Talk:DTS (company)

message: Would it be appropriate to place a redirect to here from the title "Digital Theater System"? --Reverend Loki 20:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be a good idea. Qutezuce 03:51, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect from Digital Theater System 

message: The following sentance in the DTS Variants section under "DTS-HD Master Audio" does not have a neutral point of view or is lacking a verifiable source:
"Although technically superior over its Dolby counterpart, DTS-HD Master Audio is selected only as an optional surround sound format for Blu-ray and HD-DVD."
I suggest it be changed to say:
"DTS-HD Master Audio is selected as an optional surround sound format for Blu-ray and HD-DVD."
Kirkmeyers 22:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-NPOV or source needed 

message: I have a couple of music CDs that have DTS audio, perhaps this could be elaborated on by someone who knows more about this format, and the releases, etc. Whitesanjuro 16:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I sold these for a while in a high-end a/v store when they first came out. 5.1 channel and great sound. DTS cd's dont seem to have fared well in the format wars since superior audio-only formats have come out since. Consequently there are fewer releases available than audiophiles had once hoped and which a/v salespeople like me promised would materialize.Thinkenstein 09:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DTS CD

message: Since AC-3 and AC3 is absolutely the same thing, I can't see a reason why not to go with "AC3" in this article since it's IMO used much more frequently. Is there any reason why not to do so? Is AC-3 any more correct or something?
: The Dolby Digital article always refers to it as AC-3 so I think that's the correct way to refer to it. Thunderhawk89 15:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AC-3 or AC3? 

message: Wouldn't it be more interesting to have separate articles for each codec? And just a basic comparison here in this article perhaps? Or a codec listing... Thunderhawk89 15:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate variant articles 

message: I believe DTS-HD and DTS-HDMA aren't the same.
DTS-HD Master Audio is capable of delivering audio that is a bit-for-bit identical to the studio master. DTS-HD Master Audio delivers audio at super high variable bit rates -24.5 mega-bits per second (Mbps) on Blu-ray discs and 18.0 Mbps on HD-DVD - that are significantly higher than standard DVDs . This bit stream is so "fast" and the transfer rate is so "high" that it can deliver the Holy Grail of audio: 7.1 audio channels at 96k sampling frequency/24 bit depths that are identical to the original. With DTS-HD Master Audio, you will be able to experience movies and music, exactly as the artist intended: clear, pure, and uncompromised.
DTS-HD High Resolution Audio can deliver up to 7.1 channels of sound that is virtually indistinguishable from the original. DTS-HD High Resolution Audio delivers audio at high constant bit rates superior to standard DVDs---6.0 Mbps on Blu-ray discs and 3.0 Mbps on HD-DVD to produce outstanding sound quality. It is capable of delivering up to 7.1 channels at 96k sampling frequency/24 bit depth resolution. It allows content creators to deliver rich, high definition audio on movies where disc space may not allow for DTS-HD Master Audio. From the original DTS website. Thunderhawk89 15:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTS-HD Variants 

message: According to the History of apt-X webpage of APT, Dr Stephen Smyth begun working on the fundamentals for the DTS format in the 1980s with a DSP hardware solution called APTX100ED at the end of the 1980s. According to the DTS history whitepaper the compression algorithm was demonstrated in early 1992 for Steven Spielberg using a hard drive. Universal decided to test DTS on two "minor" movies before Jurrasic Park to ensure that the technology worked (which two these were would of course be very interesting to know).
Again from the DTS history whitepaper, for the integration of the apt-X codec into practical movie use Terry Beard started working on the solution in 1972, joined by Jim Ketcham in the mid 1980s. Digital Theater Systems was founded at February 1, 1993 and was co-owned by Universal, Steven Spielberg, Terry, Jim "and others".
So the start year in the history section is if not wrong so at least misleading. It also sounds like it was Steven Speilberg who started the technology research, when it was really in a working state when he was brought in.
The section "DTS as a codec" is in its current state very questionable. To start out with a patent dispute in France is trivia and to label it as "enhanced copy" is clearly taking a side.
To label apt-X as "traditional ADPCM" is perhaps to oversimplify it, as apt-X takes four 16-bit samples and divides them into four subbands through a QMF, calculates the difference against a backward linear prediction loop and quantize the error signal with a backaward adaptive Laplacian quantizer. The bit rate of the four sub-bands, though fixed, are different due to psychoacoustic masking. (The information is from apt-X technical overview)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.15.70 (talk) 16:56, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistencies 

message: I am thinking of buying a HD TV and a Blu-ray player. I've looked on the back covers of some Blu-ray titles that list DTS HD Master Audio as the only main audio track, will DTS HD Master Audio tracks be heard on the speakers on a HD TV or do I need a surround sound system? Kieranthompson  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kieranthompson (talk • contribs) 20:23, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I need help with understanding DTS HD Master Audio 

message: This article should probably be about the company, with talk of the codec (and, pertinent to this article, the various extensions) left to DTS Coherent Acoustics. Thoughts? —Locke Cole • t • c 21:10, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Article? 

message: From the current revision: 'The PlayStation 3 can decode the "core" of DTS-HD internally at a bitrate of 1.5 Mbit/s while the Xbox 360 can output the bitstream itself via Toslink.' What does this mean? The 360 outputs the encoded stream, while the PS3 outputs, what, a partially decoded version? What's the practical effect? --DocumentN (talk) 02:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just in case anybody's still confused about this: DTS-HD is backwards compatible because it includes a standard DTS "core" that can be used by devices that support DTS but not DTS-HD, including Toslink (S/PDIF optical) and HDMI ARC, which lack the bandwidth for DTS-HD. —Torc. (Talk.) 21:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The term 'core' 

message: A great part of the text is only a copy of the 1st reference (http://firstdtsstudio.hit.bg/faq_dts_eng.html) and I don't see any reuse licence on this page, so it seems to me that this is a licence violation ...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.236.137.143 (talk) 17:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licence violation ? 

message: I branched out DTS connect to its own section, as I was able to add the DTS Neo:PC information, and thus fully explain the DTS Connect variant. I was able to find a reference, as well as use my own knowledge of the subject. Floodo1 (talk) 00:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTS Connect 

message: The article, in the History section, discusses an AC-3 data rate of 448kbps and goes on to say, referring to AC-3, that "theatrical (35 mm movie) installations, which are limited to even lower bitrates." There is one data rate for theatrical print films using Dolby Digital (aka AC-3). That data rate is 320 kbps. I'm not changing it because the entire paragraph has many problems that need to be addressed. MRJayMach (talk) 20:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  AC-3 data rate when used in 35mm film 

message: There has been a suggestion to merge the page DTS Coherent Acoustics with DTS (sound system). Please leave a Support or Oppose at the bottom of the list and state why you did so.
----
*I Support this merger. What's the point of having the DTS Coherent Acoustics page? It's simply pointless, since the information is already on DTS (sound system). I have merged the two pages together. Limetolime Talk to me • look what I did! 03:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: It should be noted that a DTS soundtrack will often sound louder than the DD soundtrack on the same disc, which will make DTS seem better.  DD is subject to dialnorm, where DTS is not which could be the reason for the volume difference.  This can lead to an unfair comparison between the two formats.
75.71.201.190 (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTS vs Dolby Digital volume 

message: a.k.a. "Low Bitrate DTS".
KSM-2501ZX, IP address:= 200.226.101.205 (talk) 04:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTS Express is missing 

message: The lack of mention of Blu-Ray really dates this article. Additionally there are many phrases that require the article to be contemporary "Nearly all standalone receivers and many integrated DVD player/receivers manufactured today can decode DTS." In an article full of references to Laser Disks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.212.184 (talk) 15:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Blu-Ray

message: There is something wrong in this paragraph: MPEG-1 Layer 2 is a video standard, not an audio standard. Maybe MPEG-1 Layer 3?--Stemby (talk) 17:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, actually it's correct. I got confused with MPEG-1 Part 2.--Stemby (talk) 18:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD, primary audio tracks 

message: Currently, "Datasat" redirects here, to DTS Sound System. However, this is not correct, there are 2 corporations:
DTS, Inc.: "DTS' corporate headquarters are located in Calabasas, California with its licensing operations headquartered in Limerick, Ireland." Their history: "Founded in 1990 by entrepreneur/scientist Terry Beard and funded by Universal City Studios, Inc. and other investors in 1993, DTS (Nasdaq: DTSI) introduced its master-quality sound with the release of Steven Spielberg’s blockbuster Jurassic Park." -  see http://www.dts.com/corporate/dts-history.aspx
On the other hand, there is the Datasat Group, with "Phil Emmel, Founder & Managing Director, The Datasat Group", and offices in Twyford (UK), Hertfordshire (UK), and Chatsworth (CA). Their link to DTS according to their history brochure: "1987: Datasat Communications is formed; 2008: DTS sells cinema arm to the Datasat Group. It becomes Datasat Digital Entertainment".
Datasat is claiming DTS' cinema history and achievements, but hardly mentions DTS. It sounds like this: "Formed in 1991, Datasat Digital Entertainment set out to provide a superior listening experience to movie-goers. We developed one of the first digital audio systems for cinemas. This caught the attention of Steven Speilberg and, in 1993, the first movie to feature our sound technology was released. The film was called Jurassic Park." and "It's difficult to over-estimate how visionary the work that we  - when we were part of DTS® – and Dolby Laboratories® conducted on digital surround sound in the early 1990s." - see http://www.datasatdigital.com/about-us/company/company-profile.php
Although these 2 companies have partly common roots, and commercially they seem to complement each other rather than compete, they are still separate corporations with separate products. Therefore I strongly suggest to set up a separate Wikipedia article for Datasat, and corresponding explanations in both articles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.158.138.19 (talk) 11:11, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Datasat is a separate corporation! 

message: Please expand this section. The description on the DTS website is rather vague. Is it only for upmixing legacy DTS formats? Or also multichannel bitstreams? And can receivers feed dolby signals in the DTS Neural:X upmixer? Does it make use of the ceiling speakers? Gosh how i hate the vague and uninformative websites some US companies have. If you're not giving any info, don't waste your words and my time on giving non-info. PizzaMan (♨♨) 18:59, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTS Neural:X 

message: You don't typically see that.  There should be a separate article for the company, and no company infobox here. Timtempleton (talk) 23:04, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is about a technology, yet it has a company infobox 

message: I see no mention of the disc caddies some theatre systems required for playing DTS discs.  It was like a jewel case but had a sliding metal door similar to 3.5in floppy drives.  They were more common on older computer systems as well.  There's a picture of one on this site but it's in French so I can't use it as a source to create a new section myself.  https://www.journaldulapin.com/2016/07/29/dts-cinema-aud/ IRMacGuyver (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: These were standard on early CD-ROM drives. They weren't specifically for DTS discs. —Torc. (Talk.) 21:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  DTS disc caddies 

message: It's been suggested a few times that this should be split between DTS the company and DTS technologies. A comment above says the merge between these two pages happened a day after it was proposed here. It might have made sense at the time, but really doesn't any more. The History section mashes together company and technology timelines, and the Technology section mixes codecs, post-processing, and networking protocols together. It's especially weird since there's an article specifically on DTS-HD Master Audio, but not DTS-HD itself.
I think the first step should be restoring this edit and cleaning up that article. Is there anything that needs to happen before we can do that? —Torc. (Talk.) 21:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split article