Video Asylum

Posted by bobo1 (A) on January 30, 2002 at 22:53:50

In Reply to: Re: DTS posted by Corbett on January 28, 2002 at 12:06:33:

To me AC-3 always sounded like and Mp3 file (about 160kbits) ,good but nothing amazing , and no wonder just like with mp3 better sounding codecs have been invented using less data .How old is AC-3 ,dunno but been around for a long time , codecs get better but not if they built it into hardware, DTS to me definently sounds better ,more open , just like a comparison between a 128k mp3 and 360k mp3(vbr) ,the later will always sound better (unless u used sum truly weird settings),DD uses sum compression which certainly doesnt help it either (yeah it might sound better to us just like a FM radio at times might sound better in the car than a cd player simply because they squashed the hell out of it) ultimately transparency is the definition of the quality of any sound reproduction. Certainly if DD was using the same bitrates as DTS it would be a more defining comparison.
Of course after hearing some receivers I am not sure if it matters at all , buy the time the signal gets through it sounds flat as hell.I am a big fan of absolute minimal sound processing , but I guess in Home Theaters u gotta have the cash for something like that.What I am hoping for is what they did with mp3v2 , its still compatible with old hardware players but if you got the new player u get much better quality ,they could do that with AC-3 maybe, dunno...