MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread las


This is a little off topic (so what else is new?).  I'm interested in
your opinions of the quality of DTS and THX.

DTS (Digital Theater Sound) is Spielberg's standard and involves special
decoding as I am sure most of you know.  While THX is belongs to
Lucasfilms and is a standard rather than specifically encoded
information.

There is now also THX-EX which adds an addition matrixed surround
speaker and can be set up with a separate 2 channel amp as 7.1 sound
(I've never heard this set up yet).

I don't see a mass growth of DTS even though the price of receivers
which have DTS decoders keeps dropping and the number of units with them
increasing.  I only have a few DVDs that are DTS encoded and have not
been personally blown away by their sound.

I am actually more impressed with THX (I have a THX certified receiver).

I still find it amazing that the defunct quadraphonic sound of the 70's
has found a rebirth since the advent of the home theater.

To get on topic.  What do you see the future of MDLP as?  This is just
my humble opinion, but outside of Japan I really don't think it will
catch on.  It's a matter of too little too late.  To me MDLP seems to be
a desperate attempt by Sony to compete with the extremely long playing
time of an MP3 CD or player.

There has been enough criticism (unjustified in my humble opinion) the
loss of sound quality do to ATRAC as it is.  To further increase that
loss seems pointless to me.

I wonder if MD would have stood a better chance if Sony had "gotten it
right" the first time around and not released the Mini Disc until it had
the  quality of at least their ATRAC version 3.5.

Sony is one of the biggest marketers of planned obsolescence.  When they
first came out with their original Beta Cam (which was a record only
system-you had to use a separate VCR to be able to play the tapes) auto
focus was already popular on the 2 piece VHS cameras.

But Sony intentionally left it off of their first version.  I guessed
correctly that when they introduced their second version a year later it
included this feature at no additional cost.

I'm not a big fan of Sony.  I am frankly resentful of how they grabbed a
major portion of the US music and film industry.  I realize that the
greed of the American industry had something to do with allowing that to
happen though.

What really bothers me is that Sony is not capable of making  better
music or movies than Americans are.  They still use all of our American
talent.  They just own the company.  If Sony had to depend upon it's own
talent to create they would have been out of business in a week.

Unlike the auto industry where the Japanese "killed" the US in quality,
(the US has been spending years trying to catch up to the Japanese) the
Japanese do not have the creative talent of Hollywood.

While I am on the subject, do you realize how much revenue and jobs (not
so much the high end/high paying directing, writing and acting as the
poor technical people like electricians) the US is losing to Canada
because of the tax breaks that the Canadian government gives US
companies to produce their programs and films in Canada.

It's too bad that it is the "little people" being hurt by this.  Canada
has lost hundreds of their most talented actors to the US over the years
and lost the taxes they could have collected from their incomes.

So if Canada had started it's own Hollywood with their own companies and
started getting talented American actors to move to Canada from the US,
that would be justified.  But they are using our talent and high pay
people.

An actor can afford to spend months making a movie in Canada and coming
back to the states to be with their family as often as they want.  But
the production people can't afford to do that.  And I don't think Canada
wants them to.  They want to use American companies to gain employment
for Canadian production people.

Wiseguy, Millennium, Highlander (when they weren't in France), The X
Files (until their 4th season when they began shooting in LA) and dozens
of other "American" TV shows are filmed in Canada.

Just my ten cents (inflation).

Larry

-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread Gerard Naude


Whoa there cowboy

To get on topic.  What do you see the future of MDLP as?  This is just
my humble opinion, but outside of Japan I really don't think it will
catch on.  It's a matter of too little too late.  To me MDLP seems to be
a desperate attempt by Sony to compete with the extremely long playing
time of an MP3 CD or player.

First off. MDLP is what long play was to home vcr's. Nobody ever raved about
it, but eventually we all ended up using it. Recording 8 hours of video on a
4 hour tape? Pretty cool. Same with MDLP, people want more music together
with less space. It will make it big, especially for MD enthusiasts and
people who want practical solutions. And besides, MDLP remains an option,
not a must have. And so what if an MP3 cd player can play 10 hours of music?
It can't record music by itself, and the media is bulkier and in some
aspects more fragile. Besides, MD equipment looks nicer and more futuristic.
Hehehe. Now for part two...

There has been enough criticism (unjustified in my humble opinion) the
loss of sound quality do to ATRAC as it is.  To further increase that
loss seems pointless to me.

Most modern Minidisc players/recorders really ARE indistinguishable from
ordinary cd. This has been proven in high quality testing labs. The whole MD
quality versus Cd quality thing really is wearing thin. There are a few very
rare cases where the atrac compression has gone bad, but they are, like I
said very rare. Atrac compression compared to mp3 compression is heaven
sent. Mp3 compression (anything under 160 kbps) lends itself to distorting
music. This is very clear when listening to a song with very high treble
sounds. The effect also known as the "bubbly" sound also gives problems.
When playing mp3's through a high end system, you can clearly hear the
bubbly sound in the background. This can even be heard with some commercial
mp3 encoders. If you do a nice digital copy of a piece of Dance, or
classical music, to minidisc, you won't hear the difference when comparing
it to the original cd. That leaves room for MD technology to actually
downgrade the quality of the music, thus fitting in more music on one disc.
MD long play mode 2 is actually almost comparable to standard atrac, which
is still pretty good quality. MD long play mode 4 does leave noticeable
artefacts, but is still perfect for every day to day use. Ask yourself: Is
compression quality really everything when it comes to normal use? If a
person records a mp3 from his pc to MD (analogue or digital) the noise
artefacts heard on the song comes from the mp3 compression. In that case
MDLP 2 or MDLP 4 is perfect. Why use standard MD bit rates when a lower one
will suffice without loss of quality. Also remember that unless you have a
VERY expensive pair of earphones, the frequency response also affects the
quality that you actually hear.

Md recorders have come a long way. Look at the Sharp Mt-77 for instance. It
can easily hook up with your pc, for digital mp3 to md transfers, and even
allows you to label your disc's from the pc. It can basically do what most
mp3 players can do, but the media is cheaper, when compared to solid state
music players.

I wonder if MD would have stood a better chance if Sony had "gotten it
right" the first time around and not released the Mini Disc until it had
the  quality of at least their ATRAC version 3.5.

The next step for the Minidisc market, is to start bringing out
players/recorders that also uses MD High Density discs. These discs can
store around 640 megabytes, while a standard MD only holds 160 megabytes.
Now imagine MDLP combined with High Density minidiscs. In theory such a disc
could hold 300 mins of standard atrac compression, and 1200 mins of MDLP 4
musicIn theory anyway. That will give you close to 20 hours of music.

Just my 2c worth.

Gerard Naude
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Always remember you're unique, just like everyone else.

-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread las


Gerard Naude wrote:

 First off. MDLP is what long play was to home vcr's. Nobody ever raved about
 it, but eventually we all ended up using it. Recording 8 hours of video on a
 4 hour tape? Pretty cool. Same with MDLP, people want more music together
 with less space. It will make it big, especially for MD enthusiasts and
 people who want practical solutions.

Yes but some day when they finally allow the release of cheap recordable DVDs,
video tapes will start to die down.  Pre recorded DVDs are one of the fastest
growing media ever released.

 Most modern Minidisc players/recorders really ARE indistinguishable from
 ordinary cd.

I agree with you 100%


 TMd recorders have come a long way. Look at the Sharp Mt-77 for instance. It
 can easily hook up with your pc, for digital mp3 to md transfers, and even
 allows you to label your disc's from the pc. It can basically do what most
 mp3 players can do, but the media is cheaper, when compared to solid state
 music players.

Agreed again.

 The next step for the Minidisc market, is to start bringing out
 players/recorders that also uses MD High Density discs. These discs can
 store around 640 megabytes, while a standard MD only holds 160 megabytes.
 Now imagine MDLP combined with High Density minidiscs. In theory such a disc
 could hold 300 mins of standard atrac compression, and 1200 mins of MDLP 4
 musicIn theory anyway. That will give you close to 20 hours of music.

I'm one of the strongest supports of MD and one of the oldest )partially because
I am probably older than most people on this list (52).  I purchased my first
Sony MZ-1 less than a year after MDs first came out.  I still find the quality
of even the MZ-1 acceptable for use in your car for example.

Regards,
Larry

-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread Neil


On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 07:14:29 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  This is a little off topic (so what else is new?).  I'm interested in
  your opinions of the quality of DTS and THX.
  
  DTS (Digital Theater Sound) is Spielberg's standard and involves special
  decoding as I am sure most of you know.  While THX is belongs to
  Lucasfilms and is a standard rather than specifically encoded
  information.
  
  There is now also THX-EX which adds an addition matrixed surround
  speaker and can be set up with a separate 2 channel amp as 7.1 sound
  (I've never heard this set up yet).
  
  I don't see a mass growth of DTS even though the price of receivers
  which have DTS decoders keeps dropping and the number of units with them
  increasing.  I only have a few DVDs that are DTS encoded and have not
  been personally blown away by their sound.

I've only got one DVD with a DTS soundtrack (T2 - Ultimate Edition), and I
have to say the sound is truly awesome - I guess I don't have any like for
like comparisons to make, but I find the sound on this DVD significantly
more jaw-dropping than any of my other DD DVDs. Having said that, I live in
the UK, and it's only been quite recently that the odd R2 DVD has included a
DTS soundtrack (T2 - UE is a region 1 DVD), I suspect most of my DVDs are
region 2, with perhaps around 25% being region 1.

  I am actually more impressed with THX (I have a THX certified receiver).

I know you've alluded to it, but THX is just really a certification thing,
the soundtrack on DVDs will still be either DD or DTS (for the
foreseaable...). THX is just a certification of the equipment you use,
alluding to the quality and integrity of the kit.

Neil





___
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/


-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread las


Neil wrote:

 I know you've alluded to it, but THX is just really a certification thing,
 the soundtrack on DVDs will still be either DD or DTS (for the
 foreseaable...). THX is just a certification of the equipment you use,
 alluding to the quality and integrity of the kit.

Actually it is a little more than that.  THX Select to qualify must include
specific enhancements (Timbre Matching, Decorrelation, Re-EQ, etc.)"

There is not THX Surround which is a combined effort of Dolby and Lucasfilms.

Larry

PS.

I've been thinking about "Twister" and yes you are right DTS is VERY impressive
when fully taken advantage of.

-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread Gerard Naude


I'm one of the strongest supports of MD and one of the oldest )partially
because
I am probably older than most people on this list (52).  I purchased my
first
Sony MZ-1 less than a year after MDs first came out.  I still find the
quality
of even the MZ-1 acceptable for use in your car for example.

Power to minidisc! Hehe.

Gerard Naude
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: MD: DTS and THX

2001-01-26 Thread Don Capps


From: "las" [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 This is a little off topic (so what else is new?).  I'm interested in your
opinions of the quality of DTS and THX.

THX is a set of quality standards being applied to Dolby Digital 5.1
surround recordings (as well as picture transfer quality) to make certain
that a particular film or soundtrack or recording or piece of electronic
equipment, etc. meets a certain criterion for quality of reproduction and
fidelity to the original master recording. It is Lucas' attempt to bring
some sort of standardization to an industry floundering in the flood brought
on by the brave new world of digital surround formats and crying out for
some ordo ab chao.

DTS, on the other hand, is actually a surround sound encoding system which
(at one time) seemed poised for a battle royale with Dolby Digital in a
format war that threatened to rival that of VHS and Beta. But, it was not to
be. By the time DTS was out of the gate, Dolby Digital was already
established as the dominant player in the field, and the intervening years
have done nothing to diminish that. However, there are many in the pro sound
industry (both music recording AND foley) who insist that DTS remains the
superior format sonically.

I am personally VERY impressed with the actual DTS audio recordings I have
heard. However, most of them have been live recordings (such as The Eagles
'Hell Freezes Over' on cd and dvd) which use the surround channels for
little more than ambience. However, if you want to hear what DTS surround is
really capable of, this is a recording you OWE it to yourself to hear.

http://www.dmprecords.com/CD-804.htm

It is a big band sampler recorded by Tom Jung's DMP Records which places you
in the perspective of the band director standing in the middle of a big band
which is semi-circled around you. The effect is nothing short of stunning
and the recording is absolutely pristine. Check it out. It's an AMAZING
recording and worth every dime.

Don

-
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]