What is the Point of DTS HD HR when its nearly as big as HD MA?

[godamongmen]

I always like to randomly look at the bitrate when I watch a movie, for fun, and both Dolby TruHD and DTS MA have variable bitrates that normally range from about 1-4 mbps, sometimes more obviously. I only have 2 movies with DTS HR. both of them have a constant bitrate of 3 mbps. Variable 1-4mbps vs constant 3mps? It takes up about pretty much the same amount of disk space doesnt it? If not more. so whats the point? Why not just use DTS MA instead?

[Super-VHS]

I always thought that the original intent of HR was that it was meant to accompany MA....

I honestly have no idea though...

[Motorheadache]

The only disc I own with DTS-HD Lossy is First Blood. I'll bet you they'll never make another disc with it again, theres probably no point

[Super-VHS]

^^^ Yes, Lionsgate was the only heavy user here in the states w/HR as the primary audio. I think a fair few of their early releases use DTS-HD HR....

A lot of overseas HD DVDs (and maybe Blu-rays) use it though (or did - don't know if they still do.)

Also, I stand by my original post that the actual intent of the codec is not primary audio, but rather as a secondary track of some kind.....

According to the stats post on AVS the new Universal discs (Mummy, Mummy Returns, Doomsday) all use DTS-HD HR (~ 1 Mbps avg.) on the PiP commentary tracks.

[allargon]

Originally Posted by Super-VHS

I always thought that the original intent of HR was that it was meant to accompany MA....

I honestly have no idea though...

DTS-HD HR is meant to be used when DTS-HD MA doesn't fit due to space or bandwidth restrictions. DTS-HD HR is equivalent to Dolby Digital Plus when Dolby True HD won't fit.

[d1g1ta7]

I've always guessed that MA has a higher licensing cost, versus the more conventional constant bitrate varieties.

[Aurora]

Originally Posted by allargon

DTS-HD HR is meant to be used when DTS-HD MA doesn't fit due to space or bandwidth restrictions. DTS-HD HR is equivalent to Dolby Digital Plus when Dolby True HD won't fit.

Also what I've read as well. Currently, the lossless tracks pull around 2-4 Mbps, so a 3.0 Mbps track might even might take more space. The space-saving aspect is probably the thing when you go to 96 kHz/24 bit tracks.

[davcole]

It seems that both DTS-HR and DD+ are somewhat wasted codecs given the abilities of the lossless codecs!