Dolby TrueHD upscaling

[August Bleed]

Here is an article on the Dolby TrueHD format and how they intend to upsample music to 24/96 for BluRay.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/dolby174-upsamples-apodizes-truehd

--
August
Bleed, Inc.
Selling Art Is Tying Your Ego To a Leash And Walking It Like a Dog

[Stephen Disney]

Interesting.  Very clearly points out the difference in sound perception between 48k and 96k.  Weird and yet nice to see that they have found a way to improve the sound in the uprez to 96k... but then why didn't these shows get recorded in native 96k?  Why not focus on that for new audio?  These were all recent audio.  Not old 48k studio masters.
S

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to Surrou...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SurroundSoun...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound

[August Bleed]

We were just talking about this recently with the Gotye release.  It's easy to think surely the studios MUST be recording in 24/96 right?  Not on your life.  The studio masters for both Norah Jones recent album and Gotye shows pop music is being recorded at 24/44.1.  That's the standard these days as surprising as it was to me.  Some eek out at 48 but virtually nothing outside specialty labels are recording at this rate.  I was interested, somewhat excited, somewhat troubled.  Surely in this day and age 24/44 is stretching the definition of high def.  I believe the studios are looking at their numerically challenged vaults and are looking to cash in on this at some point.  I'm all for it if it indeed can somehow better resolve waveforms and stuff and make music sound a bit more natural.  If it's intent is simply to be able to dump this stuff in a high res container for mass blu ray sales then I'm not too thrilled.  That said, there was some talk of reconstructing lost dynamics and such.  That is the first I've heard it claimed that something can be restored that wasn't present to begin with.  But apparently (we have to believe the folks at Stereophile at least have a passing interest in audio) the author could hear quite a difference in a symphonic piece and some in the other recordings.  So who knows.  That is quite a claim to make.  Interesting that the defacto format for BluRay Audio DTS HDMA (or something like that) is not the one introducing these downloads.  I'd have thought DTS would be chosen over dolby for this...in fact on most it has.  Perhaps there is some advantage to Dolby HD that I am not aware of.  This may have been it.  I guess we can rule out box sets of modern music coming down the pipe in another 20 years.  The best it seems we can hope for is upsampled Dolby!  lol!

[Stephen Disney]

Its not that they are recorded at 44.1.  They are usually recorded at 48k or better.  But the final masters only exist in 44.1 or 48.  My own music follows the same pattern as well.  Typically music has been 44.1k (thanks to the cd) and movies are 48k.  There has been no real push to move beyond as the widespread formats CD and DVD are set at those limits.  Bluray taking over should open all that up.
S

[Stephen Disney]

This is of course only applicable to digital masters.  Analogue masters of course are a different story...
S

[August Bleed]

No these were actually recorded at 24/44.1...the studio masters dont get better for these releases.  Qobuz is pretty specific about this being the actual master.

[August Bleed]

I thought the same about the recordings but Gotye has a website and they say the recorded at 24/44.1.  Same for Norah.  Surprising given that many of her releases were quite a bit higher.  Guess that's what happens when ya go pop.

[Stephen Disney]

OK... Probably a home DAW.
S

[August Bleed]

Or could be the opposite.  Most of the 24/96 stuff seems to be from specialty labels or those older rockers who have enough money to record in their homes.  Gotye is major label.  So is Norah Jones.  Don't think DangerMouse is using a DAW at home.  Pop on Qobuz and HDtracks from the majors seems to be coming out at a steady 24/44.1.  Check em out.

[Lokkerman]

so what are they saying - that we now can hear what we thought we could hear - although everyone was in denial about it and argued that we couldn't hear it - and it's now attributed to preringing???
lol, lol. lol

[August Bleed]

Yep.  What is sorta interesting is that they need to upsample  the music to do this.  My understanding is that it uses other tech to do this and the upsampling is what dolby is bringing to the party.  You put it very succinctly tho!  We are apparently now able to perceive what we were previously hearing.  Is something that bad with 24/48?  The proper artist and it sounds great.

August 

Bleed Inc. 

Selling art is tying your ego to a leash and walking it like a dog.

Sent from the BleedPod.

[August Bleed]

The positive note was the discs will be labeled as upsampled with their tech.  So there is that.  Better than the current practice.

August 

Bleed Inc. 

Selling art is tying your ego to a leash and walking it like a dog.

Sent from the BleedPod.

On May 21, 2012, at 11:44 AM, Lokkerman <phil.s...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Steven Sullivan]

Some of the Dolby statements are questionable, and indeed provoking much
head shaking and eye rolling on an engineering-heavy pro audio mailing
list I'm on.

(And personally I kinda doubt Poppy Crum believes all those marketing
claims either)

[Stephen Disney]

All this to-do about what is simply a better encoding algorithm that requires an upmix to be realized...
S

[Stephen Disney]

That was not intended as a response to Steven... apologies.
S

[Stephen Disney]

pardon again... upsample... not upmix.
S

[August Bleed]

Now I remember why we don't actually have discussions on this group.

[Stephen Disney]

LOL...
S

[Noreltny-gmail]

What list is that? Would be interested in joining. (I'm a EE with more than
a casual interest in audio engineering)

[realafrica]

Marketing nonsense. I wouldn't believe a word they say.

On May 24, 10:38 pm, Tab Cursor <tabcur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a cool thread.
>
> I want to point out another "rumour?" I just got with my Home Theater
> Magazine sub this month.
>
> "A New Apple Audio File
>
> format would allow adaptive streaming of cloud-based content at different
> levels of quality, reports 'The Guardian' Said one anonymous source quoted
> by the British daily, 'All of a sudden, all you audio from iTunes is in HD
> rather than AAC'..."
>
> Since Apple has all the revenue, why not? After all, what are all those
> Petabytes for?

[Steven Sullivan]

What's interesting (to me) is 1) that Apple is getting into Spotify-type
music delivery at all; they've already dipped their toe in with iTunes
Match (which lets you play your own music collection from the cloud and
upgrades the quality if your version is <256kbps AAC), and what's it all
mean for the iTunes Store? and 2) that they intend to maintain an archive
'HD' quality tracks for delivery over this system (delivery to be at
various quality levels, depending on bandwidth)

Once this gets going shouldn't be too hard to tell if a stream is truly
'HD' or not.

[August Bleed]

The Apple thing sounds nearly identical to the patent that Neil Young was applying for: ie HD music at a variable bitrate via the cloud to portable devices.  While this seems to be the direction the industry is going I personally am still a big fan of having my own media not dependent upon any kind of connection to play it.  I consider even a place on my hard drive more of a concrete ownership experience than anything in the cloud.  Of course, what Apple considers HD and what we might consider HD may be two completely different animals.

[realafrica]

Probably more than 2 different animals and some veg & minerals too I
expect :lol:
Variable bit rate dependent on bandwidth sounds like a proper location
lottery but also a case of only those who can afford it get it. iTunes
sucks! I wont have anything to do with it.

[Steven Sullivan]

Why is that? AAC is a first-rate lossy codec; iTunes Store tracks have
been 256 kbps for a long time now, and DRM-free as well. If lossy tracks
generally are what you object to, I get it, but iTunes Store tracks are
among the best of the bunch if you don't.

If you mean iTunes, the application, that's another issue. It works
brilliantly for Mac user, less so for PC users.

[Lokkerman]

methinks it's another case of Aplle trying to create a walled garden; wherupon you don't really own what you've bought; if Apple was based in another country they would not get away with what they do....

[realafrica]

I believe iTunes is much improved in recent incarnations, but I took a
dislike to it years ago, mostly for it's 'lock you in' approach, but
I also dislike all lossy files anyway.
I expect iTunes, as a way of storing/cataloging and playing a limited
range of files is very good, but it is limited in it's range and
although less 'locked in' than it used to be, still sucks from that
point of view.
I don't really trust them to redeem themselves 100%. So for me iTunes
never gets installed on my HDD, not for many, many years now. It's a
personal boycott if you like.

[RW]

I'm with Lokks and RA on this one. Everyone derides MS for being a
bully, but Apple has them beat 6 ways to Sunday. Apple always wants
to control *every* aspect of your "experience" with them. No thanks,
I can do some thinking on my own, if you please. For this reason I
stick with open-source products like FooBar2000...

-RW-

> > >iTunes sucks! I wont have anything to do with it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[August Bleed]

I don't go near iTunes either.  I use macs regularly but for reasons wholly unrelated to the iTunes ecosystem.  Anytime there is a decided shift to the 'cloud' I tend to get very suspicious.  If anything it gives the record companies even less overhead by having one copy of a file stored somewhere and streamed to everyone.  No distribution, just profit.  No product, just subscriptions.  Never ending revenue, no ownership, no overhead, no distribution--seems like a record label's wet dream.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to Surrou...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SurroundSoun...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound

[Peter Cawthron]

I wouldn’t be surprised if the late Saint Steven of Apple imagineered a future  where all new music is only released via the Cloud and could only be consumed on a strict pay per consumption model.

“…and increasingly the already-rich earn enormous sums by collecting rent on intellectual property: brands, inventions, music, or new medicines. And….the owners of patents or brands increasingly use the state, the law and the World Trade Organization (WTO) to both protect and guarantee extraordinarily high prices for ‘rents’ on these assets. This does not prevent them attacking the state for its ‘nannying’ role.”

 

From ‘The Coming First World Debt Crisis’, Ann Pettifor, 2006.

 

P.

 

From: surrou...@googlegroups.com [mailto:surrou...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of August Bleed

Sent: 26 May 2012 19:02
To: surrou...@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [SurroundSound] Re: Dolby TrueHD upscaling

 

…..  No distribution, just profit.  No product, just subscriptions.  Never ending revenue, no ownership, no overhead, no distribution--seems like a record label's wet dream.

[Stephen Disney]

On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Peter Cawthron <peter_c...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

I wouldn’t be surprised if the late Saint Steven of Apple imagineered a future  where all new music is only released via the Cloud and could only be consumed on a strict pay per consumption model.

“…and increasingly the already-rich earn enormous sums by collecting rent on intellectual property: brands, inventions, music, or new medicines. And….the owners of patents or brands increasingly use the state, the law and the World Trade Organization (WTO) to both protect and guarantee extraordinarily high prices for ‘rents’ on these assets. This does not prevent them attacking the state for its ‘nannying’ role.”

 

From ‘The Coming First World Debt Crisis’, Ann Pettifor, 2006.

 

P.

  

Wow... nailed it.
S

[RW]

Yeah, Pete did nail it. Folks, if you have never read Orwell's
"1984", get yer ass down to the li-berry and check out a copy. A more
prophetic, and frightening, work has never been written. And the sad
part is, you can see it being manifested right before your eyes every
day. And we the sheeple are lapping it up for its "convenience" and
"ease of use".

As Mr. T famously proclaimed "I pity the fool!"

-RW-

[August Bleed]

The news sources lap it up as well...never in any article about the shift to the cloud is it ever suggested that this move might not be a good one for the consumer.  In fact, they tout all the reasons a consumer would lap it up.  No where does the conversation even veer to ownership except as it relates to the artists and labels.  Sadly the consumer is not even mentioned.  Which is exactly the way to sell something onerous like this...remove the debate altogether and/or restrict the reach of the debate so its true intention remains obfuscated by the fact that its never mentioned to begin with.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to Surrou...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to SurroundSoun...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound