How did DTS one-up DD on Blu-Ray movies

[Tarheel_]

After owning DVDs since 1997, DTS tracks were definitely in the minority. I recall scanning back covers just looking for the DTS icon to demo my system. Now, as i approach Blu-ray, i've noticed most (more than 50%?) arrive with DTS HD standard.

What happened? I mean that is a major swing and i'm sure DD isn't happy about the turn of events.

As a side note, their (DTS INC) stock prices seem to be rising well over the last year. Must be doing something right over there.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

After owning DVDs since 1997, DTS tracks were definitely in the minority. I recall scanning back covers just looking for the DTS icon to demo my system. Now, as i approach Blu-ray, i've noticed most (more than 50%?) arrive with DTS HD standard.

What happened? I mean that is a major swing and i'm sure DD isn't happy about the turn of events.

As a side note, their (DTS INC) stock prices seem to be rising well over the last year. Must be doing something right over there.

This is going to be easy to answer. Dts went all over Hollywood making deals and heavily marketing its codec. Since it is more efficient than Dolby TrueHD, able to easily adopt to stemless branching and in movie experience(something Dolby Digital cannot do), and videophiles basically would pay a premium for it, Dts is now on 60-70% of Blu ray titles. Considering Dts HD MA is in every receiver, Dts had no problem convincing Hollywood its codec fit their needs.

The only reason Dts was no more widely adopted on DVD was the lack of space. Since DD was the standard, it took precedent on DVD and Dts had to take the back seat.

Is Dolby happy? I don't think they care that much. Dolby has branched off in so many different direction in the last five years, they don't rely on Dolby Digital, DD+, or TrueHD to make them much money. With D-cinema not including either on of the codecs within the stardard(its uncompressed PCM for the theater), Dolby was already losing market share anyway. Also Dolby had resigned itself to gimmicky stuff like PLIIz and PLIIx, which shows they have pretty much given up on the home video side. Dolby latest gimmick...Dolby 7.1 surround for movie theaters. The funny thing is it does not envolve Dolby Digital at all. It is based on PCM with a small Dolby Digital extension. Dts could do 7.1 for the movie theater ten years ago, do Dolby is really playing the channel catch up game.

[Feanor]

This is going to be easy to answer. Dts went all over Hollywood making deals and heavily marketing its codec. Since it is more efficient than Dolby TrueHD, able to easily adopt to stemless branching and in movie experience(something Dolby Digital cannot do), ...
What is "stemless branching"?

[kevlarus]

After owning DVDs since 1997, DTS tracks were definitely in the minority. I recall scanning back covers just looking for the DTS icon to demo my system. Now, as i approach Blu-ray, i've noticed most (more than 50%?) arrive with DTS HD standard.

What happened? I mean that is a major swing and i'm sure DD isn't happy about the turn of events.

As a side note, their (DTS INC) stock prices seem to be rising well over the last year. Must be doing something right over there.


The other reason for the change is that DTS is now a standard for Blu just like DD* is. Under DVD, DTS was just optional and depending on the amount of "extras" included on the DVD, there was no room to include that sound codec. The Bond series included both and I always found DTS much more dynamic and that's just under the DVD format. Also, the original DTS spec could handle higher data rate and DD could, which is part of the reason for the difference in sound.

Right there is a reason to go to Blu even without having a receiver that can decode the HD audio versions.

[Hairsonfire]

What is "stemless branching"?

It's just something that Sir T made up to make us all feel ignorant. He does it all the time . . . No, T, I was just kidding! Joke, joke! LOL!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

What is "stemless branching"?

That should be "seamless" branching not stemless. My dog was trying very hard to get my attention when I wrote that, and he won, he got it. I forgot to proof what I wrote!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The other reason for the change is that DTS is now a standard for Blu just like DD* is. Under DVD, DTS was just optional and depending on the amount of "extras" included on the DVD, there was no room to include that sound codec. The Bond series included both and I always found DTS much more dynamic and that's just under the DVD format. Also, the original DTS spec could handle higher data rate and DD could, which is part of the reason for the difference in sound.

Right there is a reason to go to Blu even without having a receiver that can decode the HD audio versions.

Actually only legacy DTS and DD along with PCM are standard codecs for Blu ray. DTS-HD Master audio, DTS-HD, DD+ and Dolby TrueHD are optional on the format.

[Woochifer]

After owning DVDs since 1997, DTS tracks were definitely in the minority. I recall scanning back covers just looking for the DTS icon to demo my system. Now, as i approach Blu-ray, i've noticed most (more than 50%?) arrive with DTS HD standard.

What happened? I mean that is a major swing and i'm sure DD isn't happy about the turn of events.

As a side note, their (DTS INC) stock prices seem to be rising well over the last year. Must be doing something right over there.

As T noted, DTS is one of the standard formats for Blu-ray -- it was merely optional for DVDs (notice that any DVD with a DTS track also has a DD track). Since the format is scalable from DTS-HD, it just makes sense that more Blu-ray titles are now authored using a DTS audio track.

The great thing about DTS on Blu-ray is that for people like me who use an older receiver, the DTS track that gets output through the optical digital audio output is the 1.5k version, not the half-bitrate version that DVDs use.

DD on Blu-ray also uses a higher bitrate that's audibly superior to the 448/384k DD tracks used on DVDs.

[Tarheel_]

As T noted, DTS is one of the standard formats for Blu-ray -- it was merely optional for DVDs (notice that any DVD with a DTS track also has a DD track). Since the format is scalable from DTS-HD, it just makes sense that more Blu-ray titles are now authored using a DTS audio track.

The great thing about DTS on Blu-ray is that for people like me who use an older receiver, the DTS track that gets output through the optical digital audio output is the 1.5k version, not the half-bitrate version that DVDs use.

DD on Blu-ray also uses a higher bitrate that's audibly superior to the 448/384k DD tracks used on DVDs.

I have a Toshiba HD DVD player -- using the Toslink input to my older AVR. I can toggle through the audio tracks and definitely hear the difference. Although, i don't recall seeing a DTS option..maybe HD DVDs didn't arrive with DTS optional. Anyway, the additional bitrate turns up the heat. Can't wait for my blu-ray player in July.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I have a Toshiba HD DVD player -- using the Toslink input to my older AVR. I can toggle through the audio tracks and definitely hear the difference. Although, i don't recall seeing a DTS option..maybe HD DVDs didn't arrive with DTS optional. Anyway, the additional bitrate turns up the heat. Can't wait for my blu-ray player in July.

There are quite a few HD DVD with legacy DTS on them, but I can only think of two titles with DTS HD Master Audio. This is because HD DVD had bandwidth issues from the day it was introduced.

[Tarheel_]

I do see the DTS legacy codec, but that pales in comparison to the newer DD stuff...guess i meant the DTS isn't HD Master Audio.

Great name by the way...Master Audio...sounds superior doesn't it?