Post by padraig January 9, 2012 (61 of 399)
|
|
pgmdir said:
Just had a frustrating experience: The receiver in my much used secondary system decided to cause problems. So I went looking...What happened to analog MC inputs on receivers? I can't find one with analog inputs. I don't want to use HDMI!!! what's the point of spending more for a player with a great audio section?
ARrrghhhh.
Try Anthem or Arcam, both have analogue inputs.
|
|
|
Post by pgmdir January 9, 2012 (62 of 399)
|
|
Not 5.1 or 6.1 analog. Two channel is easy. It appears that if you have a MC capable SACD player, you're going to need something other than an AV receiver. Too bad. Makes the niche even smaller.
|
|
|
|
|
|
pgmdir said:
Not 5.1 or 6.1 analog. Two channel is easy. It appears that if you have a MC capable SACD player, you're going to need something other than an AV receiver. Too bad. Makes the niche even smaller.
Some higher end receivers and all prepros retain Mch analog inputs, but the trend is increasingly toward HDMI for Mch to save cost by eliminating duplication. Mch analog is there primarily for compatiblility with older "legacy" gear, but is being phased out.
I am happier with my Oppo 93 player via HDMI into my prepro than I think I would be with an expensive player via analog. It performs quite admirably and satisfyingly via HDMI, at least with the Oppo. Personally, I think it best to invest in a better receiver or prepro with a decent player rather than overinvest in a player with "better" analog outs.
Aside from being less expensive, it enables what are to me essential Room EQ and other DSP capabilities without excessive d-a-d-a conversions. I think you have to spend a whole lot for an analog connected system to equal or debatably exceed the HDMI connection in a good system. That is also what several friends with Mch systems approaching $100K have concluded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobpaule January 9, 2012 (65 of 399)
|
|
|
padraig said:
Try Anthem or Arcam, both have analogue inputs.
If you want extreme versatility in addition to 7.1 RCAs, look at Onkyo/Integra. Look for a second hand DTR-70.3, all the bells and whistles of the 80.3 minus the more sophisticated PSU.
Or even better, save up and to the separates route, while still stuck at the same DACs for the last 4 generations, the new DHC-80.3 also sports stereo XLR inputs, and, just like the 70.3 and 80.3 DTRs offers a substantially improved and HDMI 1.4 board with a very sophisticated VP, so far free of the notoriously failing Reon 4 HDMI port boards.
Anthem D1 and D2 sound don't hold a candle to Onkyo/Integra, shoot me but i had both units before i discovered the truth.
I had an Arcam 5 channel amp for 3 months and the day it sold on Audiogon i threw a little party, hotter than a housefire and dull, did they move production to China for all lines already?
The Marantz 7005 is a different beast, a few highly respected reviewers gave it very good points, not as A/V versatile but a good contender.
Or, if you want fully balanced path sell your car and get a Theta:)
|
|
|
Post by electro January 25, 2012 (66 of 399)
|
|
Kal Rubinson said:
First, the Primare is based on the Oppo 93 and the operational manual is nearly identical.
Second, no mention is made anywhere in the documents about the resolution of the analog audio processing of SACD even though the documents say that it has "a proprietary audio stage.."
Third, no mention is made anywhere in the documents about the resolution of the HDMI output for SACD.
Fourth, there is no mention anywhere of an SACD-related resolution specifications.
So, while it would be nice if this was an OPPO-based player that processed/output 176.4, I see no evidence of it.
Firstly 176.4 is NOT native DSD SACD, but a PCM downsample of SACD
This months HI-FI News (UK mag) gives this unit a glowing report, and shows that analogue outs are full SACD, up to 100Khz. While it has a breakout explaining that you have to select various options (such as all speakers must be set to large) and that there is a dedicated DSD output stage, it does not explain if time delay can be added to speakers to compensate for different distances to the listener while remaining as full resolution DSD. Almost all players have to do this in PCM, apart from a couple of Sony machines (see my first post, that started this thread).
See review halfway down page as a pdf.
http://www.primare.net/product.asp?ProductID=52&d=5&c=1
|
|
|
|
|
|
electro said:
Firstly 176.4 is NOT native DSD SACD, but a PCM downsample of SACD
This months HI-FI News (UK mag) gives this unit a glowing report, and shows that analogue outs are full SACD, up to 100Khz. While it has a breakout explaining that you have to select various options (such as all speakers must be set to large) and that there is a dedicated DSD output stage, it does not explain if time delay can be added to speakers to compensate for different distances to the listener while remaining as full resolution DSD. Almost all players have to do this in PCM, apart from a couple of Sony machines (see my first post, that started this thread).
See review halfway down page as a pdf.
http://www.primare.net/product.asp?ProductID=52&d=5&c=1
Firstly, I never said that 176.2 is native DSD resolution but that one does hope for at least that.
However, the reviewer states: "Cambridge’s 751BD forces a downsample of all SACD to 88.2kHz LPCM for its analogue outs, but the Crystal DACs at the heart of Primare’s BD32 allow SACD to be realised as intended, with a 100kHz+ response." Really?
Paul Miller adds that, for SACD: "the response rolls away by –11dB/60kHz to –37dB/100kHz." Hardly what is implied by the comment above.
Cannot say it is not a nice sounding player but there's nothing in the docs/specs to excite one's anticipation.
|
|
|
Post by mercutio January 25, 2012 (68 of 399)
|
|
"What happened to analog MC inputs on receivers? I can't find one with analog inputs. I don't want to use HDMI!!!"
Just bought a Yamaha 667 for $319. It has pre-ins and pre-outs and good amplification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
mercutio said:
"What happened to analog MC inputs on receivers? I can't find one with analog inputs. I don't want to use HDMI!!!"
They are disappearing from AVRs, just as they are from universal/BR players. HDMI is better for you.
|
|
|
Post by mercutio January 26, 2012 (70 of 399)
|
|
"HDMI is better for you."
I agree. And economical. Why have an expensive player when all one needs from a player is an HDMI signal?
On the other hand, having the pre-ins on the AV receiver allows one to revert at any time to the time-wasting and expensive habit of switching in multi-channel players.
|
|
