RE: The use of lossless CODECs for movie sound.

TrevorS

Active Member
Hullo!

I've mentioned that I appreciate lossless sound for music (and accordingly lament the dissapearance of DVD-A MLP), and that I find DD+ to be highly dynamic and effective in conjuction with film video. I've also mentioned the HD-DVD supporting studios have reportedly NOT been compromising their content choices for their HD DVD releases. (As opposed to the occasional counter view that they are all busily paring off DD-THD tracks in order to "fit" everything else. Hence the rare inclusion of a DD-THD track -- "King Kong" being a popular victim of this particular theory.)

I just ran across a quote from Amir (of VC-1 fame) that I think helps to explain the general HD DVD view regarding lossless audio -- including DD-THD. (The kickoff issue is that the questioner feels the XBOX Elite player should have provided 5.1 HDMI LPCM for lossless audio support. However, the overall argument can be applied equally to inclusion of lossless tracks on HD video discs.)

amirm said:
XBOX 5.1 HDMI LPCM Proponent said:
Regardless of what you and Ben preach about what is acceptable, or excellent audio for some % the marketing group came up with, I am still trying to understand why you guys keep promoting on this forum that HD DVD requires advanced codecs for audio and video in players and the other camp does not, and that MS is 1000% behind the format, yet MS's own product can't even provide full output of lossless audio (and this is round 2 for the 360)? Is that really fully supporting the format?
We are getting argumentative . So I am not going to drill deep. But if you feel that lack of lossless audio on 360 HD DVD playback means we are about to close shop and go put in a BD player, well, I don't follow that logic. Because, after all, if we did a BD player, it would likewise lack lossless audio and where would that leave us? Really, I enjoy nothing more than people mistaking our intentions with this product launch. Keeping our enemies confused is “a good thing.” .
XBOX 5.1 HDMI LPCM Proponent said:
Wow so we should suffer because most of the 360 world is tone def?
Well, I am sorry but I don't know how else to say this. But turns out 100% of the 360 world is indeed “tone deaf”. Come to think of it, 100% of PS3 owners are tone deaf too. Actually it is worse than that. 100% of the people reading this forum are tone deaf! The only entity reading this post that is not tone deaf is the computer processing these words. The rest of us are human and by definition, and thankfully so, are tone deaf! And I am not talking about tones outside of the human hearing range. I am talking about all of us being deaf to tones within the human hearing range! In the words of the Oracle in the Matrix movies, “if this don't cook your noodles,” I don't know what will. :) Now that I got your attention, let's inject some science into this topic.

Research in 1950s and 1960s created some interesting data which has become the foundation of audio compression and why we are able to compress audio as much as we do without you knowing what we are taking out. I won't drill into the full science but let me touch on one aspect of it called “masking effect.”

Let's do this with an example. You know how your projector fan can be heard when your audio system is off but you don't hear it when the audio is on and especially when it gets louder? Does the fan stop making that sound as the movie explosions come? If not, why doesn't your ear hear it? What if your projector was dead silent but the same fan noise existed in the background of the said explosions? You still wouldn't hear it, right? The tones are there, right? What if you encoded the movie now in MLP/TrueHD? Do you think if I examined the PCM samples in that encode, I would find the noise in there? Of course it would be there. But how come you don't hear it? And if you don't hear it, are we not wasting bits on it? Well, we are :).

How about this example. I am sure if you are a high-end audiophile you can easily tell the difference between 128k MP3 and the CD. But don't feel too good yet as this was a trick statement and not praise for your hearing ability :). The data rate of uncompressed CD is 1.4 mbit/sec. So in representing it at 128kbps, we are compressing it at 11:1 compression ratio. Saying this another way, we have thrown away 91% of the audio and that remaining 9% is what you are hearing! That's right. Only 9% of the original is left. So do you think your ears are detecting that 91% of the audio that is taken out? Or that just a bit of the quality is missing? You see where I am going with this? MP3 is an old codec and pretty inefficient by modern standards yet, at such a high compression ratio, despite your ear missing out on a lot of “tones” your perception as an audiophile is that substantially less quality/“tones” is taken out than the number suggests.


The concept should be clear by now. We convert the audio to frequency spectrum. Within that domain, we then look at the intensity of various tones. If a faint tone is next to a louder one, we can safely reduce its resolution and your ear simply is not going to know the difference. What you will continue to hear is the louder sound, and the fact that the fainter one is at lower resolution (or gone altogether) is immaterial.

So far, we have been talking about one channel's worth of data. In movie sound we get lucky in other ways. Since you are not listening to your movies with headphones, the masking effect becomes even more helpful in that we could have a loud sound in one channel, masking fainter sound in others. In the explosion example above, you simply are not going to hear the faint ambiance in the background coming from the rear channel and we could take even more “tones” out those sources without you knowing the difference.


Now let's look at this from another angle. According to Dolby (and our tests), using 5.1 audio, one can approach nearly 3:1 compression ratio with lossless TrueHD without taking any tones out. For 16-bit, 48khz, 5.1 audio, this amounts to 1.5 mbit/sec or so data rate. So if we used a lossy codec like DTS/DD+ and encoded the soundtrack at 1.5 mbit/sec, we are operating in a domain where basically little data needs to be thrown out at all as the data rate is the same as lossless mode (all lossy codecs have a “back end” that is lossless)! We would be basically cruising, applying the lightest amount of compression and most of the time, not compressing anything at all. Indeed, this was the foundation of DTS algorithm where it operates in lossless mode even though we think of it as a lossy codec. When pushed DTS does switch to lossy encoding but at 1.5 mbit/sec it just doesn't go into this domain often.

Unfortunately, the lossy algorithm in DTS is not as sophisticate as what we use in modern audio codecs and as such, its quality suffers at half rate (760 kbps). And hence the reason we are able to do so well against it with WMA Pro operating at same data rate. But with the output of 360 running at 1.5 mbit/sec, even this is not a concern.

So as you see, the argument is not a simple one even when one looks at just one psychoacoustic technique in compressing audio.

The only people who are truly bothered by audio compression are the people trained in that science. Years of training their ears and understanding of compression science allows them to “search” and find quantization noise. These skills do not come easily though and as such, even the best audiophiles lack them and will not be able to find distortion in mildly compressed audio. But despite falling into the class of trained compression listeners after doing years of codec testing, I still enjoy compressed movie sound. I find that unlike when I am listening to music, the visual stimulus is high enough that I simply don't tear up the audio samples like I do with music. As such, despite having more expensive audio equipment than most people deserve to own, I am not swayed by arguments where people say they listen to MLP music, and as such, nothing but lossless audio meets their needs for movies. If this is not the case for skilled listeners like me, it surely is not true for 99% of the audiophiles out there let alone general public.

Just a think piece -- as it were :).
 

lgans316

Distinguished Member
Thanks for the fab info.


Without HDMI receiver USE OF + LOSSLESS = USELESS !!!! :devil:
 

Ian_S

Distinguished Member
It's quite interesting how Amir's approach has shifted. That post and others were basically a defence around why the 360 doesn't need lossless audio, even on the Elite version.

On the one hand MS like to tell us that they believe in choice with the 360, and that why they very kindly don't force an HD-DVD drive on you, on the other hand though, when it suits them you don't get the choice and get fed stuff like the above.

On the one hand Amir is on record as saying ALL HD-DVD players should be able to decode TrueHD 5.1, but why bother if you believe the above?

Those comments only make sense to me in the context of trying to defend the lack of PCM over HDMI output on the Xbox 360 Elite IMO.
 

TrevorS

Active Member
Those comments only make sense to me in the context of trying to defend the lack of PCM over HDMI output on the Xbox 360 Elite IMO.

FWIW -- I've found his above appraisal of the importance of lossless audio with movies to be consistent for MANY months now. In my opinion, this post is merely demonstrating him applying that standing viewpoint to the XBOX.

Unlike some here, I guess, I don't find the quality of the usual soundtrack to be equal to that of well recorded music. That reason plus the distraction factor associated with coincident video lessens the importance of lossless tracks (IMO).

I do note that "Phantom Of The Opera" is known for having an especially high quality music sound track, and it was provided with a DD-THD track. So if the studios are making the call depending on their view of lossless value to the recording, that would seem sensible to me. Clearly, they still consider there to be a place for it.
 

richard plumb

Distinguished Member
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with whether DTS @ 1.5Mb/s is good enough or transparant to the master for most people.

But I disagree strongly with how he has worded his argument.

Because Dolby TrueHD can approach 3:1 compression and therefore make lossless tracks with approximately 1.5Mb/s, suddenly DTS @ 1.5Mb/s will sound just the same?

Both codecs are completely different, so that just sounds to me like spinning the facts to present a particular point.

I personally disagree that we shouldn't be aiming for lossless audio. Why would we want less? If, by Amir's argument it only takes the same bandwidth, then lets have it.

If his argument is that everyone has a DTS decoder, but not everyone has a TrueHD encoder, then thats silly because the players decode the TrueHD. And can reencode to DTS 1.5Mb/s for those without HDMI audio or analogut outputs - which will be fine because Amir says so :p . Meantime those of us that can access the full lossless track via HDMI or analog can enjoy it.

I personally find the addition of HDMI to the 360 'elite' but missing out the ability to pass audio over it a huge oversight.
 

TrevorS

Active Member
On the one hand Amir is on record as saying ALL HD-DVD players should be able to decode TrueHD 5.1, but why bother if you believe the above?

If you read the thread, Amir has no control over the XBOX decision and he apparently did raise the issue with the XBOX team. Personally, I think it is entirely a question of product positioning.

For BR, the PS3 provides the entry level player. However, the XBOX does not carry that responsibility for HD DVD -- you can actually buy a standalone player for less than an XBOX plus add-on drive.

I don't think MS is trying to compete with the standalone players, it's just providing the gamer with an accessory that is actually pretty nifty for the price. If the gamer gets so into the sound that he/she feels the need to go full bore, then a standalone can be purchased to take over the job. The add-on drive could be easily sold to another gamer who may or may not eventually be interested in going the same route.

In other words, given the XBOX w/ add-on drive is not required to fill any slack at the bottom of the product line-up, there is no reason it can't be allowed to remain primarily a gaming machine. I think that's in essense the trade-off the XBOX team chose to go with, they simply don't consider 5.1 HDMI LPCM to have high value to their average customer -- just doesn't justify the additional development cost.
 

TrevorS

Active Member
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with whether DTS @ 1.5Mb/s is good enough or transparant to the master for most people.

But I disagree strongly with how he has worded his argument.

Because Dolby TrueHD can approach 3:1 compression and therefore make lossless tracks with approximately 1.5Mb/s, suddenly DTS @ 1.5Mb/s will sound just the same?

Both codecs are completely different, so that just sounds to me like spinning the facts to present a particular point.

I personally disagree that we shouldn't be aiming for lossless audio. Why would we want less? If, by Amir's argument it only takes the same bandwidth, then lets have it.

If his argument is that everyone has a DTS decoder, but not everyone has a TrueHD encoder, then thats silly because the players decode the TrueHD. And can reencode to DTS 1.5Mb/s for those without HDMI audio or analogut outputs - which will be fine because Amir says so :p . Meantime those of us that can access the full lossless track via HDMI or analog can enjoy it.

I personally find the addition of HDMI to the 360 'elite' but missing out the ability to pass audio over it a huge oversight.

To my view, what you are primarily taking issue with is preamble (and genuine explanation for the many who really do not understand those things), however I think his real statement comes down to his personal observation in the final paragraph:

amirm said:
I find that unlike when I am listening to music, the visual stimulus is high enough that I simply don't tear up the audio samples like I do with music. As such, despite having more expensive audio equipment than most people deserve to own, I am not swayed by arguments where people say they listen to MLP music, and as such, nothing but lossless audio meets their needs for movies. If this is not the case for skilled listeners like me, it surely is not true for 99% of the audiophiles out there let alone general public.
 

shaithis

Active Member
I personally think this stinks.

Firstly, the exclusion of LPCM over HDMI is unforgivable. They are selling you the elite as a part of your HT setup and as such you expect features like that to be there.

Secondly, while Amir may be an expert and he may be speaking truthfully, consumers do not like their requests to be met with a "bugger off, we know better" response. Especially when many of us most certainly do notice the difference when listening to a lossless audio track....even while watching the accompanying film :rolleyes:
 

pjr918bmw

Active Member
Trevor S - I think you have got it spot on - no matter how "audiophile" somebody thinks they are - unless they have a perfect listening environment, absolute top end kit and the ears of a bat! - they are just not going to hear the difference - although they will convice themselves otherwise! and if they have got these benefits they will have bought a standalone player!

The xbox is a gaming machine - people who think they need more will buy a standalone player and convince themselves they can hear the difference! and thats fine. seriously.

product placement - But wheres the point in Microsoft flogging a cheapy HD player with all the bells and whistles for a £120 or whatever - at this point in time? Surely that would just pi55 off the other HD DVD manufacturers ie. Toshiba?
 

Bald Monkey

Novice Member
However the Xbox is still a games console and IMO should always be, I'm not going to start replacing my AV equipment with multi-tasking games consoles.... And nor when all I had was a PS2 and a 14" portable was I concerned over quite how good a DVD player it was.

If the Xbox remians far cheaper than the PS3 and continues to have a great selection of games etc, whilst also offering additional AV capabilities if required, then thats fine by me.

I personally want the full lossless soundtracks, even if I can't hear them, even if my equipment doesn't warrant them, because I simply want the best I can, and I lurve the logos! :devil: I will however choose to get those from a dedicated AV setup rather than my games console... ;)
 

pjr918bmw

Active Member
I personally think this stinks.

Firstly, the exclusion of LPCM over HDMI is unforgivable. They are selling you the elite as a part of your HT setup and as such you expect features like that to be there.

Secondly, while Amir may be an expert and he may be speaking truthfully, consumers do not like their requests to be met with a "bugger off, we know better" response. Especially when many of us most certainly do notice the difference when listening to a lossless audio track....even while watching the accompanying film :rolleyes:

To suggest he's lying is a little over the top? Your point re "bugger off" has some merit though

If Microsoft are wrong then this release will fail - and I just dont believe that will happen!!

We always seem to forget we are in the tiny minority when it comes to these sort of things....
 

Duncan Harvey

Active Member
You can sure tell he works for microsoft :)

eg 1.5mbps dts is as good as TruHD, so who needs lossless.

Whoever needed more than 640k of memory in their PC

Who would ever need more than 30gb for a HD-DVD...

Whilst there might not be "much" difference between dta at 1.5 and lossless, I know which side of the fence I'd rather be, and frankly I've learned never to accept at face value any defence of a lossy codec.
 

Ian_S

Distinguished Member
Hi Trevor,

Amir has also stated the reason why the Elite does not pass PCM over HDMI was really because the 360 hardware as is today does not have the bandwidth to shift lossless multichannel audio around internally. Therefore it would require a much more extensive hardware change than simply adding HDMI video which was beyond the design remit of the Elite. I guess such things are the price MS was willing to pay to get the 360 out long before the PS3, and at this point I doubt they're regretting that too much.

As far as I'm concerned, the above is a pretty good and acceptable argument as to why the 360 Elite does what it does and has the restrictions it has. It's a good solid reason. As is the reason that you can't simply provide an HDMI cable for existing 360's that so many people cling to.

The quote above is IMO not needed and is simply trying to manipulate facts for something that already has a pretty good (even if it's not the answer people wanted to hear) explanation. I'm also not keen on the idea (and this is my opinion not fact) that WM Audio is getting lots of mentions by MS people.

Neither BD or HD-DVD are just about movies. Both formats are now releasing (slowly) music titles, and on these, I absolutely expect lossless audio. 2.5hrs of a Bruce Springsteen concert in HD and lossless audio is for me a mouthwatering prospect. I have many SD Music DVD's where I would happily re-buy for lossless audio and even a compression free SD picture on either format. They wouldn't even have to be in HD!!!! Pristine 576p video + lossless audio would a superb idea.

Furthermore, for me, one of the very obvious signs of lossless audio is the little details which as Amir's quite points out, are the very things that get 'lost' by compression. I agree, fine and dandy when there's a nuclear bomb going off, not so fine in other situations where the little things do add to the overall realism... Of course it's each to their own here.

I don't know if you agree, but certainly I feel that on my setup (hopefully you feel the same for yours) the sound experience I enjoy is much better (other than sheer volume) than I get in a Cinema. I'd be surprised if Studios don't also realise this fact and some appear to go to great lengths in their sound mixing fidelity that I really can't imagine being of great use in a cinema with popcorn chewing in your ear... SkyWalker sound use B&W 8 series speakers with I believe Krell amplification in their mixing suite... I'm sure it sounds stunning. If movie sound was so easily reproduced by 1.5mbps lossy audio why would you bother putting your sound together on such high end kit and adding subtle details if no-one but the sound producer would ever hear them...
 

shaithis

Active Member
To suggest he's lying is a little over the top?

I am not suggesting it at all. I have no idea if he is truthful or not, all I know is Microsoft are trying to sell them and I take any such grey-area wishy-washy personal-opinion statements with the pinch of salt they deserve.
 

TrevorS

Active Member
Thanks for the fab info.


Without HDMI receiver USE OF + LOSSLESS = USELESS !!!! :devil:

Not necessarily true! With the E1 and E10, if there is a DD+ track recorded at 640Kbps, and a DD-THD track, then even if you ouput via S/PDIF (optical or coax), you will benefit from the higher bit rate DD-THD (the cross-coded DTS max is 1.5Mbps).

If you have XBOX 360, then a soon to be released firmware update will both correct the current issue of compacted DD dynamic range, and allow selection of cross-coding to DTS. It's actually expected that those two fixes will solve most current concern about the XBOX sound.
 

TrevorS

Active Member
However the Xbox is still a games console and IMO should always be, I'm not going to start replacing my AV equipment with multi-tasking games consoles.... And nor when all I had was a PS2 and a 14" portable was I concerned over quite how good a DVD player it was.

If the Xbox remians far cheaper than the PS3 and continues to have a great selection of games etc, whilst also offering additional AV capabilities if required, then thats fine by me.

I personally want the full lossless soundtracks, even if I can't hear them, even if my equipment doesn't warrant them, because I simply want the best I can, and I lurve the logos! :devil: I will however choose to get those from a dedicated AV setup rather than my games console... ;)

I agree it's fun to have the lossless audio available. :)

Regarding the audibility of difference from high bitrate DD+, people on AVSforum have reported reactions including no to little difference at all (and dissapointment/disillusionment because of it). My impression of the primary argument for it being included is basically that it SHOULD be there. A question of perspective I guess. My feeling is that if it will bring little to no benefit, there's not much point and I can see leaving it off -- obviously a title by title question.

In my experience, any of the new higher bitrate audio CODECs leave the SD DVD DD options behind -- I've never been that happy with them (generally preferring my LD LPCM tracks and sometimes even VHS HiFi). For me, DTS has always been the saving grace and at 1.5Mbps, a good DTS track gives me an incredible film audio experience (still love my DTS LDs -- 1.2Mbps :)).
 

TrevorS

Active Member
Hi Trevor,

Amir has also stated the reason why the Elite does not pass PCM over HDMI was really because the 360 hardware as is today does not have the bandwidth to shift lossless multichannel audio around internally. Therefore it would require a much more extensive hardware change than simply adding HDMI video which was beyond the design remit of the Elite. I guess such things are the price MS was willing to pay to get the 360 out long before the PS3, and at this point I doubt they're regretting that too much.

As far as I'm concerned, the above is a pretty good and acceptable argument as to why the 360 Elite does what it does and has the restrictions it has. It's a good solid reason. As is the reason that you can't simply provide an HDMI cable for existing 360's that so many people cling to.

Absolutely, the hardware isn't up to it and would require further development. My purpose wasn't to explain the XBOX decision, but rather to discuss the apparent lossless audio perspective of the HD DVD supporting studios.

From what Amir has said in the past, the thought process he describes in this post is at least similar to the one studios have elected regarding DD-THD. Fundamentally, if people really aren't going to hear a difference, there's not much point in doing it.

The usual counter argument I run across (aside for the claim one CAN hear it) is that if BR can generally include LPCM, what's the problem on the HD DVD side? However, that begs the issue of lack of standard "high def" audio CODECs on the BR side. The only soundtracks that can be counted on having player support are core DD, core DTS, and LPCM. Hence, if the studio wants to provide a more than SD DVD listening experience, 5.1 LPCM is the only common option. Consequently the counter argument that BD provides lossless really isn't a very good one.

The quote above is IMO not needed and is simply trying to manipulate facts for something that already has a pretty good (even if it's not the answer people wanted to hear) explanation. I'm also not keen on the idea (and this is my opinion not fact) that WM Audio is getting lots of mentions by MS people.

I don't feel his supporting the hardware decision from an audio perspective to be manipulation. I think it's more about trying to educate people that just because something is lossless doesn't mean it will sound better. There's a tendency for people to want things provided, whether or not there would be a benefit.

He also points out the need for a gamer to have other HDMI supporting equipment in order for 5.1 HDMI LPCM to deliver. As the cost adds up, are we still talking about an even vaguely average gamer?

Neither BD or HD-DVD are just about movies. Both formats are now releasing (slowly) music titles, and on these, I absolutely expect lossless audio. 2.5hrs of a Bruce Springsteen concert in HD and lossless audio is for me a mouthwatering prospect. I have many SD Music DVD's where I would happily re-buy for lossless audio and even a compression free SD picture on either format. They wouldn't even have to be in HD!!!! Pristine 576p video + lossless audio would a superb idea.

An excellent point, and my impression is that the HD DVD live performance releases have thus far included DD-THD.

Therefore, I presume you are here specifically questioning the XBOX HDMI 2.0 rational, not HD DVD in general. My suspicion is that problem will be solved for the vast majority of gamers by using the 1.5Mbps cross-coding update that is about to be released. In my personal experience, full bandwidth DTS provides one excellent concert listening experience in the home -- I hate to be limited to DD on concert discs :(.

Furthermore, for me, one of the very obvious signs of lossless audio is the little details which as Amir's quite points out, are the very things that get 'lost' by compression. I agree, fine and dandy when there's a nuclear bomb going off, not so fine in other situations where the little things do add to the overall realism... Of course it's each to their own here.

I don't know if you agree, but certainly I feel that on my setup (hopefully you feel the same for yours) the sound experience I enjoy is much better (other than sheer volume) than I get in a Cinema. I'd be surprised if Studios don't also realise this fact and some appear to go to great lengths in their sound mixing fidelity that I really can't imagine being of great use in a cinema with popcorn chewing in your ear... SkyWalker sound use B&W 8 series speakers with I believe Krell amplification in their mixing suite... I'm sure it sounds stunning. If movie sound was so easily reproduced by 1.5mbps lossy audio why would you bother putting your sound together on such high end kit and adding subtle details if no-one but the sound producer would ever hear them...

I've put a lot of effort into my rig over time. I started off with audiophile "wannabe" two channel (with a VCR and TV) and gradually grew it to a full fledged home theater experience with 6.1 "audiophile" sound (took MANY years). I use quotes on the word audiophile because the word is much overused and its correct application could be argued to death :). But yes, it sounds hugely better than any cinema I've ever been in -- picture's pretty good too, though my LCD projector is only 720p displaying on a homemade screen :).

I've a second baby home theater setup in the back that also does very nice stereo and surround sound -- some of that gear may qualify as antique :). It will also beat most cinemas (IMO) except for the deep bass -- got to draw a line somewhere when you're trying to limit the investment and mostly build from leftovers :).

Both systems do very well with fine detail and an example SD film that provides exquisite detail is the original dual disc DTS version of "Dances With Wolves" (1.5Mbps). As I said earlier, I think Amir is right that high bitrate lossy can work wonders. (Most people seem to hate the movie "Lost In Space", but the DTS LD soundtrack is incredible -- 1.2Mbps).
 

TrevorS

Active Member
Trevor S - I think you have got it spot on - no matter how "audiophile" somebody thinks they are - unless they have a perfect listening environment, absolute top end kit and the ears of a bat! - they are just not going to hear the difference - although they will convice themselves otherwise! and if they have got these benefits they will have bought a standalone player!

The xbox is a gaming machine - people who think they need more will buy a standalone player and convince themselves they can hear the difference! and thats fine. seriously.

product placement - But wheres the point in Microsoft flogging a cheapy HD player with all the bells and whistles for a £120 or whatever - at this point in time? Surely that would just pi55 off the other HD DVD manufacturers ie. Toshiba?

Thanks :)! I'm glad to learn SOMEONE sees some merit in what I'm saying :).

I would be entirely happy to see a DD-THD track on every title, but that isn't to suggest I would expect to hear a worthwhile difference on every title. (Though it would be fun when I did :)!)

I've heard plenty a movie soundtrack that sounded way less than pristine or having a clearly limited bandwidth, and very few that sounded truly wide bandwidth pristine. When the quality merits it (not talking explosions, gunfire, and dialog), then I definitely want all I can get! I'll settle for high bitrate lossy the rest of the time :).
 

Pecker

Distinguished Member
Ultimately, I agree with his general point.

Whilst it might just be possible for some people with golden ears to spot some subtle differences between these various formats, if you sit down to watch 'The Usual Suspects' or 'MI:3' and spot the differences, then you're listening too hard, and you've probably missed half the film.

I've listened to some pretty shocking soundtracks in my time. But there are times I've been watching a film with a DPL soundtrack on VHS and got lost enough on the film to ignore the defficiencies :smashin: - a shame the same couldn't be said for the PQ :thumbsdow

I'd be very interested to see some results from blind testing between these formats.

Steve W
 

The latest video from AVForums

Movies Podcast: Star Trek in 4K. Is the new boxset worth it?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom