Gee whiz, Sanjay, I'm sorry. I had no idea that I had somehow urinated in your cornflakes. Why the onslaught?

Am I not entitled to respect what my own ears tell me? I was a professional musician, conductor and music critic for nearly 20 years. I was with a professional sound engineer and composer for motion pictures. I don't think it's unreasonable that I placed value on what I heard, also confirmed in detail by the ears of someone I respect.

I agree with you that no one has ever proven a difference. Still, my admittedly "informal testing" indicated that there is a difference. That's all I'm saying.

Or reason to insult a forum colleague in public.

dts is less compression, but it also uses a different algorithm than dolby digital. one thing you will notice is that the center channel on dts tracks is louder in relation to the mains. that is my main gripe against dolby digital.

dts takes up about 300mb more per disc typically, so on longer movies, that extra space forces the video to be more compressed.

if dts is an option, take it.

I thought I noticed the center a little more.

That's all I'm saying.

But my posting that fact is a public "insult" to you? And my supporting that statement with specific details is an "onslought"?

Gee whiz, Bob, I'm sorry. I had no idea that I had somehow tread on you personally by posting something at variance with your anecdotal experience. Why the reaction? Am I not entitled to respect factual information (that even you agree with)?

You'll note that when you countered my earlier statement with your "admittedly informal testing", I didn't take it as an insult or onslought. Nor did I tell you that you didn't hear it. However, if you are going to claim "a difference is there", then I don't think it's unreasonable to inform readers of the fact that this "difference" has never been proven. Unless you feel it's OK for you to reply to my posts but not the other way 'round? Agreed, wholeheartedly. We're discussing a hobby here, not some cure for cancer. If facts I've posted don't jibe with your personal experience, then readers can decide for themselves which they want to believe. Happens all the time with cables, amps, etc. Discussion is healthy and productive. And an opposing viewpoint is not a personal attack, so please don't take it that way.

Best,
Sanjay

I don't think Bob was upset with the fact you have a dissenting opinion, Sanjay. It's the structure of your post. Without being face to face, or having the benefit of knowing your speech mannerisms, I see how it could read a little confrontational, rather than conversational.

We all just need to remember that it's easy to take things the wrong way when the only way we have to communicate is the written word. Sometimes what reads one way to the poster, comes across completely different to a reader.

i'll go dts over dd any day!i even own a dvd that sounds like poo-poo in dd,but beautiful in dts:iron maiden-rock in rio

Are you setting the dB levels for DD and DTS globally and adjust the levels for each disc or can you save the dB levels for DD and DTS seperately?

Also, why do you feel you need to increase the LFE dB for DTS by 14dB?

I have 3 seperate LFE settings. For DD (-10dB to 0dB), DTS (+/- 10dB) and MPEG (+/- 10dB).

The difference is really not 14dB between DD and DTS because the DD decoder boosts the LFE by +10dB where the DTS decoder does not. The difference is only 4dB and that settings is based on playing a DD DVD with the loudest sound and adjusting so as not to break my subwoofer.