HD DVD U-571 review by Peter M. Bracke

[rapidsft]

Reviewed by Peter M. Bracke
Tuesday, May 23, 2006

I just recently checked a review for this movie. U-571. On this review from HIGH-DEF DIGEST Peter M. Bracke states that, "Ranking the options, the results are pretty predictable: the Dolby-Plus track bests the DTS track"

Are you kidding all of us. Peter must have had ear plugs on when he played the DTS track because its over 6db louder in all frequencies over the Dolby Digital Plus track for HD-DVD. The bass is much louder and deeper, the mids are much clearer and louder, and the highs scream with exceptional clarity and accuracy. Do us all a favor Peter, buy new equipment and give an honest review, because what you said in that review, it a lie, and you are a disingenuous writer, to say the least. For all of you that actually own this movie on HD-DVD post a comment on what you really think when switching through both formats. DTS outperforms to say the least.

[DeanWG]

Umm . . . I think you need to read your own posts. A reviewer needs to match the levels of the soundtracks for an accurate comparison. If I put the DTS soundtrack on and set my receive at a level of 20, and then the DD track and set it at 60 - do you think the DD would sound better?

Louder cannot be a factor in the quality of an audio track.

[Arkadin]

the "feedback" forum is really the more appropriate place for this.
and will get a response most likely also.
I would agree that some of the real old reviews are not as accurate regarding pq as they could be because we now have a better understanding of what a really good bd or hd dvd can look like. I have no idea about this particular title because I never bought it.

[SoupRKnowva]

i see no reason for you to verbally attack a review professional like peter like that, its totally uncalled for thats for sure, when comparing tracks its required that you volume match, which i just did since i read to horrible post, and honestly the DD+ track come out on top just like he said, not by a huge margin but its still better....so why dont you do us all a favor and make your first post your last unless youll learn be nice.

[JU1CYFRU1T]

Mods note: Moving to 'Feedback Forum'

Dean is 110% correct! The ONLY way to check which track is better, is to set your desired audio level (for arguement, let's say 85 db)... listen to the track...

Now the tricky part... with the next track you need to reset your audio so that the 'baseline' is 85 db. At this point, you are comparing the QUALITY of the tracks... not just which one defaults at a louder volume.

You NEVER set your receiver to reference (0 db) and say that the track that hits a higher level and an SPL is the better track! That's like comparing which car is better based on a louder engine.

rapid,
Setup your theater so that both tracks are at the same SPL setting... and tell us which track has better dynamics... which track has better tone... which track had better pressence...

I own U-571... I have done it... and let me tell you, the DD+ track wins HANDS DOWN in every category. It's a simple matter of bps.

[Citizen Erased]

Originally Posted by rapidsft

Are you kidding all of us. Peter must have had ear plugs on when he played the DTS track because its over 6db louder in all frequencies over the Dolby Digital Plus track for HD-DVD.

I'll have a go at explaining this in simple terms. If it was 6db louder at the bottom end (for example) then maybe, MAYBE you could argue that it was a better audio mix (if such a gain is appropriate for the source material, it may just become too base heavy).

But to say a certain mix is at a higher gain for all frequencies is simply saying it's the same mix but mastered at a higher volume. You could make them equivalent by turning the volume controls higher or lower!

Exactly what case are you trying to argue?

[vinnie97]

sigh, this is what it's come to....a bunch of self-proclaimed audio experts who don't know as much as they think.

[theHDphantom]

I'm running on an optical digital cable for audio and yeah, to me the DTS track blows away the DD+ track, even though that track is good too. It's been this way for me with all the movies that had a DTS track vs a DD+ track.

[vinnie97]

Simple: Dolby uses volume compression that DTS doesn't resulting in level differences that give you the impression of improved SQ.

It's akin to the whole "louder is better" mantra that has wrecked studio artist albums for approximately the last decade, with releases getting hotter and hotter with the decibel push.

[view-it-purple]

Originally Posted by vinnie97

Simple: Dolby uses volume compression that DTS doesn't resulting in level differences that give you the impression of improved SQ.

It's akin to the whole "louder is better" mantra that has wrecked studio artist albums for approximately the last decade, with releases getting hotter and hotter with the decibel push.

Lets ponder something please?
If DTS is = to DD in every way why is it......
Why was DTS the premium sound on SD DVD?
Do studios like to waste money on carbon copy audio?
Why is DTS ES = to DD+ in bit rate?
Why is it when studios need 7.1 lossless sound do they use the space gobbling LPCM or DTS HD MA, and NEVER DD TrueHD?
Seems a lot of hassle for something that just recorded "louder", but equal in every way.

[vinnie97]

I'm not sure where you're going with this. This thread pertains mainly to a simple comparison between DTS and DD+. Why are you muddying the waters with DTS ES (this is a permutation of the format that I am less familiar with)? The 7.1 lossless question is another one entirely and really has nothing to do with this thread (not to mention it's a useless comparison since lossless sources are bit-for-bit identical to the master regardless of the codec chosen). TrueHD has the capability to do 7.1; it is probably a question of implementation on the decoder side with regards to hardware support but I'm only speculating. There are zero perceptive differences (or any other differences besides a slightly differing bitrate) in the case of lossless audio as referenced above. The only reason I can think of the studios choosing 7.1 DTS-MA over TrueHD is for backwards compatibility and to salvage disc space but this has nothing to do with audio quality.

[view-it-purple]

Originally Posted by vinnie97

I'm not sure where you're going with this. This thread pertains mainly to a simple comparison between DTS and DD+. Why are you muddying the waters with DTS ES (this is a permutation of the format that I am less familiar with)? The 7.1 lossless question is another one entirely and really has nothing to do with this thread. TrueHD has the capability to do 7.1; it is probably a question of implementation on the decoder side with regards to hardware support but I'm only speculating.

I'm sorry for muddy up thing on you, but it was merrily to illustrate that DTS, DTS ES or DTS HD MA is superior to DD, DD+ or TrueHD at every turn. I often feel like the the OP feels. The reviewers hear are really bias IMO in most cases against DTS and popcorn flicks.

[vinnie97]

And there's absolutely no evidence to back that up in terms of sound quality (especially with DTS HD MA and TrueHD), just you're "feeling" on the matter. Please, at least make sure you understand what lossless audio is before making a claim like "every turn." It is physically impossible for DTS MA and TrueHD to be anything but equivalent in sound quality (volume and decoder chip differences aside).

[view-it-purple]

Originally Posted by vinnie97

And there's absolutely no evidence to back that up in terms of sound quality (especially with DTS HD MA and TrueHD), just you're "feeling" on the matter. Please, at least make sure you understand what lossless audio is before making a claim like "every turn." It is physically impossible for DTS MA and TrueHD to be anything but equivalent in sound quality (volume and decoder chip differences aside).

wiki.

O.K., Chef you believe what you want.

[vinnie97]

I am not a chef (I wish!). If you want to stick your head in the sand, that is your business but I invite you to refute what I've stated or referenced. I'll even make it easy for you! http://www.google.com/search?&q=Lossless%20Audio

Have at it, Mr. Know it All.

The onus is on you to discredit what lossless audio is...good luck with that.