HD Audio vs. DVD Audio ( DTS HD MA vs. DTS )

[rana_kirti]

Hi frens,

I'm planning to Bluray.... I've seen across many demo rooms that the picture quality of the Bluray is for sure leaps and bounds better than DVD. That being said i've not had the opportunity to compare HD Audio vs. DVD Audio.

I'd invite owners of Bluray Players & Newer HD AV Receivers to share if they've noticed the level of difference in sound between DTS HD MA vs DTS and Dolby True HD vs Dolby.

Have you compared the the sound of the same Bluray Disc in DTS HD MA mode vs. DTS mode ?

Do the newer HD Audio formats sound way superior to the older DVD formats...?

Thanks

 

[zervinb]

Yes, DTS-HD MA does sound better than DTS. Although, it will depend on how sharp your ears are at picking up the sound. I have no way to actually compare the two specifically. The only thing I can definitely say, is that DTS is lossy compression, whereas DTS-HD MA is lossless compression.

 

[no1lives4ever]

Lets put it this way.. On a BluRay, regular DTS audio would typically be at 1.5mpbs bit rate. On a DVD it would be at 750kbps. At movie theaters when they use DTS, they use 1.5mbps rate. HD audio is at even higher bit rates and the best part is that it is losslessly compressed. A DTS HD track has a regular 1.5mbps DTS track. So in a nutshell, even if you can only process regular DTS, the track on a BluRay should give you better sound quality. I am not sure about the bit rates for Dolby tracks on BluRay discs, but the situation is similar.

Now I have only a single BluRay disc and on that the difference in audio quality is pretty clear between the regular track and the HD audio track.But then this can be due to the standard track being at a lower than normal bit rate.

In general the audio difference is there, but very minor. Only audible on scenes with a lot of reverb effects, etc. The difference in audio quality between a BluRay and a DVD is nowhere near the difference in the video quality.

When setting up a BluRay HT setup, if I have to choose between getting a bigger screen or spending more on a AVR supporting HD audio, I would choose getting the bigger screen.

-- no1lives4ever

 

[sidvee]

Hi frens,

I'm planning to Bluray.... I've seen across many demo rooms that the picture quality of the Bluray is for sure leaps and bounds better than DVD. That being said i've not had the opportunity to compare HD Audio vs. DVD Audio.

I'd invite owners of Bluray Players & Newer HD AV Receivers to share if they've noticed the level of difference in sound between DTS HD MA vs DTS and Dolby True HD vs Dolby.

Have you compared the the sound of the same Bluray Disc in DTS HD MA mode vs. DTS mode ?

Do the newer HD Audio formats sound way superior to the older DVD formats...?

Thanks

IMO DTS HD and Dolby True HD have similar increases in sound quality as the does the HD picture over standard DVD, that is to say that it blows standard audio formats away. The center channel dialog is much more clearer, the surround effects are more pronounced and spacious and the .1 channel appears to have more impact than standard DTS or dolby digital. I firmly believe that sound is 50% of the home theater experience and DTS HD and Dolby HD are definitely superior. I have compared many (at-least 15-20) of my standard DVD's with the same Blu Ray releases with level matched tests and there is no doubt in my mind. In fact, now when I buy a Blu ray I make sure that it has one of the HD sound formats or I will not buy it. Again just my humble observation so no flames please.
Cheers
Sid

 

[rana_kirti]

can we say....?

1. DTS Core ( 1.5mbps ) Better than DTS ( 750kbps ) on DVD by "Big Margin"

2. DTS HD MA ( 24.5Mbps ) Better than DTS Core ( 1.5mbps ) by "Small/Negligible Margin"

 

[Imrahn]

1.Its definitely and perceivably better.

2.I don't think DTS MA is 24.5mbps or so....jsut around 2-4mbps variable.Its more like the DTS 1.5mbps core with added effects tacked on.It was really effective in Dark Knight bluray,havent compared in other blurays when my PS3 went kaput.

 

[rana_kirti]

so DTS HD MA better than DTS Core by -----> "BIG/Significant Margin"......?

guys we need some more feedback on this....

 

[yrk1969]

so DTS HD MA better than DTS Core by -----> "BIG/Significant Margin"......?

guys we need some more feedback on this....

I have not done any explicit comparison as such, however DTS-MA sounds much better than DD. (I think many Blu-rays have DD and DTS-MA tracks.)

vs DTS only, I can't really say.

 

[sud98]

DVD Audio is a much higher format than DTS. So you need to compare to SACD or DVD-A with HD Audio.

 

[venkatcr]

Rana Kirti, I am not able to understand your objective here. What are you trying to establish?

Cheers

 

[askii2]

I think what he wants is "whether blu-ray audio is much (if any) better than the audio in a dvd disc".

My opinion on this is Blue ray audio formats do have three benefits over those in DVDs - Additional channels, a higher dynamic range and higher quality audio. You need additional speakers to enjoy more than 5 surround channels. Higher dynamic range is useful only if you have a powerful enough subwoofer and play your movies at a loud volume. Higher quality is enjoyable only if you have excellent speakers.


Rana-kirti: DVD-Audio is a separate high definition audio format for audio only discs. DVD-Video format is used for the movie DVDs we typically see. DVD-Video contains either a dolby digital or DTS sound.

 

[venkatcr]

I think the very fact that Dolby and DTS are lossly compression, and DTS MA and Dolby TrueHD are non-compressed should give the answer. You get wider frequency coverage, upto 24-bit/192 kHz audio, and the possibility of 16 channel recording and 8 channel delivery. An AC-3 stream that Dolby and DTS use stops at 16-bit/48kHz.

Cheers

 

[rana_kirti]

Rana Kirti, I am not able to understand your objective here. What are you trying to establish?

Cheers

I think what he wants is "whether blu-ray audio is much (if any) better than the audio in a dvd disc".

My opinion on this is Blue ray audio formats do have three benefits over those in DVDs - Additional channels, a higher dynamic range and higher quality audio. You need additional speakers to enjoy more than 5 surround channels. Higher dynamic range is useful only if you have a powerful enough subwoofer and play your movies at a loud volume. Higher quality is enjoyable only if you have excellent speakers.


Rana-kirti: DVD-Audio is a separate high definition audio format for audio only discs. DVD-Video format is used for the movie DVDs we typically see. DVD-Video contains either a dolby digital or DTS sound.

I think the very fact that Dolby and DTS are lossly compression, and DTS MA and Dolby TrueHD are non-compressed should give the answer. You get wider frequency coverage, upto 24-bit/192 kHz audio, and the possibility of 16 channel recording and 8 channel delivery. An AC-3 stream that Dolby and DTS use stops at 16-bit/48kHz.

Cheers

I think the the word "DVD Audio" got a little confusing.

My intention was to compare DTS found on a DVD Disc vs DTS Core and DTS HD MA found on a Bluray Disc.

1. So far the replies seem to say that the 1.5 mbps DTS Core of the Bluray Disc is "Superior by a Big Margin" to the 740 kpbs DTS of the Regular DVD

2. But how much Superior is the DTS HD MA vs DTS Core ( Both found on a Bluray Disc )

Answers to No. 2 is important for me to figure out as i'm planning to get a Bluray player. I'm quite happy with the sound of my current AVR Yamaha RX V450.

I believe the RX V450 can transfer and decode the DTS CORE 1.5 Mbps from a Bluray Disc via optical cable.

So if DTS HD MA is better than DTS Core by a "Huge/Significant" margin then i'll buy a new modern AVR capable of decoding the DTS HD MA.

However if the difference between DTS HD MA and DTS Core is not much than i'll continue with my existing AVR.

That's my dilemma.....

 

[ashishkesarwani]

Rana why don't you buy a BD Player with 5.1 or 7.1 channel analogue output and that way you can do the deocding of HD Audio in the BD player rather than the AVR and send it through Multi Channel Analogue output to your Older AVR.
An option for you to consider is Dune HD Max which is a full fledged Media Player with built in Blu Ray drive to play all region BDs as well as Dvds and it also has the above mentioned requisites.

 

[no1lives4ever]

I think the the word "DVD Audio" got a little confusing.

My intention was to compare DTS found on a DVD Disc vs DTS Core and DTS HD MA found on a Bluray Disc.

1. So far the replies seem to say that the 1.5 mbps DTS Core of the Bluray Disc is "Superior by a Big Margin" to the 740 kpbs DTS of the Regular DVD

2. But how much Superior is the DTS HD MA vs DTS Core ( Both found on a Bluray Disc )

Answers to No. 2 is important for me to figure out as i'm planning to get a Bluray player. I'm quite happy with the sound of my current AVR Yamaha RX V450.

I believe the RX V450 can transfer and decode the DTS CORE 1.5 Mbps from a Bluray Disc via optical cable.

So if DTS HD MA is better than DTS Core by a "Huge/Significant" margin then i'll buy a new modern AVR capable of decoding the DTS HD MA.

However if the difference between DTS HD MA and DTS Core is not much than i'll continue with my existing AVR.

That's my dilemma.....

If your AVR can decode DTS, then it should handle the DTS core audio track from a BluRay disc's DTS HD MA track.

Now coming to your original query, here is my take on the situation.

Unless you have a very high end HT setup with a properly treated room, you will not notice any significant lack in audio quality when playing the DTS core audio track and the DTS HD MA tracks.

But all BluRay discs do not come with DTS HD MA tracks. Many come with DD & Dolby True HD. And this makes the comparision a bit less clear cut.

Here are the various audio formats under discussion in ascending level of quality as per my past experience with them
1. 384/448kbps Standard AC3 (Dolby Digital) on regular DVDs
2. 640kbps AC3 found on a few DVDs and BluRay Discs
3. 768kbps DTS on DVDs - Some would place a 640kbps AC3 stream at the same quality level as the 768kbps DTS streams found on DVDs, but I find audible differences, so I put the DTS tracks higher.
4. 1.5mbps DTS Core on BluRay discs with DTS or DTS HD MA
5. Dolby True HD or DTS HD MA - These in theory have the same quality as both are lossless audio formats

In general there is a big quality difference between the standard AC3 track and 640kbps AC3 or 768kbps DTS tracks. I suppose you already know about the differences between these various formats based on your past experience with DVDs.

Now the difference between 768kbps DTS and 1.5mbps DTS core on BluRay discs also exist, but not as dramatic as the difference between the base AC3 and higher bitrate AC3/low bitrate DTS tracks. But then again, this difference can easily be heard on any half decent HT setup using properly selected audio tracks and critical listening.

The difference between the 1.5mbps DTS and lossless HD audio codecs is even lesser and if you ask me, it should require a reasonably high end system to be clearly apparent. To me the slight difference between these 2 formats is so low that I would not bother much when watching movies. The DTS 1.5mbps tracks are extremely good with most movies.

The other advantage of the newer HD audio codecs is the ability to carry 7.1 surround sound. But even today most movies are mastered with 5.1 audio and while the standard has been around for some time, there are very few movies available on BluRay with more than 5.1 audio tracks. So this difference is not really a major difference.

Now the next thing to consider when playing back BluRay discs is that the discs typically contain either DTS tracks or Dolby tracks.

Those discs which contain only Dolby tracks. i.e. Dolby Digital and Dolby True HD, will show a very significant audio difference between the high bitrate Dolby AC3 track and the Dolby True HD audio track. But then to me the difference is nowhere near the quality difference I see between the video on a BluRay disc and on a well mastered DVD. The audio differences

Those discs which come with DTS HD MA will output a 1.5mbps DTS track to your existing AVR. On these discs the difference is quite small. I would say that you will need a really good quality HT setup to observe the difference.

What I would suggest to you would be to find a HT dealer willing to demo you these differences with a few selected BluRay discs on a high end HT setup. Do not just test using the audio track selection feature on the bluray discs to flip between HD & non HD audio but for running non HD audio hook up a coax or optical cable to the AVR from the BluRay player to know how a bluray player will really behave in your kind of a setup. This would be the best way for you to see the actual difference when applied to a high end HT setup. Next do the same demo with what you plan to actually buy and see if the differences still remain relavent in your case.

Overall I would say that using an older generation AVR which is capable of only playing back DVD audio formats will not take away the movie watching experience of BluRay discs. Now if you are just looking for a reason to get your wife's approval for a new AVR, then this should be good enough

Another thing to consider is that if you are looking for an audio quality upgrade of your HT setup then you will most likely get better results by doing some basic room treatment if you do not have any or with a speaker upgrade than just an upgrade to get HD audio with your existing speakers and room.

-- no1lives4ever

 

[acoustics]

hi kirti
dts hdma should not be the only reason to upgrade to a new avr . The yamaha rx-v450 is a model lauched in 2005 .If you compare the hardware of the 450 to the current age of the avrs you ll see that there has been a lot of changes made to all the sections of an avr in all these years and i am talking of all brands here.Lets take a few of the critical features you should consider apart from dts hdma if you go for an upgrade:
1. rx-v450 lacks automated calibration system
2. it does not feature burr brown DAC's
3. the amp design is old
4. no onboard video processing and lacks hdmi
now the 4 features that i have pointed out are good enough reasons to go for an upgrade if you have a thought of upgrading in your mind
and all the other features that come along with these are bonus ones.
Kirti i myself have upgraded from the entry models to the intermidiate ones ,then to the higher end and then at last to the flagship model from 2 different brands and i can assure you that stepping up to a higher end model(considering the 2067 or any x brand) from an entry level one(the 450) is somthing exceptional.
Another thing that i would like to suggest you is dont go for media players with built in decoders for dts hdma etc because in that case your options for decoding latest audio formats are zipped up for example if in future u buy airtel HD DTH service , it comes with dolby digital PLUS audio and you wont be able to decode it because ur avr would still be missing with the decoders
yamaha 1067 upwards support AAC 7.1 and FLAC 5.1 decoding too

 

[acoustics]

As per your concern with the dts hdma consider this:
The dts core on a dvd has a max bitrate of 1.5 mbps , when the encoding is done using only the core 5.1 the more crucial sounding elements (these can be louder sound elements or steering effect elements) are given preference because of the limited storage space avaliable for the dts core on a dvd. You can understand this better by an example of a scene in a movie where an explosion takes place , the explosion noise is given more preference on the core sound track simply because its louder and all the other sound elements that were recorded along with the explosion and fall under the specified db standard of the core are rejected. In other words more important sound elements are put on the core. This means that we dont even hear the full sounds recorded during the movie shoot on the dts core or the dolby5.1 which is even more compressed .Now this makes the soundtrack dull (if compared with a bluray)because it lacks all the sound recorded but when we talk about the core extension ie the hdma , it consists of all the rejected sound elements which are restored during the playback which makes the soundtrack more lively and enhanced with extra surround elements.
So please dont think that there is a marginal quality difference there, its "1.5 mbps vs 25 mbps" . All that extra space alloted to the hdma extension on a bluray has a lot to offer, the hdma and the truehd are actual studio audio as recorded by the sound engineers.

well i just read the above post done by "no1lives4ever" and so i am editing mine
@no1lives4ever . I am not sure about if you are familiar with the encoding process by dts for the core and the extension.
the word lossless does not mean the sound quality is enhanced by a margin in case of the extensions or the sound is simply clearer , it means that the missing audio data (which includes uncompressed 5.1 channels and the rejected sound elements) are present on the extension. The higher quality avr's and speakers help to reproduce this elements more efficiently because they have a better and excellent capability of handling uncompressed full bandwidth mutiple channels due to their better hardware but its not that the ppl with intermediate models wont feel the difference

 

[acoustics]

And there is somthing else that i would like to mention here
look all avr's which have the dts hdma and the true hd decoders will do the job of decoding the extension elements but how will an expensive avr and good quality speaker system make the difference ?
as you now know that the bitrates of the hdma and the true hd are higher so this data is handled more properly more efficiently by expensive avrs because these avrs use
-better DAC's usually the higher DSD series burr browns
-better designed audio paths and amplifier circuits (better channel seperationand good sound quality)
-low jitter circuits (low noise and sound colouring)
-more efficient power supplies which supply all the required juice to reproduce the entire bandwidth by the speakers .(this being very crucial ,the more expensive the amp or an avr would be the more heavier would it be and thus can power up the WRAT more efficiently. )
in case of hdma and truehd the audio bandwidth is wide ie it will contain both the strong current demanding lower frequencies as well as the extra elements rejected by the core which need to be reproduced all togther at the same time so only a good high current transformer and a large capacitor bank will be able to handle this properly

-seperate heat sinks for the L and R Channels which again help to maintain strong channel seperation
and if we talk about of good quality speakers yes the ribbon/ring radiator tweeters and nicely done crossovers help a lot in reproducing hdma and truehd in a much better way

So yes hdma and truehd will sound much more better on higer end avrs and speakers

 

[no1lives4ever]

@acoustics.. Thanks for the detailed explaination of the DTS HD MA & DTS Core difrerences. I did study these differences. In a nutshell, the DTS HD MA codec is designed in 2 parts, part 1 is the regular DTS encoding. Part 2 adds all the extra bits that have been dropped during the DTS encoding. So this makes it a lossless codec. The HD codecs also supply audio at higher bit depth and sampling rates.

Now I agree that on a high end AVR, there would be a difference in quality between a lossy compression scheme with 5.1 audio encoded at 48khz v/s a lossless 7.1 audio stream at 24bit 96khz resolution. But how big is this difference? Most movies are encoded with 5.1 surround so the 2 extra surround channels do not add much to the music. People on this board compare the quality of high end stereo setups using stereo 16 bit 44.1khz sources on CDs. The additional data storage is used by data that we are mostly not hearing.

I have done A/B listening tests with DTS Core and DTS HD MA audio from the same BluRay using the same source audio stream in a well treated demo room with upper mid range equipment and did not find the audio quality improvement to be very great. There was a difference, but to me it was not a whole lot. OTOH when I play the Matrix BluRay on my home HT setup, there is a big difference between the Dolby Digital 5.1 and Dolby True HD 5.1 audio tracks.

So if we are only comparing the legacy and HD versions of DTS, I would hazard to say that the difference is not big enough to warrant a AVR or source upgrade. But when comparing Dolby Digital and Dolby TrueHD, there is a big enough difference to actually consider a AVR or source upgrade.

Also you need not require HD audio bitstreaming to get the most out of these new codecs. If you have a bluray player that can decode HD audio and send them as LPCM tracks to the AVR over HDMI, then that is as good as using the AVR for decoding the HD audio stream. I have a PS3 that I use as my BluRay player. It can do both bitstreaming or decode + LPCM output over HDMI to my AVR when playing HD audio. In theory there should be no difference in the audio quality and this seems to be confirmed with my listening tests also.

-- no1lives4ever

 

[rana_kirti]

acoustics & no1livesforever,

thanks for a detailed discussion on this topic.... i've got a learn a lot with the same. Although i guess we have still not reached a conclusion as to whether DTS HD MA sounds way better than DTS Core ( both found on same Bluray Disc ) there is something else which i'd like to ask here....

My AVR is 6 yrs old and i guess it's accurate to say that the RX V450 when it was sold new in 2005 must have been in the "entry level" range.

So keeping the DTS HD MA vs. DTS Core discussion aside for a moment, would it make a huge/significant difference to general performance if i simply got one of the newer "middle level" models like the RX V 2067 ?

I mean will the RX V 2067 ( or a equivalent "middle range avr" from another brand like say maybe NAD T747, Onkyo 808 etc ) make a significant improvement which i can hear over my current ageing RX V450 ?

If the answer to above is a Empathetic/Resounding "Yes".... then it makes sense for me to get a new AVR and by default that will also give me hdmi, hd audio decoding, auto room calibaration etc.

But it the answer is "No" then i might as well stick to my RX V450 which i believe can atleast decode "DTS Core" via optical cable from a bluray player. ( is that correct ? )

A midrange AVR like the Yamaha RX V2067, NAD T 747, Onkyo 808 etc will cost me at least in the region of about 70k to 80k.

So does 70k to 80k brings me a Huge jump in sound quality over my RX V450 ?