Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Dolby Digital vs DTS
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dolby Digital vs DTS - Page 2

post #16 of 23
4/8/03 at 3:10am
I use dts anytime it is available on a disc. with my m&k 5.1 setup you can tell the difference right off. better bass response and overall better soundstage if you ask me!
Reply
post #17 of 23
4/8/03 at 2:26pm
I heard DTS was good but I never actually experienced it for myself...yet. I have a question about DTS though, a little off topic, but is it only offered in 5.1?

I heard DD was going to do more than 5.1, like 7.1 maybe even 9.1? Is DTS working on this also?
Reply
post #18 of 23
4/8/03 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally posted by C4 Suke
I heard DTS was good but I never actually experienced it for myself...yet. I have a question about DTS though, a little off topic, but is it only offered in 5.1?

I heard DD was going to do more than 5.1, like 7.1 maybe even 9.1? Is DTS working on this also?
No. I have discs with 6.1 DTS, 4.1 DTS, 4.0 DTS, and other variations.
Reply
post #19 of 23
4/29/03 at 8:43am

everything is relative.

Although I concurr with the concensus that DTS appears to sound better than DD, I would like to share the following observation with you.

I had the opportunity to test a variety of DTS recievers about a year ago. I tried everything from a $150 technics receiver to a $1000 Marantz.

My benchmark was my existing home receiver, Yamaha Dsp 3090, a NON-DTS, DD only, former flagship receiver that I had picked up second hand for a few hundred, but had retailed new for about $2000. Definitely a difference class from the test receivers.

Well.. the bottom line was, DTS did sound better than DD on all the test receivers..

HOWEVER...DD on my yahama receiver sounded better than DTS on ALL the other receivers.

Conclusion? Good quality components make alot of difference sometimes. The yahama wasn't the best for music, but the quality of the amplification, and the engineering made up for the lack of DTS..

( I didn't upgrade, still have it.. saved myself $1000_ dollars..)
Reply
post #20 of 23
4/29/03 at 1:38pm
A while back there was a debate between DTS and DD...
if I remember correctly it was in AVS forum www.avsforum.com but I cant seem to find the thread and something was published in widescreen review. Apparently, DTS did some tests that showed why they were superior to DD and DD did a rebuke etc...anyhow there was a back and forth battling of words and test results

I cant find it now but I did find these
http://www.5point1.com/dts/battle.html
http://www.secondbeat.com/html/articles/march/dts.html

I seem to prefer DTS as well as it seems more dynamic...highs are highs and lows are lows and there seems to be a wider range and the surrounds are better utilized but that could be the sound engineer having a bit more fun with the DTS mix than the DD...

Anyways...
Reply
post #21 of 23
4/30/03 at 3:14am
Quote:
Originally posted by daniel422
DTS is slightly less compressed than DD -- but realisticly not enough for you to notice. The big difference is the complete re-mastering of the soundtrack. It makes direct comparison very difficult as far as sound quality goes. I will agree that I prefer the DTS soundtracks in most instances.
This is not entirely, unless you call 448kbps and 1.4mbps a slight difference
DD may ofcourse be 640kbps, but this is quite uncommon, especially on consumer ready DVD material.
Reply
post #22 of 23
4/30/03 at 10:22am
Quote:
This is not entirely, unless you call 448kbps and 1.4mbps a slight difference
I agree. As i stated previously, i do a lot of dvd ripping where i extract the audio and video tracks. Ive had quite a few dvds where i extracted both a DD and a DTS track. The file size difference between the 2 is very large. Sometimes the DTS track is nearly twice the size of the DD. This tells me that DD has been compressed more than just "slightly" in comparison to DTS.
Reply
post #23 of 23
4/30/03 at 2:47pm
i have a decent ht, and agree that dts in general is more musical and dynamic than dd soundtracks. my impression is:

dd = brighter, more compressed, brings out detail as if the soundtrack is magnified. also, dd can be dynamically compressed by my reciever for late night movies.

dts = warmer, deeper and more accurate 3d soundstage. also, the dts track reproduces music far better, and has more realistic and subtle dynamics. cannot compress the dynamics via rec.

dts is not always better, i have noticed on some dvd's that the dts & dd tracks are almost the same in quality.

if anyone owns the 20th anniversary edition of "alien", check out the french audio track. i think it is superior to the english in almost every way (except for the dubbing of course), especially the sound effects which seemed to have been remixed.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Dolby Digital vs DTS