Why are lossy audio DVD's acceptable?

[Lou]

I'm not trying to be a wise-ass, but why is it OK for DVD's to have 192 Kbps audio but mp3's are not OK? I hate mp3's so believe me, I'm not advocating mp3 trading.

[paddington]

because it's often the only way it will fit, depending on the video BR. It's also pretty rare to find DVDs in the wild with PCM audio (though it is getting more common these days). We treat vids and audio-only as different animals.

one of the vid mods will be along with more, I'm sure.

[saltman]

ac3 is discouraged at this point but permitted. LPCM is ideal. Many, if not all, stand alone DVD burners use ac3 and it has become somewhat commonplace due to this.

Restricting the DVDs offered to LPCM only is not as well received by the community as mp3 restriction. There is an argument that using ac3 allows higher bitrate for video to be used. This is true. Not the case with stand alones, but possible with home authored DVDs.

I'm certain that when Blu-ray discs are more common that low bitrate audio will not be permitted.

[AAR.oner]

^^^what they said...plus in all honesty ac3 provides much better quality than yer average medium bitrate mp3...but its still preferred to use LPCM when authoring

[habalushy]

what they said...plus if you have a really long show or something, if your audio is ac3 or other good qualities it can make the show run over a dvd5 or dvd9 and then you have several discs

but i do agree that mp3 sound on dvds should be discouraged

[paddington]

Originally Posted by habalushy

but i do agree that mp3 sound on dvds should be discouraged

no problem there.. they don't support it.

[willndmb]

Originally Posted by saltman

There is an argument that using ac3 allows higher bitrate for video to be used.

this is exactly why i use ac3 most times
i rather have better video for a video then better audio
now audio i want better audio then say cover art
for a painting on my wall i want better art and you get the picture

[vladsmythe]

Many standalone burners will only record in AC3.

[AAR.oner]

when it comes to a DVD, you should want both excellent picture AND sound...do ya'll really think the professional film world & TV woulda survived if all they cared about was the picture???

as for SA burners--i still don't see why people who own a computer would use a SA to author a DVD...if you can spend $ on a SA burner, surely you can spend the same amount of cash on an editing/authoring suite which will typically give you better results across the board

[vladsmythe]

Originally Posted by AAR.oner

when it comes to a DVD, you should want both excellent picture AND sound...do ya'll really think the professional film world & TV woulda survived if all they cared about was the picture???

as for SA burners--i still don't see why people who own a computer would use a SA to author a DVD...if you can spend $ on a SA burner, surely you can spend the same amount of cash on an editing/authoring suite which will typically give you better results across the board

Anything recorded off television before digital broadcast was compressed sound, so LPCM of lossy sound is still lossy.

[AAR.oner]

yep, it was...so why re-compress it using a different compression codec which butchers the already beat up sound even further, in different "ways"?

[willndmb]

Originally Posted by AAR.oner

when it comes to a DVD, you should want both excellent picture AND sound...do ya'll really think the professional film world & TV woulda survived if all they cared about was the picture???

i agree however MOST people can tell the difference between ok video and good video
BUT
MOST people can NOT tell the difference between ok audio and good audio

[dummkopf]

Originally Posted by AAR.oner

as for SA burners--i still don't see why people who own a computer would use a SA to author a DVD...

because some people do not care for high end authoring. I for example care about the footage and its quality not someone's authoring skills. it's really as simple as that I prefer a XP/SP standalone transfer over a variable bitrate PC authored disc any time. I haven't yet seen a pc authored dvd that was able to match the quality of a high bitrate SA transfer done with decent hardware. LPCM audio furthermore takes away noticably from the image quality when encoding in XP mode. So I am always torn between going LPCM or AC3.

[vladsmythe]

Originally Posted by willndmb

i agree however MOST people can tell the difference between ok video and good video
BUT
MOST people can NOT tell the difference between ok audio and good audio

I can't tell the difference side by side (my beta hifi tape/dvd copy). Of the over 100 dvds I've seeded there has never been a single complaint. I will go to bestbuy and circuit city to find a standalone that records LPCM. If I can't should I seal the Graceful Duck Archive for good?

[AAR.oner]

Originally Posted by willndmb

i agree however MOST people can tell the difference between ok video and good video
BUT
MOST people can NOT tell the difference between ok audio and good audio

that i can't argue with...but then again, how many unbearably awful AUD DVDs get d/led these days by literally hundreds of people who are completely satisfied w/ the seizure-inducing picture, clipped-to-hell incam audio, AND overly compressed sound/vid because it was authored using a crappy encoder

Originally Posted by dummkopf

because some people do not care for high end authoring. I for example care about the footage and its quality not someone's authoring skills. it's really as simple as that

werd, i with ya on that one...personally i don't really care about the "authoring" that much, aside from bitrates...case in point, my DVDs are always simple...there's no way i'm spending a day or two on a menu unless i'm getting paid

Originally Posted by dummkopf

I prefer a XP/SP standalone transfer over a variable bitrate PC authored disc any time. I haven't yet seen a pc authored dvd that was able to match the quality of a high bitrate SA transfer done with decent hardware.

if that's the case, i wonder why all of the professional editing houses don't use SA's for transferring?



but i don't doubt that a higher-end SA could do a better job than some hundred dollar windoze program...as with most things in life, ya get what ya pay for

Originally Posted by vladsmythe

I can't tell the difference side by side (my beta hifi tape/dvd copy). Of the over 100 dvds I've seeded there has never been a single complaint. I will go to bestbuy and circuit city to find a standalone that records LPCM. If I can't should I seal the Graceful Duck Archive for good?

lately around here, whenever Staff or one of the numerous audio/videophile regulars gives their opinion on a technical matter, it seems that others take it as "set in stone" & "everyone has to conform to our thinking"...but guess what, ya don't! but please, don't be surprised if we come across as "philes" or set the standards high here at TTD, as we've always believed in being the site-with-the-highest-standards

this applies to everyone--you can transfer/author however you want, using whatever audio codec or video compression rate you want...hell, you can just sit on the tapes and never share em...its really up to you! for 99.8% of the users here, recording video or audio is just a hobby...don't take it too seriously