DD vs DTS - some pro DTS evidence

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Lannie Lorence, Oct 10, 2001.

  1. Lannie Lorence

    Lannie Lorence Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2000
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I purchased a DTS reciever a year ago just to make sure I could always get the best audio, be it DD or DTS. I am no audiophile. My speakers are not high end. If I flip back and forth, sometimes I think I can hear subtle differences on DVD's that are supposed to have slightly better DTS tracks. I also respect that certain DVD's have much better DTS tracks, which people have attributed to different mixes being used. This made sense to me. I didn't think the Dolby Digital or DTS codec made that huge a difference to a non-audiophile such as myself, but I was happy to hear a better track, whether it was because of a different codec or a different mix.
    As many of you may know DVD producer Bill Lustig has answered some questions about the Suspiria DVD on MHVF.
    Here is the link. http://www.mhvf.net/forum/euro/posts/23307.html
    Here is a quote from that interview:
    "- There is a marked difference between the DTS and DD 5.1 mixes as far as music and dialogue/effects levels. Is this a result of the DTS encoding or has the DTS track been mixed differently?
    I read this complaint and immediately compared the DTS and DD soundtracks on my home system, which is kept in THX spec. I could not detect a “marked” or dramatic difference in the 2 tracks except for the normal DTS/DD dynamic range differences. The DD soundtrack is a down conversion of the DTS soundtrack. So since the DD track is derived from the DTS track the mixes are identical."
    If you have the Suspiria disc, try comparing the two tracks. Despite Mr. Lustig's response, the difference is not subtle. Anyone would hear it immediately. Of course, the DTS is slightly louder due to DD dialogue normalization, so compensate for that. Go to any section with loud music. The music is much more active in the surrounds giving it that DTS fuller sound I always hear about. But this time you really hear it, and I mean strong.
    The way I see it is either Mr. Lustig is wrong and it is two different mixes. (I really doubt this, he supervised the DVD and I doubt he would lie about this.) Something bad happened during the Dolby Digital or DTS encoding causing one of the mixes to have the wrong surround levels (a possibility). Or DTS is just a lot better than I actually thought.
    [Edited last by Lannie Lorence on October 10, 2001 at 11:23 PM]
     
  2. Mike Broadman

    Mike Broadman Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2001
    Messages:
    4,951
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I for one don't really know the difference between the DTS and DD5.1 technically, but I always select the DTS track on DVDs if it's available. It just sounds better to me.
    If someone could give a quick rundown of the technical difference, that would be cool.
     
  3. Adam Barratt

    Adam Barratt Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 1998
    Messages:
    2,343
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Real Name:
    Adam
    Interviewer: "Why does the DTS soundtrack sound so different from the Dolby Digital?"
    Lustig: "I compared the soundtracks and didn't notice a dramatic difference."
    Outstanding. That's some pretty killer pro-DTS evidence there. [​IMG]
     
  4. Lannie Lorence

    Lannie Lorence Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2000
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    All I'm saying is the tracks have much more than a subtle difference, and the DVD's producer says the two tracks are from the same mix.
    Try comparing the Suspiria tracks. I think you'll be surprised.
    [Edited last by Lannie Lorence on October 11, 2001 at 01:51 AM]
     
  5. Marty Neudel

    Marty Neudel Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 1999
    Messages:
    223
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    >The DD soundtrack is a down conversion of the DTS soundtrack. So since the DD track is derived from the DTS track the mixes are identical."<
    Mr. Lustig's explanation would imply that all the faults of DTS compression plus all the faults of DD compression will be found in his DD track. Downconverting from DTS is different from using the same PCM mix for both. Of course, the DTS track will sound better in this version. This says nothing about the comparative capabilities of either system; it simply shows that you shouldn't add DD compression to a track restored from DTS compression. You would have an inferior DTS track if it were down-converted from the DD.
    Marty
     
  6. Philip Hamm

    Philip Hamm Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 1999
    Messages:
    6,873
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    quote: Mr. Lustig's explanation would imply that all the faults of DTS compression plus all the faults of DD compression will be found in his DD track. Downconverting from DTS is different from using the same PCM mix for both. Of course, the DTS track will sound better in this version. This says nothing about the comparative capabilities of either system; it simply shows that you shouldn't add DD compression to a track restored from DTS compression. You would have an inferior DTS track if it were down-converted from the DD.[/quote]Similar to the theoretical problems involved when I make a MiniDisc copy of an MP3 file. Two different lossy audio compression schemes one after another can not be good, and could possibly explain the difference. I wonder if this is common practice? It doesn't make any sense to me that they would do this. But of course 192Kb DD 2.0 doesn't make any sense to me either.
    ------------------
    Philip Hamm
    AIM: PhilBiker
    [Edited last by Philip Hamm on October 11, 2001 at 07:50 AM]
     
  7. Lannie Lorence

    Lannie Lorence Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2000
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Marty, that would explain it. That thought actually went through my mind when I first read it. I quickly discounted it just because it didn't make any sense to me to do it that way. I figured he meant he mixed it for a DTS 6.1 release and then compressed it with DTS and DD codecs.
    But I guess it would explain the difference. Now the question is why would he do it that way.
     

Share This Page