Dish messing with Voom, All are now HD-Lite 1280x1080i: Discuss this issue HERE!
- Thread starter Gary Murrell
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 864
- Views 104K
Over the past weekend I noticed that the 5.1 DD was really the best I have ever heard from a non-dvd format. I enjoyed watching LOTR again ....even my wife noticed how much sound was coming from the back speakers. It was really a treat.grb said:
My Pleasure
the reason ESPN's audio is the lower 256 Kbps is what was said above, they are only sending 2.0 Dolby Digital, CS is cheapy choice on ESPN's end, they need to step up and send Dolby 5.1
Sony promised SDDS would never be available at home and be only available in theater, I am amazed they kept their promise
-Gary
the reason ESPN's audio is the lower 256 Kbps is what was said above, they are only sending 2.0 Dolby Digital, CS is cheapy choice on ESPN's end, they need to step up and send Dolby 5.1
Sony promised SDDS would never be available at home and be only available in theater, I am amazed they kept their promise
-Gary
SatinKzo said:
I will have to second or is that third this on TNT sound quality. They are hands down the very best and it is significaly better...even my kids noticed it.
Sorry guys, I just just don't hear any difference in TNT-HD compared to HBO HD or any other HD channel. I think what you guys are hearing is the result of the movies and events they play having better soundmix then other shows. If the bitrate on sound was so important, why are the other channels not at TNT-HD level? Why is the HD PPV channel not bumped up to that level or the Demo channel as dish seems to give those channels some extra bandwidth.
Heck, why don't they boost RAVE on voom since the audio is extremely important on that channel.
I watched LOTR also the other day, I must say sound wise it was much better off my DVD than off the TV.
Heck, why don't they boost RAVE on voom since the audio is extremely important on that channel.
I watched LOTR also the other day, I must say sound wise it was much better off my DVD than off the TV.
Last edited:
I was watching The Matrix earlier this week and it looked and sounded pretty damn good on TNT HD.
BobMurdoch said:
Same thing here. Actually I watched it over the weekend and I was like WOW that's pretty damn good.
Ok, I am starting to think that people are taking my comments the wrong way. I am not bashing TNT-HD in anyway, I like the channel WHEN it shows true HD shows.
It's audio is very good also, (much better then espn in sports, but I think that has to do with my receiver not decoding Circle Surrond). All I am saying is, when compared to HBO or SHO in HD, the audio and PQ are equal to me.
I have emailed TNT numerous times on their reasoning for the high bitrate on audio on some providers and all they say is that it is up to the provider on the audio. They never answer why they are consistently given higher audio bitrates then others.
The one thing I did notice on my receiver when watching LOTR is every now and then, it would go into 6.1 mode instead of 5.1. Especially during battle scenes. Not sure if it was a fluke or possibly TNT did a little sound enginnering of their own on the broadcast.
It's audio is very good also, (much better then espn in sports, but I think that has to do with my receiver not decoding Circle Surrond). All I am saying is, when compared to HBO or SHO in HD, the audio and PQ are equal to me.
I have emailed TNT numerous times on their reasoning for the high bitrate on audio on some providers and all they say is that it is up to the provider on the audio. They never answer why they are consistently given higher audio bitrates then others.
The one thing I did notice on my receiver when watching LOTR is every now and then, it would go into 6.1 mode instead of 5.1. Especially during battle scenes. Not sure if it was a fluke or possibly TNT did a little sound enginnering of their own on the broadcast.
...which, by the way, is the reason behind this thread; VOOM has totally lost its focus!BFG said:
riffjim4069 said:...which, by the way, is the reason behind this thread; VOOM has totally lost its focus!
LOL
good timing
Last edited:
It is not unfantomable for someone to hear a difference between a 5.1 448K track vs a 5.1 384K one. 448K was a compromised DVD standard to begin with. DTS 5.1 is a minimum of 768K - with the rare track going to 1536K. So applying a little more compression to squeeze it down to 384K, is within the audible range.
This relates to the current thread in that some of our HD channels are giving us DD-lite audio.
This relates to the current thread in that some of our HD channels are giving us DD-lite audio.
Heh, no DD-Lite.
Honestly, I do understand that with some good equipment you can hear the difference, IF, the source material was encoded at the same bitrate and not converted along the way. This becomes very evident on TNT-HD when they show older syndicated shows or old movies compared to say LOTR or Matrix. Obviously the movies were encoded much better with newer technologies. I don't think it had as much to do with TNT's higher bitrate though as the better source to begin with.
As for higher bitrate equaling better audio... I don't agree. Much more has to do with the soundmix engineering then the audio bitrate. Also involved are the studios that release the DVD's. Universal Studio's DVD's have on average some of the worst audio I have heard, but those disc's are packed with extras usually. While Warner Bros have some outstanding audio, almost to the point that it is hard to discern the difference between the DD and DTS tracks. What is also obvious is when certain disc audio tracks are encoded form a transfer or from a master.
Now of course, DTS and DD both use lossy algorithms for sound encoding and then it can be hairy as DD is more effiecent at the encoding then DTS is so it is hard to match bitrate for bitrate with DD/DTS. So it begs to question, what standard is more noticeable in bitrate reduction? Most will tell you DTS as more is lost at lower bitrates. But DTS tends to compensate this as on average a DTS track is 4-6dbs louder then DD at the same volume level.
I would have to bet in normal conditions, that 95% of people would not hear the differnce in the two audio rates (given a good source, not law and order) on TNT-HD or other HD stations. And I still find pretty much every one of my DVD's to be of better sound quality then anything TNT-HD has shown.
I do agree that if the space is there, they might as well use the higher audio, but I the lower bitrate in audio is much much less noticeable then the lower bitrates in video.
Of course we could really thow a wrench in and demand that HDTV have DTS as the standard audio format.
Here is a good page on some DD vs DTS stuff for those interested. It also touches on bitrates a bit.
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/dolbydigitaldts.php
Honestly, I do understand that with some good equipment you can hear the difference, IF, the source material was encoded at the same bitrate and not converted along the way. This becomes very evident on TNT-HD when they show older syndicated shows or old movies compared to say LOTR or Matrix. Obviously the movies were encoded much better with newer technologies. I don't think it had as much to do with TNT's higher bitrate though as the better source to begin with.
As for higher bitrate equaling better audio... I don't agree. Much more has to do with the soundmix engineering then the audio bitrate. Also involved are the studios that release the DVD's. Universal Studio's DVD's have on average some of the worst audio I have heard, but those disc's are packed with extras usually. While Warner Bros have some outstanding audio, almost to the point that it is hard to discern the difference between the DD and DTS tracks. What is also obvious is when certain disc audio tracks are encoded form a transfer or from a master.
Now of course, DTS and DD both use lossy algorithms for sound encoding and then it can be hairy as DD is more effiecent at the encoding then DTS is so it is hard to match bitrate for bitrate with DD/DTS. So it begs to question, what standard is more noticeable in bitrate reduction? Most will tell you DTS as more is lost at lower bitrates. But DTS tends to compensate this as on average a DTS track is 4-6dbs louder then DD at the same volume level.
I would have to bet in normal conditions, that 95% of people would not hear the differnce in the two audio rates (given a good source, not law and order) on TNT-HD or other HD stations. And I still find pretty much every one of my DVD's to be of better sound quality then anything TNT-HD has shown.
I do agree that if the space is there, they might as well use the higher audio, but I the lower bitrate in audio is much much less noticeable then the lower bitrates in video.
Of course we could really thow a wrench in and demand that HDTV have DTS as the standard audio format.
Here is a good page on some DD vs DTS stuff for those interested. It also touches on bitrates a bit.
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/dolbydigitaldts.php
Last edited:
Your right John, monsters moved from 10 to 12 on 129
I also just wanted to report that there have been no changes to Voom as of this morning
-Gary
I also just wanted to report that there have been no changes to Voom as of this morning
-Gary
Thanks, my 61.5 is out of commision right now, I gotta get him back up quick
Work is gotta get started on Voom soon, this is gonna be a exciting few weeks
-Gary
Work is gotta get started on Voom soon, this is gonna be a exciting few weeks
-Gary
SatinKzo said:
As to point 1, I never said it did. However all other things being equal, it will.
No way I would take the bet in point 2, as many people don't hear any difference between 128KB MPEG3 vs Redbook CD.
No changes to Voom as of this morning
the lone "Ultra" on a TP. all by it's lonesome is running at 9.75 Mbps and still 1280x1080i
-Gary
the lone "Ultra" on a TP. all by it's lonesome is running at 9.75 Mbps and still 1280x1080i
-Gary
