1s and 0s are 1s and 0s. There's nothing subjective about it. Either they're the same or they're not.

Yes, but a codec is subject to the way it's designed is it not? If the codec, misses every 8th "0" or something along those lines then a lossless codec isn't so lossless anymore.

This would be very easy for an engineer to determine by analyzing the decoded PCM output. If indeed the codec were missing some of the data, it couldn't be called lossless.

Unless you've gone to the trouble of comparing the raw data yourself, please stop spreading FUD.

So a lossless track at 1.5 Mbps is going to sound exactly the same as a lossless track that's recorded at 6.9 Mbps? If that's so, why have 18 AND 24 bit PCM tracks? A track being recorded at 24 bits won't be better than one recoded at 18? Since most of these formats are so new (and it sounds like most of you haven't even heard DTS-HD) & can't be compared directly except for DD+ to TrueHD or DD+ to DTS (Riddick has both), how can you so authoritatively say there's no difference? All data can be broken down to 0s & 1s- does that mean the same video will look exactly the same if you record it with Quicktime, or as an .avi, etc.? All players read the 0s & 1s the same- do they all look the same when they reach your tv?

Wow - this is getting a little crazy.

Josh Z is correct. A lossless compression scheme is exactly what it says... perfectly lossless. By *definition*, a signal that has gone through lossless compression will be 100% exactly, perfectly numerically identical to it's original uncompressed state. There will be no difference at all. Have you ever used ZIP compression on a computer? It's the same thing.

I think you're confusing digitization with compression. They're different. Sounds humans hear are analog signals. When those signals are digitized (turned into discrete 1's & 0's) they can be digitized at different sampling frequencies (e.g. 48KHz, 96KHz) and at different sample sizes (e.g. 16-bit, 24-bit). In general, the faster the sample frequency and the bigger the sample size, the better the signal reproduction in the digital realm, but also the larger the amount of digital data required to represent the signal.

Compression occurs *after* digitization. It is simply taking the discrete digital string of 0's & 1's, and storing them so they take up less room. As a *greatly* simplified example, let's say I have some data that looks like this (a single 24-bit sample)...

10000000 0000000 0000000

This takes 24-bits to store uncompressed (one "1" followed by twenty-three "0"s). However, I could also store it like this....

1(1)0(23)

(In binary... 1 00001 0 10111)

This takes alot fewer bits to represent (12-bits), but it's *exactly* the same thing. When this signal is decompressed, it looks like this...

10000000 0000000 0000000

The compression is *perfect*. However, the digitized source signal may not be a perfect representation of the original analog signal. It may not even be a good one.

I honestly don't know how many times this can be explained to you.

Quicktime/avi/etc. are lossy compression formats. They throw out data to conserve space. TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio are lossless compression formats. They do not throw out any data.

Lossless = No loss.

While we're on the subject of PCM audio, I had a question about the PS3. I do not have a HDMI capable receiver, so I'm using the optical connection for sound. Fox only includes the DTS HD MA Lossless track. When I play a Fox title, I get the 1.5 MBPS core mix. Since PCM is also a lossless track, is there a way I can get my receiver to convert that to full 1.5 MBPS dts, the way it does with Fox's DTS MA tracks?

I'll upgrade to a HDMI receiver at some point, but not in the near future, unless I talk myself into the Onkyo 604.

I believe that right now, the PS3 can only transmit uncompressed PCM over SPDIF as 2-channel PCM. (That is, it can't do an on-the-fly compression into DTS.)

I'm not really sure you would want to though. I would think the released DTS Core signal would be just as good, and very likely better than a real-time encoding on consumer equipment.

He was talking about converting the PCM tracks into DTS, not the DTS-HD MA tracks. In those cases, the other option is 640kbps DD.

Yes. With my current setup, the Fox titles sound best since I can get the full bitrate of 1.5 mbps dts. But with Sony or Disney, it's either 640 kbps dolby or...and this is where my question gets asked.

Ahh - I understand. I think right now you're stuck with either the 640Kb DD, or using 2-channel uncompressed PCM and sending it to a Dolby Pro-Logic I/II processor.

It wouldn't be my choice, but I've heard some people really prefer the uncompressed PCM processed up to Pro-Logic.

But my question is if it's the same, why would one take 1.5Mbps & the other takes 6.9 for the exact same thing? If it's not better at all, why wouldn't they use less space? And what about the 18bit uncompressed (4.6) & 24bit (6.9)? Wouldn't there be a difference there? And if the TrueHd lossless track only uses what it needs & it never goes much below 3Mbps (at least NIN concert), how could a 1.5Mbps max track be the same as something that is only using what it needs, yet still needs at least 2x the space at all times, going up to over 3x as much? If it needs at least 3Mbps to be lossless, how does another sound do the same thing with half to a third of the space?

They use algorithms that allow the original data to be reconstructed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_compression

OK... Maybe this will make more sense...

--LPCM digitized at 24-bit/48Khz is 6.9Mbps. This is completely uncompressed. No DTS or Dolby involved at all.

--LPCM digitized at 16-bit/48Khz is 4.6Mbps. (Note 16-bit, not 18-bit.) This is also completely uncompressed.

--The 24-bit track has a chance of sounding better than the 16-bit because digital samples have more accuracy with more bits.

--The lossless DTS HD MA & Dolby TrueHD are usally not 1.5Mbs. Usually they require more than that, but the exact bitrate is variable. Your NIN disc at ~3Mbs is Dolby TrueHD.

--The quality of DTS HD MA & Dolby TrueHD is exactly the same as LPCM. If one of these is used to compress a 24-bit/48Khz LPCM track, it will sound exactly the same, it will just take less space.

--Bly-ray often uses LPCM uncompressed because BD players are not required to have DTS HD MA or Dolby TrueHD circuitry. Yes - this wastes space and bandwidth, but BD can afford to do this to some degree because they have 50GB discs.

--HD DVD players are required to support Dolby TrueHD. In addition, they don't have as much space to waste at Blu-ray, so you will usually see TrueHD instead of uncompressed LPCM on HD DVD discs.

--The 1.5 Mbps soundtracks you talk about are probably DTS core or Dolby Digital+. These are *not* lossless. They are lossy. They contain less data in them than the original PCM, and may sound worse.

That was beautiful.
(let's hope it's the last time)

What's the DTS HD MA if it's not the DTS HD tracks on most BluRays now? I have over 70 BluRays & almost 50 HDs & haven't seen it on any of them. Riddick & U-571 have DTS, but I think it's regular DTS. All the BluRays have DTS HD which is the 1.5Mbps track. I'm using the PS3, so I should be getting the full DTS, not the core, right? And a regular DTS track wouldn't be that high. What BluRay or HD has the DTS track that's higher than 1.5?

As far as I know, Fox is the only studio that has included DTS HD Master Audio lossless track. Lionsgate recently has included DTS HD High Resolution tracks, which are 1.5 mbps.

DTS HD MA is short for DTS HD Master Audio, which is the true, full name of the lossless audio codec used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Theater_System
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital...m#DTS_variants

As Mr. Cinema pointed out, there's another DTS HD codec called DTS HD High Resolution, which is a lossy format.

http://www.dts.com/dts-hd/see-how-it-works.php

No, the 1.5Mbps is the DTS core signal.

http://www.dts.com/pro-audio/soft.php
"3 Mbps DTS-HD High Resolution Audio stream with core bitrate of 1.5Mbps fixed"

http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/DTS-HD.html
"DTS Encore [aka core] is capable of delivering DTS Digital Surround at its full 1.5Mb/s supported by the DTS format"

I don't know, you could have the PS3 set up wrong.

A regular DTS track could certainly be that high. 1.5Mbps DTS is even supported on DVDs:
http://www.dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html#3.6.2

Most DVDs don't use the full-bitrate DTS though because of space concerns.

http://www.dts.com/dts-hd/better-sou...d-tomorrow.php

There are no DTS settings on the PS3. I'm getting the PCM tracks properly. What else would I have to do? You can select the PCM even if you don't have it set up & it plays it & shows the high bitrate, so why wouldn't it show the higher DTS rate & let your receiver select if it can handle it? I'm updated to the latest PS3 version & have linear PCM selected for the PS3 outputs. Are you saying that you have a PS3 and that when you select the DTS HD tracks you get a 3Mbps track that shows up that way on the display?

this is from the Xmen BluRay review from this site. Why isn't my PS3 playing it?
"As per Fox's other initial release titles, X-Men: The Last Stand comes equipped with a English a DTS HD 5.1 Master Lossless Audio Track. Despite how appealing this track sounds, no player at this time, besides the Playstation 3, comes equipped with the ability to decode this audio. Once I get my hand on a system, I'll be sure to update this review with my thoughts."

I think the PS3 will be capable of decoding the DTS HD MA track, but it has to be activated via a firmware. I believe this month, the unit is getting a big update.

So it doesn't do it yet? Why does every review on this site say that it does? And how are all these people experts on it if no players even play it yet.

If it was enabled, you'd see multiple threads at AVS. I think it's part of the spec, just not activated yet.

It's highly doubtful that "every review on this site say that it does." You cited one review from someone who didn't even own a PS3 and was likely as misinformed as you are.

Nobody here's an "expert" on the format, but many of us know what the format is due to the material available about it. DTS HD MA is a lossless format, meaning when uncompressed it's bit-to-bit identical to the original sample it was compressed from. Thus PCM, DTS HD MA, and Dolby TrueHD will all be identical in terms of digital information and thus sound, provided that they all came from the same original digitized source.

All of the reviews from the first few months say PS3 is the only player that plays & the newer ones don't say anything & make it sound like they're actually using the Lossless DTS, which no player plays?- "It's a Fox release, so you get the expected DTS HD 5.1 Master Lossless Audio track, and this time around it's a fantastic one." -Courage Under Fire review. So you mean that pretty much every review on this site that includes DTS HD is wrong? And don't people say DTS sounds better on dvds because they "sweeten" the sound somehow? So couldn't they also process or somehow tweak the uncompressed sound to make it sound better?