Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater First Impressions: DTS Master/TrueHD & 7.1 Setup

Hi Tom,

Of course digital rights management is an important aspect, but in fact it's the bandwidth limitation of an optical or coaxial digital connection that prevents lossless multi-channel transmission of six channels or more.

Despite their excellent sound quality, lossy codecs like Dolby Digital 5.1 and dts are very lossy. Both throw away huge amounts of digital data in order to carry six discrete channels of digital audio. I'd have to look it up but if memory serves, I believe the data reduction is on the order of 6:1. It's a tribute to just how sophisticated perceptual coding can be when it's well done.

Regards,
Alan

Well now, that alone would probably explain why good SACD and DVD-A/MLP recordings sound as good as they do.

Thanks for that info.

Ok so for the record, the sound we hear out of a top of the line system is analog, but the picture we see on todays TV's is digital... right?

You got it, Micah.

Thank you, Alan.

Hi Kruncher,

While lossless audio systems and ever-higher sampling rates and word lengths (24-bit vs. 16-bit) are laudable, there is a good deal of scientific evidence that suggests that it is not those factors, but rather the extra care taken in the recording process--more careful choice of microphones, monitoring of overload, careful mike placement, etc--that is largely responsible for the improved sound quality heard from many DVD-A, SACD, True HD, Master Audio and similar recordings.

And you have to make certain you compare apples with apples. Dolby Digital stereo vs. SACD stereo or DVD-A stereo. Multi-channel music, properly done, always sounds superior to two-channel stereo, whether through a lossy or lossless processor, except for the occasional solo instrument, like a guitar.

One recent test conducted with hundreds of listeners and presented to the Audio Engineering Society used standard Red Book CD standard (44.1 kHz sampling, 16-bit recording) as a "filter" through which passed much higher resolution DVD-A and SACD signals. The listeners could not detect any difference in the high-res DVD-A or SACD signals heard in their original form vs. the same signals passed through a CD "filter". In other words, the CD standard did in no way taint or degrade the sound quality of the original hi-res 96 kHz 24-bit signals. (This isn't a comparison of lossy vs. lossless codecs.)

Regards,

Alan

As always Alan, another well thought out and informative message. Much appreciated.

So the long held "axiom" in the computing world - Garbage In, Garbage Out - is meaningful as well in the audio realm.

I recall reading that the costs of setting up a hi-rez audio studio were significant, and contributed to the retail prices of the products, but clearly there's an additional labour cost element as well. A job worth doing is worth doing well, as it were.

You're very welcome. In a conventional receiver, the digital has to be converted to analog before it is sent to a separate amplifier or the amplifier section of a receiver. The amplifier makes the analog signal loud enough to be sent to the speakers. But, what about a digital receiver? Sigh. It's all so confusing.

One option for those of you with limited analog IN is to use a A/B switcher. I used stuff from Zektor for a while and really liked their gear.

But Zektor is like 20% of a new AVR so.....

Hey! My power amp IS digital!