Both. Since audio stimuli is a perception processed in the brain, your mood and amount of attention spent on listening affects your perception of audio. There are both afferent (towards brain, sensory) nerves, as well as efferent (away from brain, motor) nerves. The environment/and or your...

DTS mode = DTS:X (native object based 3D audio) or DTS Neural:X (upconverted 3D from 2.1/5.1/7.1 audio). Atmos mode = Atmos (native object based 3D audio) or Dolby Surround (upconverted 3D from 2.1/5.1/7.1 audio). Again, in DTS mode, it will upconvert 2.1/5.1/7.1 (or that stream from a Dolby...

What TV do you have? If you don't want to tell me, I can't look up specifics about it and possibly help with seeing what picture settings it has for Dolby Vision. So we'll just have to leave it there. If you enjoy the settings for your TV, great. The only thing I ask is that you don't...

It seems it's you who aren't listening. Take for example audio. You claim you like Dolby Atmos more than DTS Neural:X. In a previous post, you mentioned having 10 Commandments and 2001. Those are both movies that have a 5.1 audio track. There is no Atmos track. So the "Atmos" sound mode is...

I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. When a video is encoded in Dolby Vision, it gets decoded has Dolby Vision. If you're in DTS:X mode, and if the audio is Dolby Atmos, then it just sees the 5.1 stream and upconverts to 3D audio. Same is true for "Dolby Atmos" mode if you are...

Again, the actual video has a video track that's either Dolby Vision, HDR10, or no HDR. There is no switching them on or off: it's how the video is encoded. Most 4K TVs support Dolby Vision now (there were some Samsung and Sony TVs that opted for HDR10+ instead of Dolby Vision). For those...

You can’t toggle Dolby Vision off or on. The video is either Dolby Vision or it’s not.

Both DTS:X and Atmos are considered object based. Both are similar with consumer video in that the audio track has a 5/7.1 stream and a dynamic object stream. So a DTS:X track is also handled the same-if you have a receiver that supports DTS:X, it will read both the 7.1 stream and object stream...

No, DTS:X is DTS's version of Atmos. DTS Neural:X is like Dolby Surround. For Atmos/DTS:X, it's for a native track that has positional metadata. It constructs a 3D environment from the track's meta data to then map to whatever speaker config you have. With Surround/Neural it takes a 2/5/7.1...

With my large OLED with my HT, I calibrated it with some test clips I bought (for both HDR10 and Dolby Vision content). At least that TV is pretty nice in that apart from brightness, contrast, OLED light, there's also RGB channels. I could even fine tune color temperature to be exact. The...

OK, I was just interjecting since you started this thread complaining about content having a weird presentation (especially, I think you're indicating native Atmos content). But if it's all working for you now, enjoy!

You seemed to indicate this soundbar of yours didn't have a room calibration setup? It could be that it's just not designed for TV/movie surround....instead direct stereo is best. Streaming services like Netflix will let you switch a 5.1 track to stereo (it might sound better for your...

As someone involved with video....I'm not sure if I should clarify what I now see what was interjected. Well, I'll just do a bit of reconstruction there.... What do you mean 24hz being a new standard? A native 24fps for TV is relatively new: it was the cinema standard for decades. So cinema...

Don't be fooled by some claims that 1's and 0's are different with various component's digital connections: with today's specs, they go well above any dropout for digital music. If there are sound differences between Eversolo models....there might be differences if you're listening through one...

And since 320 is the download for standard mp3, that's why I haven't fooled with seeing what's the best setting for a codec with "transparency" for say 2 pass VBR lowest acceptable bitrate.

It seems for downloading, the common files are either FLAC or 320kbps mp3. I get the 320kbps mp3 and don't do anything further. If I was really trying to shoot for the best file size to no audible difference, I'm sure I could find something with a good setting. But in this day and age, hard...

Yes, seeing as most music is remastered from analog tapes or 44.1/48 digital..."hi-res" is more a marketing gimmick for music. I think for consumers, it's better realized with video. People grew to understand how they needed larger resolution images as their TVs increased in size (and movies...

But Tidal and Qobuz are different services right? Do you have both apps, or are they served through the Roon app? If they're different services, then you can't be certain they are the same master or normalization. I was going off Wikipedia: which cites the ITU stating 128kbps VBR as...

I don't think bitrate is really an issue with today's internet. Cell data now exceeds 100Mbps. Same is true with BT if your headphones are close to your phone (as far as bitrate not dropping). If there is an audible difference, it very well can be: 1: Different masters of the song 2...

Studies indicate that AAC is transparent at 128kbps stereo, for example. That means it's the limit of average human hearing. There are theoretical advantages of having a higher bitrate for getting higher frequency or dynamic range. But if you only need a format that meets the range of human...

The minimum bitrate for audible transparency is dependent on codec. Some are more efficient and can have a lower bitrate The argument for headphone quality is more likely EQ settings of the app, as well as the headphone's transducer and dampening designs. So, what others have been saying, is...

Well the best nuanced term for a lossy file that's 24/96 would be "lossy hi-res". Pretty sure marketers wouldn't go for that :grinning: So at least marketing "hi-res" (that includes lossy) and "lossless hi-res" would be a compromise. Consumers would understand lossless hi-res as being more...

AAC itself can get up to 48kHz (sampling rate) in this scenario

Sure, then that gets further into whether there are any academic reasons for "lossy hi-res" We've both been having to preface: this is theoretical and above auditory range for audible music reproduction. But it does seem from links that there are some measurements where lossy 24/96 can exceed...

I was just interjecting if there’s theoretical advantages with lossy 24/96. Technically, LDAC 990kbps is capable of “lossless” (CD quality),