Okay, I've read some reviews on the difference between DD & DTS. I understand some of it now. I'm not building a home theater, I just want 5.1 in my living room. I found a nice system for a nice price; hard to beat deal. It has all the usual features (DD, Proligic, DSP, etc.), but no DTS, or even Prologic II. My question is: is it foreseeable that DTS is going to pass up DD and I won't be able to rent DVD's with DD in 2,3, 4+ years. I know nobody has a crystal ball, but I'm not that up on tech. changes in the home audio world. I know I'll be happy with DD 5.1 unless it leaves me behind and new releases are DTS. Any thoughts? Thanks.
DD will always be a viable format since Dolby Labs is such a huge company. DTS, IMO, does sound better, however. Whenver the option exists to buy a movie with a DTS soundtrack (over a DD), I will do so. Unfortunately, there are more films in DD (which can still be pretty good) so you should be OK with a receiver that does only DD. Even films with DTS will have a DD track with it so you shouldn't be "left out". I would strongly encourage you to get a receiver or pre/proc that decodes DTS, however. It is a higher bit-rate encoding/decoding system that I do find to be superior to Dolby digital. -Tony
Fully agree with Tony. IMHO dts sounds better to me in all most every case (even against sacd & dvd-a) Also note that most dvds ( including dvd-a) have both dts and DD formats. I think dvd-a has a better potential than sacd as dvds can hold much more data. Also dts 96/24 is as clean a sound as you can get and plays on all dvd players with dts capability. (check out Queens video hits esp. Boheimian (sp?) Rhapsody) Never cared for the song until I heard it in dts 96/24--wow!
It's said that Prologic II is a big improvement over PL I.
My experience is only PL II, but you ought to be careful about adopting the older scheme.
Ok guys I must confess to not being able to tell the dif. between dd & dts. I hapen to own one of the few, least compressed dts dvds;Dances W/Wolves. Many/most dvd's that have both tracts--- I hear no dif. I rent most everything. I have what I would consider, a tad above average electronics (Meridian). NOW, back when dts came to lazer discs---THAT,was noticable. I guess I'm just deaf,huh?--- However for resale value and a personal placebo---DTS is required for me.
All dvds I've seen have DD or ( DD and DTS ). DTS sounds noticeably better in my system. I have a Marantz SR19-EX receiver doing the decoding.
IMO, DTS is smoother and more clear than DD. I also get better bass response from a DTS encoded disc. I have found that some discs are greatly better than their DD counterparts like "Saving Privte Ryan" or "Jurassic Park". Maybe they have better sound because these movies were originally produced with a DTS soundtrack for the theater??? Whatever the case, I have found the DTS versions of discs to be superior on the whole to their DD counterparts for audio - video seems to be the same.
DTS is without question the best format...
Down the road get yourself a DTS reciever or processor and
you will be glad you did. There is no comparison between DD
and DTS. It's a night and day difference 99 % of the time IMO.
Dwudman...In audio there is no such thing as "without question". Just the same, I think you are right.