Dish messing with Voom, All are now HD-Lite 1280x1080i: Discuss this issue HERE!

[BrettTRay]

Hey, we owe alot to Garry. He brought alot of info to our attention and he deserves alot of thanks for doing it. Thanks Gary!!!!!!

 

[vinnyv07]

That must be why TNT's sound is awesome!

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.

 

[Gary Murrell]

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

 

[Paradox-SJ]

You must have some magnificent hearing to hear the difference between 384kbps and 448kbps. I hear no difference in audio quality from tnt and tnt hd. Just get DD on the HD channel. Audio performance is more attibutable to the soundmix engineering then the bitrate alloted. I have many LD's that sound many times better than the DVD equivelent. I will say that more times then not, DTS sounds better than DD. Saving Private Ryan DTS audio is a big difference from the DD5.1 track.
As for PQ, I too thought things looks a little better last night on Monsters and Equator, but not back up to par with what I am used to seeing. (but then again, I sat in front of a 10 year old 20 inch all day monitoring processes at work). But at least the sound was consistent and no breakups like you mentioned.

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.

 

[SatinKzo]

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.

 

[BobMurdoch]

I was watching The Matrix earlier this week and it looked and sounded pretty damn good on TNT HD.

 

[RandallA]

I was watching The Matrix earlier this week and it looked and sounded pretty damn good on TNT HD.

Same thing here. Actually I watched it over the weekend and I was like WOW that's pretty damn good.

 

[SatinKzo]

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.

 

[BFG]

This topic has totally lost it's focus...

 

[riffjim4069]

This topic has totally lost it's focus...

...which, by the way, is the reason behind this thread; VOOM has totally lost its focus!

 

[hdtvtechno]

...which, by the way, is the reason behind this thread; VOOM has totally lost its focus!

LOL good timing

 

[Tom Bombadil]

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.

 

[BrettTRay]

Let's email Dish network and tell them that we will not stand for DD-Lite Audio!!!! Just Kidding Tom.

 

[SatinKzo]

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

 

[JohnH]

Monsters HD moved overnight. Don't know what effect the move had.

 

[Gary Murrell]

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

 

[JohnH]

From 5 to 7 on 61.5 also.

 

[Gary Murrell]

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

 

[Tom Bombadil]

As for higher bitrate equaling better audio... I don't agree. Much more has to do with the soundmix engineering then the audio bitrate.

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.

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.

 

[Gary Murrell]

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