Is DTS a "failure?" (1 Viewer)

[Dan Hine]

You got it Laurence! You may need to change your settings on your receiver from 5 channel stereo to just "standard" or "auto." Whatever the case may be. Have fun!
Dan

 

[LCSeminole]

Thanx Dan, I'm on vacation this week which means Best Buy will be getting some business, can't wait. Thanx again!!!

 

[Chris PC]

Well, I guess it hasn't "failed" yet, but its kinda crappy that the "better" format hasn't more coverage. What an annoyance. I say it should all go DTS or DD should be upgraded to match or surpass DTS.

 

[Geoff S]

Since Dolby Digital is the deafult for DVDs, and HDTV, it will be around for some time and hold the majority of the digital sound market.

I don't forsee DTS making it into the HDTV stage, and always being 2nd place on DVD. Even on HD-DVD in a few years.

DTS Music CDs are fading away since DVD-Audio and SACD have hit the streets.
However...... I don't see DTS as a failure. The mission is simple, create a multichannel compressed sound format that preserves the full sonic spectrum to create "master quality audio". Dolby is 12:1 compression (either 384kbps or 448kbps), while DTS is a loose 4:1 (1.5mbps or sometimes 768kbps). This higher bitrate allows increased audio resolution on properly mastered audio tracks.

However it is true that a Great Dolby mix can outshine a good DTS mix. Ex. a review I read a few years back for the Laserdisc and DVD release of 'Titanic'. It simply stated (based on the reviewer's opinion of course) that the LD Dolby mix was real good. The LD DTS mix was Great. But with a little extra remastering the Dolby DVD mix was astounding and was a mere standard 384kbps. Perhaps with further remastering a DTS DVD of that film could sound even better.

The only reasons we probably havn't seen more DVDs with the DTS alternative is because of the large amount of space that it takes up when a full 1.5mbps is added, which could be used instead for better picture quality, or extras. And also the cost and time of adding a DTS mix.

But personally, whenever I have the choice of either going Dolby or DTS I always go DTS. As long as the remastering gets better, audio will sound better and better, but with DTS's extra edge for resolution it should be the prefered playback standard for everybody who bought a DVD player and receiver since 1999 and on (most all players and receivers have DTS capability). All Digital Theater Systems needs to do is insure that every track is remastered to the extent and they win because more people will be saying "The Dolby mix is great, but the DTS mix is slightly better, so lets listen to it".

My $.02

 

[Russell _T]

Could someone please tell me who developed DTS, and who owns the rights to it?

 

[Dan Hine]

Russell,
This website should answer your question.
Dan

 

[Jeff Leeds]

I think that we've seen good progress with DTS. I remember in 1997 buying my first DVD player and receiver that had DTS (Sherwood Newcastle 945) and it was one of only two at the time that offered DTS. Finding ANYTHING with DTS was hard, but it is getting more and more. I'd say 10% of my 325 disks have it.

The thing that sets DTS apart from everything else is that it is a 100% guarentee that you get a 5.1, I HATE IT when I see the Dolby Digital symbol and get it home only to find it is 2.0 or 4.0 and the stupid Dobly Surround light comes on!

 

[Joe e h]

I am not impressed at all with DTS CDs. The question of if DTS is a failure, given the numbers you started the thread with the answer would be Yes.

Are the numbers actually correct I have not checked. However with that small of a market share, its a failure. OF course there will be passionate opinions otherwise.

Joe

 

[Dan Hitchman]

As much as I like DTS, i will say that I wish both DTS and Dolby Digital were turned into failures.

I'd much rather see HD-DVD with 7.1 discrete, MLP compressed PCM at 24 bit/192 kHz resolution or 7.1 discrete DSD.

Reliable super-capacity discs can be made or developed that would make having lossy compressed audio formats obsolete! The manufacturers just have to get off their butts and do it!! There is absolutely no reason except for politics that we still use lossy compressed technology.

Dan

 

[David Judah]

I wouldn't call it a failure, since it is a new company compared to Dolby. I think they(DTS)are happy they've been able to gain the market share they have considering they have only been around since '93(theatrically)and much later than that on the home consumer front.

DTS decoding is available in practically every consumer processor, many DVD players, and almost all major studios have DTS encoding capability. That's not bad for an optional codec.

With Coherent Acoustic's ability to run lossless they could even branch into other formats as the need to save space is diminished. It is a very flexible codec.

DJ

 

[Jeff Adams]

DTS a failure? Not at all. In the beggining of dvd there were no DTS titles, but over the past year I would say that 3/4ths of the new dvd releases are encoded with a DTS soundtrack. And alot of the older titles that were only in DD are now available in DTS. DTS is also available on pretty much any home theater product. Even the very low end gear is available with DTS. So I would think that they are pretty successful especially since they have only been around since Jurrasic Park in 93.

 

[Joe e h]

Interesting Thread

The last post stated about 3/4ths of the titles released in the past year have DTS soundtracks. Where did this Data come from?

Joe

 

[Willy burz]

Ummm NO, I'll take DTS over Dolby any day of the week hands down! A perfect DTS track is always better than a perfect dolby track!

 

[KyleRoussel]

I think the point of the original question can be taken another way instead of the DTS vs DD thread.

WHY isn't DTS on more DVD's? Out of my 100 DVD's maybe 15% are encoded with it.

 

[Doug_NHT]

I dig DTS encoded dvd's. It seems as though the sound field is more forward than say THX cinema on my Denon 4802 which sounds a bit subdued on my system. If a dvd is DTS encoded, that's the way I set it up for playback.

 

[Andrew Pratt]

I guess the question to ask is what's DTS's business plan? Only by knowing that can we judge them to be a failure or not...yes they have managed to get their decoders into every receiver made now and DVD players are all DTS complient so in that respect they're doing ok. There's a fair number of DVD's with DTS tracks on them so they aren't failing to badly on that front though I'd love to see a higher percentage of new movies with DTS as an option but IMO where they've failed is to create a distinct niche. By that I mean yes DTS usually does sound slightly better but its not a big enough difference for most JSP's to notice or care about. Its simply not much of an issue for most people outside of us enthusiasts. I think had they pushed the bit rate limits and marketed it as an audiophile version they might have done more for their image as a company but right now they're just another logo on the DVD box to most consumers. Again though I don't know what their business plan is so I won't call them a failure but IMO with HDTV being DD and the DVD standard being DD they will always be a small time player in a big pond if they continue they way they have been.

 

[Steven Simon]

I think the Studios are the main reason we see certain titles with DTS, or not. Studios such as Dreamworks(Spileberg) and Universal use DTS tracks on almost all of there new titles. Fox seems to have a handful of DTS titles, but Paramount and Warner just don't believe in the DTS format, but I do remember Paramount saying the first DTS title may be a tiny Harrison Ford Trilogy
While I believe DTS is an excellent format, I don't think it's the pinnacle of 5.1/6.1 audio. Dolby Digital 5.1 in my opinion has proven to be just as good sonically....

 

[Greg Haynes]

Steve is right about the studios. How is DTS going to expand and grow if certain major studio's don't release any DTS titles. Look at Paramount, they haven't released a single DTS title at all. Warner started to come around with the Lethal Weapon Series, Twister, & Interview with a Vampire but after their releases Warner just stopped. What happened?

I applaud Dreamworks & Universal for their complete support with DTS. I just wish other studios could show the same.

 

[GregK]

I think Warner Brothers was fulfilling an older contractual obligation with DTS. Of particular interest regarding WB's DTS DVDs: All four are encoded with full bitrate DTS tracks, (1509kb/s) *not* the half bitrate DTS DVDs we see all of the the time now. (756kb/s) ..Also, the 448kb/s DD tracks were at set at the 31 dial norm setting. (Dial norm defeated)

 

[Adam Barratt]

Well, I wouldn't say DTS is a unmitigated failure but it certainly hasn't been successful based purely on available titles. Despite what some here believe, DTS titles make up a very small proportion of new DVD titles; certainly nowhere near 75%, or even 10% for that matter.

Judging from the responses in this thread, what they have unquestionably been is a marketing success. The sheer level of devotion to the format, based on very little or no evidence of actual technical superiority, is truly an impressive achievement.

In its current form (754kbps) I personally believe DTS is wasted data that would be better spent on enhancing video quality.

I applaud Dreamworks & Universal for their complete support with DTS. I just wish other studios could show the same.

This is only to be expected, as DreamWorks (via Spielberg) and Universal both have financial interests in Digital Theater Systems.

Adam