How do you play DVD-Audio discs in DD5.1 on a DVD-A player? (1 Viewer)

[Apinder Nagi]

I have a Toshiba SD-4700. When I play a DVD-Audio disc in it, it only offers me the option of playing it in DVD-Audio mode or in Dolby Digital 2.0. However, the same disc, when inserted in a regular DVD player, plays back in Dolby Digital 5.1.

How can I play DVD-Audio discs in DD 5.1 on the Toshiba? The player does not manage bass in the DVD-Audio mode, and my speakers cannot handle the bass.

I want to avoid having to use something like the Outlaw ICBM if possible.

 

[John Kotches]

Apinder:

Go into setup mode and find the General Settings.

Look for a field called "Priority Contents".

Set it to "Video / DVD-VIdeo"

That being said, spring for the Outlaw so that you can hear how much better DVD-A is than DD or DTS.

Regards,

 

[Philip Hamm]

John's advice is correct.

I can't help but wonder why bother with DVD-Audio when you're just going to use the crappy DD track?

 

[Matt DeVillier]

Philip,

the DD track does offer the advantage of a 5.1 mix and greater dynamic range than a regular audio cd. For some people the benefits gained going from the DD5.1 to the DVD-A track aren't enough to warrant the purchase of a separate bass management solution and extra cables, especially if they only have an entry level speaker system

 

[John Kotches]

Matt,
Respectfully, I disagree.
The sonic improvements from even a modest player with the addition of bass management to DVD-Audio are (IMO of course) well worth the expense.
It's the entry level speakers, often with limited frequency response, that benefit most from bass management.
In 2002, I believe you'll find that more and more DVD-A players are including Bass Management. While a bit pricier than the Toshiba x700 models with DVD-A, the Denon 1600 will have basic bass management on DVD-A at the US$550 or US$600 price point releasing in the next month or two.
Just my contrasting thoughts
Regards,

 

[Steve T]

I've heard some very good DD5.1 tracks that rivaled CD quality sound, but they have not been on any of the DVD-A discs I own.

Steve

 

[Matt DeVillier]

John,

I think you may have misinterpreted what I wrote (or I misspoke). I fully realize the difference the ICBM makes vs not having it for a DVD-A player w/o bass management. I'm personally waiting for players like the Denon 1600 rather than forking out for the ICBM for my Panny RA-60, and am putting up with the reduced bass in the meantime. Though the limited bass management on the 1600 might be a bit of a let down (for me anyway) after being spoiled by the flexible bass management on my receiver, a Sony DB-840 (which allows a selectable 120/90/60/40Hz crossover for the mains, center, and surrounds separately), so I may end up springing for the ICBM anyways...

But what I was suggesting in my previous post was there there exists a certain segment for whom the difference between CD audio and the DD5.1 track on a DVD-A disc was plenty, and that the difference in going to the DVD-A track(s) was not worth it once the extra cost for the ICBM was figured in.

-Matt

 

[John Kotches]

Matt,
I suppose that could be the case, but I'm not buying it
Perhaps my point of view is tainted because I listen to DVD-A mixes before I listen to DD/DTS mixes on DVD-A discs?
Regards,

 

[RicP]

the DD track does offer the advantage of a 5.1 mix and greater dynamic range than a regular audio cd

Nope. DD does not have a greater DR than CD Audio, certainly not on a DVD-A disc, nor does it sound anywhere near as good. Ask anyone that has Laserdiscs with DD and PCM audio tracks on them.

DVD-A has a 5.1 mix and is uncompressed PCM. Get a DVD-A player and hear the discs the way they were meant to be heard.

 

[Matt DeVillier]

Nope. DD does not have a greater DR than CD Audio, certainly not on a DVD-A disc, nor does it sound anywhere near as good. Ask anyone that has Laserdiscs with DD and PCM audio tracks on them.

Ric,
regular audio cd = Redbook Audio CD. A DD compressed 5.1 track can have a greater dynamic range that 16/44.1 Redbook CD Audio. And (if you had read my 2nd post you would know) I do have a DVD-A player and enjoy the uncompressed 5.1 tracks on the DVD-A discs I have

 

[RicP]

A DD compressed 5.1 track can have a greater dynamic range that 16/44.1 Redbook CD Audio

No it doesn't. Not for audio anyway. For a film soundtrack perhaps it does, but not for audio. They aren't re-recording the tracks, so what was on the master is what's going on the DVD-A, albeit remixed for 5 channels. I'd eat my shoe if there's an audio recording out there on DD that has a Dynamic Range greater than 90db. DD on a DVD-A disc is 384kbps -- not 48Khz/640kbps. You're going to say that it is going to sound better than a PCM stream at 1.44Mbps? I don't think so.
DD for music is anathema to me, it's compressed to death and the high frequency artifacts are virtually unlistenable.
dts gets it better IMO for music, but neither of those even come close to matching the full 24/96 PCM stream from a real DVD-A disc.

 

[Matt DeVillier]

Ric,
assuming a redbook audio cd and a DD5.1 mix on a dvd-a disc both come from the same 16/44.1 or 16/48 master (DAT tape or otherwise), it is possible for the DD5.1 mix to have greater dynamic range depending on how the LFE channel is used (because when it is decoded it gets boosted by 10dB relative to the other 5 channels).
I realize that the DD5.1 mix is only 384Kbps, and all the limitations that goes with that (rolloff above 12kHz? etc). I'm not trying to argue that the DD5.1 mix sounds "better" than either a 16/44.1 cd-a or 24/96 dvd-a mix. I know that an uncompressed PCM track is far superior (= truer to the original recording) to any DD5.1 track. I don't listen to the DD5.1 tracks on my dvd-a discs. I was simply conjecturing on why some people might prefer the DD5.1 track over regular cd audio and over the dvd-a tracks when bass management was not available

 

[PaulKH]

Apinder - I have a Toshiba 4700 and one DVD-Audio disc which says it has 6ch DVD-A as well as stereo and DD tracks. I can't get the DD track to play either even setting the player to DVD-video priority, etc.

 

[Apinder Nagi]

Paul,

I set my player up like John Kotches suggested and it worked fine for me. Maybe it has something to do with the particular disc?

Have you tried to play back your disc in a regular DVD player? I only have two DVD Audio discs - Deep Purple's Machine Head and ELP's Brain Salad Surgery - and they play back in DD in my regular DVD player.

 

[John Kotches]

Paul,

Is this disc by chance a "flipper"? I've seen DVD-A discs with surround on one side, DVD-V and stereo on the other.

It would be helpful if you told us the title, one of us could very well have it in our collection.

Regards,

 

[PaulKH]

Thanks Apinder and John - inspired by your comments, I finally broke the code.

To play the DD track off 'Corrs - In Blue' DVD-Audio DVD, I had to set the 4700 to Bitstream output, DVD-Video play priority, and THEN, when I played it through the receiver (telling the receiver to get the digital output) I got NOTHING. Then I pressed the 'audio' button on the 4700 remote and it showed that the sound track was indeed DD5.1 so I pressed audio again, and I guess it 'selected it' this time, and I got audio.

Besides this tedious theoretical exercise though, it made me appreciate how much better the DVD-Audio analog audio output is than DD!!!!!!!!

I'm running Monster Interlink400II's (3 pairs) from 4700 to my new Elite 49TX receiver - sounds GREAT.

 

[Lewis Besze]

Nope. Ask anyone that has Laserdiscs with DD and PCM audio tracks on them

99% of the time I've favoured DD over PCM through DPL on LD[movies] !

 

[John Kotches]

Lewis,

Your comparison isn't exactly what I would call "equal" either.

DPL vs DD5.1 is what you really compared, not PCM vs. DD.

DPL sounds terrible compared to DD, that's a given.

The real comparisons are when you take a DD5.1 track and put it up against the (same masters) DVD-Audio track.

DPL-2 could very likely get the results between PCM and DD much closer together.

Regards,

 

[Matt DeVillier]

yes, a better comparison would be the PCM track on a laser compared to the DD2.0 track on the same DVD (for some of the early DVDs which were simply the LD masters pressed on a DVD, like backdraft/usual suspects).

 

[Lewis Besze]

John I wasn't saying anything regarding DVD-A.

My point was that DD beats DPL[even PCM on LD] 99% of the time,and I'm not sure why it was brought into this debate in the first place.

And like you pointed out they really aren't apples to apples,IMO.