Post by glidepath February 26, 2011 (41 of 50)
|
|
I could not agree more Andy, but admit I don't have the best equipment, ears or expertise. I finally began to listen to multi channel material (thank you OPPO!)two years ago and was mesmerized. Better a late bloomer than a never bloomer I guess. Thanks for the interesting discussion!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks glidepath. I have been tracking the Oppo BDP-83 thread since its inception. It strikes me that you are not alone in having discovered Mch because of this machine and its capabilities. Even though they may have bought it for its video prowess, it seems many others have become interested in SACD because the Oppo supported it.
Oppo is not the only "universal" machine, of course, but it led the way and has been a smashing worldwide success. I think this trend has been very helpful in bringing new fans to both SACD and hi rez multichannel music.
|
|
|
Post by Stanbury March 13, 2011 (43 of 50)
|
|
ARQuint said:
Definitely not!...Covered an Audite disc of Janacek quartets for April.
The magazine's starting a new music item, as people reading all periodicals seem to love lists. It's called "Fave Fives" (don't blame me for the title) and I've got one in the May/June issue - my top five "surrounded" classical recordings; that is, those that are supposed to have direct sound in the rear channels.
Thanks for the Janacek review...I'll have to get that recording.
But it looks like your editor is engaged in a war against surround sound. The front cover of TAS no longer claims "multichannel audio", and his editorial starting on page 12 of the April TAS issue is truly vehement in its disdain for surround sound.
Woops! Did I forget about April fools?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stanbury said:
Thanks for the Janacek review...I'll have to get that recording.
But it looks like your editor is engaged in a war against surround sound. The front cover of TAS no longer claims "multichannel audio", and his editorial starting on page 12 of the April TAS issue is truly vehement in its disdain for surround sound.
Woops! Did I forget about April fools?
I think you are entirely right about Bob Harley in TAS. It is clear he would rather feature reviews on obscure stereo gear - a Hegel(?) integrated amp that'll sell like hotcakes - than on Mch sound, except for the occasional and rare figleaf of a review, such as the Classe prepro a while ago. I think his meandering editorial in the current issue once again makes his priorities clear: Mch = "gimmicks", the roots of recorded music are stereo (I thought they were mono), etc. He is about promoting, protecting and defending the high end manufacturers above all else. And since they, by and large, will not or cannot deliver Mch like the Asian mass marketers, it is stereo and only stereo that he promotes. Any pretense that TAS is truly about the abso!ute sound, rather than about the annointed high end manufacturers club, is long gone in my view. Yet, he has told me in exchanges on his forum that many of the equipment gurus on his staff have Mch systems. Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by 51surr March 14, 2011 (45 of 50)
|
|
Is it better, if using HDMI, to have an AVP that accepts pure DSD, such as the Integra DHC 80.2, as opposed to an AVP that doesn't accept DSD, such as the Marantz AV7005? It will be used in an audio only MCH system. Yes I know the player will need to convert DSD to PCM for use with the Marantz unit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
51surr said:
Is it better, if using HDMI, to have an AVP that accepts pure DSD, such as the Integra DHC 80.2, as opposed to an AVP that doesn't accept DSD, such as the Marantz AV7005? It will be used in an audio only MCH system. Yes I know the player will need to convert DSD to PCM for use with the Marantz unit.
I have made this comparison many times but the differences among processors is much more signficant than the difference between sending DSD and PCM. That said, I almost always use bass management and room EQ which requires a conversion to PCM in the player or in the processor. Keeping the signal as DSD for D/A means depriving the system of these functions which, IMHO, are much more important for high quality audio than the DSD vs. PCM issue.
Kal
|
|
|
Post by 51surr March 14, 2011 (47 of 50)
|
|
Kal Rubinson said:
I have made this comparison many times but the differences among processors is much more signficant than the difference between sending DSD and PCM. That said, I almost always use bass management and room EQ which requires a conversion to PCM in the player or in the processor. Keeping the signal as DSD for D/A means depriving the system of these functions which, IMHO, are much more important for high quality audio than the DSD vs. PCM issue.
Kal
Thanks Kal
I plan on using the bass management and EQ functions of the AVP and interpreting from you then the more important aspect is the processing power of the AVP which answers my question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
51surr said:
Is it better, if using HDMI, to have an AVP that accepts pure DSD, such as the Integra DHC 80.2, as opposed to an AVP that doesn't accept DSD, such as the Marantz AV7005? It will be used in an audio only MCH system. Yes I know the player will need to convert DSD to PCM for use with the Marantz unit.
I have an 80.2 and, in my opinion, DSD sounds noticeably better, even though it is converted to PCM in the processor for full DSP processing. Others in the Oppo BDP 83 thread at AVS have reached the same conclusion on other gear. But, Kal's point is right. The choice of processor may make a bigger difference, and in the case of the 7005 vs. the 80.2, Audyssey XT/32 in the Integra will also make a noticeable positive difference. Having had prior versions of Audyssey MultEQ XT, I think XT/32 is super, especially on music, and well worth the price of admission.
|
|
|
Post by Stanbury March 14, 2011 (49 of 50)
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
I think you are entirely right about Bob Harley in TAS. It is clear he would rather feature reviews on obscure stereo gear - a Hegel(?) integrated amp that'll sell like hotcakes - than on Mch sound, except for the occasional and rare figleaf of a review, such as the Classe prepro a while ago. I think his meandering editorial in the current issue once again makes his priorities clear: Mch = "gimmicks", the roots of recorded music are stereo (I thought they were mono)...
Mono indeed! All that Mr. Harley writes about the advantages of stereo are even more appropriate to mono.
|
|
|
Post by 51surr March 15, 2011 (50 of 50)
|
|
Fitzcaraldo215 said:
I have an 80.2 and, in my opinion, DSD sounds noticeably better, even though it is converted to PCM in the processor for full DSP processing. Others in the Oppo BDP 83 thread at AVS have reached the same conclusion on other gear. But, Kal's point is right. The choice of processor may make a bigger difference, and in the case of the 7005 vs. the 80.2, Audyssey XT/32 in the Integra will also make a noticeable positive difference. Having had prior versions of Audyssey MultEQ XT, I think XT/32 is super, especially on music, and well worth the price of admission.
Thanks for the response and information.
|
|
