Quantcast

DVD/DTS Poll McCartney, Paul & Wings - BAND ON THE RUN [DTS]

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Rate the DTS-CD of Paul McCartney and Wings - BAND ON THE RUN


  • Total voters
    68

neil wilkes

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
4,301
Location
London, England
It is an appalling blunder!
However - is this really in 4.0?
I have a couple of 4.0 DTS albums from Eric Clapton, but my copy of this one is in the centre channel too, whereas the EC discs are definitely not.
 

EMB

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
4,104
Location
The Top 40 Radio of My Mind
Some of the DTS titles have a subdued center channel, apparently fashioned so the company could claim '5.1,' even though they were using the 4.0 Quad master tapes.

ED :)
 

quadtrade

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 3, 2002
Messages
1,448
Location
Ugene
Ed Bishop said:
Some of the DTS titles have a subdued center channel, apparently fashioned so the company could claim '5.1,' even though they were using the 4.0 Quad master tapes.

ED :)
When doing these, we always wanted them to be the original mixes, but DTS insistied on deriving the center from the fronts and adding a sub. This was the emergence of 5.1 and we were about all DTS had going for it other than the laserdiscs being issued at the beginning. These of course, were 5.1 and DTS wanted some consistancy. They were a small fragile company at that moment and desperatly trying to convince manufacturers to include their codec as a nessesary part of the plan. DTS had no way of making cash at that time, very little coming from the licencing. We even defered ours for quite a while with the Mill as we needed it for advertising. So in reality it was all because of the film side, which is why multichannel survived at all after Qdeath. They were not all that thrilled to become known as the quad reviver, so they found the cash to do some discs like Boys to Men. That one is licensed by Miller Nevada, but really owned and done by DTS, remixed in a little LA studio. Any of their music discs were going to be 5.1, so we had to follow. Just the way it was. That was cool:cool:, we were getting quadraphonic soundfields reintroduced to the world. Ultimatly, that was our goal.
 
Last edited:

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
16,606
Location
Connecticut
The QQ community owes a great deal to Brad Miller and people like Tad Bartel!

:brew :brew
:spot :wave


:-j:phones n
 

wapfu

Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
46
Location
NZ
Very quick Question.
What is the bit rate on this disc?
Full rate or half as you get on DVD's?
Regards
Bill
 

neil wilkes

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
4,301
Location
London, England
What do you mean?
Half rate is an option, and I always make DVD-V using full bitrate at 1.502, not the half rate which is only there when space is at a premium. It's certainly not the standard for DTS on DVD! It is merely a lower quality option.
 

winopener

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
3,840
The bitrate on cd is fixed at 1411, the same as ordinary audio cd, because it should fit into the audio cd frames exactly (otherwise compatibility with cd players will fail).
From what i've read about the dts compression (thanks Neil) the algorithm used is adaptive, because it splits the total bitrate available into the numbers of channels encoded. This gives out +- 240 per channel on a 5.1 disc *but* +-360 for a 4-channel encoded disc, which is one of the reason why it is better to keep a quad2dts conversion still on 4.0 format.
I just got a thought - and will be intresting to have someone from dts itself to confirm it or not: what will happen if i use the full dts cd bitrate to encode a *stereo* 24 bit music disc?
Lossless musical compression algorithms such as Flac, Monkey etc squeeze out from 55 to 65% of the original size; let's assume the worst case scenario with a 66% compression efficency (2/3 of original size).
Sample rate is fixed at 44.1 for compatibility sake.
A standard 16 bit 44.1 stereo file is exactly 2/3 of a 24 bit 44.1 stereo file. Got the picture?
So... dts cd could had been not only a pratical multichannel way but also a way to get better stereo, pratically lossless, with 24 bit depth in a 16 bit space such as cd.
 

neil wilkes

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
4,301
Location
London, England
@ Winopener.
You just stumbled over a very little known truth, my friend!
If you use full bandwidth DTS encoding at the higher bitrate of 24 bit - then the encoded disc is as near to lossless as possible.
Your assumptions are perfectly correct. I got this information direct from the head of DTS Europe, and what happens is something like this:
Your original source material, once encoded into DTS, then becomes what is called the "Transport Stream", which as you know is at 16/44.1 for CD and 16/48 for DVD. When it goes through the DTS decoder, it gets turned back into what is called the "Payload stream", which should be as close as possible to your original source files but depth.
Using 24 bit source does in fact mean the encoded file is very close to lossless.
It actually gets a little more complicated in reality, as the transport stream isn't really at 16/44.1 at all - it is in fact at 14/(original). This is done to reduce the possible damage if the file is played by accident through a normal system with no DTS decoder - it is only the file header that is at 16 bit to fool the burning applications into accepting the file. You can also encode to DTS stereo or Surround for CD using 24/48 files as long as you tell the encoder to use a 44.1KHz header. I do this all the time in the Nuendo DTS encoder. It will happily encode to DTS-CD from a 16/44.1 file, but it sounds noticeably better if you use 24/44.1 and even 24/48 with the flag set correctly will still play back correctly.

If you like, I have the DTS specs in PDF format - drop me a mail and I will happily send you a copy.
 

neil wilkes

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
4,301
Location
London, England
It's not DVD-Audio. It is a reissue of the DTS-CD. That site, along with Amazon, often mislabels DTS-CD as DVD-Audio. I have written to them asking them to please correct the error, but got no reply.
 

neil wilkes

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
4,301
Location
London, England
I just spotted who was responsible for the digital transfer of this disc, and it's none other than our old friend Peter Mew at Abbey Road.
He who so destroyed the 30th anniversary Bowie CD's that his work is known in the Bowie fan groups as "Mew-Tilations".

It's a great record, but how on earth did he miss the intro to the opener?

I have not yet actually seen the reissue version for real - so am wondering if it really has been reissued, or if 101CD managed to find a box of them somewhere?
 

bizmopeen

500 Club - QQ All-Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Dec 6, 2002
Messages
581
Location
Oswego, IL
I just spotted who was responsible for the digital transfer of this disc, and it's none other than our old friend Peter Mew at Abbey Road.
He who so destroyed the 30th anniversary Bowie CD's that his work is known in the Bowie fan groups as "Mew-Tilations".

It's a great record, but how on earth did he miss the intro to the opener?
Yeah, this is annoying. I remember this was the first title I got when I acquired the capability to decode DTS discs, and it made me think my setup was faulty! :mad:@: I spent a fair amount of time trying to debug things before a colleague told me that the disc was the problem...

Still, a great album and I was glad to grab it. This Q8 was one of the titles that really drew me into quad (along with "Dark Side")...
 

dr. simple

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,432
Location
Ohio
O.K., I apologize in advance - maybe I've lost my mind. Since this thread popped up again I listened to this, and for the life of me I can't figure out what you are all talking about. Mine is absolutely NOT missing the first three notes to the title track.
 

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
16,606
Location
Connecticut
O.K., I apologize in advance - maybe I've lost my mind. Since this thread popped up again I listened to this, and for the life of me I can't figure out what you are all talking about. Mine is absolutely NOT missing the first three notes to the title track.
That's amazing. I am really shocked that they fixed this. Is yours in the DVD-A sized case?
 

dr. simple

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,432
Location
Ohio
That's amazing. I am really shocked that they fixed this. Is yours in the DVD-A sized case?
Jon:

Yeah, it's in a DVDA-sized case. I'm still more inclined to think that I'm misunderstanding you all when you say "the first three notes are missing" rather than to think they fixed it. However, as has been stated, that's an unmistakable intro, so if I'm missing something I'm at a total loss.

Paul
 

zabble

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 1, 2003
Messages
1,147
Location
Chicago
Jon:

Yeah, it's in a DVDA-sized case. I'm still more inclined to think that I'm misunderstanding you all when you say "the first three notes are missing" rather than to think they fixed it. However, as has been stated, that's an unmistakable intro, so if I'm missing something I'm at a total loss.

Paul

The complete version has a solo guitar intro that lasts for a little over one second before the drums kick in. On the dts version, the drums come in within one second (as opposed to after the one second mark).

Another way to try to describe it:

The dts version begins with one guitar chord that slides down into the drums' entrance. All other versions have a four guitar chord intro before the drums come in (the bass drum and ride cymbal enter the song simultaneously along with the guitar's fifth chord).

Does this make any sense?
 
Top