PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => PS3 Discussion => Topic started by: soundifound on December 27, 2001, 10:02:01 AM
-
It adds so much to DVDs, and it would do the same for games. Do any PS2 game feature it?
-
NHL 2002 is the only game I know of so far.
-
NHL 2002 and SSX Tricky are the only two games available on PS2 which supports realtime DTS and not Dolby Digital. The only console on market today with realtime Dolby Digital is XBOX because it has built-in Dolby encoder. There are more games for PS2 coming in DTS 5.1 from EA. The only thing that PS2 can do DD5.1 is in cutscenes like eg. The Bouncer and MGS2, it sounds just AWESOME!!! There are games like Soul Reaver2 and ExtremeG3 which supports Dolby Surround, at least if developers use that technique it\'s damn good becuse Dolby format has very tight bass compare to DTS. Sure DTS sounds very clear but it lacks some bass because of weak LFE channel compare to tight and heart shaking bass that DD offers. I hope all future titles supports DTS in PS2 or DD5.1 in cutscenes and Dolby Surround in realtime. It would be cool if Sony or Dolby releases some kind of upgrade which would support realtime DD5.1, even if that thing cost $100 i\'ll just get it. Sound is soul of movies and it gives feeling to game, imagine playing an FPS game with 5.1 support you could hear if someone is at your back or at your blind spot, you could not see but you can hear and thats like using your sense, "the sense of hearing" that would be so coool.
-
EA has found a way to make it 5.1 in gameplay. XBOX is not the only one that has it.
-
Originally posted by ViVi
EA has found a way to make it 5.1 in gameplay. XBOX is not the only one that has it.
Yep, NHL 2002 is one of em.
-
Well guys that\'s what i meant realtime DTS 5.1 but not realtime DD5.1 there\'s a difference between these two sound fromats if you read my post u will understand what i meant. DTS 5.1 is great but Dolby "DIGITAL" 5.1 is great and little more because the .1 channel that is the Subwoofer sounds much better in DD than in DTS and that\'s what i like BASS.
-
If Im not mistakin, NHL 2002 is Dolby Digital.
-
NHL 2002 is in realtime DTS 5.1 not in realtime Dolby Digital, the only Dolby format it uses is Dolby Surround Pro Logic which is three channel that is because Rear channels are matrixed to give surround feel to it that\'s how Pro Logic works. If u don\'t believe check out the press releases on http://www.dtsonline.com about EA\'s NHL 2002 and technical detail for Dolby Pro Logic on http://www.dolby.com
-
Ea has found a way. It requires the correct connections. They are selling it to other companies.
-
Doesn\'t Silent Hill 2 have something special about its sound? Not sure if its DD5.1 though.
-
Everything about SH2 is something special. lol.. That game is amazing.
-
Originally posted by RichG
Doesn\'t Silent Hill 2 have something special about its sound? Not sure if its DD5.1 though.
I think its called S-force. Not Dolby or DTS
-
Originally posted by Jösëphä
NHL 2002 is in realtime DTS 5.1 not in realtime Dolby Digital, the only Dolby format it uses is Dolby Surround Pro Logic which is three channel that is because Rear channels are matrixed to give surround feel to it that\'s how Pro Logic works. If u don\'t believe check out the press releases on http://www.dtsonline.com about EA\'s NHL 2002 and technical detail for Dolby Pro Logic on http://www.dolby.com
Dude, cut it already. DTS is a digital 5 + 1 format and is generally accepted as slightly better than DD5.1.
DTS 5.1 is used in EA games for PS2. DTS has nothing to do with Dolby Pro Logic which is inferior to both DD5.1 and DTS 5.1
-
well Marconelly, thanks for clearing up everything but NHL 2002 DOES support Dolby Pro Logic as well as DTS, stereo and mono in sound options and i know dude that pro logic is inferior to both DD5.1 and DTS5.1 also i personally like Dolby Digital in movies and DTS in some specific ones like the original Jurrassic Park :D
-
Just to clear up the tech-stuff a bit...
1. dts is better than DD (not so much compressed)
2. NHL 2002 and SSX Tricky sounding just great with dts
3. SH2s S-Sound is just another way round paying Dolby for it´s Surround Sound... it´s the same thing with another name ! ...it´s not 5.1 and not digital, but just some new kind of Surround Sound.
-
Originally posted by Jösëphä
Dolby Surround Pro Logic which is three channel that is because Rear channels are matrixed to give surround feel to it that\'s how Pro Logic works.
I know someone already picked on this post but I just had to clarify something.....
Dolby Pro Logic isn\'t 3 channels, it\'s a two channel signal that is matrixed into FOUR channels. Evidently you\'ve forgotten about the center channel my friend.
I should say though that everything else this guy\'s said makes perfect sense and you all need to stop picking on what he\'s saying.
-
/me agrees with this guy ^^^^^^^^
-
Originally posted by Dolbytone
I should say though that everything else this guy\'s said makes perfect sense and you all need to stop picking on what he\'s saying.
He was just very confusing and from his posts it looked like DTS is actually inferior to DD. LFE channel *weak* on DTS?!
-
Well, you can\'t argue personal taste or preference. When I set these systems up, they look the same on the RTA and thus would theretically sound identical in the same room. Let\'s put it this way folks....
We\'re talking movies here, but the theory should apply to all forms of media. When a soundtrack is recorded, it\'s recorded by whomever\'s making the film (or someone they\'ve hired anyway). Then it\'s mixed and mastered by an engineer, who again, works for the folks making the film. These engineers don\'t work for Dolby or DTS or anything, Dolby and DTS are just tools they use to transfer the sound data from the recording to the auditorium.
Now, as a sound engineer, it\'s my job to make these sound systems reproduce that sound track according to standards that these engineers expect me to comply with. This way, the movie\'s sound track is faithfully reproduced. I don\'t however, have any control over what the actual recording will sound like in relation to it\'s digital counterpart. That\'s taken care of at the studio where the film was mixed and mastered. So in short, if the Dolby and DTS mixes are the same at the studio, they should therfore be the same in the auditorium.
If you\'re hearing a difference, it\'s not DTS or Dolby\'s fault, it\'s the engineer who mastered the soundtrack\'s fault. So in conclusion, you won\'t be able to argue to me whether or not one is superior. And that whole thing about DTS using more data is just stupid. Regardless of the bit rate, you either have a digital signal or you don\'t. More digital data coming through the DSP doesn\'t equal better sound coming out the other end, with a digital signal, it simply works or it doesn\'t. There is no degredation of a digital signal.... and I got news for you folks, it all ends up a big fat analog signal anyway.
Now, I didn\'t get the impression that anything he said was confusing. I think that if you carefully read what he said, you\'ll find he\'s being very clear about things. It\'s when a bunch of other people jump in there and make short comments about it, throwing in little pieces themselves, often these little pieces being disinformation, that things begin to get confusing.
-
Originally posted by Dolbytone
And that whole thing about DTS using more data is just stupid. Regardless of the bit rate, you either have a digital signal or you don\'t. More digital data coming through the DSP doesn\'t equal better sound coming out the other end, with a digital signal, it simply works or it doesn\'t. There is no degredation of a digital signal.... and I got news for you folks, it all ends up a big fat analog signal anyway.
I can\'t believe what you\'re saying. Your above sentence could be as well translated into this: 256kbit/s MP3 sound as good as 64kbit/s MP3 just because both are digital, and signal simply works or doesn\'t!
Or how about this: DivX at 1000kbit/sec according to you, looks the same as DivX at 500kbit/sec.
Bitrate is extremely important thing in digital media, and I can\'t believe that a sound engineer can say something like that...
DTS uses 2:1 or 4:1 compression while DD uses 14:1. They are both using lossy compression, just like MP3 is (for example), and technically, there is a difference in quality.
-
Okay bud, here you go:
Take a recording and compress it 4:1, then compress that same recoding again in 2:1. When you\'re done doing that decompress them both and what do you have?
Answer: Two identical sounding recordings.
-
Dolbytone, don´t get me wrong... I´m a fan of your great posts, but I´m not sure if this is the right way to explain that kind of compression...
DD or dts doesn´t work like rar or zip. If you use that kind of compression (like mp3) than everything above or below a given rate is LOST ! If you decompress it, those lost information won´t come back... I just don´t know if I´m 100% right here...
So I think, if you compress it 4:1 more info´s lost than under 2:1 ?!
:fro:
-
Okay, I oversimplified there Eye. The fact is, that this whole competing digital formats thing has or is nearly escalating to a level that approaches the DC Vs. PS2 fanboy discussions and it\'s getting on my nerves. Direct comparisons of these two formats isn\'t easy, but from what I\'ve seen when setting these systems up, there is a remarkable identicalness to them considering the huge difference in data transfer. As a result, I must conclude that bits simply isn\'t all that matters... Much like comparing the PS2 and XBox stats side by side. Read this please:
"So is Dolby Digital better than DTS? No. I merely preferred Dolby Digital over DTS under these particular conditions. (Did the cold New York City weather in February play havoc with my delicate Miami temperament?) My tentative conclusion is that the differences are relatively small. In some ways, that\'s disappointing because DTS has been touted as sounding superior. On the other hand, the outcome of this test has increased my respect for Dolby Digital. It works really well for both multichannel movie soundtracks and music.
Anyone with the DD logo on his system should not feel limited by it. Crank up your system and enjoy it! And if you\'ve made the extra investment in DTS, it\'s pretty darn good, too - just be careful how loudly you brag to your Dolby Digital-only friends."
This was an excerpt from here: Dolby Digital vs. DTS (http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/SoundAndVision/FrameSet/0,1670,_sl_SoundAndVision_sl_Article_sl_0_cm_1653_cm_130_2352_1_cm_00,00.html)
-
Dolbytone thanks for clearing up everything, i was expecting someone like you to post in this thread :cool:. Also about the pro logic thing i meant 4 channels because there is front right, front left, center and matrixed (mono) rear channel compare to all discrete channels that DD and DTS has to offer. I admit i made a mistake for saying three and not four but i realized it after clicking the submit button and i couldn\'t edit it afterwards :(