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

[JulianK]

Universal UK has just announced that the R2 version of The Hulk will have a DTS track.

 

[David Judah]

I'm not going to argue semantics, Jeff, but if you don't believe in principal that the coding technique which reproduces more of the original has a better chance of being more transparent to the original, then we really don't have anything else to discuss.
---------------------------------------------------------

DD was never designed to be tranparent. It was designed to be as transparent as possible where space was going to be a major concern for a wide variety of applications. IMO, it has achieved that goal and does quite alot with very little.

The closest thing we have to a listening comparison between codecs following all the scientific protocals is the journal article submitted to the AES in 1998(Gilbert A. Soulodre, Theodore Grusec, Michel Lavoie, and Louis Thibault, Vol.46 #3) and unfortunately DTS was not included(they offered their encode/decode combo in 2000 to anyone who wanted to perform the same type of test).

In it, audio samples of MPEG-2, MPEG-3, MPEG AAC, DD(AC-3), and Lucent's PAC were compared against a CD quality reference. Only AAC was found to be sufficiently transparent to the original.

So, coupling that with the fact that DTS reproduces more of the original than DD, it is certainly possible that DTS is more transparent to the original than DD. Is it definitive proof? No, but it is something to be considered, among other things, when there are anectodal reports of DTS sounding more open, fuller, more immersive, etc...

DJ

 

[Jeff Gatie]

it is certainly possible that DTS is more transparent to the original than DD. Is it definitive proof? No, but it is something to be considered, among other things, when there are anectodal reports of DTS sounding more open, fuller, more immersive, etc...

What about anecdotal evidence that when each codec is derived from the same master there is no difference between the DTS and DD versions, ala the "Lethal Weapon" Director's Cuts? Should we discount this? I do not deny that "Gladiator", "SPR", "Road to Perdition" and many other's have "open, fuller, more immersive" DTS tracks. I also know or can assume (there's that word again) they are from different mixes (definitively in the case of "Gladiator" and "SPR"). Therefore, I hear a difference in the ones from different mixes and no differences in the ones that aren't. This also is "something to be considered" and certainly should carry no less weight than the "possibilities" set forth by you.

As far as arguing semantics et al, it all depends on what the codec does to achieve it's transparency and neither you nor I have the details on that. It is all speculation, but unlike most I tried to eliminate the different mix factor from my analysis by using the LW series as my test group and arrived at my (anecdotal, but certainly controlled for outside factors) observation that the two are indistinguishable. Have you done the same?

 

[Greg*go]

So what's this "5.1" everyone keeps mentioning?

This thread is all kinds of off topic... Has anyone heard a reason why DTS isn't on quite a few R1 DVDs? The Hulk? 2 Fast 2 Furious? Charlie's Angels 2? Maybe the simplest answer is the right one, which is this: the DTS guys just don't think any of these crap-fest movies coming out deserve their efforts. If that's the case, then I wish DD did the same thing. I've heard a lot of assumptions in this thread, but no real answer to the question "Why?". We can assume as much as we want, but when we do, you make an ASS out of U and ME... Don't make an ass out of me.

 

[Edwin-S]

What about the Extended edition of FOTR? The picture certainly doesn't seem to have suffered from the addition of DTS. I prefer the DTS mix for FOTR because the low frequency channel information isn't overdone like it is on the DD track. Following your methodology, people would have gotten MAYBE a 10% PQ improvement that MAY show up on a standard consumer set, but if the New Line had followed your methodology people would have been stuck with an overblown DD mix. Some mixes are better than others and some of those mixes use the DTS codec so they should be included on the disc. If DTS was dropped, like you favor, then there would be no way to know if the best mix possible was being used.

 

[Brent M]

John,

I could care less whether you or anyone else takes my views seriously. I think DTS sounds better and that's all that matters to me! If anyone is on a high horse here, it's you with your condescending attitude. Good day.

 

[Jeff Gatie]

Therefore, I hear a difference in the one's from different mixes and no differences in the one's that are.

That should be "and no differences in the one's that aren't". Damn broken edit function:b !

 

[Michael Reuben]

Maybe the simplest answer is the right one, which is this: the DTS guys just don't think any of these crap-fest movies coming out deserve their efforts.

Unlikely, since DTS has nothing to say about which movies get DTS tracks on DVD. DTS doesn't do the encoding and hasn't done so for some time. They license the encoder, and the work is done either in-house at the studio or at an independent facility.

M.

 

[David Judah]

As far as arguing semantics et al, it all depends on what the codec does to achieve it's transparency and neither you nor I have the details on that

Actually, we have exactly what happens within each codec at their respective websites under technical literature. Have you read them? It's not a mystery at all and is free for all to read.

Also, if we are to believe the test done in 1998, which was done with strict accepted scientcific standards(which you shouldn't have a problem with)AAC should have been our low-bitrate DVD standard, if quality was the main concern, since it was more transparent than DD. I won't speculate as to why it was not adopted.

I am providing a possible explanation for why some hear what they do. Notice I said, "among other things" when talking about differences. There are alot of steps in the production chain, and a problem with anyone of them will have consequences downstream and affect the final result.

I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but I think I've laid out a reasonable explanation for all but the completely closed-minded to consider .

DJ

 

[Jason Harbaugh]

Dropping DTS would in no way be a death blow to DVD.

Maybe not but what on earth would I do with my "This Theatre Features DTS Sound" plaque?

One of my favorite demos is The Fast and the Furious DTS. The dvd is just like I remember it in the theatre. Last night I watched 2Fast 2 Furious DD, and was disappointed. It didn't sound the way it did in the theatre compared to Fast and the Furious. I'm not saying it was because of a lack of a DTS track. It could just be a poor DD track.

I do tend to lean towards DTS but most importantly I want DTS ES. All of these summer blockbusters should be coming with that.

I have bought dvd's just for the sound. I have went to see movies in theatres just for the sound. The Haunting DTS is a particular dvd I bought just because of the sound, and it doesn't disappoint.

 

[JamesHl]

I think DTS sounds better and that's all that matters to me!

That's thinking critically in action for you.

Competition is healthy, hopefully DTS and DD can inspire each other to be better. At this point they're technologically even I would say, or DD has a slight edge- DTS takes up more space for about the same sound, but also has the option of a discrete back channel.

It'll be extremely hard to ever see real improvement from either because they'll always feel like they have to be backwards compatible (and in the case of dolby, they probably really do have to be backwards compatible).

 

[John_Berger]

If anyone is on a high horse here, it's you with your condescending attitude.

I'm not the one pulling a tantrum because the ice cream cone doesn't have the extra sprinkles. Thank you, Mr. Kettle. By the way, there's a Mr. Pot on the phone who says you're black.

 

[Michael Reuben]

It's been a good thread overall, and I'd very much like to keep it open. So everyone please take it down a notch. Thanks.

M.

 

[DeanWalsh]

It is all speculation, but unlike most I tried to eliminate the different mix factor from my analysis by using the LW series as my test group and arrived at my (anecdotal, but certainly controlled for outside factors) observation that the two are indistinguishable.

The Lethal Weapon series hardly makes a valid comparison point, with dated soundtracks ranging from 1987 - 1992.

 

[TheBat]

I had mentioned early on about the DTS for hulk. both korean (R3) and australia (R4) will have DTS.

JACOB

 

[Richard Kim]

If DTS was dropped, like you favor, then there would be no way to know if the best mix possible was being used.

Not true, since the EE DD track is better than the overblown theatrical track, and I hear little difference between the EE DD and DTS track.

 

[Matt-Brooks]

[rant]
I like DTS, in fact The only time I've liked at DD track better when they are on the same disc is the Rock (R1). I still love DD also. I know some of you Can't hear the difference but isn't the point that we like/love different things. No two home theaters sounds the same, no two ppl hear the same, so why can't one person say that DTS is better then DD and be write or wrong. In fact no one here is write or wrong.

The Best thing is we all have a reason for not like or liking a Soundtrack, just execpt that some has a different option then you. Both track are great, both track sell DVD's, fact is we all love DVD's and that's why we can let our ego's go sometimes and start a DTS vs DD.

I like DTS, But I also like DD, I and a lot of ppl here can hear the difference between the two soundtracks. Thats why we think that one is better.

Btw, don't they worry about the video first on a dvd then decide on the soundtracks second and if there is space for them??

Remember you choice is your own! [/rant]

 

[Aaron Garman]

Dean said

The Lethal Weapon series hardly makes a valid comparison point, with dated soundtracks ranging from 1987 - 1992.

That is a great point, and I haven't heard many bring this up. Why didn't Warner do the experiment on films that take complete, full, and utter advantage of 5.1 digital sound? Sure, Twister was a good one to use, but didn't many prefer the DTS over that Dolby track anyhow? They should have used The Matrix or Harry Potter to test this theory. Hint hint Warner Bros...

AJG

 

[Edwin-S]

I know it bothers a lot of people when they have to get up and change a disc. I'm not one of them. I would rather get up and switch a disc and get a better mix than have the "convenience" of a movie on one disc with a worse mix.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

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.

Bingbingbingbingbing! You win the solid gold kewpie doll! These DreamWorks releases were designed to sound better in DTS because Steven Spielberg is a shareholder in the company. Not too hard to make the connection, is it?