Heirarchy of Home Audio Stds - DD+, DD, DTS, etc.

Crazy Legs

Crazy Legs

New member
Folks,

I'm more of a videophile than an audiophile. In the discussion of Blu-ray and HD-DVD the audio quality often arises as a topic. I've lost track of what's newer and better than what else with regards to the different audio standards.

What is the general rank order the different standards, such as the ones included in the title (and any I missed)?

I'd like to be more educated on audio for the next surround sound upgrade. I'd also like to know what output(s) are better than others when using DVD players or, eventually, a next-gen player.

Thanks for the help.

CL
 
I think you're opening up a whole can of worms here with that question. It's a bit easier to rank the audio standards on a technical scale than on an objective listening scale. However, the objective listening scale is what matters most in the end. There are far too many variables with standards that are relatively close in technical performance to be able to put them all in any kind of definitive rank on an objective listening scale.

Here's a quick technical breakdown:

3. DD < DTS or DTS < DD depending upon who you ask (although DTS allows higher data throughput, but some argue that doesn't matter)
2. DD+
1. Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, LPCM (all are lossless)

Technicality has some weight with objective listening. However, it comes down to the proficiency of the mix and the source material more than anything else. A general rule you can live by is that most high resolution audio tracks (DD+ or greater) will sound better than what you'd find on SD DVD, although there are plenty of exceptions. It's also helpful to have the equipment to take advantage of the high resolution audio.
 
Deathnights list is accurate for audio quality. I think the more channels the better as well.
 
I've done some reading up on the latest audio standards, bit rates, compressions, and options of both Dolby and Digital Theater Systems. It is fair to say that both offer a very wide range of options to say the least. I also believe it is fair to say that both DTS and Dolby allow at the very least, audio resolution that is on par to the finest source material and equipment.

In other words, it is highly unlikely that any source material will be limited when released to the consumer. In fact, in many cases the source material will NOT benefit from using the 24bit lossless options at all, because the source just does not contain the resolution in the first place.

In practical terms, using either Dolby Digital Plus or DTS 96/24 is essentially transparent and more than enough for the vast majority of materials and systems. It is nice to have the higher resolution options such as Dolby TrueHD (24 bit, 96 kHz up to 18 Mbit/s up to 8 channels) or DTS-HD (8 channel 24bit 96 kHz up to 6.0 Mbit/second)

IMO lossless audio formats such as Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio are overkill in most applications. Again, it has to be stressed that having a lossless high resolution format is useless if the source cannot deliver.

I am happy to see that HD DVD required all players to support both Dolby Digital Plus and Dolby TrueHD (Blu Ray has both formats as optional, I think, someone correct me if wrong) which gives content producers the option of using the ultra high resolution formats if they actually have source material worthy of it.

The short version would be, Dolby Digital Plus is perfect for most movies, for high quality live music, special edition releases, "reference" material etc. then go a step up to TrueHD or DTS-HD.

[edit]DTS-HD master audio format seems to be the most powerful and flexible of the formats, but I don't know how much it will actually get used.
 
Last edited:
IMO, this is how it works:

In terms of being mathematically close to the master:
DD 384kbps < DD 448kbps < DD/DD+ 640kbps = DTS/DTS-HD 768kbps < DD+ 1.5mbps = DTS/DTS-HD 1.5mbps < Dolby TrueHD = DTS-HD Master Audio = PCM = Original Master (assuming all are the same bit resolution/sampling rate)

In terms of actually sounding different I think the 1.5mbps lossy codecs are the cutoff for being perceptually lossless, or indistinguishable soundwise. This is based not only on my own listening but also the comments of industry professionals. So I'd modify the above as follows:

How they sound:
DD 384kbps < DD 448kbps < DD/DD+ 640kbps = DTS/DTS-HD 768kbps < DD+ 1.5mbps = DTS/DTS-HD 1.5mbps = Dolby TrueHD = DTS-HD Master Audio = PCM = Original Master (assuming all are the same bit resolution/sampling rate)

Just like WMA/AAC/MP3, at some point lossy sounds the same as the master with 5.1 audio. I think that is reached at the 1.5mbps bitrate. However, if you actually want to open the sound in a wave editor and visually see exactly the same sound, that is where lossless comes into play.
 
I'm amazed at how good HD-DVD's sound on my 360 add-on, which is just 640 kbps DD I believe, since my receiver doesn't have DTS. Sounds way better than regular DVDs.
 
Dawg said:
I'm amazed at how good HD-DVD's sound on my 360 add-on, which is just 640 kbps DD I believe, since my receiver doesn't have DTS. Sounds way better than regular DVDs.
Click to expand...

That's cause regular DVDs are usually 384kbps - 448kbps DD, and DD 640 is a step up from those. The addon can also output 1.5mbps DTS, which is a step up from DD 640 - you might want to set it to output that.
 
tranCendenZ said:
That's cause regular DVDs are usually 384kbps - 448kbps DD, and DD 640 is a step up from those. The addon can also output 1.5mbps DTS, which is a step up from DD 640 - you might want to set it to output that.
Click to expand...
Here's where I start to get a little confused.

My receiver supports Dolby Digital and DTS (none of these HD audio standards). I use optical output on the Xbox 360 to my receiver. Once I install the HD-DVD add-on, are you saying that even though my receiver doesn't do TrueHD or DTS-HD, I'll still be able to get better than standard Dolby Digital or DTS audio?

:runaway:
 
brc64 said:
Here's where I start to get a little confused.

My receiver supports Dolby Digital and DTS (none of these HD audio standards). I use optical output on the Xbox 360 to my receiver. Once I install the HD-DVD add-on, are you saying that even though my receiver doesn't do TrueHD or DTS-HD, I'll still be able to get better than standard Dolby Digital or DTS audio?

:runaway:
Click to expand...

No :) However-

Most DVDs are 384kbps - 448kbps Dolby Digital. You cannot encode a DVD at 640kbps DD without breaking spec. Also, if a DVD does have DTS generally its lower bitrate 768kbps DTS.

The HD DVD addon transcodes the DD+/TrueHD/whatever to either 640kbps DD or 1.5mbps DTS (your choice). So, though you won't get the full benefit of HD audio, you will get higher quality than most DVDs since most DVDs are lower bitrate DD or lower bitrate DTS vs. the higher bitrates output by the HD addon.
 
tranCendenZ said:
No :) However-

Most DVDs are 384kbps - 448kbps Dolby Digital. You cannot encode a DVD at 640kbps DD without breaking spec. Also, if a DVD does have DTS generally its lower bitrate 768kbps DTS.

The HD DVD addon transcodes the DD+/TrueHD/whatever to either 640kbps DD or 1.5mbps DTS (your choice). So, though you won't get the full benefit of HD audio, you will get higher quality than most DVDs since most DVDs are lower bitrate DD or lower bitrate DTS vs. the higher bitrates output by the HD addon.
Click to expand...
But will my receiver be able to handle the higher bitrates?
 
It'll be able to handle 1.5Mbps DTS if it's not a Sony receiver (numerous Sony receiver models can't handle 1.5Mbps DTS for some reason or other).
 
DD+ and [email protected] is almost overkill. Its comparable to a song encoded in AAC @ 500kbps. I recommend these formats as the most anyone needs. Lossless formats are like if a TV could also display the infared spectrum of light, yes more information, but its of no use to humans who can't use it anyway.

So-called (HD) audio can only be improved by the number of channels, we have already reached the threshold for audio fidelity. Everything else is just marketing gimmicks.
 
tranCendenZ said:
That's cause regular DVDs are usually 384kbps - 448kbps DD, and DD 640 is a step up from those. The addon can also output 1.5mbps DTS, which is a step up from DD 640 - you might want to set it to output that.
Click to expand...

My Yamaha receiver doesn't have DTS, it's 10 years old.
 
DigitalDemon said:
DD+ and [email protected] is almost overkill. Its comparable to a song encoded in AAC @ 500kbps. I recommend these formats as the most anyone needs. Lossless formats are like if a TV could also display the infared spectrum of light, yes more information, but its of no use to humans who can't use it anyway.

So-called (HD) audio can only be improved by the number of channels, we have already reached the threshold for audio fidelity. Everything else is just marketing gimmicks.
Click to expand...

Yup. In order to experience the benefit of HD audio, there must first be a great improvement in driver technology (speakers), then a similar improvement in human hearing. Audible differences between DD+/DTS1.5 and DTrue and lossless are differences in mastering process, not limitations of encode.
 
hithere said:
Yup. In order to experience the benefit of HD audio, there must first be a great improvement in driver technology (speakers), then a similar improvement in human hearing. Audible differences between DD+/DTS1.5 and DTrue and lossless are differences in mastering process, not limitations of encode.
Click to expand...

I think the biggest improvement is having the sonic equivalent of full rate DTS quality (1.5mbps DTS or 1.5mbps DD+) on most releases. On DVD most releases you had 384kbps DD or 448kbps DD. While it is true there is little improvement between 1.5mbps lossy and losslesss, there is a decent improvement between the lower bitrate lossy and higher bitrate lossy. Sort of like going from 128kbps MP3 to 256kbps MP3.
 
What I think he is trying to say is that anything higher than DD+ or DTS1.5, its not useful since drivers today cannot reproduce the frequencies recorded in the source to be able to tell DD+ and DTS from lossless, not to mention a human being able to hear a 40,000Khz signal.

I am also not mentioning the speaker cable supposedly required for optimum signal transmission, some as much as $7,000 for 3 feet. The ones people use who claim the cables are 'danceable', who then fail to realize the speaker wire used from the terminals on the box to the drivers is worth 50 cents.
 
Last edited:
DigitalDemon said:
The ones people use who claim the cables are 'danceable', who then fail to realize the speaker wire used from the terminals on the box the the drivers is worth 50 cents.
Click to expand...

I'm not a big fan of applying microwave transmission line engineering to speaker cable or patch cable in support of audio frequencies over feet of distance...Those that claim to hear the difference between 16 gauge lamp cord and lan cable adopted for speaker use must get really annoyed with all those noisey cell phone, point to point microwave, and land mobile radio towers keeping them awake at night.

When I worked at Best Buy, they sent us out to a one-day brainwash seminar on why their cables are better. I won a 10 foot Monster speaker cable...$110 dollar MSRP. No kidding. Anyone wanna buy it? It's half price. :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top