New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Standard DD & DTS Tracks of BR DVDs

post #1 of 3
1/12/09 at 3:36pm
Thread Starter 
Recently, I read (HTF?) that because of the higher bitrate of BR DVDS and the player, even standard DD and DTS codecs of BR DVDs sound much better when played through optical or coaxial connections on a non-HDMI receiver. Is this true? What are the bitrates (or differences) for standard and BR DVDs?
Reply
post #2 of 3
1/12/09 at 4:10pm

Re: Standard DD & DTS Tracks of BR DVDs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve>JF
Recently, I read (HTF?) that because of the higher bitrate of BR DVDS and the player, even standard DD and DTS codecs of BR DVDs sound much better when played through optical or coaxial connections on a non-HDMI receiver. Is this true? What are the bitrates (or differences) for standard and BR DVDs?

I'm not sure about "much better", but it does seem like BDs typically carry substantially higher bitrates for the lossy DD/DTS tracks than DVDs. All the BDs I've seen carry 1.5Mbps for DTS 5.1 and 640Kbps for DD 5.1 while most DVDs carry roughly 1/2 that for each (although a fair number of DVDs do carry 448Kbps for DD 5.1 while OTOH you'll find far more support for DTS on the BD format than on DVD).

On the few dozen(?) occasions where I've tried the lossy tracks on BD, I do find them noticeably better than what's typically found on DVD, but I didn't do any serious/thorough comparisons though...

_Man_
Reply
post #3 of 3
1/12/09 at 4:24pm

Re: Standard DD & DTS Tracks of BR DVDs

IMO, it is really hard to objectively say where differences are coming from. Unless you were involved in the actual mastering of the BD & DVD, there is no idea about how sound elements were used, remixed, remastered, etc. before even going through any particular encoder. Unless you have certain knowledge that the original was completely untouched, just different encoder / bitrate used, the comparison doesn't really mean anything.

I think bitrate and the effect of "lossy compression" (which remember was very purposefully designed with lots of testing to only lose sound that is inaudible to typical people) is way overrated by most people. It's exactly analagous to CD vs. AAC/MP3, if you have people compare listening to original .wav file vs. higher bitrate lossy, at some point they just aren't going to be able to identify a difference in a scientifically done blind comparison. I think in most cases if a true difference is heard, it was because the original master, prior to encoding, was tweaked. Certainly for any so called "night and day" difference. Differences due solely to bitrate are going to be very subtle if noticeable at all.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home