What's the difference between Dolby Digital 5.1 EX & DTS 6.1 ES?
 

What's the difference between Dolby Digital 5.1 EX & DTS 6.1 ES?

5.1- Two front, two rear, one front center discrete channels and one subwoofer channel.

6.1- Two Front, two rearone front center and one rear center discrete channels and one subwoofer channel.

Dolby Digital 5.1 EX - Matrixes the two left and right rear speakers to the rear center channel.

DTS-ES 6.1 - Has a unique rear center channel.

I've had my JVC receiver for 5 years now. It's a 5.1 DD and DTS. I was thinking of upgrading to a receiver that produces EX and DTS 6.1

Does that rear center speaker make a big difference when compared to standard 5.1 sound?

Most certainly! DD-EX Matrix and DTS-ES Discrete, or Matrix encoded DVDs are very audible, especially with sountracks that are specifically recorded with the surround back signal theatrically. Standard 5.1 DVDs decode, and sound really nice in 6.1 also, if the surround back channel is on, and being transmitted.

Receivers that are equipped with Surround Back Channel capabilities, enabled to use two surround back speakers configurations for future 7.1 audio as well, instead of one speaker, depending on the user's preference during the initial set-up. It's emphatically worth the upgrade... You gonna love it.

I have admit I haven't heard either in a home theatre setup, but from my experience in the theatres the Toy Story II 6.1 soundmix was pretty cool. One notable scene had a hubcap of a car clanging directly behind you, which was a startling but cool nonetheless.

Ahhh, but is it worth it if the center channel is $2,500.... yikes. I don't want to buy another Martin Logan Theater speaker...

I think Shagrath meant "Matrixes the rear center channel to the two left and right rear speakers."

Also, DTS-ES can be either matrixed like Dolby or discrete. There is a list at dtsonline.com that tells you which DVDs are which.

So what is going to happen when things go to 10.1+?

It seems alittle absurd that you would need more than 5 speakers to 'enjoy' a good audio experiance with a film made in surround sound.

Not absurd if you have it. Completely understandable But i wouldn't go beyond what i have. THEN it's absurd ;)

Actually, isn't it in DD EX where it matrixes the left and right rear speakers to the center rear? I've got a 6.1 setup, and I'm pretty sure that's what it does, not the other way around.

As for the DTS-ES 6.1, that is always discrete. It's the regular DTS-ES that does the matrix rear center channel, as far as I'm aware.

Martin Logan are exceptional quality of speakers, but if you are currently using this brand of speakers, and want the exterior design appearance of the speakers to match, with equivalent sound output, then yes! they are recommended to use, but not a necessity. Other less expensive mid, or high end brand of speakers are suitable for surround back channel production.

Antecedent to purchasing, I strongly advise you to visit your local high end, state of the art Home Theater Dealer and asked to listen to a 6.1 sound demonstration in their showroom, and make a final decision if you would want to invest in a expensive surround back channel speaker (s) afterwards.

Semantics on the DTS issue. I'm not sure that DTS makes the distinction you are making, they just call it all DTS-ES.

But on Dolby, the 6th channel is matrixed into the 4th and 5th channels when mixed, by recording it out of phase with those channels. The receiver pulls it out when in 6.1 mode and puts it into the rear center speaker(s). Maybe this is just more semantics, but it doesn't have anything to do with the 4th/5th speakers since it is out of phase. I did write it poorly in that quote, sorry.

Julie,
I'm astounded that someone who cares about audio as much as you do thinks there is no value to more channels. (assuming they are used properly) That being said, the rear center channel is behind you and hard to hear, and there aren't all that many 6.1 recordings, matrixed or discrete. It's value is usually directly related to the pocketbook of the individual.

awmurray,
If you can afford one..... ;)

I would love to see an 8.2 system with 2 fronts, 2 front centers, 2 sides/rears, 2 rear centers, and 2 sub channels. Better for those with wide rooms and very large screens. But it isn't going to happen.

They are working on things like height channels. Presumably to put 2 speakers in front above the main front speakers.

Yamaha actually already has this. The call them effects channels and the expand the sound stage. I believe it makes a difference!

I was thinking 8.2, but in a different way. First we had two channels, front Right and Left (FR:FL), we eventually progressed to five channels (FR:FC:FL:LR:RR). I see the natural progression being a simple circle like FR:FC:FL:LC:LR:CR:RR:RC. :D

Yep. They've actually had that since the 80s, somewhat. My DPL Yamaha receiver had extra front channel action. Still needs to be from the encoding onward to be better, though. So the ball is in Sony/Dolby/DTS court.

I do care about audio,but do find it alittle ridiculous that nothing is ever 'good enough'. It is like now 5.1 is not good enough for some viewers. So they make a 6.1,then a 7.1..and so forth. And which ever one becomes the more predominant audio choice. A new one speaker more version will come to take it's place.

And realistically,you do not need that many speakers to enjoy a film,especially at home. I'm sure dialogue driven films will not need such mixes. Since they will be mostly front speaker heavy anyway. And plenty of other films even though made in surround/5.1 don't always use up every speaker on a regular basis. Many are front heavy with small bits of rear speaker action or none at all. Some are more agressive,while others are not. It all depends on how it was mixed and what the filmmakers intended. But still there are many complaints when 5.1 films have little 'speaker action'.



So basically what I am saying is,5.1 is good enough for modern audio. And anything beyond that is stretching it quite abit. Since more and more speakers will be barely put to use unless they want to sound gimmicky for gimmick sake.

And I am sure like the complaints over lack of 6.1/7.1 dvds. There will be even more once even more speaker formats come out.

I agree with you. Even though I have a 7.1 system; the standard is still 5.1. It is the standard picked by the networks for broadcasting.

True, it does still have to be done well. That will always be a struggle for those of us who give a damn. And dialog movies basically can be mono and be great. Doesn't mean we should be happy with mono, though. From what I hear, Madagascar is the latest to come out with a very poor audio mix, I do have to play it myself to test those rumors, though.

But when 6.1 (there is no 7.1 and may never be) is done well, and played back properly, it is wonderful. LOTR EE, Star Wars II, Gladiator, many movies have fabulous benefit from the rear channel. One of my favorite things is to scare the crap out of someone (even those used to 5.1) with the tiger in Gladiator, you swear it's about to rip your back open in one particular moment.

I agree with Julie. For people who already have a great 5.1 setup, making the switch to 6.1 is something that should be pondered a bit before doing so, because you don't want to go from a good quality 5.1 receiver to a so-so 6.1 receiver. I made the switch this year but I'm not sure it was really worth the upgrade...and as has been mentioned, 5.1 is the standard and likely will be for some time to come- I just don't see the studios rushing to get 6.1 tracks on their releases, and I don't think there will be a pronounced effort to do so until some HD disc becomes a popular standard; as it is we get far too few DTS tracks and mediocre DD 5.1 mixes.
Granted, 6.1 capability gives you various matrixes that would otherwise not be possible, but a really good 5.1 setup is hard to beat and would be plenty good enough for most users.

Audio/Video Electronics have ongoing obligations for improvements, and progressions daily in the industry. Engineers in every field are constantly endeavor for new projects, enhancements for their products to be comparatively appealling to the video, and audiophile consumers. The current DD-EX Matrix, and DTS-ES Discrete/Matrix audio invention from both Dolby and DTS codecs is only the beginning.

The November Issue of Widescreen Review magazine, a reliable source for A/V product news, and reviews has introduced two new upcoming sound designs from Dolby, which are:

Dolby Digital Plus -The long awaited 7.1 audio, and more.
Dolby True HD - An MLP Lossless, (first used for DVD Audio), but with double the maximum bit rate of (18 Mbps), and double the number of channels (14.0).

The renown SDDS (Sony Dynamic Digital Sound) offers up to eight (8) discrete channels, only available theatrically are vastly beneficial, but as stated from their representative, that all SDDS soundtracks are not fully encoded with eight discrete channels, only selected films, that will definitely benefit from their overall sound system.

Sound Engineers, and Technicians earn an astronomical salary for their profession to produce new audio inventions continuously, and they are unable to stymied from developing new products in the future, because of the current 5.1 digital sound design is a normality for Home Theater, and Theatrical use.

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/techno...ital_plus.html

http://www.dolby.com/promo/HD/trueHD.html

I have been more concerned with having the best 5.1 set up that I can afford. I wonder if some of those upgrading to 6.1 and up with get better results if they instead invested on improving their current 5.1 set up.