DVD/DTS Poll Muse - The Resistance [DTS/DD DVD+CD]

[tlake6659]

This.

Take note the exact reason I joined these forums was due to this album. I heard the unofficial DTS copy of this floating around, and it sounded terrible. That’s an understatement. The channels were out of order, and the compression on the DTS source vs. the Dolby Digital source is unbelievable.

I was fortunate to find a hard copy of the box set which includes the 5.1 disc.

Once I heard the Dolby Digital track, my opinion of the 5.1 mix completely changed.

Thanks for posting this. The Dolby Digital 5.1 mastering is light years better than the ultra compressed DTS mastering.

 

[TheGreatRamseythe2nd]

Thanks for posting this. The Dolby Digital 5.1 mastering is light years better than the ultra compressed DTS mastering.

I did not know this. Thanks.

 

[gorman]

I looked at eBay but could not find the disc... kind of sad I'm gonna miss this in Dolby Digital. :-(

Unless it's this one... but the price... https://www.ebay.it/itm/195707864559

 

[wiredsol]

Thanks for posting this. The Dolby Digital 5.1 mastering is light years better than the ultra compressed DTS mastering.

Dolby Digital on DVD was encoded in a bitrate of 448kbps for 5.1 tracks. While 5.1 DTS tracks typically used a 750kbps bitrate. DTS would claim they were superior because they used less compression.Jan 30, 2023

 

[wiredsol]

You may have that backwards fine chap

 

[edisonbaggins]

He might have been referring to dynamic compression.
It’s not unheard of for different streams to have unique mastering.

 

[himey]

Dolby Digital on DVD was encoded in a bitrate of 448kbps for 5.1 tracks. While 5.1 DTS tracks typically used a 750kbps bitrate. DTS would claim they were superior because they used less compression.Jan 30, 2023

Mix and/or mastering is more important than the format.

 

[gorman]

He might have been referring to dynamic compression.
It’s not unheard of for different streams to have unique mastering.

On top of this, I remember reading about listening tests where it turned out that DTS *needed* the higher bitrate to reach parity with DD at lower bitrates. Sooo... definitely not a clear cut difference even when we talk about compression (not dynamic compression, the actual bitrates of files).

 

[himey]

On top of this, I remember reading about listening tests where it turned out that DTS *needed* the higher bitrate to reach parity with DD at lower bitrates. Sooo... definitely not a clear cut difference even when we talk about compression (not dynamic compression, the actual bitrates of files).

Are you thinking of Dolby Digital Plus? DD+ is an upgrade I believe, compared to the older compression formats.

 

[ssully]

Dolby Digital on DVD was encoded in a bitrate of 448kbps for 5.1 tracks. While 5.1 DTS tracks typically used a 750kbps bitrate. DTS would claim they were superior because they used less compression.Jan 30, 2023

He was referring to the dynamic range compression -- the mastering -- not the data compression.

The DD is apparently far less DR compressed than the DTS version. See https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/muse-the-resistance-dts-dd-dvd-cd.17487/post-665585

 

[gorman]

Are you thinking of Dolby Digital Plus? DD+ is an upgrade I believe, compared to the older compression formats.

No. Original DD and DTS.
If I find I will post the relevant PDF I read.

 

[gorman]

Are you thinking of Dolby Digital Plus? DD+ is an upgrade I believe, compared to the older compression formats.

This was the one I had read (and saved on my HD): https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3324.pdf

Page 25:

For example, consider Dolby Digital (DD) or DTS which have been in the market for more than 10 years: Dolby Digital requires 448 kbit/s and DTS still requires around 1.5 Mbit/s for "Excellent" quality. The newer codecs, such as Dolby Digital Plus or Windows Media provide "Excellent" quality only if operating at 448 kbit/s or above.
And this is the follow-up study: https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3339.pdf

Where, on page 20, you can check table n. 10, that shows how DD at 448kbps still produces good results. Note that this second study concentrated more on multiple transcoding scenarios, if I understand correctly, which are probably likely in a broadcast scenario.

So, basically, it's ok to use DTS 1.5 when available. But a far better master in DD will most likely sound far better than a worse master in DTS.

Too bad I won't be able to ever listen to The Resistance how it was meant to sound. In this day and age I find ridiculous to still have content gated through limited releases that basically end up putting one in the hands of scalpers...