VideoHelp Forum
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: AC3 5.1 or 2???

Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date: Dec 2005
    Location: Australia
    Search Comp PM
    Im trying to cut out as much as possible for a movie in shrink, do you need to keep the AC3 5.1 Channel English Audio or the 2 AC3 2 Channel Audio?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2002
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    AC3 2 Channel Audio (if it is the in fact the movie and not a extra)
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date: Dec 2005
    Location: Australia
    Search Comp PM
    Yeah, 1 of the AC3 2 audio is directors comments and the other is just normal.

    So should I just untick AC3 5.1?
    Quote Quote  
  4. Член BJ_M's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2002
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    yep
    "Each problem that I solved became a rule which served afterwards to solve other problems." - Rene Descartes (1596-1650)
    Quote Quote  
  5. VH Veteran jimmalenko's Avatar
    Join Date: Aug 2003
    Location: Down under
    Search PM
    Originally Posted by monkeyballz
    Im trying to cut out as much as possible for a movie in shrink, do you need to keep the AC3 5.1 Channel English Audio or the 2 AC3 2 Channel Audio?
    That depends. Are you likely (either now or in the future) to have access to a surround sound system ?

    If the answer to either question is yes, then I'd keep the 5.1. Either that or I guess if you do get suround sound later, just do another backup.
    If in doubt, Google it.
    Quote Quote  
  6. Member
    Join Date: Apr 2002
    Location: Oskeeweewee Ontario
    Search Comp PM
    jimmalenko wrote:
    If the answer to either question is yes, then I'd keep the 5.1.
    What i don't understand...
    If DVD players can downconvert 5.1 to stereo, then why do the authouring houses even bother loading the extra stereo stream into the .VOB?? It just takes up more space.
    Am i missing something?
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date: Dec 2005
    Location: neverland
    Search Comp PM
    I am guessing that for older systems, there is no down conversion. And from my experience, you get more clarity from the center channel of a non-digital Dolby Surround receiver (prior to 5.1) when you choose the 2.0 versus the 5.1.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Banned
    Join Date: Dec 2005
    Location: Canada
    Search Comp PM
    Virually all recent movies are encoded with 5.1 and DTS for best listening experience. Keep 5.1 this is what it's for. Your receiver can then play it as 5.1, 2.0 or plain stereo (whatever you choose). If instead you choose 2.0 you cannot "upgrade" it later to 5.1 (during playback).
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member waheed's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2003
    Location: Manchester, UK
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by pijetro
    If DVD players can downconvert 5.1 to stereo, then why do the authouring houses even bother loading the extra stereo stream into the .VOB?? It just takes up more space.
    Am i missing something?
    The stereo 2.0 stream sound much better and clear than a 5.1 downmixed to stereo.
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member sanjayk's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2005
    Location: India
    Search Comp PM
    If you want to reduce the file size AND are happy with 2Ch AC3 then throw away the 5.1 AC3. but be advised, you will not be able to convert 2ch AC3 to 5.1ch AC3.
    When I was born I was so shocked that I could'nt speak for 18 months.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member ghoster's Avatar
    Join Date: Nov 2002
    Location: usa
    Search Comp PM
    you can convert 2ch ac3 to 5.1 ch ac3. there is software that can do this but it won't be true 5.1 suround....
    How Big A Boy Are Ya?
    Quote Quote  
  12. Member
    Join Date: Apr 2002
    Location: Oskeeweewee Ontario
    Search Comp PM
    Waheed wrote:
    The stereo 2.0 stream sound much better and clear than a 5.1 downmixed to stereo.
    Is this from personal experience, and is it noticeable on an older system that doesn't even support true 5.1?

    InXess wrote:
    If instead you choose 2.0 you cannot "upgrade" it later to 5.1 (during playback).
    Of course, but the original poster (me included) would safely like to dump the 5.1 .AC3 stream, since it takes up gobs of potential video bitrate..This was the intention.

    But seems like it's safe to dump the 5.1, especially for those of us who don't quite need the 5.1..
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member waheed's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2003
    Location: Manchester, UK
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by pijetro
    Waheed wrote:
    The stereo 2.0 stream sound much better and clear than a 5.1 downmixed to stereo.
    Is this from personal experience, and is it noticeable on an older system that doesn't even support true 5.1?
    I just remember reading it somewhere. cant remember exactly where but had read that is why movie studios inclide the 2.0 stream along with the 5.1 stream. In practice, its best to see for yourself and be the judge. Everyone has their own opinions about what sounds better. I have surround speakers so never use stereo or need to downmix.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date: Dec 2005
    Location: neverland
    Search Comp PM
    I read that somewhere too. And when I upgraded my analog surround sound (Dolby Pro-Logic) to 5.1, it made a huge difference as far as center channel clarity (where 95% of your dialogue comes from).
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads