I only have a relatively cheap surround set up (a £200 Yamaha decoder/amp, 5 small satellite speakers and a sub) but even with this I can still discern a difference between DD and DTS. But again it depends on the film. I agree with the volume issue though. A film I would play on level 4 in DD, I'd have to lower down to 3 for DTS, just for the sake of comfort, but the DTS tracks usually do reveal a extra level of subtle detail in a soundtrack that can get lost with DD. And when I say that, I'm not a DD hater, there is nothing wrong with DD. If that's the only sound format we had then it would hardly be cause for complaint would it? No one could say that Episode 3 (for example) was flat and compressed rendering the whole film unwatchable. It could be (and has been) argued that it is unwatchable for a whole host of other reason, but it's DD track wouldn't be one of them.

Is there a point looming. With me, probably not. The only thing I would say is 'enjoy the film and stop obsessing about the compression of the soundtrack'. If a film is good, then it would still be good in Stereo (or even Mono).

Enjoy film. Enjoy life.

OMMMMM. OMMMMMM.

They just apply more bass to the .1 I'm guessing. You could probably approximate the effect in DD just by upping your sub level. Don't forget also that a films soundtrack is down mixed to 6 channels. There is no DTS mix, as it were, that makes the film sound better. It's just that DD loses some of the detail during it's compression. DD still uses to same 6 channel mix that DTS used.