do you have any analog inputs to your receiver available? You should be able to get the full effect of TrueHD without any downrezzing (though it'd be stereo) if you use those. Or does the A2 have analog outputs? I don't have one so maybe not.

[Michael Reuben]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Zimmer

Or does the A2 have analog outputs? I don't have one so maybe not.

It has stereo analog outputs, but not 5.1 analog outputs. And I can't say for sure that nothing is lost in the downmix.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David B