5.1 vs Stereo
Posted by: Mr Underhill on 16 May 2003
As new digital media are introduced I've been trying to get a feel for them. I've got a DV88 which feeds an AV2. I've not had the DV88 upgraded to DVD-A; the price of which jumped from an anticipated £300 to an actual £650. For that price I've decided to wait and see which format wins, DVD-A or SACD. I have, however, dipped my toe into the waters of compression, DOLBY 5.1 -vs- DTS.
I contacted NAIM and asked about DTS 24/96. The AV2 will not decode at this resolution currently - but a firmware / software upgrade is on the way, at a reasonable cost.
I bought a Police compilation DVD, with DOLBY 5.1, DOLBY 2.0 and DTS soundtracks. Phil Collins live concert PCM Stereo and DOLBY 5.0, and Cheryl Crow concert with 5.1 and DTS.
One thing to get off my chest is the line of 'DTS is best', re-enforced in Hi-Fi News. Is it? I've read a couple of articles where in 'blind' listening tests DOLBY has been generally preffered. It is interesting to note that if you switch between soundtracks the DTS varient sounds louder.
Both Dolby and DTS are compressed soundtracks. I've listened to the Police DVD a reasonable number of times. On the plus side is archive footage from 'The Old Grey Whistle Test'. The sound? Well the mix hacks me off. Do I really want to listen to Sting from the front, and the backing vocals from.....err...the back? NO! That said, it could be that's because it's not what I'm used to - my daughters don't mind.
I don't find the music as interesting/enjoyable as it is on the equivalent vinyl/CD. I do prefer the DTS soundtrack.
The Phil COllins is a much better mix. It is frustrating to see musicians playing their hearts out, but only hear what their doing WAY back in the soundtrack - if at all. But it does look to have been a good concert and, if you like Collins, I'd recommend it. Still not in the same league as stereo Vinyl - but not dreadful.
Has anyone on the forum done any comparisons with SACD / DVD-A? Any thoughts?
Any other Music DVDs bought - thoughts?
I've also got a selection of the BBCs Opera DVDs, with DTS soundtracks, which I'd recommend.
I contacted NAIM and asked about DTS 24/96. The AV2 will not decode at this resolution currently - but a firmware / software upgrade is on the way, at a reasonable cost.
I bought a Police compilation DVD, with DOLBY 5.1, DOLBY 2.0 and DTS soundtracks. Phil Collins live concert PCM Stereo and DOLBY 5.0, and Cheryl Crow concert with 5.1 and DTS.
One thing to get off my chest is the line of 'DTS is best', re-enforced in Hi-Fi News. Is it? I've read a couple of articles where in 'blind' listening tests DOLBY has been generally preffered. It is interesting to note that if you switch between soundtracks the DTS varient sounds louder.
Both Dolby and DTS are compressed soundtracks. I've listened to the Police DVD a reasonable number of times. On the plus side is archive footage from 'The Old Grey Whistle Test'. The sound? Well the mix hacks me off. Do I really want to listen to Sting from the front, and the backing vocals from.....err...the back? NO! That said, it could be that's because it's not what I'm used to - my daughters don't mind.
I don't find the music as interesting/enjoyable as it is on the equivalent vinyl/CD. I do prefer the DTS soundtrack.
The Phil COllins is a much better mix. It is frustrating to see musicians playing their hearts out, but only hear what their doing WAY back in the soundtrack - if at all. But it does look to have been a good concert and, if you like Collins, I'd recommend it. Still not in the same league as stereo Vinyl - but not dreadful.
Has anyone on the forum done any comparisons with SACD / DVD-A? Any thoughts?
Any other Music DVDs bought - thoughts?
I've also got a selection of the BBCs Opera DVDs, with DTS soundtracks, which I'd recommend.
Posted on: 16 May 2003 by Ancipital
I watched Pink Floyd The Wall last week on DVD through my AV2 using Dolby 5.1 (that's what is on the disc), and the words F*** me sprung to mind watching it.
In comparing some DD5.1 and DTS soundtracks off the same dics, I find that the DTS soundtracks seem to contain a lot more depth. Gladiators springs to mind.
Only other Music DVD's I own are Yellow Submarine and Led Zeppelin's The Song Remains the Same (I think!).
Steve.
In comparing some DD5.1 and DTS soundtracks off the same dics, I find that the DTS soundtracks seem to contain a lot more depth. Gladiators springs to mind.
Only other Music DVD's I own are Yellow Submarine and Led Zeppelin's The Song Remains the Same (I think!).
Steve.
Posted on: 16 May 2003 by RichardHallman
I believe DTS is recorded 5dB louder than DD, hence the volume increase when switching between.
I think also that although there may be a DTS soundtrack, it may not have been recorded using the full bitrate available - this is particularly the case where several soundtracks are available on one disc.
Apparently the Region 1 version of Saving Private Ryan, which can be had with DTS only, is an awesome thing.
EDIT: Apologies for going off into movie territory there. I'm awaiting the Led Zepp 2 DVD box set which is out at the end of the month - loads of old concert footage, apparently all remixed by Mr Page - be interesting to see what that sounds like....
[This message was edited by RichardHallman on FRIDAY 16 May 2003 at 15:01.]
I think also that although there may be a DTS soundtrack, it may not have been recorded using the full bitrate available - this is particularly the case where several soundtracks are available on one disc.
Apparently the Region 1 version of Saving Private Ryan, which can be had with DTS only, is an awesome thing.
EDIT: Apologies for going off into movie territory there. I'm awaiting the Led Zepp 2 DVD box set which is out at the end of the month - loads of old concert footage, apparently all remixed by Mr Page - be interesting to see what that sounds like....
[This message was edited by RichardHallman on FRIDAY 16 May 2003 at 15:01.]
Posted on: 16 May 2003 by Geoff P
quote:
One thing to get off my chest is the line of 'DTS is best', re-enforced in Hi-Fi News. Is it? I've read a couple of articles where in 'blind' listening tests DOLBY has been generally preffered. It is interesting to note that if you switch between soundtracks the DTS varient sounds louder.
Has anyone on the forum done any comparisons with SACD / DVD-A? Any thoughts?
I listen to both DVD-A & SACD. Both can be very good, both can be "artificial", both can be poor.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
Neither allows you much control of DSP since their outputs are analog discrete(Except for the newest Pioneer kit) . The fact that you do have DSP control of DD 5.1 and DTS makes up to some extent for the fact that they are compressed formats.
DVD-A discs always have at least a stereo mix on them which can be a hidden "glory", because it is quite common for the stereo to be recorded at 98/26 which gives a very high quality sound.
If you hate the trickyness of surround you can listen in high quality stereo. A good example of this is FLEETWOOD MAC's famous RUMORS on DVDA. The stereo track is excellent.
On the other hand well controlled multichannel can be very good. In my opinion FOREPLAY's same name entitled DVDA is ecellent, followed by NATALIE MERCHANT's TIGERLILY and GRAHAM NASH's recording SONGS FOR SURVIVORS. Also worth checking out are DONALD FAGEN'S
quote:
I believe DTS is recorded 5dB louder than DD, hence the volume increase when switching between.
I think also that although there may be a DTS soundtrack, it may not have been recorded using the full bitrate available - this is particularly the case where several soundtracks are available on one disc.
Posted on: 16 May 2003 by Geoff P
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing to get off my chest is the line of 'DTS is best', re-enforced in Hi-Fi News. Is it? I've read a couple of articles where in 'blind' listening tests DOLBY has been generally preffered. It is interesting to note that if you switch between soundtracks the DTS varient sounds louder.
Has anyone on the forum done any comparisons with SACD / DVD-A? Any thoughts?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I listen to both DVD-A & SACD. Both can be very good, both can be "artificial", both can be poor.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
Neither allows you much control of DSP since their outputs are analog discrete(Except for the newest Pioneer kit) . The fact that you do have DSP control of DD 5.1 and DTS makes up to some extent for the fact that they are compressed formats.
DVD-A discs always have at least a stereo mix on them which can be a hidden "glory", because it is quite common for the stereo to be recorded at 98/26 which gives a very high quality sound.
If you hate the trickyness of surround you can listen in high quality stereo. A good example of this is FLEETWOOD MAC's famous RUMORS on DVDA. The stereo track is excellent.
On the other hand well controlled multichannel can be very good. In my opinion FOREPLAY's same name entitled DVDA is ecellent, followed by NATALIE MERCHANT's TIGERLILY and GRAHAM NASH's recording SONGS FOR SURVIVORS. Also worth checking out are DONALD FAGEN'S famous NIGHTFLY and ERIC CLAPTON / BB KING on RIDING WITH THE KING.
SACD multichannel discs often have the option to switch to stereo SACD aswell so again you can choose to listen to high quality sound in whichever format suits your taste. SACD seems to be the mode of choice for classical music and a lot of it is not multichannel but very carefully done versions of the original recordings.
Mainstream SACD's that I like include JAMES TAYLOR's - HOURGLASS, KEB'MO singing on THE DOOR and MARY CHAPIN CARPENTER giving out on TIME,SEX,LOVE, both as multichannel and as stereo
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe DTS is recorded 5dB louder than DD, hence the volume increase when switching between.
I think also that although there may be a DTS soundtrack, it may not have been recorded using the full bitrate available - this is particularly the case where several soundtracks are available on one disc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also read somewhere that DTS is recorded "louder" than DD5.1 and music DTS should be decoded without the "cinema" DSP function enabled which over emphasizes the bass frequencys.
Discs such as DVD-A's with included DTS tracks may indeed not have full bit rate DTS recording but I feel the DTS track can still sound very good.
Of course the famous one is the DEMO DVD to end all demos, EAGLES - TILL HELL FREEZES OVER. Comparing the DTS track to the DD5.1 shows the DTS to be better here aswell.
I have some dedicated DTS music discs which are very good and sound alive in my opinion. In particular JOE COCKER singing NIGHT CALLS and STEELY DAN on GAUCHO spring to mind.
So in summary DVDA, SACD and DTS can all sound great for music. DD5.1 falls a little behind on music but often is "tops" for movie sound tracks even above DTS.
The one thing you really have to come to terms with is some "artificiality" in the sound stage because of the multichannel environment. Even when there is really only ambient information coming from the sourround channels the position of the soundstage shifts significantly compared with stereo. If you can't make yourself settle in and accept this then DVDA and SACD in multichannel mode are not going to be comfortable for you.
The fact that there are often superior quality stereo options can make the difference so SACD and DVDA can still offer something even here.
One interesting side effect, at least for me, is that if I listen to a multichannel recording and then listen to a traditional stereo CD I find I am hearing a "deeper" soundstage than normal. It seems as if the brain has accepted sound coming from all angles during listening to multichannel and now processes stereo differently from the way it would if no intial multichannel sound had been used to tell it to suspend belief that sound was only coming from the speakers in front.
Summing up I think it depends if people just listen to surround music because they have home cinema and do nothing to create a system with the proper balance for music, or if they actually plan a system with music reproduction in mind as to whether they will really get full value from DVDA and SACD.
regards GEOFFP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing to get off my chest is the line of 'DTS is best', re-enforced in Hi-Fi News. Is it? I've read a couple of articles where in 'blind' listening tests DOLBY has been generally preffered. It is interesting to note that if you switch between soundtracks the DTS varient sounds louder.
Has anyone on the forum done any comparisons with SACD / DVD-A? Any thoughts?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I listen to both DVD-A & SACD. Both can be very good, both can be "artificial", both can be poor.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
Neither allows you much control of DSP since their outputs are analog discrete(Except for the newest Pioneer kit) . The fact that you do have DSP control of DD 5.1 and DTS makes up to some extent for the fact that they are compressed formats.
DVD-A discs always have at least a stereo mix on them which can be a hidden "glory", because it is quite common for the stereo to be recorded at 98/26 which gives a very high quality sound.
If you hate the trickyness of surround you can listen in high quality stereo. A good example of this is FLEETWOOD MAC's famous RUMORS on DVDA. The stereo track is excellent.
On the other hand well controlled multichannel can be very good. In my opinion FOREPLAY's same name entitled DVDA is ecellent, followed by NATALIE MERCHANT's TIGERLILY and GRAHAM NASH's recording SONGS FOR SURVIVORS. Also worth checking out are DONALD FAGEN'S famous NIGHTFLY and ERIC CLAPTON / BB KING on RIDING WITH THE KING.
SACD multichannel discs often have the option to switch to stereo SACD aswell so again you can choose to listen to high quality sound in whichever format suits your taste. SACD seems to be the mode of choice for classical music and a lot of it is not multichannel but very carefully done versions of the original recordings.
Mainstream SACD's that I like include JAMES TAYLOR's - HOURGLASS, KEB'MO singing on THE DOOR and MARY CHAPIN CARPENTER giving out on TIME,SEX,LOVE, both as multichannel and as stereo
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe DTS is recorded 5dB louder than DD, hence the volume increase when switching between.
I think also that although there may be a DTS soundtrack, it may not have been recorded using the full bitrate available - this is particularly the case where several soundtracks are available on one disc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also read somewhere that DTS is recorded "louder" than DD5.1 and music DTS should be decoded without the "cinema" DSP function enabled which over emphasizes the bass frequencys.
Discs such as DVD-A's with included DTS tracks may indeed not have full bit rate DTS recording but I feel the DTS track can still sound very good.
Of course the famous one is the DEMO DVD to end all demos, EAGLES - TILL HELL FREEZES OVER. Comparing the DTS track to the DD5.1 shows the DTS to be better here aswell.
I have some dedicated DTS music discs which are very good and sound alive in my opinion. In particular JOE COCKER singing NIGHT CALLS and STEELY DAN on GAUCHO spring to mind.
So in summary DVDA, SACD and DTS can all sound great for music. DD5.1 falls a little behind on music but often is "tops" for movie sound tracks even above DTS.
The one thing you really have to come to terms with is some "artificiality" in the sound stage because of the multichannel environment. Even when there is really only ambient information coming from the sourround channels the position of the soundstage shifts significantly compared with stereo. If you can't make yourself settle in and accept this then DVDA and SACD in multichannel mode are not going to be comfortable for you.
The fact that there are often superior quality stereo options can make the difference so SACD and DVDA can still offer something even here.
One interesting side effect, at least for me, is that if I listen to a multichannel recording and then listen to a traditional stereo CD I find I am hearing a "deeper" soundstage than normal. It seems as if the brain has accepted sound coming from all angles during listening to multichannel and now processes stereo differently from the way it would if no intial multichannel sound had been used to tell it to suspend belief that sound was only coming from the speakers in front.
Summing up I think it depends if people just listen to surround music because they have home cinema and do nothing to create a system with the proper balance for music, or if they actually plan a system with music reproduction in mind as to whether they will really get full value from DVDA and SACD.
regards GEOFFP
Posted on: 17 May 2003 by Mr Underhill
Thanks for the replies.
I have done some 5.1 / DTS comparisons; and I agree with Richard that the 'Saving Private Ryan' track is excellent. My objection is to the automatic assumption that DTS is better. The choices of the engineer can have a significant impact over which is preffered, and the biase of the particular listener.
Geoff, I think you points are well made. Ancipital was impressed by The Wall. I also have that DVD. The reservations I hold are not, primarily, to do with sound quality - it is just that I know the album so well. In the same way that, to me, Madonnas 'American Pie' is poor in comparison to Don McLean. That my objections are on that level must say something about my acceptance of the 5.1 track. I agree with your points around presentation. I found the Phil Collins DVD far easier to get along with as the rear channel was used in a more subtle way.
However, I do find that the emotional feedback I get from vinyl/cd is greater than that from music DVD-V. An early comapison I did was with Les Miserables, I had the CD and bought the DVD. The DVD soundtrack is PCM stereo, and so not compressed (?). The sound quality from the CD blew it away, by this I mean I got a far greater emotional kick.
I just need to emphasis that by this I don't mean that the AV side is bad - my ever growing collection of DVDs is a witness to that; just that my collection of albums is still growing, and gives me greater musical satisfaction!
Geoff - what hardware are you using for DVD-A / SACD? How does the Rumours DVD-A compare with CD / Vinyl to you?
I have done some 5.1 / DTS comparisons; and I agree with Richard that the 'Saving Private Ryan' track is excellent. My objection is to the automatic assumption that DTS is better. The choices of the engineer can have a significant impact over which is preffered, and the biase of the particular listener.
Geoff, I think you points are well made. Ancipital was impressed by The Wall. I also have that DVD. The reservations I hold are not, primarily, to do with sound quality - it is just that I know the album so well. In the same way that, to me, Madonnas 'American Pie' is poor in comparison to Don McLean. That my objections are on that level must say something about my acceptance of the 5.1 track. I agree with your points around presentation. I found the Phil Collins DVD far easier to get along with as the rear channel was used in a more subtle way.
However, I do find that the emotional feedback I get from vinyl/cd is greater than that from music DVD-V. An early comapison I did was with Les Miserables, I had the CD and bought the DVD. The DVD soundtrack is PCM stereo, and so not compressed (?). The sound quality from the CD blew it away, by this I mean I got a far greater emotional kick.
I just need to emphasis that by this I don't mean that the AV side is bad - my ever growing collection of DVDs is a witness to that; just that my collection of albums is still growing, and gives me greater musical satisfaction!
Geoff - what hardware are you using for DVD-A / SACD? How does the Rumours DVD-A compare with CD / Vinyl to you?
Posted on: 17 May 2003 by Geoff P
quote:
Geoff - what hardware are you using for DVD-A / SACD? How does the Rumours DVD-A compare with CD / Vinyl to you?
Answers
1) Equipment:
I have a SONY XS333ES SACD player which has some control of multichannel in that you can rebalance the volume levels between Front to Surround, Front to Center and Front to Sub-Woofer which is quite usefull particularly if the original recording is heavy handed on surround levels.
I use a Pioneer DVD939A for DVD-A. I invested in this for DVD-V because of it's image output but it is pretty good on DVD-A aswell. Interestingly it also "upsamples" ordinary CD's. It's control of relative channel levels is pretty "clunky" so I have to re-balance DVD-A at the A/V amp
I have a SONY VA555ES A/V 6.1 amp which I bought because it has TWO sets of 6.1 analogue inputs so I can hook up both DVD-A and SACD at the same time.
I take the front channels from the pre-outs on the SONY A/V and put them into the A/V input of my 112 set for unity gain so the volume control is at the SONY and then thru'my 150 to the front speakers, so I get to use NAIM amping for at least the main front channels.
The front speakers are TOTEM MANI 2's and the erest of the speakers are B & Ws from their CM range which are HiFi quality stand mounts.
Since both the Pioneer and the Sony players have a second stereo pair of outputs I also have these plumbed into the 112 direct. This allows me to give the 112/150 complete control including pre-amping and volume when I listen to stereo tracks off DVD-A or SACD, which of course gives me much better quality with the full NAIM sound.
This means I can compare stereo off DVD-A and SACD directly to CD as played by a CDX2 which I have just forked out for.
2) Sound
Well now that I have the CDX2 (without XPS2, which I now have to save up for!) plain ol fashion CD has a lot going for it because the CDX2 is streets ahead of the Pioneer and Sony as a CD player. I am very happy I bought it and must be honest I am re-dicovering my CD collection which means I have not been listening to DVD-A and SACD very much of late.
Perhaps that says it all!
Well not quite. The RUMOR's stereo sound track off DVD-A IS very good and when I compare it with the straight CD played through the CDX2 it has a little extra "aliveness and air" about it. The multichannel track in comparison losses something in re-direction of individual recording tracks for me which put's it in 3rd place.
I have the famous Miles Davis "KIND OF BLUE" on multichannel/stereo SACD and on std. CD. Interestingly the order of sound quality is the same with stereo SACD 1st, std CD stereo 2nd and multichannel SACD 3rd.
I also been able to compare Vinyl as follows:
Charlie Mingus "MINGUS AH HUM!" Vinyl vs SACD stereo. The SACD sounds as good if not a fraction better because of bass depth which is pretty important with mingus and the "breathiness" of the Saxaphone playing.
Steely Dan "GAUCHO" Vinyl against DVD-A and Donald Fagen "NIGHTFLY" Vinyl against DVD-A.
With both of these the DVD-A mastering was done very well (I think it was supervised in both cases by Mr. Fagen who is known for his meticulous music standards. This shows thru'and again the new format has that little something extra in it for me.
With Vinyl comparisons of course it's no longer about dynamic range differences. It's about the mixing and frequency boosting and cutting that went on during the remastering process. Again for the purists this is probably enough sacrilege to rule out the digital formats.
Vinyl has the pace and live feel but my kit at least cannot dig out quite the same low frequency dynamics that are there in the digital fromats which for me (and I stress the "for me" bit) puts the digital DVD-A and SACD stereo versions just ahead of the Vinyl.
As for multichannel it is more of a sound "experience" and if approached as just that can provide a pleasure of it's own.
regards GEOFFP