Which do you prefer - Dolby Digital or DTS?

[yoda313]

So which of the two main digtial surround sound formats do you prefer? I prefer Dolby just because. DTS is actually a bit too much for me at times - and it restricts what you can squeeze on a disc so that cuts down on bonuses - unless its a multidisc set like the Lord Of The Rings Extended versions.

[Grain]

DTS is my clear favorite, bigger & clearer soundfield IMO.

[yoda313]

All right which joker voted for STEREO IS STILL KING????? I didn't expect any backward audiophiles here at this tech heavy website......









Ok I'll run and hide from any stereo purists for awhile now

[ricoman]

How can anyone even question that DTS is better. Although the audio files are much bigger, when I switch a dvd from Dolby Digital to DTS it's like turning off a filter. The music (sound) is clearer, fuller and richer. Like suddenly having more and better speakers. Like night and day.

[Bodyslide]

I like them Both. But the DTS has always sounded better and the Bass is just Fantastic....

[edDV]

You spend your bitrate and take your choice.

[SingSing]

DTS has always being clearer in dialog, and sound effect's location.

Try any DVD with both Dolby 5.1 and DTS on a decent surround system, and you will be convinced.

I don't know surround sound make any different in those dorm-room type system, including those over priced Bose 3 piece unit ?

[SingSing]

All right which joker voted for STEREO IS STILL KING????? I didn't expect any backward audiophiles here at this tech heavy website......

Many rock concert DVDs have Dolby surround and STEREO LPCM sound tracks. These stereo sound tracks sound better than Dolby surround.

Note : I transfered CD music to DVD sound tracks, and guess what ? Playing the CD against the DVD in stereo, the CD sounds better. IMO the resampling from 44 KHz to 48 KHz degrade/alias the sound quality.

[mats.hogberg]

DD, as my amp doesn't do DTS!

/Mats

[slickster]

I agree with SingSing, if you have a good stereo system you CAN tell the difference.
If you don't, you can't.
I've always preferred DTS.
Note, my wife can't tell the difference and she really doesn't care either, as long as she can here it, she's happy.


Ciao

[Cole]

As a collector of old televison programmes, much of my video conversions etc are in mono anyway; its "doesn't matter to me" I'm afraid.

[joy]

I love dts(the bass just sounds natural and other stuffs clear) but since i live in a condo i have to switch to dd so i don't have to keep on lowering the volume everytime there are loud parts of the movie and then raising it back to normal after that.

[dvdguy4]

DTS is my clear favorite, bigger & clearer soundfield IMO.

I agree with you but since my surround amp doesnt have DTS I have to vote for Dolby.
Hopefully soon I get new amp .

[edDV]

DTS is my clear favorite, bigger & clearer soundfield IMO.

I agree with you but since my surround amp doesnt have DTS I have to vote for Dolby.
Hopefully soon I get new amp .

Thats like saying a Ferrari sucks because I drive a Ford.

[Conquest10]

Thats like saying a Ferrari sucks because I drive a Ford.

You say that like its a bad thing.

DTS for me. Shame a lot of movies still only have DD.

[Guiboche]

What are you all crazy! Stereo all the way man!

Just joking. Haha!

DTS for me. Sounds way clearer and fuller. And yes, the bass kicks butt

Guiboche

[greymalkin]

there should be no question about it..DTS is technically superior.

Sampling rate:
DD: 48khz
DTS: up to 96khz

Resolution:
DD: up to 20-bit
DTS: up to 24-bit

I can walk into the room and tell whether or not the DTS track of a movie (i've heard before) is playing. And I don't have a very expensive surround sound setup.

[edDV]

there should be no question about it..DTS is technically superior.

Sampling rate:
DD: 48khz
DTS: up to 96khz

Resolution:
DD: up to 20-bit
DTS: up to 24-bit

I can walk into the room and tell whether or not the DTS track of a movie (i've heard before) is playing. And I don't have a very expensive surround sound setup.

But you pay with bitrate.

[Rich86]

I vote for DD - because my wife always yells at me to turn the AV amp down whenever I run a dvd with a DTS soundtrack.

It's pretty clear to us that almost all DTS tracks are set to a higher volume level than the corresponding DD track on the same disc - which makes accurate critical comparisons pretty tricky. Occasionally it seems to us that the DTS track is better with some music and movie scenes. But most of the time it just seems louder. I confess that I usually run the DTS track if it is available on the dvd being played. And "yes" - I am running a high quality/powered home theater system.

But I will never buy a dvd with only a DTS soundtrack - it must have DD available also for compatibilitiy issues with a broader range of equipment (such as my older Pioneer and HK av receivers used elsewhere).

[ricoman]

But I will never buy a dvd with only a DTS soundtrack - it must have DD available also for compatibilitiy issues with a broader range of equipment (such as my older Pioneer and HK av receivers used elsewhere).

yeah, whenever I burn a disc I burn both audio tracks so friends without DTS can enjoy it. But...when I play it at home, I always use the DTS track.

[yoda313]

But I will never buy a dvd with only a DTS soundtrack - it must have DD available also for compatibilitiy issues with a broader range of equipment (such as my older Pioneer and HK av receivers used elsewhere).

yeah, whenever I burn a disc I burn both audio tracks so friends without DTS can enjoy it. But...when I play it at home, I always use the DTS track.

Actually you can't buy an official DVD with DTS only. The dvd specs don't allow it. You have to have a dolby track too so you can have it play on stereo and non stereo equipment without dts decoder circuitry.

[Noahtuck]

DTS is the only way 8)

there should be no question about it..DTS is technically superior.

Sampling rate:
DD: 48khz
DTS: up to 96khz

Resolution:
DD: up to 20-bit
DTS: up to 24-bit

I can walk into the room and tell whether or not the DTS track of a movie (i've heard before) is playing. And I don't have a very expensive surround sound setup.

But you pay with bitrate.

Only if you're doing a backup or making one on a dvd5... not with originals 8)

[MOVIEGEEK]

DTS rules!

"I can walk into the room and tell whether or not the DTS track of a movie (i've heard before) is playing. And I don't have a very expensive surround sound setup."

I agree,in fact a friend and myself did a blind test....9 out of 10 times I could tell the difference.

[mats.hogberg]

DTS is my clear favorite, bigger & clearer soundfield IMO.

I agree with you but since my surround amp doesnt have DTS I have to vote for Dolby.
Hopefully soon I get new amp .

Thats like saying a Ferrari sucks because I drive a Ford.

No, that's like saying Ferrari sucks, because there aren't any roads where I live.

/Mats

[yoda313]

Only if you're doing a backup or making one on a dvd5... not with originals

Well but still with originals you only have 8.5gb to work with assuming dual layer. And they have to include a dd5.1 track as well. Throw in any extras on the same disc and you have to take the bitrates from somewhere - ie video quality. SUPERBIT dvds are unique though - no extras so they can crank up the bitrates on video and sound.

[lordhutt]

DTS is my clear favorite, bigger & clearer soundfield IMO.

I agree with you but since my surround amp doesnt have DTS I have to vote for Dolby.
Hopefully soon I get new amp .

Thats like saying a Ferrari sucks because I drive a Ford.

No, that's like saying Ferrari sucks, because there aren't any roads where I live.

/Mats

Heh...good call!

Seriously though, what is the difference (technically) between the 2?

[MOVIEGEEK]

Seriously though, what is the difference (technically) between the 2?

www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/dolbydigitaldts.php

[Noahtuck]

Only if you're doing a backup or making one on a dvd5... not with originals

Well but still with originals you only have 8.5gb to work with assuming dual layer. And they have to include a dd5.1 track as well. Throw in any extras on the same disc and you have to take the bitrates from somewhere - ie video quality. SUPERBIT dvds are unique though - no extras so they can crank up the bitrates on video and sound.

Well, most commercial dvd's (dual layers) even with the extras still have enough space left for a DTS audio track so you would not be losong any more video br & they DO NOT have to have a DD 5.1 audio track 8) there is no reason you can't have a DD 2.0 audio track and a DTS 5.1 audio track.

As Long as there is 1 DD track, regardless if it's 2.0 or 5.1 ect., & usually a DTS 5.1 audio track is maybe 700mb, depending on the length of the film of course, that's not much space on a DL dvd or dvdr.

[Renko_is]

You can simply hear that something is lost in any of the Dolby formats. When you have a DVD in both Dolby and DTS, you can switch from one to the other and easily hear the difference. I did not realize that until I rented a DVD which had both Dolby and DTS soundtracks. I was having trouble understanding the dialogue in the movie. I was so frustrated that about halfway through the movie, I decided to switch to the stereo track. Then I noticed that it also had a DTS soundtrack. When I swithed to it, there was a distinct difference. I could hear every word of the dialogue and the background noises were fuller. In one scene in which the character was speaking to someone on the phone, I even noted that the words being spoken by the caller could be heard on the DTS track while nothing of what the caller could be saying could be understood on the Dolby track. I had previously thought there could be little difference but was shocked at how much clearer and fuller things were using DTS. I initially doubted my ears and began switching from one to the other on other DVDs and replaying tracks to note the differences. The difference was not small. DTS was much better! As far as my ears are concerned, there was no comparison. There was nothing that I could not detect using the DTS tracks. But using the Dobly soundtracks, some of the voices seemed muted and the background noises sent to the rear surrounds simply did not exist in some places. Since then, I read an article in which an author asserted that there was little difference between Dolby and DTs and that if such a difference was noted in soundtracks on a DVD, it was because identically sourced audio content was not used for each. He was saying that whenever the DTS sounded better, it was because it was recorded in a better method. The odd thing is that whenever I had come across a DVD with both tracks, the DTS always sound immensely better. I guess each of those movies also used soundtracks that were not identical. I think NOT! I have no idea why the industry continues to claim Dolby is as good as DTS when we can easily hear the difference.

[nwo]

Uncompressed stereo is better than any dd or dts on many blu-ray films, even if it only comes out two/four speakers.