I'm beginning to become a "DTS GUY". (1 Viewer)

[JustinCleveland]

Ultimately, I think the dialogue comparing the two formats is very important, simply because it pushes DD to be better with the competition. I like dts, and have heard some great ones, and some terrible DD tracks... and vice-versa (well, not so many bad dts tracks...)

But anyway, my 2 cents.

 

[RobertR]

I read an article in the September issue of VIDEO magagzine where they
compared these two formats in a double blind test.Levels were matched,
and the program material was Last Man Standing, Sewen and Long Kiss
Goodnight. There were 6 reviewers and the comparisons where done head
and seperately. I belive there were (2) 2 1/2 hour sessions.

You would be well served to read this article yourself, But in the
indivdual format rating, the panel chose the two almost indentical,
However in the head to head, the favor was for Dolby Digital just
slightly.

As you said, I'm a skeptic. If DTS advocates want to present evidence to the contrary with comparisons done
with the same rigor, I'm willing to listen. NOTHING presented in this thread (or any other thread I've ever read from a DTS advocate on the Forum) comes CLOSE to meeting that criterion.

 

[chris_clem]

Ok. So from what I gather in this thread so far is that most of us can agree that DD and DTS mixes can both sound amazing given the right mix. Meaning that in theory both codecs could stand on equal footing, right?

Thus, there are instances wherein both formats sound equally good in a given title (the Lethal Weapon series has been almost universally cited as an example of this) and in an ideal setting perhaps ALL titles would sound indistinguishable from each other in either format. However, in practice we all know this is not always so. Sometimes one or the other sounds “better” to certain people. There are some who want to attribute sounding “better” to placebo effect, others to “cooking” mixes and some might even say one codec is inherently superior to the other (this is not flame bait…I am not one of those people) whatever the case may be--- preference need not be backed by a plethora of scientific testing. Take it with a grain of salt if you will but it doesn’t make sense to call a person’s preference invalid due to lack of testing.

IMHO in the titles in which I took the time to compare DTS and DD, DTS came out on top more often than not. Sometimes I couldn’t tell the difference and once or twice DD won out. I would love to have the time to compare both tracks closely all the time but realistically that’s not an option for most of us. This is why I choose DTS over DD as a general rule of thumb and so far I have not heard a crappy DTS mix from any title. For me, having DTS on a disc assures me that there is *at least* one track that sounds above average at worst. I have heard a lot of average to below average sounding dvds on DD but not on DTS. The fact is, DD because of its universality is a mixed bag while DTS is more consistent. Also, if as some people say there are studios that intentionally try to make DTS sound better than DD (and no one claiming the reverse) then shouldn’t that alone should be reason enough to choose that track?

 

[Jeff Gatie]

RobertR

Cooking" has nothing to do with "leaving out" parts of a codec. The codec itself is unchanged. It's the MIX that's changed.

We are in total agreement. My questions were sort of tongue in cheek. I was bringing to light that the DTS afficinados do not complain when the DTS tracks do sound equal to their DD counterparts. IMHO, they should be up in arms if the brilliantly superior DTS codec is not used to it's fullest. Somehow the mix must be either "undercooked" (i.e. the mix is made to sound worse and the "superior" codec makes up for the lousy mix, somehow making it an equal of the DD) or the "superior" parts of the codec are left out (i.e. downgrading the mighty DTS codec to a mere equal of lowly DD). A third possibility is the DD mix is "cooked", but nobody really "cooks" soundtrack mixes, do they?:rolleyes

IF the DTS codec is superior, why do the soundtracks that are "supposedly" from equal mixes sound equal? Answer - maybe, just maybe they are equal.

 

[Jeff Whitford]

What would be really cool is if this forum had a sensor that automatically deleted any thread that was DD vs DTS. I love DTS. Alot of people dont. I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud but there seems to be one of these threads every couple of weeks.

 

[RobertR]

Alot of people dont.

What people?

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Alot of people dont

I also ask, what people do not like DTS?? Please do not equate a skepticism of codec superiority with a dislike of a product. I love my DTS DVD's. Some are vastly superior to their DD counterparts. I just am not convinced every DTS DVD is superior to every DD DVD simply because of the codec and it's superior "lack of compression". I know enough about compression techniques to know this is an absurd assumption, but I don't dislike DTS because of it.

 

[RobertR]

You said it, Jeff Gatie

 

[Lew Crippen]

Robert I thought that you had a particularly interesting post regarding a controlled, double-blind test, conducted by a disinterested and expert party.

As I have not read enough of the results of that kind of test, nor ever participated in a less rigorous one myself, I have come to no conclusion as to any product superiority. It is unfortunate that Jeff Whitford wrote something that I see all too much of in threads such as this: ‘Alot (sic) of people don’t.’

I read this whole thread and find no one who professed to not like DTS. The same with those other threads Jeff references.

I join Robert in stating that I agree with Jeff Gatie’s posting.

And further, I observe that DTS seems to be close to religion: belief is more important than scientific proof. Even though I dislike this attitude, I (so far) have not let it influence me as to my consideration of DTS.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I'd just like to add my insignificant two cents to this discussion.

I've heard DVDs where to my ear, DTS tracks have sounded better, and some DVDs where DTS sounded equal to DD. Off the top of my head, I remember a live Steely Dan DVD that came out in 2000 where the DTS mix blew away the DD. Off the top of my head, a live Paul Simon DVD sounded the same in DD as it did in DTS.

But here's my concern, as has been shared by others in this thread: the more stuff you start packing on the disc, the less space remains. I'm a fan of DVD in no small part because of the special features it can offer. I'm a film student, so that's to be expected. A commentary with a director can be just as good (if not better) than a live lecture, and are great references to have. I can't tell you how many times I've wanted to imitate a shot or something like that in a film, and turning on the commentary track gave some insight into how the filmmakers got that look. Listening to a DTS track does not teach me anything about filmmaking, so given the choice between extras that might and a DTS track, I'll take the extras - which is why I've chosen the DD release of Soderbergh's Out Of Sight with all the special features.

Also, as a college student, I don't have a lot of money to be spending on home theater stuff. My parents both have DD/DTS 5.1 systems, but I personally do not. Now that I spend less and less time at home, I have less access to that equipment. A DTS track won't play on the equipment I have at my place. If I can't play it, it's not worth the loss of special features or video quality. I know that's not a good enough reason to deprive everyone of the tracks, especially because as soon as I can afford a DTS system I'll get one, but I think it is a fair statement that well-produced special features can be more valuable than redundant audio tracks. (I'd get rid of all dubbed tracks too if I could - if I get a foreign language film, I want to watch it in its original language with subtitles, and since most films I have are in English anyhow, I don't need tracks in other languages.)

To conclude, it's been pointed out that in a lot of cases where DTS tracks sounded better than DD, it was a result of having a superior mix rather than it being a superior codec. If that's the case on a particular track, then by all means, I want the superior mix. If they're the same mix or very similar and my choice is a DD track and a good amount of supplements, or a DTS track and little or no supplements, I'll take the DD track. I've never once complained about a disc lacking a DTS track, but I have complained about DTS discs lacking features I'd like to have.

 

[Daniel Becker]

Josh brought up some good points.


I guess i'd like to make this statement. If all Dolby Digital tracks were handled with the type of care and attention that the Star Wars DVDs have I wouldn't mind if DTS disappeared all together. Thats a big if but if it was the case this discussion wouldn't be so common. I guess my end opinion on the matter is that a Dolby Digital soundtrack done the right way can sound amazing and basically render DTS obsolete. Yes, i'm willing to say that. However, with many of the pathetic Dolby Digital tracks I hear I just don't think this will ever happen and I feel DTS remains the king of DVD digital soundtracks. I'm still in awe of what they did with those Star Wars dvds though.


Dan.B

 

[Jeff Whitford]

"Alot of people dont."

Wow Im sorry what I was actually meaning was for the people who hear no difference between DD & DTS that DTS on a DVD doesnt mean much and they love to come on these type of threads and just rehash over and over again that they hear no difference. It gets old. Again im sorry, im sure you guys have never typed anything while you were thinking about the next thing you wanted to say and may not have typed it the way you wanted it to come out.

 

[GlenRF]

well all I have to say about you becoming a DTS guy is "god love you for it".

 

[Adam Barratt]

then why is it so impossible to suggest that DTS at 754 might sound better than DD at 448 or 384???

Because we're not talking about intra-format bit-rate comparisons (as you use in your example). We're talking about inter-format bit-rate variations, which renders comparisons based on bit-rate alone useless.

Adam

 

[RobertR]

what I was actually meaning was for the people who hear no difference between DD & DTS

Your attempt at clarification only serves to further misrepresent what people are saying. NO one in this thread says he "hears no difference" between DD and DTS soundtracks. What we ARE saying is that the difference is attributed to differences in the MIX, not the CODEC.

It's fascinating to me how often this point is reiterated (and given scientific evidence in my previous post), yet continually ignored by people such as yourself.

 

[Michael Reuben]

I was actually meaning was for the people who hear no difference between DD & DTS that DTS on a DVD doesnt mean much and they love to come on these type of threads and just rehash over and over again that they hear no difference. It gets old.

I'd say it's "these type of threads" that get old. I would skip them, except that (a) reading them is part of the job description, and (b) when Adam posts, I almost always learn something new.

M.

 

[chris rick]

There is hardly a gap now between DD and DTS. It's quite different now than it used to be, where the average dts track would annihilate the average DD track. (If you don't believe that look at some of the old DTS ld's--wow) Now though there is no difference really except in some cases.

 

[Jeff Whitford]

RobertR I have been a member of this forum as long as you(maybelonger),iregardless of what it says (the data base mix up a few years ago) I also have been involved in this industry since before there was digital sound in the theaters let a lone in the home. I dont dispute the difference between codec's or mixs so why the attacks directed at me????

The differences between these soundtracks are negligible to my ears, and no one I have played them to (on their own systems as well as mine) has been able to reliably distinguish between the soundtracks when they don't know which one is playing

Michael I agree that I also usually get something out of Adam's posts as well.I would appreciate it if you guys would put away your cross and nails.

 

[Tim Glover]

I am a late to the party dts enjoyer, but comparing the dts laserdisc of Toy Story to the Dolby Digital dvd shows that at least on that soundtrack, the dts is far superior. Not just the ambience or more/tighter/deeper bass, but the dialogue sounds full and rich. The dvd sounds tinny, thin and very bright compared.

Wish I liked the DD more because the laserdisc doesn't look as good on a 106 inch screen.

 

[RobertR]

why the attacks directed at me?

I'm disputing your erroneous statements ("people don't love DTS", "people don't hear a difference between DD and DTS"). No need to characterize it as an "attack".