VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 23 of 23
Thread
  1. I'm new at this so excuse if it has been answered already. I am using ripbot ot convert blurays for streaming to my ps3. I have been succesful in making the movie with good quality video. My question is how to get the DTS audio. I had seen in previous threads to use COPY STREAM, that only got me video with no audio. What am I missing?
    Thank you for any help you can give.
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    By definition, AVCHD has AC-3 audio. I don't know if any hardware players would accept DTS.
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  3. Have there been any tests that show some players, all players, almost all players, almost no players, etc that will play AVCHD with DTS? Assuming the AVCHD is being played in a Blu-Ray player that includes DTS in it's spec (although AVCHD does not) I would think it would work. Anyone tested this?

    Searching on Google for "AVCHD DTS" shows many movies available for download as AVCHD w/ DTS, not that I am suggesting anyone download them, but their prevalence seems to imply that players that play AVCHD will also play DTS.
    Quote Quote  
  4. Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Freedonia
    Search Comp PM
    Players that support AVCHD seem to not enforce the standards. This is kind of like how NTSC DVD isn't technically allowed to use MPEG audio but most DVD players will allow it anyway. But technically speaking DTS is not part of the standard so if down the road some player enforces the standard, you can't really complain about it. But it will probably work OK in most players that play AVCHD discs.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    @jman98 - I don't mean to contradict you but this is from the videohelp dvd spec page:

    Audio:

    48000 Hz
    32 - 1536 Kbit/s
    Up to 8 audio tracks containing Dolby Digital, DTS, PCM(uncompressed audio), MPEG-1 Layer2. One audio track must have MPEG-1, DD or PCM Audio.

    It would seem the mpeg audio SHOULD be an acceptable audio track. Now whether or not this was enforced on the EARLIEST dvd players may be part of that. Just like some of the very first players couldn't play dual layer dvds. Am I right on that?

    Sorry to go off topic there.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    yoda313,

    The DVD spec says (I'm summarizing): If audio is used, one of these formats MUST be supplied and supported - AC-3 or LPCM. Exception: in PAL countries, MP2 is added to that list. All other formats (MP2, DTS, & SDDS-which was NEVER implemented) are supplementary and optional, as well as optional to be supported by the player.

    Hell, I've been able to author test VCDs and DVDs that used MP3 audio! But rarely did a player support it, so regardless of whether it CAN be done, it really SHOULDN'T be done as it is a waste of the author's & user's time.

    Just because the "Internet Idiot Lemmings" choose to jump of the cliff and use AVCHD+DTS doesn't mean you should join up with them. Sure, there's a LOT of them. Since when was that crowd EVER short-handed?

    Specs are there for a reason (or many reasons): Universality, Compatibility, Portability, Longevity. Stick with the spec and take advantage of those features, or flout the spec at your own risk.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  7. But isn't there data somewhere that says "about x% of players have reported..."? Because, to be compatible, you often sacrifice quality.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Those AVCHD+DTS titles did NOT come that way from the H'wood distributor. They were probably rips of BD titles - and BAD rips at that. Somebody who knows what they're doing would have converted the DTS, DTS-HD, DD+, DD Lossless titles to AC-3 (at a decent bitrate) and sacrificed very little, yet achieved 100% compatibility with the spec.

    Honestly, what's the point of "sharing videos" that you really can't share, or "saving space" or time that you'll have to redo years down the road when you get a different player that DOESN'T have the support you already enjoy? Yes, there are compromises that have to be made, but that's just short-sighted.

    There are sites on the 'Net that have reviews & specs of players (this is one of them), but so far I have found NONE that cover all the bases. Good technical evaluations are necessary, but most of those sites are fan/user-submitted and are anecdotal and without using a deterministic, scientific method. If there was a "Consumer Reports" site that was geared towards A/V/PC equipment, with an eye towards "expanded consumer usability + fair use", and it also had PLENTY of $$$ and time to spend getting all the different models together and testing, then you'd have something. I just don't find it likely that will happen.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member edDV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Northern California, USA
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by kinglerch View Post
    But isn't there data somewhere that says "about x% of players have reported..."? Because, to be compatible, you often sacrifice quality.
    It isn't a quality issue. To be standard you need to supply an LPCM or AC3 track in addition to DTS. The AC3 track can be 2.0 or 2.1 so adds little extra bit rate..
    Recommends: Kiva.org - Loans that change lives.
    http://www.kiva.org/about
    Quote Quote  
  10. It is a quality issue when releasing something for download where the audio is multi-channel and the video fills a DVD9. Using multi-channel PCM excludes those with optical/co-ax audio connections. Using Blu-Ray format excludes those without Blu-Ray burners and requires BR media. Using AC3 (even in 640k) reduces audio quality. Including PCM, AC3, and DTS reduces the bitrate of the film to fit on a DVD9.

    The best quality/most compatible option in this case is an AVCHD with DTS-MA.

    If I could find the approximate percentage of Blu-Ray players that cannot play this audio, or even the model number of a single Blu-Ray player that will not play AVCHD with DTS-MA, then that would be different from having to reduce the quality of my film, or make it less compatible, or release several versions even though there are no Blu-Ray players that fail the AVCHD w/ DTS test....or are there?
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by kinglerch View Post
    It is a quality issue when releasing something for download where the audio is multi-channel and the video fills a DVD9. Using multi-channel PCM excludes those with optical/co-ax audio connections. Using Blu-Ray format excludes those without Blu-Ray burners and requires BR media. Using AC3 (even in 640k) reduces audio quality. Including PCM, AC3, and DTS reduces the bitrate of the film to fit on a DVD9.

    The best quality/most compatible option in this case is an AVCHD with DTS-MA.

    If I could find the approximate percentage of Blu-Ray players that cannot play this audio, or even the model number of a single Blu-Ray player that will not play AVCHD with DTS-MA, then that would be different from having to reduce the quality of my film, or make it less compatible, or release several versions even though there are no Blu-Ray players that fail the AVCHD w/ DTS test....or are there?
    I understand the need to lower some bitrate to fit within the constraints of a lesser-sized medium. But be realistic - anytime you do that you are making compromises! You may very well likely have to compromise on the video quality to get it down to DVD9 size (unless the feature happens to have lots of extras bloating the original disc size). Well - compromise on the audio as well. But only just a tiny bit.

    Using BD format doesn't exclude those without BD players/media, it just excludes them if they use BAD players as a number of players can deal with BD ISOs or Folder structures (I was on a thread that included this yesterday). It's other main drawback is that of size.

    ***The best quality may be AVCHD & DTS-MA, but that is NOT the most compatible option by any means.

    What's your breakpoint on this? 80%? 50%? 25%? 5%? That's the whole point of standards. You match the standard, you get the 95+% compatibility. You're not matching the standard, so it's a free-for-all.

    Scott

    EDIT: and BTW, 640K 5.1 AC-3 being noticeably or severly reduced quality is total BULLSHIT. Only with a bad encoder (human or computer).
    Quote Quote  
  12. My film in this case is 60 minutes, and fits nicely on a DVD9. I am ok to reduce the video bitrate, but only if there are some players out there that can't play it as-is. Or to put it another way, if no Blu-Ray players reject a AVCHD w/ DTS-MA, then that is the most compatible/best-quality option. If 90%+ players could play it, then it's still a good option. Less than that and I would go on a different path.

    I cannot comment on personal experience with 640k DD. I had bad experience with 448k DD sounding very compressed for music. From what I *read*, 640k DD is still noticeable though not severely compressed for music. But yes, this is highly encoder and ear dependent.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't dolby true hd at 640k?

    There are plenty of dolby only releases on bluray that sound just fine. Transformers and Star Trek to name a few (all of the Transformers and Star Trek are dolby so far as I know - I have all 11 Star Trek on bluray and two of the three Transformers on bluray and so far as I know none have dts-ma and all sound just fine).

    @cornucopia - I can understand about "possible" and "required". I just thought if it was spec'd that was completely permissable. I guess its a difference between technically possible and realistically possible.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  14. Originally Posted by yoda313 View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't dolby true hd at 640k?
    No, only the THD core is 640kbps
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member yoda313's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Animus
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by poisondeathray
    No, only the THD core is 640kbps
    Ok. Thanks I didn't know that. I only have a sd digital amp so it hasn't mattered to me since I only use fiber optic connections from my ps3 and 360 for movies.
    Donatello - The Shredder? Michelangelo - Maybe all that hardware is for making coleslaw?
    Quote Quote  
  16. As already mentioned, DD5.1 at 640 kbs is supposedly "transparent". Maybe if you have "golden ears" and a top-end ($) audio system you could tell the difference from DTS-MA. But I wouldn't bet on it. From time to time, there have been informal tests in which supposed experts couldn't *reliably* distinguish the two.

    OTOH, DTS-MA will take a big portion of a 60 minute video on BD9. A couple GBs? I haven't bothered calculating but recall saving on the order of 4 GB or more when backing up the main movie of a Blu-ray and re-encoding the audio to DD5.1 at 640 kbs.

    So as I see it the choice is between a debatable loss of audio quality versus an undeniable and very significant loss of video quality. I'll take greatest possible video quality every time.

    [EDIT] Maybe mrswla will chime in here. Some time ago there was a thread on this very subject and mrswla did a test, forcing BDRB to not re-encode DTS-MA for a (BD9 size) AVCHD. And it played okay, but obviously that will depend on the standalone.
    Last edited by fritzi93; 17th Apr 2012 at 16:07.
    Pull! Bang! Darn!
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    @yoda313,

    DD-TrueHD (aka MLP Lossless+) is a VBR-type signal that is totally program-dependent and UN-manipulatable by the author/user AFA the overall average bitrate (and peak) goes. It usually falls in the 1.9:1 to 4:1 range, commonly ~2.2:1 as compared to LPCM/Uncompressed.

    So if your LPCM source would have been 16bit * 5.1 ch * 48kHz = 3825kbps, your DD-TrueHD might be 1738kbps average, with an occasional peak of 6000kbps. Again, this is NOT adjustable - take it or leave it.

    As pdr said, the DD core (lossy part) is 640kb, just the remainder is the lossless "residual" extension.

    @kinglerch,

    I'm sure it's possible to have 448kbps DD 5.1 sound reasonable (for movie soundtrack, etc). But if you ARE an audiophile, you may be able to tell the difference, and that is one of the big value differences between Lossy and Lossless/Uncompressed. 640kbps regular 5.1 DD should be pretty good, even for music - for most people.

    I would be VERY surprised to find that 90+% could support these AVCHD/DTS-MA formatted files. Given the manufacturers in the marketplace right now, I'd guess at around 65% (hardware players, not software - they probably would be 95+%).

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  18. kinglerch - Just curious, what is the audio source? How was it recorded and with what equipment?
    Quote Quote  
  19. The audio is music from analog reels, board feed, so it would be more susceptible to compression than dialogue and sound effects. And I think it is debatable whether the video bitrate would suffer more or less than the audio. But the fact remains that this video would need 9% lower bitrate to handle DTS-MA versus DD 640k, and I'll have to decide what is worth more.

    If anyone knows of a standalone BR player that won't play AVCHD w/ DTS, please note it. Thanks.
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    If you are not that worried about video bitrate (considering your source), have you tried just making LPCM audio instead of DTS-MA? There would be no quality loss (in the audio) and it should be more compatible.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  21. It is multichannel audio, and multichannel PCM while large, would be possible but would require HDMI or discrete audio connections. DTS-MA has the advantage of reverting to the "core" bitrate if used on a system with optical/co-ax audio connections, and still retain the multichannel output, as an example.
    Quote Quote  
  22. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Yeah, but the "core" bitrate is a LOSSY standard DTS core, equivalent to DD 640! So you're basically going the long way around to the same place we've been suggesting, but adding "non-compatibility" into the mix.

    Scott
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads

Visit our sponsor! Try DVDFab and backup Blu-rays!