High-Def FAQ: Uncompressed vs. Lossless Audio

[jed]

In his latest column, Josh Zyber addresses the age-old question: is
uncompressed audio better than lossless? Also: what Dialogue
Normalization really does to an audio signal.

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/1233

[LastSonOfKrypton]

Thank you Josh for the time you put into comparisons and writing the article.

[polyh3dron]

I don't think I've seen anyone with any kind of intelligence in here really argue that PCM was superior to TrueHD or DTS-MA. Lossless compression is exactly that: lossless.

[TripleHBK]

Yet another excellent article that pointed out more points to consider then I would have ever dreamed of.. (The section on Dialnorm was really interesting). All good stuff though, and really goes to show that the similarities between the 2 formats are much more apparent then then the differences.

[M@tt]

What a great read, well done Josh.

[Solstice X]

I agree, another great read. By the way, Josh, how is the BD30 panning out for you? Some were wondering if you had upgraded your reciever to take advantage of HBR. Still, though, you have a very nice system. I'm Jealous

[lichtenfelt]

I got to hand it to Josh Zyber, in his numerous lengthy articles he certainly goes to extraordinary lengths to defend the shortcomings of hd dvd.

[sambow87]

Originally Posted by lichtenfelt

I got to hand it to Josh Zyber, in his numerous lengthy articles he certainly goes to extraordinary lengths to defend the shortcomings of hd dvd.

This statement makes me wonder if you even read the article. Holy crap can you leave the FUD and crap out of one thread?

The article was very well written, just like his other articles. Thank you for writing this!

[Adam4tvs]

Originally Posted by lichtenfelt

I got to hand it to Josh Zyber, in his numerous lengthy articles he certainly goes to extraordinary lengths to defend the shortcomings of hd dvd.

What the hell is wrong with people? Jesus.

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by lichtenfelt

I got to hand it to Josh Zyber, in his numerous lengthy articles he certainly goes to extraordinary lengths to defend the shortcomings of hd dvd.

I will only point out here that lossless compression is also used extensively on Blu-ray, and it seems that Sony is interested in phasing out the use of PCM due to it being such a space-waster. They've starting using TrueHD exclusively on some big titles, including Spider-Man.

This article had nothing to do with the "war". Lossless compression is the future of High-Def audio on both formats.

[Josh Z]

Originally Posted by Solstice X

By the way, Josh, how is the BD30 panning out for you?

It's working out nicely. I wish it had internal TrueHD and DTS-HD decoders, but in that respect it's no worse than my last two Blu-ray players.

The unit does seem extremely sluggish on disc menus, though. It's not a big deal, but is a nuisance.

Some were wondering if you had upgraded your reciever to take advantage of HBR.

Working on it.

[nuke888]

Well there are even theories that even u just do compress the audio that u cant actually hear,(which many compression algorythms are based on) well that can contribute to marginally change the audio, if u can hear it or not its another matter.I would prefer uncompressed pcm if u can have it,particulary now that you got more space with most of the extras on 480i only.When they ll need much more space for HD extras content we will see if they ll use 2 discs,100GB discs, or simply relegating pcm to a niche.Last you shouldnt forget that pcm for non english speaking is a the best,since you sure got an extremely higher chance to get pcm uncompressed then you do havin new codecs on your own language(mean anyother non english one) and that happened quite a lot for thr DVD format too.When it took much time to see DTS in non english tracks.(and today they aint even yet as popular as the english part) Thumbs up for Bluray and every single BD with pcm uncompressed Italian audio tracks !

[kcmurphy88]

Originally Posted by Josh Z

I will only point out here that lossless compression is also used extensively on Blu-ray, and it seems that Sony is interested in phasing out the use of PCM due to it being such a space-waster. They've starting using TrueHD exclusively on some big titles, including Spider-Man.

This article had nothing to do with the "war". Lossless compression is the future of High-Def audio on both formats.

Agreed. It will cause some early BD adopters a problem, but no one should expect an early version of a technology to last forever. And once Blu adopts compression they will be able to use that extra bandwidth and size to better advantage. Either they will be able to lower costs (BD25 instead of BD50), or cram on the extras on Warner discs to make comparisons favor them more completely.

One thing that could have been clearer (nitpicking) -- lossless compression also lowers bandwidth requirements coming off the disc -- another advantage that BD could use better.

[nelll]

Wow!!! Superb article JZ, as usual.

[kcmurphy88]

Originally Posted by nuke888

Well there are even theories that even u just do compress the audio that u cant actually hear,(which many compression algorythms are based on) well that can contribute to marginally change the audio, if u can hear it or not its another matter.I would prefer uncompressed pcm if u can have it,particulary now that you got more space with most of the extras on 480i only.When they ll need much more space for HD extras content we will see if they ll use 2 discs,100GB discs, or simply relegating pcm to a niche.Last you shouldnt forget that pcm for non english speaking is a the best,since you sure got an extremely higher chance to get pcm uncompressed then you do havin new codecs on your own language(mean anyother non english one) and that happened quite a lot for thr DVD format too.When it took much time to see DTS in non english tracks.(and today they aint even yet as popular as the english part) Thumbs up for Bluray and every single BD with pcm uncompressed Italian audio tracks !

Well, yes, a lossy codec will have problems if it makes poor assumptions about a language or other content.

But "lossless" compression means just that: lossless. It does not rely on statistics or any outside knowledge. It is mathematically lossless. The strategy it employs may result in more compressed results for one kind of content, but all results are equally exact.

Computer files in Swahili or Urdu compress JUST AS EXACTLY with pkZip as those in English. Why? Because the Zip format is lossless -- it mathematically reduces the data independent of any knowledge of what it contains. Some things will compress further, of course, because pkZip assumes the file is text-like and images don't behave the same way and compress less. But the result is still "lossless"

So your argument about language or cultural differences is quite valid for any lossy compression, but not for lossless, which doesn't care.