Home Video Asylum

TVs, VCRs, DVD players, Home Theater systems and more.

Re: DTS

Joe,

Once can easily make the argument that DTS is a worse codec than DD because it uses 2 to 5 times the data for the same results.

Have you ever done some playing around with surround levels on various discs that are both DD and DTS encoded? I bet one of your favorite DTS discs is Gladiator, because it's "so much better" DTS encoded than it is DD encoded.

Actually, what it is, is so much LOUDER in the surrounds than DD. Really. It so happens that we perceive louder as better. I suppose a +6dB difference on surrounds might be considered "louder".

Well, do this, listen to Gladiator at -3dB on the surrounds level for DTS, then listen to the DD track at +3dB on the surrounds level. All of a sudden most (if not all) the differences you perceived will be gone.

I know, I've done the trick, and was a bit surprised.

Would be interesting for you to do this and report back what you thought.

Regards,



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  The Cable Cooker  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • Re: DTS - kotches 18:49:46 01/27/02 (3)
    • Re: DTS - Corbett 12:06:33 01/28/02 (2)
      • Re: DTS - bobo1 22:53:50 01/30/02 (0)
      • Re: DTS - kotches 23:07:20 01/28/02 (0)


You can not post to an archived thread.