DTS 6.1 sound tracks are not as Loud as DD EX soundtracks (1 Viewer)

[Patrick Lyons]

I have the Onkyo Integra DTR-7 which is from the same year run as yours only with their Integra Line. I have also noticed the DTS tracks being quieter. You may want to check your speaker settings in setup. I recently discovered that mine were some how set to THX which makes them "small". When I manually configured my speakers to "Large" the effect described was significanly lessened but still there. There are also some specific DTS surround settings especially in regards to the subwoofer settings.

 

[Josh Simpson]

I want to apologize as well if I threw fuel on the DD vs. DTS fire.

 

[Kevin*Ha]

No need to apologize - your question was a good one and this thread is full of interesting information, even if it might not all pertain to the original post.

 

[Roger J]

The "large" and "small" setting is the THX setup are crossover settings and should have little or nothing to do with overall volume.

It is quite possible there is something in Onkyo's implementation of the DD and DTS decoders that is boosting the DD tracks based on the usual practice of the dialnorm feature attenuating the DD track by 4 dB. If that is the case, then a soundtrack such as The Two Towers which has a dialnorm setting that is 4 dB louder than usual would sound very loud.

 

[richardWI]

I don't really need a source for logic and common sense. Normalizing the dialogue will give the impression of a consistent dialogue volume level. Turn it up and, db for db, you'll get a louder dialogue level than on DTS, but you're being cheated out of the wider dialogue dynamic range that DTS can provide. DD's dialnorm is a way of dumbing down the dynamic range for the average consumer.

 

[Jon_Gregory]

Well thanks for all the information. I know this thread may have gotten off track a bit but it still gave me some direction to investigate this more. There is a lot of other useful information that came as a result also.

Michael, to answer an ealier question that you had:
I have set my receiver up with test tones and a SPL meter.

It is not a matter that one sounds better than the other on my setup, it's just the simple fact that DD is louder. I know that I mentioned LOTR, but it is not just this DVD. It seems to be across the board with all DTS soundtracks including but not limited to:

Saving Private Ryan
Gladiator
Jurrasic Park (all 3)
and many more.

I will try to find out all I can about this and maybe find something that is specific about the onkyo receivers. If I do I will post my findings.

And Moderators, If you would like to re-title this discusion and move it somewhere that is more appropiate, by all means, do it.

Just let me know where you put it and what title you give it.

I consider my question answered.

 

[Tim Glover]

This has been a good discussion and reasonably free from the usual dts-dd battle. Since I got my little hands on the legendary NHT 3.3's I've been doing a ton of audio comparisons and still haven't really got the sound consistent.

For the original question, the only time I find the DD track to be louder is when my reciever lights up and says "Dialnorm-Offset +4 db" which means I need to turn this baby down a bit. To get a fair dts comparo I usually have to turn the volume up to 3-4 #'s higher.

Both LOTR sets have the dialnorm set high and have to be adjusted. Some Columbia titles are set too low and have to be raised. The DD tracks do have a somewhat stronger bass presence even when the volume levels are matched.

Off topic but does anyone know where to locate an article discussing benefits of setting mains to Large and using a subwoofer???? This setting varies from movie to movie. Thanks!

 

[Roger J]

No, dialnorm is not that at all. At least two other people in this thread tried to explain to you that dialnorm does not affect dynamic range yet you do not seem to want to believe them and instead want to continue to make statements that are not accurate.

Dialnorm does one thing, and one thing only. This feature of the Dolby Digital coder attenuates the overall volume of the encoded material. That is all it does. it does not affect the dynamic range of the encoded audio. That is something completely different.

The reason Dolby included dialnorm in their format was to allow content producers to "normalize", as in make consistent, the volume level of different material. An example would be DTV broadcasting. If applied properly, dialnorm would allow for a consistent volume level of different programming. The feature has also been used in DVD production to set overall volume level of various soundtracks to a level consistent with usual production levels when a soundtrack master may be slightly louder or slightly lower in level using the average level of the dialog as a reference point.

Unfortunately, dialnorm has also been misused on a few occaisons in an attempt to add "punch" to a soundtrack. Because the standard dialnorm setting is -27dBfs which gives 4 dB attenuation, it is also possible to increase the overall level of a soundtrack (relative to the "norm") by increasing the dialnorm setting to something above -27dBfs, up to -31dBfs which is no attenuation. Virtually all Dolby Digital decoders in consumer gear are designed based on a dialnorm setting of -27dBfs. Upping the dialnorm ssetting on a soundtrack will make it louder relative to "reference" level.

So, once again, dialnorm is not about "dumbing down" anything and it does not restrict dynamic range.

 

[Adam Barratt]

No it isn't. You appear to misunderstand its functioning and purpose.

Adam

 

[Rich Malloy]

Are you guys suggesting that "dialnorm" raises the volume of the dialog comparable to the other elements of the soundtrack, and thus might make DD tracks seem louder than DTS tracks on the whole because the dialog is louder?

(Just trying to follow the argument.)

FWIW, I'm not approaching this as a "DTS vs. DD" thing. I've never heard any DD track on any DVD-video or DVD-audio disc that sounds better than its DTS counterpart, though I've heard one or two that I found nearly identical; for me, there's no argument about which usually sounds better, for whatever reason. But speaking from a music mastering perspective, I'm immediately suspect of any CD that seems to play loudly at a lower volume setting than is usual, as this almost certainly suggests over-maximization. This is a serious problem in music mastering, at least for rock and pop recordings, and I'd hate to see the "loudness wars" extended into DVD, though I suspect this is already occurring.

 

[Michael Reuben]

Adam, Roger J and I certainly aren't suggesting that. I hesitate to speak for anyone else.

Dialnorm is an extremely simple mechanism (for lack of a better word). A value is included in the DD bitstream that tells the decoder to lower (or raise) the playback volume by a certain amount, the default being -4db. This change does not affect the recording, nor does it single out any element of the playback. It simply changes the playback volume of the entire -- repeat, entire -- soundtrack. It is no different than raising or lowering the master volume control.

Rich, I understand the issue you're raising, but dialnorm is not part of it.

M.

 

[CraigF]

Can you guys see the dialnorm setting for regular 5.1 Dolby tracks with your equipment? I can't with my decoder, as far as I know, can only see it for DD tracks when I'm in a THX mode.

And even more OT, I am not sure exactly what the decoder is doing when I use dts in a THX mode (dts+THX the display says), the manual is very unclear on this. Any ideas?

 

[Michael Reuben]

Yes. All of my DD processors have been Lexicons, and they all show the dialnorm value in one form or another.

As for the other question, I'd suggest starting a separate thread in Receivers.

M.

 

[Roger J]

CraigF,

I have certainly not seen all DD/DTS decoders, but I have some experience with more than a few. The most common implementation of DD decoders will not give an indication of a dialnorm setting if the "standard" setting of -27dBfs is used. If a different dialnorm setting is used, then the controller will most often display an "offset" value.

Continuing to use Lord of the Rings as an example, when the bitstream is first detected by the decoder, the dialnorm value is displayed for a few seconds. On my particular controller, two lines of text are available so the display reads...

"Dialog Normalization
Offset +4 DB"

This could vary somewhat for different controller/receivers. What the value means is that soundtrack has a dialnorm setting 4 dB above the "reference" of -27dBfs (-31dBfs). What that is telling me, the user, is in order tp play this soundtrack at calibrated "reference level" on this controller, I would set the master volume to -4 dB instead of 0 dB reference level. This is for a THX controller which generally uses the 0 dB mark for calibrated reference level.

Another example of the blatent misuse of dialnorm is the recent DVD release of the movie, Underworld. The soundtrack for this film was obviously already recorded "hot" with very wide dynamic range. Columbia Tristar mastered the soundtrack with a dialnorm setting of -31dBfs, 4 dB above "reference". The result is a ridiculously loud DVD that has even the most devoted bass-heads riding the volume control.

 

[CraigF]

OK, thanks guys. I can not listen at reference levels in my room, it's much too loud for me. So I just note the dialnorm setting when I see it, for interest's sake, and +4 seems to be quite common. I'll pay better attention to see if it comes up for DD tracks that I know are not "normal", but admit I don't watch the decoder display much, just make sure it looks right, and dialnorm is only displayed for a few seconds at the beginning and I'm usually fooling with something else then...

 

[Leon Liew]

Jon, perhaps you may wish to try hooking up your system with
coax cable as I have noticed that optical cable was used
as mentioned in your posting.

I have 2 DVD players hooked up to my Onkyo TDX676 receiver
one with coax and one with optical. Have done comparisons
between the two and the coax cables sounds solid with
punch with both Dolby Digital and DTS soundtracks.

Have always felt that coax cables gave better sound & bass
because of it's solid core of copper wire whereas optical
cables transmit signal thru light giving a rather 'hollow'
feel to the sound. Just my own opinion but others may beg
to differ.

 

[Rick ricardo]

I have also noticed the dolby soundtrack as being louder on the dirty dancing, fellowship of the ring, and led zeppelin dvd's. But the fellowship's dts soundtrack was better.

 

[Adam Barratt]

That would be me...

DTS and Dolby Digital are packeted systems. That is, they are sent to the decoder as encapsulated, self-contained frames that include control information about the audio material being transmitted. This information ensures that the soundtrack is decoded with 100% accuracy or not at all, regardless of the cable being used.

The decoder uses a small piece of frame control information to synchronise with the packeted data, and then begins buffering it. Control information is then used to calculate what a word of the frame being decoded should look like. Once decoding of the actual frame begins, it is compared with the calculated frame word. If the two match, the entire frame is decoded, if not the data is discarded and the soundtrack blanked until the next intact frame is decoded (or the last intact frame may be repeated). This process ensures that the data coming from the decoder is identical to the data stored on the DVD (if that's what you happen to be listening to). Only once the data for an entire frame has been checked and verified as 100% intact is it passed to the DAC.

Because of this control information, comparison verification and buffering, these systems are totally immune to transmission jitter and anything other than catastrophic interference (which would result in no sound at all, not a subtle difference in sound quality). In other words, the type of cable you use to connect your DVD player to your decoder will make absolutely zero difference.

In an experiment carried out several years ago, a Dolby Digital soundtrack was decoded using a stripped metal coathanger as the digital interconnect. When the resultant signal was analysed by the pro decoder being used it was found to be a 100% error free.

Adam

 

[Rich Malloy]

Yeah, but that decoder ain't as sensitive as my ears, and certainly doesn't analyze every element that's important to the perceived rightness of sound/music. And it couldn't, simply because we haven't identified those elements in their totality (and may never succeed in doing so). Measurements are important, they help explain what we hear and can provide important baselines. But, in and of themselves, they are incomplete.

Simply put, your ears are more sensitive devices, and the only measure that's ultimately of importance. Ultimately, there is no "objective" perfection in sound; there is only how we perceive it.

I blind-tested coax vs. toslink, and coax sounded more musical. Get a buddy, do a blind-test (double-blind, if possible), and trust your ears.

 

[CraigF]

I have not tested cables with packeted info, but for general audio with unpacketed info, say from a CD player digital output, there is a very noticeable difference between cables. I happen to prefer coax for that, possibly because less electrical conversions allow things to be kept "tighter" and more musical sounding.

I would not expect there to be any difference between cables with packeted info with error detection, such as dts/DD, since the data is essentially "reassembled" before being converted to analog etc. Like Adam said, as long as the data is not corrupted in transmission, the transmission medium shouldn't matter as far as the sound...to the best of my understanding anyway!