digital out or 5.1 anolog for 2 channel music?

[vnzbd]

I have not yet taken the blu-ray plunge yet but am now looking at the Oppo 93. I am curious on what the consences is for two channel music delivery. My avr, currently being used as a pre-amp is an older but top of the line Marantz when it came out. It does not have any HDMI ports and I would not like to upgrade at this time. I currently feed it from a like aged Marantz DVD player for music and movies through the digital coax. With the purchase of the Oppo I could maintain the same type of feed or change to the 5.1 anolog in. I realize that the 5.1 will carry the lossless formats of which I currently have no media for. I am 90% music/10% movies. I would suspect that the DAC's in either unit would be of similar quality. Is one of these delivery formats considered superior to the other for 2 channel and why?

As always, thanks for the input!

[willland]

Hey Mike,

Long time no talk to.

My NAD T773 receiver does not have HDMI either and I will assure you, the HD audio from my Oppo BDP-83 through 5.1 analog sounds fantastic. I am sure you will experience the same results from your Marantz. If you are going to take the Bluray plunge(great choice with the Oppo 93 [Y]), 5.1 analog is the only way to go and let the Oppo do the decoding of the new HD audio formats.

For CD's, I think you should run a digital coax and a pair of analog RCA's and AB them switching back and forth. If the DAC's are superior in either one, you should hear a difference. My Oppo 83 sounds about the same with digital and analog for CD's. I use my NAD C542 mostly for 2 channel in my HT setup.

Bill

[dtel]

I use the 2 ch analog outputs, never tried anything else. I think it sounds good , better than my last player, it was a non blu ray player, a Pioneer 671 I think it was.

I was going to get a Oppo but wanted the wireless Pandora, Netflix and a few other things built into this one. http://www.samsung.com/us/video/blu-ray-dvd/BD-D6500/ZA

Our Tv had HDMI but my receiver does not, I used the HDMI for the Tv and used the 5.1 analog for the receiver, the separate 2 ch analog outputs went for 2 ch.

There are many out there now, decide what you want to spend and compare features and go from there.

I like the one I got, the wireless works great no problems but I do not like the way Blu Ray works as far as the menu works, DVDs were much better IMO. Could be I am old and do not learn new tricks easily ? [:$]

[vnzbd]

Gentlemen,

Thanks for you input. dtel, my setup will be similar to yours as my TV has the HDMI in but not my reciever. I too am looking for the wireless aspect and would like to do Netflix/Blockbuster streaming. The Oppo 93 offers the typical digital outs as well as HDMI and 7.1 anolog which I will feed the receiver for movies. There is a setting that you need to change on the 93 to turn the anologs strickly into a 2 channel. The upgraded 95 has both the 7.1 and dedicated 2 channel, but at $500 more and based on the review comparisons between the quality of audio from both units, I cannot warrent the xtra money for the 95.

I suspect I will use the digital out for 2 channel. I use that now with my marantz DVD and it is very good. I have heard that the Samsung players are some of the slowest on the market as far as load times. The price on your Samsung is very good. Do you feel it is up to speed and did it come with all of the neccesary wireless equipment in the box?

Bill, Thanks for the advice, I do look forward to playing with a new toy! Thanks for the call. After a move and other reorganization in my life I have misplaced my phone book. Please shoot me an email with your # and I will give you a shout. Talk soon.

[russ69]

In most cases the analog outputs will sound the best. If you buy a quality player, it's assumed you are buying it for the quality audio. Good players have good DACs and good sounding analog circuits. That is how they are designed to work. The bypasses are more for convenience than anything else.

[Chris A]

It does not have any HDMI ports and I would not like to upgrade at this time.

That's too bad...[:S] Updated HDMI is the reason why most AVPs/AVRs are being sold, IMHO. The decrease in noise and increase in fidelity is pretty spectacular--at least to my ears. I had an Outlaw AVP that had AVI inputs only (i.e., digital video only). I didn't realize how much fidelity I was losing by not upgrading to HDMI, including CDs, SACDs, DVD-As, and NOT playing all manner of Blu-Ray formats.

Chris

[dtel]

It does not have any HDMI ports and I would not like to upgrade at this time.

That's too bad... Updated HDMI is the reason why most AVPs/AVRs are being sold, IMHO. The decrease in noise and increase in fidelity is pretty spectacular--at least to my ears. I had an Outlaw AVP that had AVI inputs only (i.e., digital video only). I didn't realize how much fidelity I was losing by not upgrading to HDMI, including CDs, SACDs, DVD-As, and NOT playing all manner of Blu-Ray formats.

Chris

I didn't know that, thanks. I was wanting to get a receiver with HDMI and figured I would just wait a while.

I can guarantee if I buy a receiver with HDMI they will change to something else.

[dtel]

The wireless is built in and setup was easy and works great. As far as speed it seems a little slow but not terrible. Many new players are now including wireless but the ones with the apps built in are better and easier to set up like for Pandora, Netflix and blockbuster.

When I was looking I found many with wireless already built in so I would say shop around and read the reviews, not necessarily the ones from the manufacturer. I would also look for Stereo analog outputs so you can try both and see what sounds best, most have that any way I think.

I wanted the Oppo also but like you said the extra money was the problem. I figure this player will last until the next changes come around and by then I will have the HDMI on the receiver or whatever the next thing is ? I read somewhere there already working on something better than HDMI and it will be replaced......they have to keep up buying one way or another. [8o|]

[vnzbd]

Cask, I was under the impression that the 7.1 anolog our would carry the same formats(SACD, etc) that the HDMI would carry, only in a non digital stream. What are the differences as you see them?

[Chris A]

Cask, I was under the impression that the 7.1 analog our would carry the same formats(SACD, etc) that the HDMI would carry, only in a non digital stream. What are the differences as you see them?

The analog outputs of my digital disk players and analog inputs of my preceding Outlaw AVP-the one that that could not accept the higher rate bitstreams of SACD, DVD-A and DTS--were poor. They exhibited a large drop in signal/noise and a significant drop in dynamic range of at least 20 dB relative to the HDMI (digital) connections. S/PDIF optical audio connections are crippled by manufacturer's standards to--apparently--stop music pirating...(if you can believe it). HDMI carries full SACD/DVD-A bit rates and the full dynamic range of even PCM (CD) sources - analog doesn't.

I also avoid the use of analog RCA (i..e., non-balanced) cables
since you can easily hear the increased 20+ dB
50/60 Hz noise floor over that of balanced (i.e., XLR) cables. The AVP that I use has XLR connectors for both its analog inputs, and outputs to the amplifiers. The balanced connections are orders of magnitude more resistant to noise
and retain all the dynamic range of the original source.

"So what?" you might ask... I have found that even PCM (CD) fidelity music
is compromised by using analog or even S/PDIF optical inputs over HDMI digital
connections. Here
is an example CD that will immediately let you know if you have issues
with your analog pathway: if you hear any distortion whatsoever, you
will know that you've got a problem with your signal path.

Chris

[vnzbd]

Cask, Thanks for the reply. In checking you system in your profile it is very impressive, something for all of us to aspire to! Were I might not be able to take the HDMI reciever plunge right now I will certainly keep it in mind for the future.

[pzannucci]

vnzbd,

If you get a blu-ray with full blown DTS-HD Master, Dolby TrueHD, or PCM/LPCM (umcompressed) decoding internally and they have a good set of dacs/opamps, such as the 93SE, your sound quality will be excellent. You just have to make sure that you use quality wiring and connections. HDMI is easier and of course this is also based on you can get better digital conversion with your blu-ray vs your internal dacs. Problem is if you don't have HDMI ports, you really can't decode the better bit streams anyway.

I have one of the earlier Panasonic blu-ray players with all the conversion built in going to an Anthem AVM-30. For an inexpensive blu-ray player the sound quality is excellent though I only use stereo.

[Chris A]

Were I might not be able to take the HDMI receiver plunge right now I will certainly keep it in mind for the future.

Clearly, I understand this. I was out of the audio hobby for 22 years while I raised a family and did the corporate chase, etc.

I've applied discretionary extra income generated via teaching to my substitute "middle-aged motorcycle" habit--I find it's much cheaper than boats or expensive autos, and I get to enjoy it every day--rain or shine.

Chris

[Mike Lindsey]

I am sure you will experience the same results from your Marantz. If you are going to take the Bluray plunge(great choice with the Oppo 93 ), 5.1 analog is the only way to go and let the Oppo do the decoding of the new HD audio formats.

I wanted to believe this as well, but am not so sure. I have a BDP-83SE connected to a Anthem D2. I am using the HDMI cable and the 5.1 inputs, and have experimented with both. After long deliberation I prefer the HDMI input. The 2-ch analog outs on the BDP-83SE sound fantastic though (great DAC). I have those connected to the BBX on my 2-ch rig.

You're just down the road from me. Maybe you can swing by and we can fine tune it.

Mike

[willland]

I am sure you will experience the same results from your Marantz. If you are going to take the Bluray plunge(great choice with the Oppo 93 ), 5.1 analog is the only way to go and let the Oppo do the decoding of the new HD audio formats.

I wanted to believe this as well, but am not so sure. I have a BDP-83SE connected to a Anthem D2. I am using the HDMI cable and the 5.1 inputs, and have experimented with both. After long deliberation I prefer the HDMI input. The 2-ch analog outs on the BDP-83SE sound fantastic though (great DAC). I have those connected to the BBX on my 2-ch rig.

Mike

Mike,

Thanks for your imput. I do agree with using HDMI when available.

I am not implying that multichannel analog is superior to HDMI, I was just suggesting to Mike(Vnzbd) that being he does not have an HDMI receiver, he should use the multichannel outputs on the BD player and let it decode Dolby TrueHD and DTS-MA. Until he upgrades to an HDMI equipped receiver, analog multichannel will yeild the best sound quality over regular DTS or DD. My NAD is not equipped with HDMI and I have to do the same.

As far as CD's go, I think he should just experiment and see which has better DAC's, his older receiver or new BD player.

You're just down the road from me. Maybe you can swing by and we can fine tune it.

Let's make it happen.

[pzannucci]

Again, it will all depend on the quality of the decoding on either end, the player or the processor/receiver.

The higher quality analog outputs on the player, the better it will fare compared to the analog conversion elsewhere. You don't know until you do the comparison. If you don't have any hdmi inputs, there is only one answer as on my AVM-30.

If you have a very good receiver or processor with HDMI, there really isn't any good reason to have analog outputs. The processing is done elsewhere and you have a simple one cable connection. If your processor isn't very good but has HDMI, your analog outputs into it likely won't fare any better then the HDMI connection.[:S]

[t-man]

Again, it will all depend on the quality of the decoding on either end, the player or the processor/receiver.

The higher quality analog outputs on the player, the better it will fare compared to the analog conversion elsewhere. You don't know until you do the comparison. If you don't have any hdmi inputs, there is only one answer as on my AVM-30.

If you have a very good receiver or processor with HDMI, there really isn't any good reason to have analog outputs. The processing is done elsewhere and you have a simple one cable connection. If your processor isn't very good but has HDMI, your analog outputs into it likely won't fare any better then the HDMI connection.

This is how I've always approached this issue as well. I am confused by your last sentence. Are you referring to the processor in the DVD/CD/Bluray player? If so, that makes sense. In other words, if your optical player has better DACs use analog (bypasses the DACs in the receiver). If your receiver has better DACs use the digital connections like Coax, Optical or HDMI, which will bypass the internal DACs of the optical player and use the DACs of the receiver. You can't use both at the same time.

[Mike Lindsey]

Mike,

Thanks for your imput. I do agree with using HDMI when available.

I am not implying that multichannel analog is superior to HDMI, I was just suggesting to Mike(Vnzbd) that being he does not have an HDMI receiver, he should use the multichannel outputs on the BD player and let it decode Dolby TrueHD and DTS-MA. Until he upgrades to an HDMI equipped receiver, analog multichannel will yeild the best sound quality over regular DTS or DD. My NAD is not equipped with HDMI and I have to do the same.

OK, I missed that he didn't have an HDMI receiver. My Denon 4800 was like that prior to the Anthem, and like you I always used the Analog inputs on the 4800 for DTS, DD5.1, etc. The DACs were just better on the DVD player.

Mike

[pzannucci]

If you have a very good receiver or processor with HDMI, there really isn't any good reason to have analog outputs. The processing is done elsewhere and you have a simple one cable connection. If your processor isn't very good but has HDMI, your analog outputs into it likely won't fare any better then the HDMI connection.

This is how I've always approached this issue as well. I am confused by your last sentence. Are you referring to the processor in the DVD/CD/Bluray player? If so, that makes sense. In other words, if your optical player has better DACs use analog (bypasses the DACs in the receiver). If your receiver has better DACs use the digital connections like Coax, Optical or HDMI, which will bypass the internal DACs of the optical player and use the DACs of the receiver. You can't use both at the same time.

t-man,

What I was stating is that if you have an hdmi connection and your processor can decode newer blu-ray audio formats, the quality of the sound may well be up to the quality of the decoding and analog sections. The processor using hdmi may sound better or if the player has excellent decoding with 5/7.1 outputs, it may sound better using analog connections. Problem being if you processor isn't as good as your analog outputs from blu-ray, maybe you'll never hear the difference because of the processor's poor analog section using direct in.

Since there is no hdmi in this instance, it doesn't matter. It's all down to the end quality of the down stream component (processor or receiver).

[vnzbd]

OK, another question that is not exactly where I am at but could end up there. I stated that I am looking at the Oppo 93, but I haven't totally ruled out the 95. All the reviews I have read state that it is almost imposible to distinguish between them audiably but.....

So someone does buy the Oppo 95 that is said to have amazing DACs for all channels including for 2 channel anolog and also another set of 7.1 anolog out for the advanced audio formats. Of course it also has HDMI out. The new happy owner of this unit is installing this into their home theater system and they have a lower/mid quality avr that has HDMI in but also has lower/mid quality DACs vs the Oppo's 7.1 out.

What is the general concensious on the best way to install the unit at that point?

Thanks again!