never realized how bad dolby digital 5.1 was till recently...

[purbeast0]

I have a 10+k system. Other than the bass boost, I don't hear much diff either. SMR did a comparison based on a dvd-audio, using it as master since that is as close as consumers can get to master and he found the DD waveform to be much closer to the dvd-audio one, especially in the lower HZs.

Of course that was not a definitive test, but at least there was a third track that is lossless that DD and DTS were being compared to.

so you have a $1010 sytem?

but yes that is good to know that it is the rips that make the sound bad.

i started band of brothers again last night, haven't seen it since it aired, and the sound is pretty good in that as well for being somewhat older now. the picture definitely is grainy at parts though, even though i know that is the look they are going for.

 

[sdifox]

so you have a $1010 sytem?

but yes that is good to know that it is the rips that make the sound bad.

I started band of brothers again last night, haven't seen it since it aired, and the sound is pretty good in that as well for being somewhat older now. The picture definitely is grainy at parts though, even though i know that is the look they are going for.

10+k <> 10k+...

 

[Mackan]

Ironman has dynamic range compression enabled. Turn it off in your player or AVR and it should sound like the DTS track.

This guy knows what he is talking about. In general, Dolby Digital (AC3) is often encoded with a Dynamic Range profile (usually Film Standard), which can be enabled or disabled by your receiver. That is the reason it sounds 'dull'. If you don't know what dynamic range compression is, you might want to look it up...

Overall, DTS might sound better, but the difference is not that big if the dynamic range compression is disabled for the Dolby Digital track.