dvdlover20

I just wanted to find out who likes DTS or DD better in my opinion Dts will never be beaten

eau

The bottomline is:

If you are an audiophile, you will go for DTS over DD in most cases.

If you are a J6P, you probably don't care or care to know.

Also, you'll need a decent HT setup in order to appreciate DTS. Otherwise, they may sound the same to you.

palebluedot

DTS sounds better with the right setup. Matching, full-range speakers all the way around is how DTS is supposed to be used because there is less compression in the signal resulting in a more dynamic signal and a more open sound stage. Also DTS has a more detailed program sent to the rear channel speakers. DD tends to use the rears for ambience (at least early on) which you would usually want to use a dipole or bipole speaker. In DTS you defeat the purpose by using such speakers.

I don't know how much of a difference you can really tell on DD vs DTS when using a HTIAB or smallish speakers in your HT, but that is personall experience because I have only used matched, full-range speakers in my HT.

FuzzyBallz

Matching speakers? So for DTS ES 6.1, I'd get 3 pairs of JBL S38-II, a S Center-II, and a Sunfire True Subwoofer Signature?

audrey

Regardless of the codec, the rear channels are intended to be somewhat diffuse—bi/dipolar speakers are as valid for DTS/DD as for pro logic. While some people prefer monopole designs for the rears, others use bi/dipoles. Each can sound great in the right environment.

Josh H

DTS by an extremely small margin for me. I'm not an audiophile and only spent about $600 on my receiver and speakers, so I really don't notice much of a difference between the two on my systems. With the lame half bit rate DTS I hear none at all.

BTW, this topics been beaten to death here, so you can likely get more feed back by doing a search. But good look since the POS search engine here will only accept 4+ letter words rendering it useless for DTS.

MJKTool

Pro Logic all the way baby!!

Robert George

I disagree most vehemently.

bb80301

I think that DTS is a technically superior format, but the difference that quality recording/mixing/mastering makes is much greater than the difference caused by the format. For example, Queen's We Will Rock You has 2 versions & the DD version has superior audio vs. the DTS version.

BB

Robert George

Technical specifications and measurements would not support your opinion.

AC-3 (Dolby Digital) is capable of reproducing flatter frequency response with equally wide dynamic range than DTS at considerably lower bit rates. In the intended applications for these codecs, efficiency is as important as accuracy and in this AC-3 trounces DTS.

claviusb

I've watched several concert DVDs lately ("Corrs Live In London" and "Janet Jackson In Hawaii") and the DD track smoked the DTS track on my system. You've got to listen to both and decide for yourself.

Deckard-10

I prefer DTS over DD. &nbsp Yes, I've read the reviews, technical specs and measurements, but in the end it's all about what sounds best to me. &nbsp My ears tell me that DTS sounds better.

danol

I just got watching "Below" a actually scary for me flick and if the film was in monaural I wouldn't buy it. Older movies I have a few with a stupid mono track, I am so glad that they updated 20,000 Leagues with Dolby Digital 5.1 and OAR of 2.55:1 CinemaScope in Color from *1954* when movie tickets were 25¢ to get in!

You sound *purests* knocked my thread so bad I had to trash it. I am 56 years old I had *no* chance to watch color until it was invented on TV. The same with sound I had *no* choice, to listen to monaural. You young people have had color TV all your lives, I had color TV when I was 18 years old (1965), and stereo TV in 1985 when I was 38 years old!


Now that I am 56 I will push for *all* films with OAR and DOLBY Surround on older films as well as newer films.

Rypro 525

Well, Julie will be pissed when he hears this.

danol

Julie if he or she doesn't like what a high buyer of DVDs don't like it, you *know* what I would say. Understand that some of us oldies have been waiting all our lives for great sound in movies. You and Julie want to stop our dream NOT!

I have been a home bound cripple for the last *18* years (June 1985). Since I don't own a car, I have great DVD buying *power* and a credit card that has been taken care of since 1965...38 years ago *unsecured* and not a penny ever paid for late charges, or interest on things bought!

BTW I just started filling my 3rd Sony CX-875 Progressive Scan DVD *Changer* at 300 + 1 (6) I can't wait till I have what I want in OAR and Dolby Digital 5.1 or 2.0 English Surround, not 2.0 monaural.

Frank S

And here goes Robert trolling away with the BS unsubstantiated DTS & DD specs to prove his off-the-wall opinion!

caiman

You know it's weird, I came into this thread wanting to talk about DTS, but now all I can think about is danol's top notch credit history. Way to go danol!

djtoell

And here goes Frank S, following Obi around DVDTalk, flame baiting and not providing any actual information as a counterpoint.

DJ

kthemmes

Sorry folks, i have listened to both. I have a Yamaha Digital Reciever with both DTS, and Dolby Digital

My ears enjoy the Dolby Digital over the DTS

danol

I love to buy DD 5.1 or English Surround 2.0, with my pro logic set up I am dedicated to 2.0 with CCards great buying power.

karnblack

What does this mean?

Anyways, I'll usually listen to DTS if it's available, but I don't really have a preference.

Spiky

Goodness!! Is this still discussed??? I thought the folks at DVD Talk were NOT J6Ps. Guess I was wrong.

1) Every disc is different, take everything below with a grain of salt accordingly, since it will change slightly from movie to movie.
2) DD has better compression.
3) DTS has higher bitrate.
4) DTS is generally recorded at around 4db higher on the disc.
5) DD generally has better LFE separation. Or at least more in the LFE channel. Some call this DTS has better sound in the full-range channels, but it's really the same thing--the bass is there, just coded in a different place.
6) Related to #4, DD has the dynamic compression built-in to most recordings, affecting the volume level of dialog depending on your settings.
7)Full bitrate DTS hasn't been used yet. Maybe a couple times.

If you can set your receiver properly for comparisons, you will not be able to tell which codec is which in an A-B comparison on over 90% of DVDs. It is possible that full bitrate DTS could be noticeably different than DD, but it would still be a very minor difference.

The most obvious situations to see the difference is on films like Gladiator, where the DTS is 6.1 discrete and the DD is 5.1, but this isn't a difference in 5.1 sound, just number of channels, so not really a valid comparison. Another is DVDs with various soundtracks, like Asian DVDs where the DD is one language and the DTS is another language and hence from a different master; of course, this is another non-valid comparison, you might as well compare two different movies.

It basically comes down to each movie. It's more likely that someone in the studio did something slightly different on one track, making one or the other better for that disc, than it is that you could tell the difference in a correctly adjusted comparison of perfect encodings from the same original master.

SCHMEGGA

Talk about beating a dead horse

renaldow

I do like a good DTS track, but I don't think it's the end all. And with some of these discs coming out with a full DD 5.1 and a cutrate DTS 5.1, DTS is not the prestigious format it once was.

If it's a barebones disc and I have the choice between the two, I'll go with DTS. If it's feature laden, then I'll go with DD as I know they've skimped on the DTS coding.

Spiky

Actually, I think this thread is proof that it is NOT a dead, or even adequately covered topic.