Demand Dts!!! [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Demand Dts!!!



superpanavision70mm
04-14-2006, 09:35 PM
Ok,

I love to vent when it comes to how the U.S. is shortchanged in so many ways it's not even funny when it comes to DVD releases...more explicitely the way that DTS is not included on certain U.S. releases, but it is on foreign issues. Take for example the following titles that are NON-DTS releases in the U.S., but are DTS elsewhere:

WINDTALKERS
THE CELL
BLADE
THE LION KING
FINDING NEMO
MONSTERS INC
HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS
HERO
SPARTACUS
ALI
MAGNOLIA
MADE
RONIN
TERMINATOR 3
ARMAGEDDON
INDEPENDENCE DAY
BACK TO THE FUTURE
BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI
TAXI DRIVER
ON THE WATERFRONT
DONNIE DARKO
FIGHT CLUB
FACE/OFF
FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE
FISTFUL OF DOLLARS
NARROW MARGIN

and this just names the few that are at the top of my head.

We need to collectively demand for high quality when it comes to formats like DVD and especially the newer Blu-ray and HD-DVD, which are suppose to have Dolby Plus (yawn). Anyone else have thoughts??????????????

Woochifer
04-16-2006, 01:53 AM
Pretty much boils down to what people want out of limited disc space. I would suspect that most of those overseas releases that include DTS soundtracks are able to include DTS because those DVDs lack the special features and added content that comes with a lot of the U.S. versions. Also, the DTS support will greatly vary depending on which studio releases the DVD.

I know that I hardly ever buy movie-only DVDs, regardless of whether they include a DTS soundtrack. For my purchases, I prefer to go with the DVDs that are released as special editions and include the commentary tracks and documentaries. Sure, I would prefer that they also include a DTS track, and do two-disc releases for everything, but that's just not always feasible.

And when you talk about demanding quality, what "quality" are you referring to when discussing DTS? Most comparisons between DTS and DD soundtracks are not really comparable because the DD track typically uses a dialog normalization offset that reduces its level by about 4 db, and a lot of the transfers were done at different times using different settings.

If you really want to do a comparable comparison listening between DTS and DD soundtracks, then you should try the following titles: Twister, Lethal Weapon, Lethal Weapon II, Lethal Weapon III, and Interview With The Vampire. Warner released these titles using the full bitrate versions of DTS and DD, and simultaneously transferred them using the same printmaster with no dialog normalization offset applied to the DD track. In my listenings, I did find a subtle improvement when using the DTS track, but it's not nearly as big as comparisons I've done with other discs. This would indicate that a lot of other factors need to be accounted for in assessing the actual benefits of the DTS format itself. Keep in mind that most of the DTS titles on the market use the half-bitrate version.

Don't know why you're yawning at Dolby Digital Plus. That will use a standard bitrate that's double the bitrate that the full version of DTS uses and quadruple the bitrate that you typically see on most DTS releases. Plus, there's the lossless version. Already, the HD-DVD release for Phantom of the Opera includes a lossless DolbyTrueHD track.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-16-2006, 07:15 PM
Pretty much boils down to what people want out of limited disc space. I would suspect that most of those overseas releases that include DTS soundtracks are able to include DTS because those DVDs lack the special features and added content that comes with a lot of the U.S. versions. Also, the DTS support will greatly vary depending on which studio releases the DVD.

I know that I hardly ever buy movie-only DVDs, regardless of whether they include a DTS soundtrack. For my purchases, I prefer to go with the DVDs that are released as special editions and include the commentary tracks and documentaries. Sure, I would prefer that they also include a DTS track, and do two-disc releases for everything, but that's just not always feasible.

And when you talk about demanding quality, what "quality" are you referring to when discussing DTS? Most comparisons between DTS and DD soundtracks are not really comparable because the DD track typically uses a dialog normalization offset that reduces its level by about 4 db, and a lot of the transfers were done at different times using different settings.

If you really want to do a comparable comparison listening between DTS and DD soundtracks, then you should try the following titles: Twister, Lethal Weapon, Lethal Weapon II, Lethal Weapon III, and Interview With The Vampire. Warner released these titles using the full bitrate versions of DTS and DD, and simultaneously transferred them using the same printmaster with no dialog normalization offset applied to the DD track. In my listenings, I did find a subtle improvement when using the DTS track, but it's not nearly as big as comparisons I've done with other discs. This would indicate that a lot of other factors need to be accounted for in assessing the actual benefits of the DTS format itself. Keep in mind that most of the DTS titles on the market use the half-bitrate version.

Don't know why you're yawning at Dolby Digital Plus. That will use a standard bitrate that's double the bitrate that the full version of DTS uses and quadruple the bitrate that you typically see on most DTS releases. Plus, there's the lossless version. Already, the HD-DVD release for Phantom of the Opera includes a lossless DolbyTrueHD track.

Wooch is right, it really depends on what the public wants to see. I will always forgo extra's for a Dts soundtrack. Dts soundtracks are important to me, extra's are not. I work in the industry, and there is no need for me to know how a movie is made. I keep up on all movie making technology from CGI to soundtrack creation, so I have no need for this information on any DVD.

I would also like to add to Wooch's observations. From my pretty extensive work with both Dts and DD from both the professional and consumer side, I would say that hearing any audio differences and improvements highly depends on how much acoustical work you have done, and how much processing (i.e bass management and delay) you use. I happen to not use any delay (my speakers are physically equi-distant) or bass management( my main speakers are full range( my surrounds are near full range), with my L/R mains considered extended range ( they extend down to below 25hz at THX specified levels) with two subs on my LFE.

I have found that Dts, on at least the twister and lethal weapon series, had deeper, louder deep bass on the Dts tracks, with the DD soundtrack sounding indistinct and boomy. I found the soundfield on Dts tracks wider, deeper, with Dts sound like a huge coherent soundfield with spot effect found in a 360 degree space, and DD sounding like effects coming distinctly from the speaker position, and almost no clearly distinguishable, stable soundfield at all. Dialog is always clearer in Dts than in Dolby digital. Unless the soundtrack was pretty old, I have always found at least subtle improvements with Dts, and sometimes some dramatic ones as well. It really depended on the sample and bit rate that each soundtrack was recorded, editied, mixed and mastered in.

If you use bass management you are blending channels together that were neither recorded, mixed or mastered in that fashion. This will skew any sonic differences that will occur in both formats. Widescreen review happens to have the most trustworthy DVD reviews when it comes to both audio and video. Their system is laboratory calibrated, acoustically controlled to the hilt, and use equipment that is worth in access of a quarter of a million dollars. Experts in all field of hometheater have consulted, calibrated, and positioned all of the components in their reference system, and if a person has a competent hearing mechanism, they can readily tell how well a soundtrack quality is.

On a side note, I think that both Dts and DD are largerly un-needed on both HD-DVD and BluRay. Both formats native(loseless PCM) sound space have standards that are identical to both Dts and Dolby's that they are largely unnecessary for use in these formats. The could really use the bit budget in another area if they eleminated both of these two formats.

paul_pci
04-16-2006, 09:48 PM
Really, who gives a rat's ass who played what practical joke on whom during the filming. And after watching the deleted scenes, there's always a collective nod that said "yes, good choice leaving those out of the film, then why am I watching them now?" Screw it. Give me my DTS and save your ego-massaging, self-induldgent "I'm an important actor/director/producer, fill-in-the-loser-blank" for your home movies that no one wants to watch anyways. If I wanted to know all about that crap I'd go to film school and spend the rest of my life asking, "would you like the check now?"

superpanavision70mm
04-17-2006, 08:28 PM
Well, the overseas market does contain extras and often times they include better special editions and STILL include DTS. HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS in Korea was a full-bit rate 1536kbps release and blows away just about any other DVD on the market it terms of sound design and DVD mix. WINDTALKERS was the same way. Also, the Disney titles are identical, but include DTS, wheras the U.S. releases were Dolby only. Yawn. Save the extras for disc 2 if that is the case and that way it doesn't compromise picture or sound quality. Studios don't seem concerned with spending a little extra for disc 2 anyway...look at how many DVD's these days are 2 discs. Most of the time it's crappy extras that are aimed at making people want to buy them regardless of whether the movie is good or not. For my money I'll take kick ass picture and sound long before I'll sit through 4 hours of extra and suffer through poor video and lame audio. Anyone else agree?

It's not like the studio needs to do much extra...the films these days are already recorded in DTS...just put it on the damn disc!

noddin0ff
04-18-2006, 06:43 AM
...the films these days are already recorded in DTS...just put it on the damn disc!

um, not.

Woochifer
04-18-2006, 06:15 PM
Well, the overseas market does contain extras and often times they include better special editions and STILL include DTS. HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS in Korea was a full-bit rate 1536kbps release and blows away just about any other DVD on the market it terms of sound design and DVD mix. WINDTALKERS was the same way. Also, the Disney titles are identical, but include DTS, wheras the U.S. releases were Dolby only. Yawn. Save the extras for disc 2 if that is the case and that way it doesn't compromise picture or sound quality. Studios don't seem concerned with spending a little extra for disc 2 anyway...look at how many DVD's these days are 2 discs. Most of the time it's crappy extras that are aimed at making people want to buy them regardless of whether the movie is good or not. For my money I'll take kick ass picture and sound long before I'll sit through 4 hours of extra and suffer through poor video and lame audio. Anyone else agree?

It's not like the studio needs to do much extra...the films these days are already recorded in DTS...just put it on the damn disc!

Like I said, try doing a comparison of the soundtracks with comparable preparation. Those DVDs that I listed are among the very few on the market where the DTS and DD soundtracks were transferred under identical conditions, and allow the consumer to make an honest and unbiased comparison between the two formats.

Any other time where you hear a DTS track that blows away a DD soundtrack (like the DTS ES soundtracks for Gladiator, The Haunting, and Saving Private Ryan), you likely have a lot of other variations in how the tracks were prepared. In comparable listenings, the DTS track is audibly superior, but not by as wide a margin as a lot of people on these internet forums scream about.

As such, there are plenty of reference quality DD soundtracks out there, and just because a soundtrack was encoded into DTS does not automatically make it reference grade. The soundtrack needs to stand on its own merits, regardless of what audio format is used on the DVD release. Until you actually compare the soundtracks, you have no idea whether the DTS track even improves upon the DD track in the first place. In some cases, the DTS track might even sound worse (e.g. Pulp Fiction: Collector's Edition).

Personally, I like having the DTS option because of the improvements that it MIGHT offer, but for my favorite films, the supplemental features a lot of the time are more important because they lend context to those films and get more in depth into how the film was done. Ideally, I'd like to have all of the above, but as I said earlier, I try to avoid buying movie-only editions, unless I'm fairly certain that no re-release is on the horizon. As of now, there's still no market consensus as to consumer demand for DTS versus other factors such as price, inclusion of bonus features, enhanced video quality, etc. That's why the release pattern for DTS is so inconsistent.

The only way that you can force the studios into releasing more DTS tracks onto DVD is to vote with your wallet, i.e. boycott all non-DTS DVDs (which basically means that you won't buy much from Warner or Paramount). Complaining about domestic releases that exclude DTS won't do any good if you still run to the store on new release Tuesday and stock up on DD-only DVDs. Wal-Mart and Blockbuster didn't get with the program on widescreen until they started tracking the sales figures and reading the e-mail from their customers who basically said that they would go elsewhere for their DVDs if these stores only stocked pan & scan editions; and they did exactly that until those companies carried more widescreen editions. And the studios wouldn't include these supplemental features onto their discs unless they saw that consumers want the extra content. I would love to add movies like Blade Runner and Mad Max 2 (The Road Warrior) to my collection, but the current editions include nothing except the movie, so I'm content to wait until a better edition comes out.

FYI, films are not "recorded in DTS" -- they are encoded into DTS (or DD or SDDS) from an analog or uncompressed digital print master. With an original master, there's no reason whatsoever to use a compressed format like DTS because you don't have the bandwidth limitations of DVD, HDTV, or theatrical prints to worry about. Also, keep in mind that the bitrates for DD and DTS used on theatrical prints are different than those used for the DVDs, so the DVD still needs to have a separate audio encoding run done during production. If you want something that's a bit-for-bit transcription of the original source, DTS ain't where it's at because it's still a highly compressed format.

musicman1999
04-18-2006, 08:02 PM
I have only had dts capability for about 2 years,as my first player did not have the capability.I listened to my buddies rave on about dts even did a couple of tests at his place.My first impression was "well its louder".When i got my new dvd player i tested several discs at home.My impressions were that most of the discs i used,the dts track was better but by a lot.The sound was a little more open and spacious andd i find that the subtle details are where dts has the advantage,such as the turning of a door knob,falling rain or a sound in the distance.If a film has the option i will chose dts,but the difference is not day and night as some would suggest.

bill

Woochifer
04-19-2006, 05:07 PM
I have only had dts capability for about 2 years,as my first player did not have the capability.I listened to my buddies rave on about dts even did a couple of tests at his place.My first impression was "well its louder".When i got my new dvd player i tested several discs at home.My impressions were that most of the discs i used,the dts track was better but by a lot.The sound was a little more open and spacious andd i find that the subtle details are where dts has the advantage,such as the turning of a door knob,falling rain or a sound in the distance.If a film has the option i will chose dts,but the difference is not day and night as some would suggest.

bill

Your impressions are comparable to what I've observed. In the early days, DTS did all of the encoding in-house, and some internet threads have accused DTS of bumping up the levels in the surrounds and making other changes to the soundtrack to give it a subjective advantage over the DD track. In addition, the dialog normalization offset that's typically used on DD tracks means that you have to bump up the level by about 4 db in order to level match to the DTS tracks, which don't use any dialog normalization. Very often, the most audible difference between the DD and DTS track is the level.

When I've done level matched comparisons, DD has a slightly abrupt sound that produces a subjectively "fatter" soundstage, while DTS has a little bit more openness, slightly tighter imaging, and a little better coherence in the low frequencies. As you noted, these differences are not huge if you control for the levels.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-20-2006, 09:16 AM
Your impressions are comparable to what I've observed. In the early days, DTS did all of the encoding in-house, and some internet threads have accused DTS of bumping up the levels in the surrounds and making other changes to the soundtrack to give it a subjective advantage over the DD track. In addition, the dialog normalization offset that's typically used on DD tracks means that you have to bump up the level by about 4 db in order to level match to the DTS tracks, which don't use any dialog normalization. Very often, the most audible difference between the DD and DTS track is the level.

Its a internet myth about Dts "purposeful" intent to outclass Dolby digital soundtracks by raising the surround levels. The reality is that Dolby didn't share the information with Dts that they reduce the surround levels by 3db during encoding to account for playback in a smaller room. It was only when reviewers and consumers started commenting on how eveloping the surrounds of a Dts track where over Dolby soundtracks that Dolby began pointing out that the reason lies in the volume the surrounds are encoded, and not in the Dts codec itself. Dts immediately began backing off the levels by 3db to comply with industry standards.

Another myth is that Dts is generally louder than DD. Well, technically it is. However the caveat is that Dts soundtracks are indentical in level to the printmaster, and DD is not because of the effect of dialog normalization. When dialog normalization is not imployed both Dts and DD will be indentical in level. It was Dolby's decision to include this feature in their codec, even though it does no good for DVD at all. Dolby wanted DD to be all things to all people, and in the process it had to make many compromises to sound quality to do it.


When I've done level matched comparisons, DD has a slightly abrupt sound that produces a subjectively "fatter" soundstage, while DTS has a little bit more openness, slightly tighter imaging, and a little better coherence in the low frequencies. As you noted, these differences are not huge if you control for the levels.

I agree with your observations but characterize them a bit differently. I agree with the fatter soundstage, but I attributed this to signal smearing which makes the soundstage fatter, but more diffused and indistinct as well.

GMichael
04-20-2006, 10:09 AM
Wow guys. Lots of great info without any fighting. Where's Lex when we really need him?
Thanks for the great read.

I agree that most of the public likes to see the extras included. But do they really watch them? I find that I'll pick up the special edition for a few extra $$'s but then NOT WATCH THEM. (Flashback guys?) Give me DTS. It may only be a small upgrade, but better is better no matter how small. Now, can you get the general public to agree for me?

superpanavision70mm
04-20-2006, 10:14 PM
I can listen to any DVD on the market and without knowing what audio format I can tell you what is it based on it's sonic nature. I automatically know when it sounds limited and more compressed (must be Dolby) and when it's fuller and more dynamic (must be DTS). There are VERY VERY few DVD's on the market that have decent Dolby-only tracks....APOCOLYPSE NOW REDUX, TARZAN, maybe a few others, but not many. I could turn down the DTS a few dB and still hear more detail than boosted Dolby up. Dolby even tries to compensate sometimes by having it at a louder level, but it's a pathetic attempt. It doesn't take a genius to hear the differences in almost every case and more consumers would be impressed if the standars would enable all DVD audio to include DTS at a bit rate of no less than 720. Dolby can play second fiddle or not even be included for all I care (like Queen who didn't even include it in their DVD-video releases because they would prefer 2.0 PCM versus crappy Dolby HAHA).

musicman1999
04-21-2006, 11:38 AM
You should know that the Queen dvd's that you mention do not employ regular dts,but a format called 96/24 dts which is basically a dead format,some recievers(like mine )do not even decode it.The reason i bought it was that it had lpcm as this is the superior format.It has a much higher bit rate per side than either dts or dd.

bill

Woochifer
04-21-2006, 02:16 PM
I can listen to any DVD on the market and without knowing what audio format I can tell you what is it based on it's sonic nature. I automatically know when it sounds limited and more compressed (must be Dolby) and when it's fuller and more dynamic (must be DTS). There are VERY VERY few DVD's on the market that have decent Dolby-only tracks....APOCOLYPSE NOW REDUX, TARZAN, maybe a few others, but not many. I could turn down the DTS a few dB and still hear more detail than boosted Dolby up. Dolby even tries to compensate sometimes by having it at a louder level, but it's a pathetic attempt. It doesn't take a genius to hear the differences in almost every case and more consumers would be impressed if the standars would enable all DVD audio to include DTS at a bit rate of no less than 720. Dolby can play second fiddle or not even be included for all I care (like Queen who didn't even include it in their DVD-video releases because they would prefer 2.0 PCM versus crappy Dolby HAHA).

Making a rather bold generalization here, considering that in doing a straight listening with no original master source as a reference, you have no idea whether the soundtracks are comparable, or if there are other variables in play that are more responsible for any audible differences. You seem to be on a slippery slope by automatically presuming that the soundtrack is inferior if it's encoded in Dolby and superior if it's encoded in DTS.

I can think of plenty of DTS soundtracks that are inferior to other Dolby Digital soundtracks. But, that has nothing to do with the format, but more about how well the soundtrack was done in the first place. A good soundtrack will be a good soundtrack, regardless of whether it's DD or not, just as a poorly done soundtrack won't magically turn itself into a reference quality playback just because it was encoded in DTS.

Contrary to your accusation, "Dolby" does not "compensate" for anything by "having it at a louder level." Dolby does not decide what level is used during the encoding process, it's up to whoever encodes the soundtrack and produces the DVD. I don't think that Dolby mandated that New Line crank the soundtrack levels up to near distortion levels with Lord of the Rings:FOTR, just as they didn't tell Lucasfilm to use a lower level with Star Wars Episode III: ROTS.

And FYI, the DVD standard mandates EITHER Dolby Digital or PCM for the audio track. DTS is optional, always has been, always will be. PCM is superior to Dolby Digital because it's an uncompressed format, but keep in mind that DTS is also a heavily compressed format. Most DVDs that include PCM tracks use higher sampling rates and/or higher bit depths than the 44.1 kHz/16-bit resolution of CD audio, and are capable of matching the master tape resolution on many digital recordings. Music videos will often include PCM tracks because 1) the original mix was done in two-channel; 2) they are generally shorter than movies and therefore have more disc space available to accommodate an uncompressed audio; and 3) the original source is likely to be in a PCM format.

Like I said, try those soundtracks I referred to if you want to do an honest and unbiased comparison between DD and DTS, and that's IF you want to do that kind of comparison.


You should know that the Queen dvd's that you mention do not employ regular dts,but a format called 96/24 dts which is basically a dead format,some recievers(like mine )do not even decode it.The reason i bought it was that it had lpcm as this is the superior format.It has a much higher bit rate per side than either dts or dd.

Actually DTS 96/24 is not a dead format because it's backwards compatible with existing DTS decoders. DTS 96/24 means that the original master source was encoded using a 96/24 resolution, but it still uses the same compressed datarate as the regular full bitrate DTS. DTS is already a 24-bit format and the 96/24 version adds an extension that allows for the material to use a 96 kHz sampling rate.

Most newer receivers that I'm aware of have the DTS 96/24 extension included, but there's not a lot of material out there encoded in that format. Unfortunately, it's for the same reason that not a lot of DVDs out there use the full 1.5k bitrate version of DTS -- lack of disc space. If a DVD can accommodate the 1.5k bitrate DTS, then it's not much of a leap to encode it using DTS 96/24.

musicman1999
04-21-2006, 03:27 PM
wooch
When i play the disc there is about a 1 second drop out every 10 seconds.I at first assumed something was wrong with the disc and returned it for a new one,same result.Pcm track worked fine.I was curious so i took it to my dealer and he seemed to know right away when i explained the problem.We tried it through a denon 3806,worked fine,an Anthem processor,worked fine,another Cambridge and it didn't work.So my reciever wont decode it.The only other option is that my dvd player wont pass the bitstream but i cant see that being a problem.

bill

Woochifer
04-21-2006, 04:23 PM
wooch
When i play the disc there is about a 1 second drop out every 10 seconds.I at first assumed something was wrong with the disc and returned it for a new one,same result.Pcm track worked fine.I was curious so i took it to my dealer and he seemed to know right away when i explained the problem.We tried it through a denon 3806,worked fine,an Anthem processor,worked fine,another Cambridge and it didn't work.So my reciever wont decode it.The only other option is that my dvd player wont pass the bitstream but i cant see that being a problem.

bill

Might want to try a different 1.5k DTS track on your system (check your collection for older Universal DTS DVDs, since their early releases were the ones that predominantly used the 1.5k bitrate; the vast majority of releases from about 2002 onward used the 768k bitrate DTS). If your receiver has trouble with a DTS 96/24 track, it might have trouble with 1.5k DTS tracks in general. My receiver is five years old, and it can decode the DTS 96/24 tracks on Peter Gabriel's Play DVD just fine. The only difference is that my receiver's DTS decoder is limited to a 48 kHz sampling rate.

musicman1999
04-21-2006, 06:21 PM
I have Twister,which i believe is full bit rate and it works very well.

bill

superpanavision70mm
04-22-2006, 10:40 AM
to my knowledge TWISTER is not full bit rate. might help if you learn a bit about the formats before lecturing me on them. turns out it might be your equipment that is the problem as well as your opinion. i am quite aware of 96/24 and neo:6 etc etc when it comes to DTS. I've reviewed hundreds of titles at www.fulvuedrive-in.com if you want to check it out.

musicman1999
04-22-2006, 12:31 PM
It's not my opinion.it's a fact.Twister is 1509 kbps,full bit rate and one of the best dvd track i own.That is an opinion.And nothing wrong with my gear.

bill

superpanavision70mm
04-22-2006, 07:21 PM
well, you said so yourself that both your receiver and perhaps dvd player are not allowing for a proper decoding of 96/24. if TWISTER is the best disc that you have for sound than you must not have many others. that dvd is old and there are far better examples that have been issued since then. not that it has a bad mix by any means, just that there are better reference quality pieces available now.

musicman1999
04-22-2006, 07:26 PM
I did say one of the best,not the best.Give us an example.

bill

Woochifer
04-24-2006, 07:14 PM
to my knowledge TWISTER is not full bit rate. might help if you learn a bit about the formats before lecturing me on them. turns out it might be your equipment that is the problem as well as your opinion. i am quite aware of 96/24 and neo:6 etc etc when it comes to DTS. I've reviewed hundreds of titles at www.fulvuedrive-in.com if you want to check it out.

I'll simply confirm what's already been stated, the DTS track on Twister is the full bitrate 1.5k version. The media tags indicate this, so you might want to make sure your information's correct before you start taking shots at someone else's knowledge, opinions, and equipment.


well, you said so yourself that both your receiver and perhaps dvd player are not allowing for a proper decoding of 96/24. if TWISTER is the best disc that you have for sound than you must not have many others. that dvd is old and there are far better examples that have been issued since then. not that it has a bad mix by any means, just that there are better reference quality pieces available now.

What does the number of discs that someone owns have to do with the validity of their opinion on a soundtrack or factual knowledge of the bitrate that a disc uses? Ever heard of video stores or Netflix?

The Twister DVD might be "old" in your estimation, but it also uses a higher resolution soundtrack than nearly all of the DVDs that have been issued since then. The bass extension might not go as low as some other DVDs, but the surround mix is very well done in terms of the envelopment, directional cues, imaging, and timbral characteristics; and the dynamic range on both the DD and DTS tracks is very high.

Plus, it's one of the few DVDs that contains a full bitrate Dolby Digital track with no dialog normalization offset, ensuring perfect level matching with the DTS track. So, if you want to listen for the actual (rather than presumed) differences between DD and DTS, this DVD is indeed one of the best reference discs you can have. Think you can reliably tell the differences between the formats? Try doing a blind test with this disc, and see for yourself.

GMichael
04-25-2006, 05:28 AM
Wow guys. Lots of great info without any fighting. Where's Lex when we really need him?



Nevermind.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-25-2006, 06:12 AM
Nevermind.

They're not fighting. They are disagreeing violently, and with attitude :mad5:

The most common bitrate for Dts DVD's is 754kbps.

Antz
The River Wild
Apollo 13
Mouse Hunt
The Peacemaker
Waterworld

These Dts only titles contain a full bit rate of 1509kbps data rate. There is only a dolby stereo soundtrack on these titles

The core data in a 24/96 track is a 24/48khz bitstream. By using meta data Dts encodes the remaing 48-96khz data, or frequencies to 48khz in the meta data bitstream. All of the information is combined during decoding with latency compensation to keep the bitstreams in sync. So as long as there is a Dts, none of its meta data powered formats are obsolete. The core of them all(at least on DVD) is the 24/48khz bitstream. This insures that there is always a core compatibilty with all Dts formats.

superpanavision70mm
04-26-2006, 01:01 AM
Thank you for listing those and saving me the time thinking of all those original DTS discs that Universal was issuing. I know there are a few more. Some of the best examples that I can think of for DTS on the market right now include the import DTS titles that I listed at the beginning of this thread. The following are some other great examples....

AKIRA DTS
MEET JOE BLACK DTS
TOY STORY AND TOY STORY 2 re-issue
RONIN DTS UK Edition (does not sound as good as the DTS Laserdisc though)
BLADE DTS (Japan)
HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS (Korean full-bit 1536kbps)
THE CELL import full-bit DTS
WINDTALKERS import full-bit DTS
THE ROCK Criterion Ed.
STAR TREK NEMESIS DTS ed.
TITANIC (does not sound as good though as the DTS sampler full-bit)
DANCES WITH WOLVES import DTS or out of print DTS from Image
HANNIBAL
THE PATRIOT Superbit Ed.
XXX Superbit Ed.
HOLLOWMAN Superbit Ed.
BLACK HAWK DOWN Superbit Ed.
JURASSIC PARK Superbit Ed. Import
SPIDER-MAN 2 Superbit Ed.
VERTICAL LIMIT Superbit Ed.
TERMINATOR 2 Arisan DTS Ed.
TERMINATOR 3 DTS Import Region 2
FINDING NEMO DTS-ES Korean Import
THE LION KING DTS Korean Import
BLADE 2 DTS-ES

examples of older remixed DTS

LAWRENCE OF ARABIA Superbit
SPARTACUS DTS Import Region 2
FOR A FEW DOLLARS MORE/FISTFUL OF DOLLARS DTS region 2
ENTER THE DRAGON DTS Korean Import

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-26-2006, 08:47 AM
to my knowledge TWISTER is not full bit rate. might help if you learn a bit about the formats before lecturing me on them. turns out it might be your equipment that is the problem as well as your opinion. i am quite aware of 96/24 and neo:6 etc etc when it comes to DTS. I've reviewed hundreds of titles at www.fulvuedrive-in.com if you want to check it out.

Don't think it is his equipment either. It is pretty well known that the early full bitrate Dts titles by Universal are failing now. Some suspect dis rot, others have a different explaination. I am not having trouble with mine ( I have all of the full bitrate Dts disc), at least not yet.
I found out on Hometheaterforum, and it seems to be pretty widespread

shokhead
04-26-2006, 09:40 AM
You should know that the Queen dvd's that you mention do not employ regular dts,but a format called 96/24 dts which is basically a dead format,some recievers(like mine )do not even decode it.The reason i bought it was that it had lpcm as this is the superior format.It has a much higher bit rate per side than either dts or dd.

bill

How dead could it be if its being used on Morph The Cat.

musicman1999
04-26-2006, 12:22 PM
I know this may sound strang,but 96/24 dts is not the same as dts 24/96 which you find on dvd-audio.When i had the problem with the Queen disc,and by the way i rented a queen dvd with the same format and it did not work properly either,i went to my local shop and discussed it with one of the sales guys.He has been in hi-fi for 30 years and had run into it before ,he explained it was a format that had been in use,mostly in europe he thought,but was not widely used anymore.I did not ask many questions as i really did not care that much,but we tried the disc in some of their other display setups and the only one it did not work in was the cambridge.My new speakers should be in a week or so,so i will ask for some more info.

bill

musicman1999
04-26-2006, 12:44 PM
Follow up

i went to dts website,seems i have been led astray by my trusted audio guy.Dts says my reciever should be able to decode it,just downrezed to 48.But that is not what happened with the queen disc,every ten seconds or so it drops a second or so of audio.All other dts discs work fine.i have tried 2 versions of this disc plus a rental of another Queen disc.Not a big problem as its only one disc and i listen in stereo anyway.

bill

shokhead
04-26-2006, 12:46 PM
I know this may sound strang,but 96/24 dts is not the same as dts 24/96 which you find on dvd-audio.When i had the problem with the Queen disc,and by the way i rented a queen dvd with the same format and it did not work properly either,i went to my local shop and discussed it with one of the sales guys.He has been in hi-fi for 30 years and had run into it before ,he explained it was a format that had been in use,mostly in europe he thought,but was not widely used anymore.I did not ask many questions as i really did not care that much,but we tried the disc in some of their other display setups and the only one it did not work in was the cambridge.My new speakers should be in a week or so,so i will ask for some more info.

bill

96/24 24/96 I didnt know that.

Woochifer
04-26-2006, 01:02 PM
Follow up

i went to dts website,seems i have been led astray by my trusted audio guy.Dts says my reciever should be able to decode it,just downrezed to 48.But that is not what happened with the queen disc,every ten seconds or so it drops a second or so of audio.All other dts discs work fine.i have tried 2 versions of this disc plus a rental of another Queen disc.Not a big problem as its only one disc and i listen in stereo anyway.

bill

Hmmm, sounds like a coding issue with that particular disc. On three of my DVD-A's, I was not able to pull up the DD and/or DTS tracks when using a regular DVD video player.

Your sales guy definitely led you astray, because if you're listening to the DTS 96/24 track from a DVD-A, then it comes from the video-compatible layer, which should be no different than any other DVD video disc once it's detected. No reason whatsoever to include the DTS 96/24 track on the DVD-A layer because the tracks on that layer can render uncompressed 96/24 audio, and even with the DTS 96/24 metadata included, that format is still heavily compressed.

If you want another DTS 96/24 demo just to check on any compatiblity issues with your receiver, the Peter Gabriel Play DVD uses DTS 96/24.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
04-27-2006, 05:00 AM
Hmmm, sounds like a coding issue with that particular disc. On three of my DVD-A's, I was not able to pull up the DD and/or DTS tracks when using a regular DVD video player.

Your sales guy definitely led you astray, because if you're listening to the DTS 96/24 track from a DVD-A, then it comes from the video-compatible layer, which should be no different than any other DVD video disc once it's detected. No reason whatsoever to include the DTS 96/24 track on the DVD-A layer because the tracks on that layer can render uncompressed 96/24 audio, and even with the DTS 96/24 metadata included, that format is still heavily compressed.

If you want another DTS 96/24 demo just to check on any compatiblity issues with your receiver, the Peter Gabriel Play DVD uses DTS 96/24.

Actually Wooch the 24/96 Dts is not so heavily compressed. The very object of Dts 24/96 is to maintain as much of the original information during encoding. Just like Dts 1509kbps format is can run lossless in many cases. Dts 24/96 compression rate is 3:1 during ordinary operation, and can run lossless in some cases. Unlike DD which relies heavily on perceptual encoding, as the Dts bitrate goes higher, it relies less and less on perceptual encoding. As the bitrate goes higher, the more sub bands Dts encoder processes. That is why Dts at 1509kbps sounds so much better and more relaxed than Dts at 754kbps.

If you were to compare full bitrate Dts with Dts 24/96, you will find that 24/96 sounds more open and has a slightly larger soundstage than regular full bitrate Dts. That is a result of better sub band encoding, and the addition of the frequencies between 24khz and 48khz.

You will be hard pressed to tell uncompressed 24/96khz from Dts 24/96 in a double blind, it is just that good.

superpanavision70mm
04-29-2006, 01:11 AM
I'll also point out that TWISTER was issued twice to DVD in the U.S. market. Only the second issue of the film has the DTS....a rarity for Warner. Wooch I seem to know more than you think I do.

Woochifer
04-29-2006, 02:07 AM
I'll also point out that TWISTER was issued twice to DVD in the U.S. market. Only the second issue of the film has the DTS....a rarity for Warner. Wooch I seem to know more than you think I do.

Uh, where did I say that the version of Twister that has the DTS soundtrack was the only release? Those Lethal Weapon DVDs that I mentioned were also reissues, if you're looking for full disclosure.

superpanavision70mm
04-29-2006, 02:09 AM
Terrence, I am waiting for a re-issue of 12 MONKEYS. The sound on the DTS Universal disc is great, but the picture...arggg. Needs a new mastering. Oh well, not bad for a disc that came out 7 years ago.

Woochifer
04-29-2006, 02:13 AM
Terrence, I am waiting for a re-issue of 12 MONKEYS. The sound on the DTS Universal disc is great, but the picture...arggg. Needs a new mastering. Oh well, not bad for a disc that came out 7 years ago.

Reissue came out last year. I read that the video was cleaned up, new bonus features were added, but the DTS track was not added since Universal decided to keep the new edition to a single disc (and not a flipper DVD-18 format). List price though is $15, which means it streets for around $12.

superpanavision70mm
04-29-2006, 02:18 AM
Yes, I know they re-issued it...I want that new edition w/ DTS of course. What new bonus features are there that were not on the older one? They looked the same when I looked at the packaging, but maybe there are some new ones....?

Woochifer
04-29-2006, 02:25 AM
Yes, I know they re-issued it...I want that new edition w/ DTS of course. What new bonus features are there that were not on the older one? They looked the same when I looked at the packaging, but maybe there are some new ones....?

Actually, you're right. The bonus features stayed roughly the same as the previous DD-only version. The big difference was the new video transfer.

superpanavision70mm
04-29-2006, 02:53 AM
I am glad that they did a new transfer, but that's no excuse to not use the DTS track from the previous DVD. Although even that could have been redone a tad.

musicman1999
04-30-2006, 11:27 AM
Wooch
I rented that Peter Gabriel disc you mentioned this morning and it works fine.Very strange,i tried the Queen disc again,same problem.Something does not add up.

bill