HiRez Poll Adams, Bryan - RECKLESS [BluRay]

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Rate the BDA of Bryan Adams - RECKLESS [BluRay Audio]

  • 5 -

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4 -

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 3 -

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 2 -

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1 - Poor Surround, Poor Fidelity, Poor Contact

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    65
If I'm gonna split hairs, I prefer the PCM overall in this case, then the Dolby TrueHD, then the DTS-MA. They're all pretty close though.

Just to clarify about the "metallic" mid-range sound on Dolby TrueHD, I think a better way to describe it would be to imagine the ol' 5-band graphic equalizers that stereos used to have (but that we had taken away from us without our permission - grrrr!) and giving the middle 3 a bit of a boost.
 
If I'm gonna split hairs, I prefer the PCM overall in this case, then the Dolby TrueHD, then the DTS-MA. They're all pretty close though.

Just to clarify about the "metallic" mid-range sound on Dolby TrueHD, I think a better way to describe it would be to imagine the ol' 5-band graphic equalizers that stereos used to have (but that we had taken away from us without our permission - grrrr!) and giving the middle 3 a bit of a boost.

FWIW, I preferred PCM overall too, followed by DTS-MA and finally TrueHD. I agree that TrueHD seemed to have a mid-range boost. And, as you said, the sounds seemed to move more "to the front" with TrueHD. I did not experience that the sound-stage moved forward with PCM and DTS-MA. Comparing PCM and DTS-MA; the DTS track lost a slight bit of detail, and felt more laid-back. I consistently get that when comparing PCM to DTS-MA. I prefer the DTS-MA sound on some albums that are a bit "bright" (Yes CTTE for example).

FYI... I use an Oppo BDP-83SE analog outputs into my Emotiva preamp. So, the Oppo is doing all decoding. The preamp is purely and analog volume control.

I don't know why the tracks sound any different at all (they shouldn't) but there is absolutely no doubt that they do sound different. It is quite obvious.
 
FWIW, I preferred PCM overall too, followed by DTS-MA and finally TrueHD. I agree that TrueHD seemed to have a mid-range boost. And, as you said, the sounds seemed to move more "to the front" with TrueHD. I did not experience that the sound-stage moved forward with PCM and DTS-MA. Comparing PCM and DTS-MA; the DTS track lost a slight bit of detail, and felt more laid-back. I consistently get that when comparing PCM to DTS-MA. I prefer the DTS-MA sound on some albums that are a bit "bright" (Yes CTTE for example).

FYI... I use an Oppo BDP-83SE analog outputs into my Emotiva preamp. So, the Oppo is doing all decoding. The preamp is purely and analog volume control.

I don't know why the tracks sound any different at all (they shouldn't) but there is absolutely no doubt that they do sound different. It is quite obvious.

I'm pretty much the same. I tend to prefer PCM where available too. I also didn't notice the sound stage move forward between PCM and DTS-MA - I only notice this when Dolby TrueHD is engaged. Similarly, I find DTS-MA to have a tiny bit less detail than PCM (along with that "wide/spacious" DTS effect).

I'm using a $200 Sony BDP (gasp!), bitstreaming out and letting the Yamaha do the decoding and push it out through me Kefs.
 
I'm pretty much the same. I tend to prefer PCM where available too. I also didn't notice the sound stage move forward between PCM and DTS-MA - I only notice this when Dolby TrueHD is engaged. Similarly, I find DTS-MA to have a tiny bit less detail than PCM (along with that "wide/spacious" DTS effect).

I'm using a $200 Sony BDP (gasp!), bitstreaming out and letting the Yamaha do the decoding and push it out through me Kefs.

It is interesting that we experience very similar sounding differences between the codecs, even when using different equipment and methods of decoding. I'd really like to know why we hear any difference at all. All three formats, when decoded are supposed to result in the exact same PCM bit stream (or so I thought).
 
Well I've been bleating on about the differences I've encountered on these HFPA discs between PCM, DTS HD MA and Dolby True HD for some time and so its heartwarming to hear I'm not alone.. and a bit disturbing at the same time. As has just been said there shouldn't be any difference at all..

.. frankly, the whole HFPA things been a balls up from day one, with a handful of more recent exceptions, lacking any real standard or purpose. Ah well, it got some more 5.1 out of the vaults, in amongst too many inferior sounding stereo only lazy cash grabs.
 
Yeah, the graphs show that the wave forms are the same but the PCM/Dolby TrueHD/DTS-MA processing must be doing something else to the signal (that the graphs don't show) before it gets pushed out of our speakers. This is the only thing I can think of that would account for the differences that we're hearing between the different formats.

I'm glad that there is a difference in how they sound too. Otherwise, we'd have no choice as to how we listen to our music - the producer would be deciding this for us.
 
I'm sure that dialog normalization has a lot to answer for.... :rolleyes:

Like SMS - I have a Oppo 83SE going into a Emotiva pre-amp via analog outs. LPCM always sounds at least the same or better than the other audio streams.
 
Does Dolby dialog normalisation also boost the midrange? (as that's where the human voice/dialogue resides). Might explain some differences being heard.
 
Does Dolby dialog normalisation also boost the midrange? (as that's where the human voice/dialogue resides). Might explain some differences being heard.

No, it is a volume shift only, applied equally to all channels.

Of course if you have Dynamic Volume or Dynamic Equalization enabled on your processor, it will mess with other things, but that has nothing to do with dialog normalization:
 
I have not done any research on the subject on why this would equate to better sound but it is interesting that LPCM always shows a higher transfer rate (at least, with all the discs I have) than either DTS or Dolby. I agree that one would think all three codecs would produce the same sound quality.
 
I have not done any research on the subject on why this would equate to better sound but it is interesting that LPCM always shows a higher transfer rate (at least, with all the discs I have) than either DTS or Dolby. I agree that one would think all three codecs would produce the same sound quality.

LPCM is not compressed in any way. Think WAV or AIFF file. The lossless versions of DTS and Dolby use data compression to store the same signal in a smaller file. Think FLAC. While all should theoretically send the same thing to your speakers, lossless DTS and Dolby will stream fewer bits off the disc.

I'd be curious what would turn up if all three streams were ripped and FLACed, then had their checksums compared. Of course, even a fraction of a second of difference in timing between them would make that test fail, but it would really be something they turned out identical.
 
LPCM is not compressed in any way. Think WAV or AIFF file. The lossless versions of DTS and Dolby use data compression to store the same signal in a smaller file. Think FLAC. While all should theoretically send the same thing to your speakers, lossless DTS and Dolby will stream fewer bits off the disc.

I get that but what we are all trying to understand is why they all would sound different. ;)
 
Given all the variations that we have in our playback hardware it's hard to think that all play exactly the same. There's bound to be some differences minor or otherwise.


From QQ HQ
 
Given all the variations that we have in our playback hardware it's hard to think that all play exactly the same. There's bound to be some differences minor or otherwise.

On my system, I can play a WAV file (or CD in my Oppo) and then play the equivalent FLAC file (also through the Oppo), and they will sound absolutely identical. Similarly, I would expect that 5.1 PCM and 5.1 DTS-MA (or Dolby TrueHD) would also sound identical, but they definitely do not. I do not understand why, and I've never heard anyone give a reasonable explanation.

Anyhow... this is really gone off topic for a poll thread. Jon, it would be great if these posts could be moved to a new thread so the discussion could continue.
 
Given all the variations that we have in our playback hardware it's hard to think that all play exactly the same. There's bound to be some differences minor or otherwise.


From QQ HQ

I think you are spot on...in fact there are so many differences in setups(speakers.. players...amps....room acoustics..etc)it's no wonder we have so many debates about sound quality..or whether vocals are buried...or any other difference...just look at the comments on various threads...too many moving parts..including the human factor..you can still have "good hearing" and still interpret "tones" differently than others...
 
I've just given the 5.1 LPCM on the Blu-ray in the box set another listen to.

For the music its an 8, a couple of tracks haven't stood the test of time for me. The mix is very front central, but with a lot of things happening around you, so the surround supports the centre centric bias (& there is nothing wrong with that, we don't want every mix to position everything the same!). I'll give it an 8 for clarity as well, a lot of the 80s recordings aren't that wonderful, but this one is - though I find the mastering/mix slightly bright/trebly for my taste. I'm giving it an 8 overall.
 
I haven't voted yet but it can't be a 9 or 10 because it simply does not have a perfect/discrete mix and it's dynamics are not amoung the best either. I'm tossing between a 7 or 8...

This is a good release though, just not deserving to be at the top of my list on audio quality, in fact I'm not sure it would make my 'surround demo list' but at the same time it's a great listen due to so many classic hits.

I need another couple listens before my final vote. (Maybe I'm just a bit disappointed this doesn't sound better...)
 
Back
Top