Right behind you one that one. With a family of kids, the oldest of which is only 7 and the newest only 10 months, I can't really be blasting my audio system anyway. As far as I'm concerned my DD 5.1/DTS provides all of the sounds quality that I need to enjoy a movie. I'd much rather put the extra money from getting a less expensive receiver into a bigger screen and more HD media.
Ben, your elitism is blatantly obvious here, particularly the belief that because a codec is old and "only" 1.5 Mb that isn't somehow unacceptable. Monaural or low-bitrate DD/DTS is unacceptable, but that's all based on how the disc is mastered and encoded. There is absolutely *nothing* wrong with the technology itself. Just because "regular" DD/DTS is dated doesn't mean that it has to be scorned, but that's exactly what you're implying.
So, if that means that I'm stuck in 1999, so be it. I'm content with that. It sure as hell beats the days when we didn't even have surround sound. Hell, being stuck in 1999 just gives me an excuse to say that I'm actually 29 years old. :P
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Right behind you one that one. With a family of kids, the oldest of which is only 7 and the newest only 10 months, I can't really be blasting my audio system anyway. As far as I'm concerned my DD 5.1/DTS provides all of the sounds quality that I need to enjoy a movie. I'd much rather put the extra money from getting a less expensive receiver into a bigger screen and more HD media.
Ben, your elitism is blatantly obvious here, particularly the belief that because a codec is old and "only" 1.5 Mb that isn't somehow unacceptable. Monaural or low-bitrate DD/DTS is unacceptable, but that's all based on how the disc is mastered and encoded. There is absolutely *nothing* wrong with the technology itself. Just because "regular" DD/DTS is dated doesn't mean that it has to be scorned, but that's exactly what you're implying.
So, if that means that I'm stuck in 1999, so be it. I'm content with that. It sure as hell beats the days when we didn't even have surround sound. Hell, being stuck in 1999 just gives me an excuse to say that I'm actually 29 years old. :P