No DTS on any of the big summer blockbuster DVDs? (1 Viewer)

[Brent M]

I can't see how anyone could find DTS to be a redundant feature and a waste of space. My favorite demo DVDs for sound all have DTS(The Haunting DTS-ES, Saving Private Ryan, Jurassic Park-corrected version, Gladiator, Daredevil, U-571, Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition, Fellowship of the Ring EE, Pearl Harbor, The Fast and the Furious, etc). I think most open-minded people would agree that these are some of the greatest reference quality audio tracks available on DVD right now. However, when it comes to Dolby Digital, the only discs I ever use for demos are The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, Black Hawk Down and Toy Story 2. I think that makes a pretty strong case for DTS over DD, but maybe I'm just crazy. Anyway, with all of these big summer action movies coming out I really believe that at least a few of them would benefit from a DTS track and it really sucks that the studios aren't making that option available to those of us who prefer DTS over DD.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I think that makes a pretty strong case for DTS over DD, but maybe I'm just crazy. Anyway, with all of these big summer action movies coming out I really believe that at least a few of them would benefit from a DTS track and it really sucks that the studios aren't making that option available to those of us who prefer DTS over DD.

 

[Michael Reuben]

My favorite demo DVDs for sound all have DTS(The Haunting DTS-ES, Saving Private Ryan, Jurassic Park-corrected version, Gladiator, Daredevil, U-571, Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition, Fellowship of the Ring EE, Pearl Harbor, The Fast and the Furious, etc). I think most open-minded people would agree that these are some of the greatest reference quality audio tracks available on DVD right now.

The unspoken assumption in that statement -- and it's a common one -- is that those tracks sound good because of the digital format (as opposed to numerous other factors, notably the mix). It's a faulty assumption.

M.

 

[Brent M]

What exactly is the faulty assumption again? Please enlighten me because as far as I can tell those tracks DO sound better than their DD counterparts....at least to me.

 

[Randy A Salas]

Please enlighten me because as far as I can tell those tracks DO sound better than their DD counterparts....at least to me.

You're turning this into a discussion over quality between the two formats, which you specifically asked others not to do.

 

[Nick_Scott]

I can't see how anyone could find DTS to be a redundant feature and a waste of space. My favorite demo DVDs for sound all have DTS

Most of my "top 10 soundtracks" are also DTS tracks.
But, they are mostly Dreamworks tracks, which partially owned DTS and obviously used a different master. So there is some politics involved.

I do consider DTS to be redundant, but I also always consider it closed to the original. We have had many sound techs say on HTF that Dolby tracks are often compressed and filled with downconversion artifacts, with an under-utilized .1 channel.

So, I'd rather they just DO THE DOLBY TRACK RIGHT, then DO NOT compromize for J6P who doesnt really care about the audio anyway....
There is no reason the DOLBY version of "The Haunting" and "Saving Private Ryan" should sound as different as they do... unless they were either trying to sell 2 different copies, or promote one format over the other.

-nick

 

[Jason Seaver]

Well, you're part of an audience that values sound enough to have specific "demo tracks". The audience that just wants to watch the movie is more interested in the bonus features that the space for at DTS track could otherwise be used for. They (and I include myself in them) don't find the difference between DD and DTS significant enough to pay extra/sacrifice other content for.

And I suppose you could argue that it's the DD track that's redundant, but it's gotta be there. Certainly, having both is redundant, and because of its space and licensing costs, DTS is fairly easy to cut.

 

[Michael Reuben]

What exactly is the faulty assumption again?

You're assuming, as many people do, that it's the DTS encoding that makes these tracks sound "good" or "better" or whatever. Comparative testing of DD and DTS, using the same source material, has failed to demonstrate that there is any significant difference in the ability of the two formats to accurately reproduce an uncompressed original. (For details, see this thread in the Software Archive.)

The Haunting, Gladiator and Saving Private Ryan are examples where it has been pretty well established that the DD and DTS tracks use different mixes. That being the case, the question shouldn't be, "Why aren't they including a DTS track?" It should be, "How can we be sure that the very best available mix is being used for the DVD?"

There are also some fairly technical issues with the way DD encoding is handled, which are discussed here. These issues may (I stress "may") account for some of the perceived deficiencies in certain DD tracks, both as compared to their DTS counterparts and to their DD predecessors on laserdisc.

The issue of how to get a "reference quality" soundtrack onto DVD is multifaceted and complex. The false assumption is that a significant benefit can be obtained merely by running the soundtrack through a DTS encoder.

M.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

One member here has done a far more meaninful test than those who just buy a disc and listen to both mixes and decide which one is 'right' without ever hearing the uncompressed studio master(s) or determining if the same mix/master was fed into both encoding processes.

And what did his test (which included controlled encoding from the same source) find? Neither sounded appreciably better or worse than the other.

DTS 'fans' like to assert that it is a 'fact' that the DTS codec is 'better' than DD because they compare some soundtracks and find the DTS version more pleasing to their ears. Yet this 'fact' doesn't jibe with the 'fact' that many people find laserdisc DD tracks at a lowly 384k bitrate to sound better than either the DD or DTS track on the comparable DVD! I guess the latter 'proves' the superiority of the DD codec, right?

There's more that's going on in DVD soundtrack-land than codecs, people. Accept it. There are different mixes, different masters, different codec settings, and tweaking for who knows what else.

Ever consider that discs where the DD sounds as the same as the DTS were possibly done right, and that all the discs where the DTS sounds 'better'/'richer'/'fatter' are the discs that were done wrong. If you are not open to that possibility, you must want to believe that the DTS codec is superior.

The right thing for the studios to do is to take extreme care to make sure the DD track is presented with care and not compromised in any way. Then eliminate DTS tracks from DVD forever. And use the increased bit headroom to improve picture quality to better-than-Superbit levels on every single disc.


ps 'Good' and 'better' are words that should really never be used in this context. 'Neutral', 'accurate', and 'transparent' are what you should strive for, and if you don't have access to the original master you are not qualified to make such judgements.

 

[John Beavers]

I may not buy any of these DVDs and just wait for the eventual "upgraded" versions as I'm getting sick of this stupid practice of releasing a movie and then releasing it again with better audio/video quality just a few months later.

Getting back to the main issue raised in this thread. The problem is that DTS exclusion may become standard even for the special edition release. Consider the Black Hawk Down SE with no DTS. The European version had the same content, along with the "SuperBit" video and a DTS track. This tells me there's really no issue with space, it's just a money saving factor for the studio. Obviously their market research showed that in the US Superbit video/DTS would not sell more copies, but in Europe it would. Now this pisses me off, and though I really wanted that SE DVD I refused to buy it. In my estimation I'm being ripped off. As a consumer in the USA it was deemed that I would pay the same cost and accept less. I will not.

 

[Adam_ME]

I think it's strictly based on which studio is releasing the DVD. As stated by others in this thread, WB doesn't support DTS, hence T3 and Matrix Reloaded won't include it. And on a side note, we've been told by Jonathan Mostow to expect additional SEs for T3 in the future(and it's almost a given the same goes for The Matrix series), so they've got extra motivation to hold out on certain features this time around.

As far as Charlie's Angels and Bad Boys II, Sony supports DTS....but only for Superbit releases. Sure, they've made exceptions in the past with Spielberg titles and Memento(which BTW didn't get a DTS track til its 2nd DVD release), but those are extremely rare. Hell, I think it's a minor miracle they're including any extras for these two films and not going the bare bones route like they usually do.

Universal's a tougher studio to figure out. They still support DTS, but you never can tell which titles are gonna get the treatment. For example, Scarface gets a DTS track despite being a 3-hour movie and needing all the room it can get for the transfer, yet much shorter films like The Hulk and American Wedding don't. Then again, Universal's DVD department has been a disaster for a while now, so good luck understanding the logic behind any of their decisions.

Disney is a lot like Universal. They support DTS, but are inconsistent when designating which DVDs will include it. Frankly though, I'm a lot more pissed about their omission of trailers than audio tracks these days. Not to mention a few catalog titles I was eagerly awaiting turning up with non-anamorphic transfers(*cough* The Ref *cough*).

Paramount is pretty much in the same camp as WB. They released a few DTS titles and don't seem have any intention of doing it again. But much like Sony, I'm thankful just to get supplements on their DVDs, so a DTS track from them would just be icing on the cake.

MGM if I'm not mistaken has only done two DTS titles so far. Hannibal, which I'm certain was at the behest of Ridley Scott, and Die Another Day, which had some audio synch issues with its DTS track. So I pretty much place them in the same camp as Paramount and WB.

Which leaves New Line, Dreamworks, and Fox(I'm only including actual studios). They don't always include DTS on their big titles, but at least they're strong supporters of the format. Honestly though, everything about their DVD releases are stellar. They're by far the best in the business. Yes, New Line and Dreamworks have the benefit(at least in this case) of smaller libraries which means more attention can be paid to each title. But you could say the same thing about Artisan and they sure as hell don't churn out quality product consistently(if ever).

 

[Lev-S]

Two small points that are not opinionated but rather factual...

Just read the other post and would care not to get into it...

1. DTS has the only true 6.1 format: DTS:ES discrete. Dobly Digital:EX is a matrix.

2. At the end of a film reel from Warner Bros., Universal, MGM, New Line Cinema, when the credits are all but shown, two logos remain: a Dolby Digital and a DTS one.

I think the real question is who in the Dolby Digital camp is sleeping with who to stay in place as "The Leader in Digital Surround Sound". Their product is just not up to par with the DTS counterpart, which, no matter which sound format is superior in your opinion, is backed up by numbers in their favor. Then again, Bose still holds onto the "Leader" title in the area of speakers, so what does that tell you.

 

[Michael Reuben]

DTS has a higher bitrate than Dolby Digital. (Averaging 754 over 448).

As was pointed out to you the last time you trotted out this dead horse, that's a meaningless statement.

M.

NOTE: The above quotation was from the original posting by Lev-S, who has now edited out the quotation.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I think the real question is who in the Dolby Digital camp is sleeping with who to stay in place as "The Leader in Digital Surround Sound".

If I had only known which business had the perks all those years ago...

I can’t speak for anyone else but causally throwing around the name ‘Bose’ does not really advance your argument—sex is probably more persuasive.

 

[Julian Lalor]

The European version had the same content, along with the "SuperBit" video and a DTS track. This tells me there's really no issue with space, it's just a money saving factor for the studio.

Which "European" version of Black Hawk Down are you talking about? The UK version doesn't have DTS, the various versions available on the Continent which equate to the 3 disc SE don't have DTS. I think there was a Dutch release with DTS, but that wasn't the SE. And, remember, R1 encompasses Canada which necessitates (from a commercial, not legal, perspective) a French DD track and often a Spanish DD track. Yes, it's a Studio decision, but it's not necessarily money saving alone.

I also disagree that there are a materially higher number of films released in R2 with DTS tracks than in R1. There are a number of Superbit releases which are not available in R1, but few "blockbuster" films receive DTS treatment in R2 that don't also receive that treatment in R1. And there are quite a few films with DTS in R1 that don't receive the same treatment in other regions.

 

[Brent M]

Jason,

I think a LOT of HT enthusiasts "value" sound enough to care about reference quality audio on their DVDs. I, for one, feel that the A/V presentation of the movie is far more important than the special features and when you look at a lot of these "so-called" special editions coming out the bonus features aren't even worth the space. For example, there's a thread going right now about the upcoming Matrix Reloaded DVD and the special features are being called some of the worst ever. Personally, I'd rather those lame fluff materials be scrapped in favor of a high-quality DTS track. However, if you're more interested in the making of the Matrix video game or the Samsung phone used in the movie you're in luck because that's the kind of crap WB has chosen to include on the DVD instead of a DTS track. Great!

 

[JulianK]

but few "blockbuster" films receive DTS treatment in R2 that don't also receive that treatment in R1

I'm trying to think of some examples of R2-only DTS tracks.

Buena Vista (UK) has released a few recent blockbusters with DTS sound: Signs, and Monsters Inc leap to mind (as well as a few others, which are also available in R1: Chicagp and Reign of Fire for example). They seem to be pretty supportive of the format. It wouldn't surprise me if we got a DTS track on Pirates of the Caribbean.

As for other companies, Universal's UK Red Dragon is the only recent example I can think of.

 

[John Beavers]

This one http://www.movietyme.com/catalog/pro...ducts_id=16598 Superbit Deluxe Edition which appears to be the same 3 disc SE, except it has DTS and a Superbit transfer.

 

[Dave H]

I agre with randy about this and I am glad the extra bits are being used for picture quality. I have several movies where I know the picture would have been better without a DTS track (American Beauty being one off the top of my mind).

 

[Brent M]

I don't think picture quality suffers if DTS is included on a DVD. Superbit releases have DTS tracks and that doesn't seem to affect their picture quality adversely.