General discussion

DTS(96KHZ) vs. True HD audio

I am looking for any opinions, on the comparison of these two formats. I understand that DTS(96khz) is a loss-less format, and Blu-Ray is limited in use, or not using True HD yet. Am I getting full audio capability, out of Blu-RAY; using a DTS(96KHZ processor)? I have a Denon AVR 589 receiver. Is there any big advantage to upgrading to Dolby True-HD audio processing; or am I just fine with my DTS processor? How big is the difference, if any?

Discussion is locked

Follow
Reply to: DTS(96KHZ) vs. True HD audio
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: DTS(96KHZ) vs. True HD audio
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Starting point
- Collapse -
Any Ideas on this please?

Great article! Very helpful and simple stated. It looks like only one small possibility for me getting lossess audio, from my current receiver, with Blu-Ray. That is this one:

"Getting Lossless Audio via HDMI and PCM
Dolby TrueHD is based on the original Meridian Lossless Packing profile that was developed for DVD-Audio, in which eight channels are compressed to take up less space but then exactly reconstructed by the player so there are no losses. If you get a Blu-ray player that will "unpack" or decode Dolby TrueHD and output it via HDMI in PCM form, then you all you need is an AV receiver that?s capable of receiving multi-channel PCM via HDMI. Any version of HDMI cable will carry multi-channel PCM -- including HDMI 1.0 through HDMI 1.3. However, your AV receiver must be able to deal with eight channels of PCM audio via HDMI connection.

My receiver has 2 HDMI Switchable input ports. I know I don't have the eight channels(only 5.1(6)) but I am wondering if I can get lossless audio from the five channels I am using through the HDMI SET ON PCM (96khz)setting on my receiver? I wonder how I might know what Blu-Ray player would "unpack" in PCM form? Maybe just a setting for the output on most Blu-Ray players? Any Ideas? Great starting point.

- Collapse -
How are you getting "HDMI SET ON PCM"?
- Collapse -
I don't know about high end, but...

I got a Samsung BDP for less than a hundred and it has dts-hd and master audio. But does it decode it or just support pass-through (I have no idea)? BD movie looks nice.

- Collapse -
Yes, but...

...does your $100 BD player have multi-channel analog outputs? That's the pressing issue for the OP to get a little more bang for his buck with the older Denon.

To the OP> Which BD player do you have? Look in back for multi-channel anlog outputs. If you have them you are good to go (with a few more cables, of course). Feel free to post additional questions if you need to.

cheers,
Pedro

- Collapse -
Muti channel analog is lossless(better)?

You are correct, it does appear, that the HDMI does not pass audio through the receiver itself. I am going blind; I knew I saw that detail before. I found it again. What exactly is the difference between the older DTS and the DTS HD.........and is DTS HD the same as True HD? I am assuming it takes the HDMI cable, to carry the DTS True HD. All other connections require compression, to physically get the signal from one point to the other. Are you saying I can get a lossless Analog True HD signal, from the cluster of individual channel hook ups......as opposed to a compressed lossy digital signal from the fiber or coax? I have the analog cluster for surround,on the back of my receiver, that you mention. Is that a better hook up? Lossless analog is better than lossy digital? The excerpt below, is my reference; which leads me to believe, the physical cabling is the cause of the signal loss and compression. Theoretically the signal comes out the player lossless, or could....and the receiver can process it; but it gets compressed again to go from point to point with anything other than HDMI(with 8 separate point to point channels). If I am right on this, does the analog cluster do the same thing HDMI does, by keeping each channel uncompressed with separate cable to each channel, from player to receiver? Is that what we are doing here? I have never used the cluster. Still learning some stuff. Thanks. I would not have considered this option. Are those just high quality RCA connections, for the analog cluster?


"Getting Lossless Audio via HDMI and PCM
Dolby TrueHD is based on the original Meridian Lossless Packing profile that was developed for DVD-Audio, in which eight channels are compressed to take up less space but then exactly reconstructed by the player so there are no losses. If you get a Blu-ray player that will "unpack" or decode Dolby TrueHD and output it via HDMI in PCM form, then you all you need is an AV receiver that's capable of receiving multi-channel PCM via HDMI. Any version of HDMI cable will carry multi-channel PCM -- including HDMI 1.0 through HDMI 1.3. However, your AV receiver must be able to deal with eight channels of PCM audio via HDMI connection.

- Collapse -
where to begin ;)

It sounds like you pretty much have it nailed down regarding using multi-channel analog connctions. Older DTS is still a lossy format. DTS-HD & Dolby True HD are lossless, hence the higher dynamic range, etc. Now whether or not it will necessarily sound better depends somewhat on your setup and how you have it tweaked. If done correctly, then yes, throwing one of the HD audio tracks over multi-channel analog cables will generally should sound at least a little better than something over digital optical or digital coaxial. I'll be honest though- with really good speakers/room placement, DD5.1 and regular DTS can sound phenomenal to say the least. The problem though is there is no way to calibrate each other's ears and brains- they are all different Wink.

This site should also be useful IMO-
http://www.soundadviceblog.com/blu-ray-audio-explained/

-Pedro

- Collapse -
Great explanation!

That is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks Pedro. This excerpt below, explains the main concern I had:
"If you are using the analog outputs, the player will decode the lossless audio, convert it to analog, then send the high-resolution sound from its analog connections to the receiver?s analog inputs. In this case the surround settings are set on the player and receiver is just a volume control and an amplifier. When you use internal decoding you will hear the menu sounds and Bonus View audio along with the lossless soundtrack"

I am guessing that the 96/24 processor in my receiver, is for a lossy DTS format(fiber/coax);as it looks like the DA converter on the Panasonic BD85 player is 192khz speed. I suspect the processor is also? The bit-rate seems the same; but perhaps the processor speed is 192khz for the True HD and DTS HD formats? In any case, using the players HD processor, and slaving the receiver via analog multi-port has the end affect; of swapping the processors, and using the better HD one, in the player. I imagine this will lose the effects and synthesizer capability of the receiver; but these add distortion anyway.Could always leave a fiber connection to supplement, I guess; then change receiver input settings. The only thing this article did not do, was spec the processors for comparison. Perhaps not as important, as the delivery and compression; as it looks like the 48khz processor, can deliver lossless audio via PCM as well. I wonder how the speed of processor, affects the sound?

Looks like I am going with a Panny BD-80(85) instead of the 65. Glad I asked before I bought. Very helpful. Thanks again.

- Collapse -
Technical portions
- Collapse -
Honest and resourceful

Honest and resourceful Pedro. Can't ask for more than that. I will check those sights soon. Need to get a couple more threads going, on a couple other details. Probably see you again. Last small detail if you happen to know. I can likely figure it out; but do you know if those analog multi-channel chords(from blu ray to receiver) are just standard RCA chords? Anything special about them? I will likely get some good new shielded cables to hook up. I don't need the RCAcoax, or anything like that do I?


To the other posts: I need the 80 or 85 ahtoi, to get the analog in cluster. The Oppo do look sweet, if you can go top shelf...I am not there yet.

- Collapse -
AFAIK

AFAIK they use standard RCA connectors but are usually a little bit better quality with gold plated ends and good shielding to help the audio signal. I have never done a side by side comparison, truth be told though. Monster is still way overpriced in the sense that I would probaby be satisfied with something cheaper if I had to choose.

Definitely check AVS for more specifics on cabling, esp. the manufacturing process.

- Collapse -
Also check out Oppo

I am anxious to see one of the Oppo BD players in person too. A bit more pricey however.

-P

- Collapse -
It seems to me both the 65 and 85 have the same spec. except

they added a couple cute tricks to the 85 which might make it worth the extra cost (hope so). 7.1 channel analog out and simulate tube out to give that "warm" feeling.

- Collapse -
Additional info for the OP

Keep in mind DTS is the lossy format while the newer DTS HD is lossless. I suggest you peruse a higher end audio/video-HT shop to see if the expanded audio quality of some blu ray discs meets your expectations. IMO going from well placed DD5.1 or DTS surround to True HD or DTS HD is not the same increase per se as going from standard definition video to high def. OTOH, until you hear it in person you won't really get a proper sense if it's something you could live without.

CNET Forums

Forum Info