Noticable difference between TrueHD and DD (1 Viewer)

[David Lindon]

Do you notice much difference with the new HD formats over the standard DD sound? Is it worth the upgrades in terms of sound?

 

[Royce H]

Heck, yes! The clarity and detail are hugely improved, especially for dialog. IMHO, it's similar to going from audio cassette tapes to CDs. Dolby Digital Plus is great, but TrueHD is the bomb.

 

[ppltd]

While I agree that the difference is noticable, I think comparing it to the difference between CD and cassette is not valid. It is more like the difference between CD and and the SACD formats. The clarity of the DD+ tracks has been up to now, very good. While I would have liked DD-HD, it has not detracted from the enjoyment of the releases, at least not much.

 

[Royce H]

Hi, Thomas. Believe it or not, I've never heard SACD or DVD-Audio, so I couldn't make that comparison. My only frame of reference is the difference between CD and analog sources such as tape or phonograph.

 

[ppltd]

Fair enough. But I have got to say, I have been very impressed with some of the Dolby Digital Plus tracks at 1.5 mg (and hoping to hear what it will sound like when pushed to it's max 2.7 mb) and am beginning to wonder if True HD is not just more of an incremental step forward. Need a few more True HD releases before I can finalize an opinion.

 

[David Lindon]

Are there any bandwidth restrictions on the analogue inputs or can any receiver with analogue inputs get "true" Doldby/DTS HD sound?

 

[Cees Alons]

The bandwidth restriction on the analog inputs is the restriction of your receiver (amplifiers): something like 20Hz - 30.000 Hz (± 3 dB). Or whatever your receiver's characteristics are: but it applies to every mode it is in and will certainly not restrict the passing on of the TrueHD.


Perhaps, but it's the final step.
Once you have lossless reproduction, you cannot improve further on the recording functionality (in this respect), but only at the mastering side (and the quality of your audio gear, of course ).


Cees

 

[Bob_L]

Actually, as an analog nerd, I believe you can improve further. All digital audio recording is lossy to a degree. It doesn't fully represent the analog waveform (that's why they call it digital sampling).

Lossless reproduction is actually a misnomer when applied to digital recording. While it may be lossless compared to the digital track, it is not lossless compared to the original, real-world waveforms.

So, there IS improvement available by increasing sampling rate and bit depth.

 

[Cees Alons]

Bob,

That's what I meant when I said "at the mastering side".

We were comparing codecs, and improvements in the digitizing stage will affect those all in the same way.
And when reproducing analogically too! But that's not what we were talking about, we were discussing lossless codecs (compression), not "total" reproduction!


Cees