Bit rate is just numbers....what our ear hear is a totally different thing. You can have a billion kbps and if our ear cannot tell the difference, then it means nothing.

Just like digital photo....300dpi is photo realistic already. Anything above that our eyes cannot tell the difference. Just remember that Manufacturers will always come out with new things to empty our wallet. The next thing you will see is probably Superbit Bluray coming your way btu how much better is the picture quality is qeatiuonable.

Sure. If you're half-deaf or deaf, of course audio bit-rate means nothing.

Before LaserDisc/DVD, people thought VHS was good enough. Before BD/HD, people thought DVD was good enough. But most people won't know what they are missing until they are shown the difference. Read this review of the Lord Of The Rings on Blu-ray Disc.

Video on BD is using lossy compression. Audio on BD can also use lossy compression but most new studio releases use lossless compression. There is a big difference.

If you gone to see This Is It in digital cinema, what you were hearing is the best the movie could sound.


fuad

+1

Gud topic tis..

Heres my 2 cts..

Do u nid new hd odo.. in a nutshell - no.. but since it cums wif de new 1080p vdo .. which incidentally is way way better than SD, there really isnt much of a choice..

I upgrdd my avr to lossless all becos of hdmi's eqpd displays/sources .. de odo part is jus de icing..

Wil I upgrd again if its jus solely for odo? I would say NO..
But tis is me who hv 'tin' ears.. another individual would say otherwise thou'..

On de topic of de experts not hearin much of a difference .. Sound is veri subjective n tis only bolsters tat argument..

Bottom line is u hv to decide for urself whether an upgrd warrants de expenditure..

I jus enjoy de mv..
D

The difference between 56k vs 256k mp3 would probably sound very different. But as the bitrate gets higher and higher the difference become less and less obvious until to a point where any increase in bitrate cannot be differentiate by the human ears. Even a lot of pro under lab condition have acknowledge that there isn't much difference between those compress and uncompress audio.

This is It when play on the same cinema with normal DTS could have sound just as good too!!!

you know what, I got "This Is IT" in DVD.ISO format and MKV. The MKV is in 1080p and the DVD is not that clear and I think even lower than 720p. But both use the same sound quality DTS 5.1.

And you know what, he said the mkv version sound better. he he he. it might be due to the 1080p change the perception in audio as well?

for me, I cant tell the diffrent on the audio because both same format. But picture quality lots of diffrence of course. But the picture made the whole experience feel more realistic.. honestly.

The diminishing returns on lossy compression is well documented. But so too are the fidelity of lossless compression.

DTS HDMA and Dolby TrueHD don't work like MP3s. In both codecs, the compression is VBR. That means the more complex audio passages get more bitrate while the quieter ones get much less. Their file sizes would always be bigger than standard DTS (1.5Mbps) or DD (640kbps). You can see the same thing when you compress an audio file using MP3/AAC/WMA and Flac/AAC Lossless.


MPCM is uncompressed audio. DTS HDMA and Dolby TrueHD are compressed audio. All deliver master tape quality.

Don't confuse lossless and lossy compression.
It could have. But there is a big difference between sounding good enough to sound fantastic. I remember the snap of the drums that sounded true to life and hardly heard in even normal CDs (16-bit instead of 24-bit master tapes).

There are gourmand and audiophiles and there are people who just like what's in front of them. So let's agree to disagree.

The .MKV is probably from the BD. A DTS HDMA track on BD also contains a separate lossy DTS track at 1.5Mbps. The DVD might have the DTS track at 768kbps. There are audible differences.


fuad

peasant always kena pijak by elites

I second this .... this could very well be the case . The full bandwidth of plain ol' DTS available on blurays ( and some handful DVDs) easily outperforms the chopped down DTS track on most DVDs .The same can be said for DD as well.
And trust me , u don't need high fidelity equipment to hear the difference. My cousin still is shocked and delighted on how he's sony HTIB has gone from ok to awesome with blurays ...lol

Hmm.... Sony HTiB also beat Jamo Someway must have gone seriously wrong

DD thruHD & DTS MA...make my pocket koyak....

result....

No matter the DD or DTHD or DTS or DTS HD, it all depends on the good recording and mixing. I have heard and campared with the normal DTS and DTS HD, the end result is the good recording and mixing wins hands down. A very good recording and mixing normal DTS soundtrack is always better than the DTS HD with mid class recording and mixing. But if vice versa, in theory, should be the DTS HD win hands down, but it still depend on the HT set, not all HT set can fully reproduce the DTS HD. And for me, the best sound reproduction is Cinema even they using normal DD or DTS, I think this is because they are using a very good HT set.

Malaysian Cinemas? Not from what I have seen....

Haha..

I hv attended mvs tat didnt hv any surround action at all..
Thou tats prbbly due to de fact tat de operator couldnt care less wat is happening n not due to de sofware/hardware involvd..

I stil go to de cines if only becos I cant wait to catch de mv..

D

Please try the THX certified cinema.

even THX cinema also not more better than HT at home..
might be better abit compare to normal cinema

I personally feel THX cinemas is a clear step up compared to the regular ones. Even the now aging THX hall in Summit USJ beats many of the cinemas that came after that. just my 5 cent

Yes, you are right, for THX certified hall, they will do regular check-up to make sure all the THX standard can be met. So this is not a surprise to get better sound quality if comapre to normal cinema. I have been start watching movie only in THX cinema hall somewhere around 1997 when I first introduced to THX Cinema. Now I'll only watch movie in Mid Valley Hall 12, Summit THX Hall, unless I'm watching cantonese or chinese movies, then any cinema will do.

Of course. But we're talking about best case scenario where the mix is Oscar calibre. There's no point talking about a movie recorded and mixed using substandard equipment yet delivered via its master tapes.

Again, of course. To deliver the full range fidelity of 5.1/7.1 mix, you should ideally have floorstanding speakers and powered sub. But most setups are decent enough that you can hear enough quality for what you pay for. That's where you have the enthusiast and audiophile markets.

Not all cinemas have the best sound reproduction, so let's not generalize there. Unlike sound mixing, the best case scenario for sound system in cinemas is less than 40%.

As far as THX or not, a cinema hall does not need THX certification to sound good. The certification is a way for the public to know that it meets a MINIMUM quality standard to earn that certificate. You can have better setups in your cinema and still not pay THX for their service.


fuad

congrats, so, which avr did u end up with? tell us..

Honestly, I have to agree with anfieldude and maskedchan. Yes, those THX cinema is better that the normal ones, but in terms of sound reproducing, I bet HT in house will sounds better, given that the set up is good, not perfect. Not to mention that you're sitting at your own confy sofa rather than an el chepo chair that is constantly vibrating because the person behind you is an a**. Also, most avr nowdays comes equipt with all those HD audio and what not, where else, the cinema is still on dts or dd, correct me if I'm wrong, haven't been to the cinema for more than a year now.

This post has been edited by Alias: Apr 9 2010, 11:12 AM