How about THX??

most home entertainment formats come with
either Dolby or DTS.

but it seems more blu-rays come with only Dolby True-HD 5.1 and Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks.. apart from the legacy DD 2.1 and LPCM 48kHz.

i like Dolby for its lower frequency dynamics
however for dialogue normalization, i find DTS is better

It is a Lucasfilm quality standard.

In order for stuff to get the THX logo, it needs to meet the THX standards..

Think of it like Example SIRIM logo, or ISO logo stuff like that...meaning to have that logo needs to meet certain requirement..

Anyway, you can read all abt it here:
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entertainment/

This post has been edited by azbro: Dec 2 2010, 06:18 PM

To add to what azbro said: THX is not a sound format. Even though it's a sign that the DVD has met the THX standards, it's just about meeting the standards. Even a mono movie can meet a THX standard.

With BD, most studios have forgone sending their discs to meet THX standards because most often they are really good. THX still has value when it comes to cinemas.
Hasn't been the case in the last year or so. Most BDs now are in DTS-HDMA - Fox, Universal, Disney, Lionsgate. Paramount and Warner sometimes go with DTS-HDMA and sometimes Dolby TrueHD.

One huge advantage of DTS HDMA over Dolby TrueHD is that the DTS 1.5Mbps data is encoded with the DTS HDMA data. So if you only have legacy decoders, you automatically get DTS 1.5 and if you have newer decoders, you get DTS HDMA. With Dolby TrueHD, it's encoded separately and you have to choose which audio tracks you like to listen to - Dolby Digital or Dolby TrueHD. Most Warner BDs will automatically play the movie - a great feature - but if it comes with Dolby TrueHD, it'll play the feature in Dolby Digital. You have to manually change it to Dolby TrueHD before you can really enjoy the movie's soundtrack.


fuad

THX system is not a recording technology, and it does not specify a sound recording format.

THX and Dolby Cinema are in the same category, matrix decoder to emulate best possible surround experience.

Dolby Prologic and DTS-Neo:6 is another category, this ones are for upmixing. i.e 2.0 -> 5.0, 2.1 -> 7.1 etc.

DD, DD+, Dolby True-HD, DTS, DTS-ES, DTS-HD HR, DTS-HD MA are encoding technologies.

every encoder and decoder muz meet the requirements set out by the individual licensing companies.

all products must be done by the following procedures:
self testing>application for testing>approval>(commonality application)>licensing>royalty

i myself have done testing for Dolby and DTS related products.
to say, i prefer Dolby because its certification procedure is simple, straightforward and easy to decipher. DTS on the other hand is a total pain in the ass.


Example of Dolby actual test documentations.. sorry cannot show insides.. confidential~



This post has been edited by lee_lnh: Dec 2 2010, 06:52 PM

For me i prefer Dolby Digital 640kbps extracted core from TrueHD,

DTS core extracted from Master Audio cant hear any huge improvement compare to Dolby.

PCM is almost uncompressed audio format.

DTS HDMA and True HD is loss-less compress format.

DD+ and DTS is lossy compress format.

Technically, PCM should be more superior (bit rate can reach up to 6Mbps).

This post has been edited by ariff_tech: Dec 2 2010, 10:33 PM

Should be DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 (which include DTS Core: 5.1 inside) Nowadays, less and less BDs got True-HD.

For some reasons, I prefer the sound of TrueHD over DTS-HD MA in the Bluray discs that I have heard . Too bad there's less and less TrueHD.

seeing as both are lossless compression codecs, what you are hearing may be mixing differences. If it's the same mix there can't - logically - be any difference.

reason: trend for comin 2011 dolby getting less and less is because of royalty issue~

dolby do not charge application & licensing fee.. but charges royalty per unit item sold to market..

remember that the encoding is lossless~ but in the end the decoder and its hardware play the most vital role to accurately reproduce. Nothing is fixed, everything has tolerance~

there are many difference:
major ones are such as THD+N vs freq, THD+N vs level, SNR, dynamic range compression, frequency response with/without emphasis, dialogue normalization, downmixing coefficient, speaker remapping.
only those possess high quality audio system and a keen hearing can discern until the very detail~

This post has been edited by lee_lnh: Dec 3 2010, 02:13 AM

yeah,
dont forget the speaker.

I thought we are comparing both formats using the same system? IMHO, it is all depends on how the studio recorded it. Bad recordings: TF2 (muffled vocal, heavy bass), Ip Man (muffled vocal), Avatar (25HZ LFE cut-off), Rambo 4 (hollow sound) to name a few.

+1. Just exactly what I expressed in earlier post. It all boils down to original studio mixing.

That reminds me of the disappointing 2012's AQ. When those debris from volcano eruption in Yellowstone hit the earth, it is like tofu. Yikes!

Back to work on my client's project 1st

Saving Private Ryan is a brilliant example of a natural sounding DTS HD soundtrack... not just the obvious war scenes...but the sound of the american flag flapping... stepping on grass... brilliant

same system.. but dolby decoder is independent of dts decoder. How can it perform the same? and depend on the system hardware configuration, the way the decoder software parameters are written, it affects the actual output.

at output stage, same system only share the DAC and amp, of course include same grounding and pinjack~

I like King Kong soundtrack presented in DTS-HD Master mixing. Those special effects just put your seat right in the middle of the jungle. Reference quality audio.

I used to like DTS because it sounded louder

Then I started to realise that DTS sounded sharper and not as soft or natural like Dolby... anyone has the same experience? Maybe it is just the source encoding and not the technology itself.

Feels like the same sharper LCD vs softer Plasma debate...

Rubbish in rubbish out