Post by canonical December 20, 2013 (11 of 21)
|
|
Iain said:
This is not a "High End", "audiophile" discussion site. It's purpose is discussion of SA-CD and music.
If you want to discuss kit, go elsewhere.
That does seem rather rude. And inappropriate advice too ...
SA-CD is both high-end and audiophile ... so discussing high-end and audiophile as it relates to SACD seems an excellent fit, in my view.
|
|
|
Post by hiredfox December 20, 2013 (12 of 21)
|
|
Well Iain, you win some you lose some but as this is the season of forgiveness I guess the indignant ones will search their hearts whilst PDN-SACD will learn that we are overall a pretty accommodating bunch of fellow travellers and occasional friendly fire is all part of the enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Peter, welcome. There's a lot of fire that goes on here and a lot of it has to do with people who think that PCM in all its forms is inferior to DSD, while others feel there isn't a huge difference as it often has to do with many other elements in the chain. There are some here that are golden eared and others, like myself, that don't aspire to such a position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iain said:
This is not a "High End", "audiophile" discussion site. It's purpose is discussion of SA-CD and music.
If you want to discuss kit, go elsewhere.
tsk tsk... This was a well framed question to which if you do not know the answer, you should eagerly have sought it. SACD in my opinion is all about sound quality and someone asking how to use his equipment is quite on track in addressing us to inquire of it.
|
|
|
Post by nucaleena December 22, 2013 (15 of 21)
|
|
Windsurfer said:
tsk tsk... This was a well framed question to which if you do not know the answer, you should eagerly have sought it. SACD in my opinion is all about sound quality and someone asking how to use his equipment is quite on track in addressing us to inquire of it.
Well said Bruce and everyone else who rebutted Iain's churlish and curmudgeonly comments. I hope, Peter, that you're still visiting the site after such an ungracious response from a single user and that you've been able to ignore his outburst and instead focus on all the other site denizens who have welcomed you to the site and to SACD.
|
|
|
Post by PDN-SACD December 24, 2013 (16 of 21)
|
|
Pacwin, I am reporting back to you on on my test results per your various configuration recommendations. Essentially I found two configurations to provide the best results in overall soundstage, musical details, and reaching the full potential of the SACD disc. Please forgive me if I don't use all of the correct terms and acronyms. I used only multi-channel SACDs and played all in 5.1 surround sound audio. Some of the SACDs used included Weather Report, Spyro-Gyra, Pieces of a Dream, Bob Dylan, Elton John, etc.
1. SACD player (Marantz UD5005) using HDMI output. This sends DSD over HDMI output into HDMI of processor (Integra 40.2) with processor displaying DSD. This provides the overall best musical results and sonic presentation and allows the disc to be played to its full potential in my opinion. I believe it plays all of the details in the music that the SACD digital remasters & producers intended in DSD. Provides the most pronounced musical details in all loudspeakers achieving the best in surround sound multi-channel music. The most "in your face" sound !!
2. SACD player (NAD T-535) using separate 6 channel outputs into 6 channel inputs of processor. The NAD T-535 decodes DSD on board from an SACD disc and sends that through its 6 channel separate outputs as DSD and not PCM per its technical data. Integra 40.2 Processor music format set at PLII Music. The Integra 40.2 processor only decodes DSD in its HDMI circuitry and does state this in the manual. Result is next best surround sound multi-channel music but some of the information and details contained in the SACD disc are far less pronounced and even missing. Less "in your face" surround sound but certainly acceptable and very decent but again does not achieve the full potential of the SACD disc being played.
Setting any of these in "pure direct" results in considerably degraded sound & music reproduction and loses most of the music's dynamic range.
If I had a surround sound receiver or processor that did support and decode DSD from its separate 6 channel inputs, it would be interesting then to compare that sonic presentation to its HDMI audio circuitry. I'm not aware of any processors that support both. Your comments and questions are welcomed. THANKS very much.
|
|
|
Post by AmonRa December 25, 2013 (17 of 21)
|
|
PDN-SACD said:
2. SACD player (NAD T-535) using separate 6 channel outputs into 6 channel inputs of processor. The NAD T-535 decodes DSD on board from an SACD disc and sends that through its 6 channel separate outputs as DSD and not PCM per its technical data
No SACD player can send DSD (or PCM) with 6 separate outputs. Those are analog outs, NAD has done the DA conversion. Processor is basically doing nothing but functioning as a volume control.
So you are comparing the DA conversions between the processor (HDMI in) and NAD player. If there is something funny happening in the processor in each case we do not know (there often is all kinds of default "improvement" settings).
If you can not do this comparison blind it is next to worthless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm having an NAD T535 hooked to a Rotel RSX-1058. So that's close to your system.
I had the latest update on the Rotel, so that I can use different settings for HDMI Multi-Channel and Analog Multi-Channel (before the settings were similar).
I discovered it was required to have this update to enable different settings regarding subwoofer attenuation/amplification for DD/DTS versus SACD (if you look around you will find that there are differences the way a subwoofer channel is used).
I have 5 KEF speakers, and a Rel subwoofer. I won't go into detail how I have set them for movies.
For SACD, I have set the NAD to the configuration 3 (large fronts; other speakers small; no sub). This has the disadvantage that the fronts have to handle all lows including those from the .1 channel, but I like this configuration best for the discs with subwoofer channel. Using the sub seems not to fit completely musically to my ears. And the Rotel en KEF work together very well for the lows.
|
|
|
Post by Bradman December 25, 2013 (19 of 21)
|
|
AmonRa said:
If you can not do this comparison blind it is next to worthless.
Also, it needs to be level-matched, correct?
|
|
|
Post by AmonRa December 25, 2013 (20 of 21)
|
|
Yes. It is unlikely that HDMI in and analog in would be matched within 0.1 dB with consumer gear, especially with different sources. Louder sounds better, even if it is lower quality.
|
|
