LPCM or DOLBY?

[jparnold]

I am rendering standard definition video.
I use 8000kbps for the video but would like to know the pros and cons between using LPCM and DOLBY for the audio.
I have no problem 'fitting' the rendered movie to a DVD so can use either and am just interested if there is a preference using one over the other (if size is no problem). I am thinking that as DOLBY compresses the audio that some degree of sound quality may be affected. Is that the only difference?

[Trevor Andrew]

Hi John

My preference is Digital Dolby, most if not all commercial DVD’s use Digital Dolby.
The quality is excellent, you will not notice any difference between the two options.
We also have the option of surround sound using the 5 channel option.

LPCM uses about 5 times the memory as DD 1500kbps to 256kpbs (approx), so will allow you a little more space for your movie.

The program, that is Video Studio was developed by default for NTSC, as such uses LPCM as its default audio.

In Pal country we have to manage the templates a little more than our NTSC colleagues.
I use Make Movie Templates Manager to create my own templates.

[Ron P.]

For any form of audio compression, Dolby is the best.
http://www.dolby.com/about/who-we-are/d ... index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_Digital

I don't think there is a stand-alone player made today that does not have the ability to play Dolby audio in some form. So you don't need to worry about if your disc is going to play the audio. The only limitation in PCs, is with encoding, since Dolby does not give away it's products. Most all programs that are not freebies, come with the ability to encode some form of Dolby. They are the innovators of Surround Sound, to give the audiences the true live audio experience.

With VS, it boils down to space saving and if you want Surround Sound. If Surround Sound is not needed or wanted, then you really are not going to be able to determine the difference in quality between PCM or Dolby.

[jparnold]

Thanks for the advice.

It seems that I should always encode using Dolby rather than LPCM regardless of if I need the space savings or not.

I have a rather annoying set top DVD recorder/player which always takes forever to read and load a home burnt DVDs (factory made ones load quickly) regardless of brand and whether I use DVD-R or DVD+R disks (they can take 30 to 60 seconds to load) and I wondered if there could be a difference there which might result in my dodgy dvd player loading particular encoded dvd's or not.

For the record my DVD set top recorder/player (it has an inbuilt hard disk for recording) is an NEC brand BUT the guts are LG, the DVD drive has already been replaced once under warranty and I don't have a nice word to say about LG as we have another home appliance of the same manufacturer which isn't good quality either and as such I will never buy LG again. Oops just remembered that the DVD burner in my PC is LG (they PC shop only sold that brand) and so far (I shouldn't have said that) it has been reliable.

Thanks again for your quick replies.

[skier-hughes]

Keep the total bitrate to 8000, see if that helps. It must be pretty new having a hdd recorder as well, but sometimes under 8k helps, so I always max out at 7500 for video and 192 or maybe 256 for audio.

[jparnold]

Thanks Graham
I have always in the past gone for 8000kbps in the past to ensure the best DVD image possible unless of course it would not fit on a single layer DVD.

I guess that I would not notice the difference in image quality between 8000 and 7500 - do you agree?

I always am amazed that factory made (movie) dvds are encoded sometimes as low as 5000kbps yet they always have a great image quality but I guess that's due to using the best encoders which probably cost mega dollars to buy.

[skier-hughes]

I don't think you'll notice any difference.
Commercial encoders use 20+ passes, and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

[Black Lab]

I always use 7500.