Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

is trueDD and DTS-HD worth the upgrade?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
41 replies to this topic

#1 of 42 OFFLINE   Bmoney

Bmoney

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2007

Posted January 18 2008 - 01:48 AM

can someone explain to me what is the difference between lossless tueHD and other HD audio from reg. DD and DTS. I mean what is heard in the differences? cause i already feel BD audio is supierior to SD dvd. thanks for the help. I just wanna make sure the upgrade is justified



thanks guys always truly appreciate this forums help

#2 of 42 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,530 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted January 18 2008 - 04:35 AM

If by "BD audio" you mean uncompressed PCM, then TrueHD is the same thing when decoded. So is DTS-HD Master Audio. Both are lossless codecs, so when decoded, they are the exact same tracks as before being encoded. The others (DD+, DTS-HD, etc.) are in between DD/DTS and lossless as far as fidelity is concerned.

Are they worth it? Depends on how much you like your audio.

#3 of 42 OFFLINE   Bmoney

Bmoney

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2007

Posted January 18 2008 - 05:02 AM

i love my audio. it is #1 in my book. so what i am asking is what differences will i hear? is there more seperation. deeper bass? any description would be great!

#4 of 42 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,530 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted January 18 2008 - 05:08 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmoney
i love my audio. it is #1 in my book. so what i am asking is what differences will i hear? is there more seperation. deeper bass? any description would be great!

Greater dynamic range. Fuller sound - meaning there are not any "thin" parts, like rolled off highs. Think of the difference between a 192k MP3 file vs. a CD, it's about the same difference. BTW, you mention that you like "BD audio" and think it is superior. If that means you've heard Blu-Ray uncompressed, then you've already heard the difference. TrueHD would sound the same.

#5 of 42 OFFLINE   Craig Morris

Craig Morris

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 198 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 10 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 05:11 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmoney
i love my audio. it is #1 in my book. so what i am asking is what differences will i hear? is there more seperation. deeper bass? any description would be great!

I agree... for all the talk about new processors and receivers, there's very little (or no) talk about how these formats sound compared to regular DD and DTS. HDMI switching and all these "new" features are hardly worth it if in the end the audio sounds virtually the same as before.

#6 of 42 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul



  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 05:24 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Morris
I agree... for all the talk about new processors and receivers, there's very little (or no) talk about how these formats sound compared to regular DD and DTS.
That's because it's very hard to generalize. A lot depends on the source material. A lot depends on the playback equipment and environment. If you're in a small room with poor acoustics, cheap speakers and an uncalibrated system, chances are you won't hear a huge difference between a well-mastered standard DD or DTS track and a lossless track on hi-def media. The better your equipment, accoustics and ears, the more you're likely to hear a difference.

But the differences may be subtle. People who are expecting to be blown out of their seats are frequently disappointed. The differences may be quite subtle and may sneak up on you. A lot depends on the sound design as well.

In this particular thread, the question is also complicated by the way the OP has asked it:

Quote:
cause i already feel BD audio is supierior to SD dvd
As Jeff Gatie noted, "BD audio" can mean different things, and we have no idea what the OP is listening to that he finds superior to standard DVD.

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#7 of 42 OFFLINE   Craig Morris

Craig Morris

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 198 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 10 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 06:38 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
That's because it's very hard to generalize. A lot depends on the source material. A lot depends on the playback equipment and environment. If you're in a small room with poor acoustics, cheap speakers and an uncalibrated system, chances are you won't hear a huge difference between a well-mastered standard DD or DTS track and a lossless track on hi-def media. The better your equipment, accoustics and ears, the more you're likely to hear a difference.M.

I guess I assumed that given the experience of most listeners on a forum like this, those factors would be a given. I was thinking more along the lines of "everything else being equal" what does a DD soundtrack sound like versus the TrueHD version... like A vs. B on the same system.

My fear is that if the differences are truly subtle, then dropping my AVM20 for a $1500 receiver may result in a net change of zero. ie. if the subtle improvement of TrueHD is lost because of a 'downgrade' in D/A conversion or other circuitry, then there's no point in switching.

#8 of 42 OFFLINE   Bmoney

Bmoney

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2007

Posted January 18 2008 - 06:50 AM

what i meant was the DD on BD to me sounds more dynamic than what i have heard on my 500+ sd dvd's I am usinf reference series Klipsch (rf-7's) with a yamaha v2500 and svs cs+/samson1000.(all calibrated with sp meter, avia etc.) just so you know what i am dealing with.

I just was wondering for me to upgrade an already 1000$ reciever for another i.e/. denon 3808, for the HD uncompressed audio if it were a big difference say as in SD vs. BD video. I am very aware of nuances and subtle sounds in surround mixes. I really have upgrade-itis but would like to refrain from doing it if i dont have to. i can deal with the no HDMI switching for a while...but can i do without the trueDD and other uncompressed audio?

thanks guys

#9 of 42 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,530 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted January 18 2008 - 06:58 AM

In my opinion, it is not as big a difference as SD vs. BD video. Then again, there are people who claim the differences between SD and BD are minimal to none (believe it or not). So it is all anecdotal, but to me the difference is significant. As I said before, if you can tell the difference between 192k MP3's and the original CD, then you will be able to enjoy HD as superior to DD/DTS.

#10 of 42 OFFLINE   Bmoney

Bmoney

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2007

Posted January 18 2008 - 07:07 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Gatie
In my opinion, it is not as big a difference as SD vs. BD video. Then again, there are people who claim the differences between SD and BD are minimal to none (believe it or not). So it is all anecdotal, but to me the difference is significant. As I said before, if you can tell the difference between 192k MP3's and the original CD, then you will be able to enjoy HD as superior to DD/DTS.


thank you, great response, i cant believe people cant see the dif between sd and hd.

But yes i can hear the diff between 192 mp3's and cd's so that is a very good comparison. I guess i will have to go audition it in the store...that would be my best bet huh?

dont get me wrong...i wil be upgrading anyhow eventually....just wondering if i should stretch myself out now and do it immediatly

#11 of 42 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul



  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 07:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmoney
what i meant was the DD on BD to me sounds more dynamic than what i have heard on my 500+ sd dvd's I am usinf reference series Klipsch (rf-7's) with a yamaha v2500 and svs cs+/samson1000.(all calibrated with sp meter, avia etc.) just so you know what i am dealing with.
You've omitted some key information:
    [*]How is your BD player connected to your receiver?[*]What BD player do you have?
Now, if your player is connected to your receiver by a regular digital coax or optical connection, you're hearing standard DD or DTS, because that's all those connections are capable of delivering. if you're connected by a set of 5.1 analog connections, you might very well be hearing TrueHD, if your player is capable of decoding TrueHD into discrete PCM -- which is why I asked which model you have. And of course, you can just select the uncompressed PCM track on any BD disc that has it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Morris
I guess I assumed that given the experience of most listeners on a forum like this, those factors would be a given.
Believe me, they're not!

Quote:
My fear is that if the differences are truly subtle, then dropping my AVM20 for a $1500 receiver may result in a net change of zero. ie. if the subtle improvement of TrueHD is lost because of a 'downgrade' in D/A conversion or other circuitry, then there's no point in switching.
Does the AVM20 have a set of 5.1 analog inputs? If so, do what I did -- connect a BD player via the analog inputs and let the player do the decoding. The only sound formats I can't take advantage of are DTS-HD and DTS-HD MA, because my Panasonic BP10 won't decode those, but there should be players coming along shortly that can.

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#12 of 42 OFFLINE   Bmoney

Bmoney

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2007

Posted January 18 2008 - 07:54 AM

oh yeah that would be pertinent info...

ps3 via optical...so I KNOW it is not uncompressed. Posted Image

#13 of 42 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul



  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 09:30 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmoney
ps3 via optical...so I KNOW it is not uncompressed. Posted Image
Not only isn't it uncompressed, but you're listening to what you could get off a standard DVD.

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#14 of 42 OFFLINE   ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer



  • 5,874 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted January 18 2008 - 11:31 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
Not only isn't it uncompressed, but you're listening to what you could get off a standard DVD.

M.

Actually, that's not quite true. SD DVD's DD is somewhat lower bitrate than the 640Kbps DD coming from BDs. I can't tell you how much actual diff it makes, but to me, I *think* I've noticed a diff compared to SD DVD. Then again, it's really hard to compare these things since the soundtracks can be mastered differently, etc. For instance, it's been pointed out in the past that the Redbook CD layers on Hybrid SACDs tend to get better mastering than typical CDs.

Also, I'm not sure what exactly the PS3 outputs via optical when you choose an uncompressed PCM track. My PS3 seems to suggest it does actually output uncompressed PCM via optical, but I can't be sure since my ancient processor doesn't seem to handle 5.1 PCM.

[EDIT] RE: uncompressed PCM tracks, seems the PS3 just downmixes it to 2-channel PCM w/ DPL matrixing for optical output. I think it does something like that for DTS-HD/MA also from what I can tell w/ Hairspray.

_Man_
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#15 of 42 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,530 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted January 18 2008 - 11:43 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong
Actually, that's not quite true. SD DVD's DD is somewhat lower bitrate than the 640Kbps DD coming from BDs. I can't tell you how much actual diff it makes, but to me, I *think* I've noticed a diff compared to SD DVD. Then again, it's really hard to compare these things since the soundtracks can be mastered differently, etc. For instance, it's been pointed out in the past that the Redbook CD layers on Hybrid SACDs tend to get better mastering than typical CDs.

Also, I'm not sure what exactly the PS3 outputs via optical when you choose an uncompressed PCM track. My PS3 seems to suggest it does actually output uncompressed PCM via optical, but I can't be sure since my ancient processor doesn't seem to handle 5.1 PCM.

_Man_

The maximum the SPDIF spec allows is 2.0 PCM.

#16 of 42 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul



  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 11:47 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
you're listening to what you could get off a standard DVD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong
Actually, that's not quite true.
Yes it is "quite" true, because it was deliberately phrased to take account of the inevitable nitpicking. He is listening to what he "could" get off a standard DVD -- not what he does, but what he "could". As has been established in several other discussions, a standard DVD is capable of holding a 640kb/ps DD track, and occasionally they do. Moreover, to the extent that we're dealing with a DD+ track on Blu-ray, it is not being output as DD+ via optical but is being transformed into something else. (CORRECTED: See discussion in subsequent message.)

Quote:
Also, I'm not sure what exactly the PS3 outputs via optical when you choose an uncompressed PCM track.
Unless I'm seriously misinformed, the most that an optical digital connection can handle is PCM 2.0. (I see Jeff beat me to it.)

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists

#17 of 42 OFFLINE   Bmoney

Bmoney

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 57 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 02 2007

Posted January 18 2008 - 12:01 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
Yes it is "quite" true, because it was deliberately phrased to take account of the inevitable nitpicking. He is listening to what he "could" get off a standard DVD -- not what he does, but what he "could". As has been established in several other discussions, a standard DVD is capable of holding a 640kb/ps DD track, and occasionally they do. Moreover, to the extent that we're dealing with a DD+ track on Blu-ray, it is not being output as DD+ via optical but is being transformed into something else. (CORRECTED: See discussion in subsequent message.)

Unless I'm seriously misinformed, the most that an optical digital connection can handle is PCM 2.0. (I see Jeff beat me to it.)

M.

you very condescending. i dont need to be talked down to. i KNOW that i can only get normal DD off out of the optical cable thats why i posted i KNOW i am not getting uncompressed. i am not an idiot. I was asking in the original question.....

will a difference be heard. to me it sounds like(maybe they are only mastered diff.) that BD has better sound on them than SD discs.

Posted Image

#18 of 42 OFFLINE   ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer



  • 5,874 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted January 18 2008 - 12:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmoney
you very condescending.

Bmoney, he was not actually replying to you in that post, but to my error in assuming SD DVD DD doesn't do 640Kbps. Still, in practice, I haven't seen any titles that did 640Kbps, so to me, the point is kinda moot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Reuben
As has been established in several other discussions, a standard DVD is capable of holding a 640kb/ps DD track, and occasionally they do.

Ok. But are there really significant SD DVD titles that offer 640Kbps DD tracks? I can't ever recall hearing about any such titles, so the point may be moot.

Quote:
Moreover, to the extent that we're dealing with a DD+ track on Blu-ray, it is not being output as DD+ via optical but is being transformed into something else. (CORRECTED: See discussion in subsequent message.)

I need to doublecheck, but I think my PS3 says 640Kbps DD in those cases though I suppose it's possible the few I've tried actually have 640Kbps DD tracks on them rather than needing conversion.


Quote:
Unless I'm seriously misinformed, the most that an optical digital connection can handle is PCM 2.0. (I see Jeff beat me to it.)

No, you guys are right -- and beat me to it when I corrected myself. Posted Image The PS3 seems to downconvert to 2.0 PCM w/ DPL matrixing.

_Man_
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#19 of 42 OFFLINE   Robert Crawford

Robert Crawford

    Studio Mogul



  • 25,071 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 09 1998
  • Real Name:Robert
  • LocationMichigan

Posted January 18 2008 - 12:06 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bmoney
you very condescending. i dont need to be talked down to. i KNOW that i can only get normal DD off out of the optical cable thats why i posted i KNOW i am not getting uncompressed. i am not an idiot. I was asking in the original question.....

will a difference be heard. to me it sounds like(maybe they are only mastered diff.) that BD has better sound on them than SD discs.

Posted Image
I don't see how Michael was condescending to you with his comments.





Crawdaddy

Crawdaddy

 

Blu-ray Preorder Listing

 


#20 of 42 OFFLINE   Michael Reuben

Michael Reuben

    Studio Mogul



  • 21,769 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 12 1998

Posted January 18 2008 - 12:32 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong
I need to doublecheck, but I think my PS3 says 640Kbps DD in those cases though I suppose it's possible the few I've tried actually have 640Kbps DD tracks on them rather than needing conversion.
It might be helpful to identify specific titles. In my experience, it's uncommon to encounter BD discs with standard DD tracks, but we may just have different tastes. Posted Image

Bmoney, I'm sorry you're offended, but I haven't said anything to you since post 13.

M.
COMPLETE list of my disc reviews.       HTF Rules / 200920102011 Film Lists


Back to Receivers/Separates/Amps



Forum Nav Content I Follow