How did you guys miss the first Universal Blu-ray player?? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : How did you guys miss the first Universal Blu-ray player??



Mr Peabody
01-28-2009, 08:25 PM
That's right, the Denon DVD-A1UD is the first. It will play most anything you have, SACD, DVD-A, CD, DVD, and of course Blu-ray.

http://www.blu-ray.com/players/players.php?p=1&id=120

But, yeah, it exists, you might want to keep waiting on the Oppo if this price is any where near true.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10113801-1.html

pixelthis
01-28-2009, 11:03 PM
NOT overlooking it, mr pee pee, but theres one small problem...
TWENTY FIVE HUNDRED BUCKS

Yeah, let me pull that outta my BUTT.
I am saving so I DONT HAVE TO EAT cheap dog food when I RETIRE,
I am aiming for expensive dog food.
For 2500$ I could have a pair of nautilus speakers, I could finally make the jump
from receiver peon to cheap seperates peon.
I could buy sex from a real girl.
I could rent a place where cockroaches are optional.
I only have two kidneys, and I WAS SAVING ONE for an emergency.
And theres nobody left in town stupid enough to loan me money.
TWENTY FIVE HUNDRED BUCKS for a disc player.
GAWD.:1:

Rich-n-Texas
01-29-2009, 05:30 AM
I'll send the link to my boss. He's a big Denon fan, and since he ALSO still has a job, he'll probably jump on it. :sosp:

Worf101
01-29-2009, 05:40 AM
Great response Pix... For once you and I are in TOTAL agreement. I don't know what brand of crack those guys are smokin' but they need to give it up.

Da Worfster

Luvin Da Blues
01-29-2009, 05:51 AM
I could buy sex from a real girl.


Real IS better Pix, ya should try it sometime. Even better when you don't have to pay for it.:wink5:

02audionoob
01-29-2009, 05:55 AM
Real IS better Pix, ya should try it sometime. Even better when you don't have to pay for it.:wink5:

When it's the real thing...One way or another, you pay.

Luvin Da Blues
01-29-2009, 06:28 AM
When it's the real thing...One way or another, you pay.

You maybe right but with the right lady it's a small premium to pay.:)

bobsticks
01-29-2009, 09:01 AM
I didn't. I got the PS3.

Rich-n-Texas
01-29-2009, 09:04 AM
I'm wit sticks.

Mr Peabody
01-29-2009, 05:29 PM
Technically, the Denon plays DVD-A, can the PS3 do that?

Pix, what's your point :)

LDB sound like a bit of a romantic.

Luvin Da Blues
01-29-2009, 05:38 PM
LDB sound like a bit of a romantic.

Psst Mr.P, don't let that be known around here tho, OK.

I'll never hear the end of it from Rich.

pixelthis
01-29-2009, 11:13 PM
When it's the real thing...One way or another, you pay.

ESPECIALLY when you get to my age.
But no matter the age, you do ALWAYS pay, one way or the other.:1:

pixelthis
01-29-2009, 11:24 PM
Technically, the Denon plays DVD-A, can the PS3 do that?

Pix, what's your point :)

LDB sound like a bit of a romantic.

My POINT?
Well, gee, un, lets see,....
OH yeah...

TWENTY FIVE HUNDRED BUCKS

AND FOR WHAT?
Much as I love the idea of SACD, it and DVD-A is dead, basically.
A bLU AUDIO FORMAT will drive a stake into its heart for good.
As for performance, BLU is like CD when it first came out, mainly that a cheap Blu player
will porbably do about as good as an expensive one.
All you get with an expensive one is refinement and a few extra features.
Like playing obsolete audio formats most have never heard of...
Now if I were rich enough to use a crack ho for a footstool on a daily basis
(instead of just for the holidays) then sure why not?
The Lambo insurance is that much a month.
But I LIVE IN A WORLD where 2500 bucks is a new set of Beemer speakers,
five months rent, a pre-pro that I have craved forever, etc.
VIDEO is not like analog audio, you get only very tiny improvements by throwing money at it, and I can get a lot bigger bang for the buck than a very marginal improvement
I would get with the Denon.
Heck, thats a weekend in Vegas!:1:

nightflier
01-30-2009, 10:03 AM
Maybe the real issue is that it's $2500 for a made-in-China Denon. I'm sure if it was a Levinson, people would be wondering why the price was so low.

But yeah, so far, the only realistic option for us regular guys who want a universal player is the Oppo, when & if it finally arrives. For $2500 you could buy a pretty sweet dedicated SACD player, and BR player, and still have money left over for some software to boot. Someone up at Denon corporate is smoking pot, big time.

Rich-n-Texas
01-30-2009, 10:53 AM
Psst Mr.P, don't let that be known around here tho, OK.

I'll never hear the end of it from Rich.
Well, when you live in... where is it, Kenelowa Bitter Cold, what else do you have to do?

Pix couldn't have said it any better eh? :D

pixelthis
01-30-2009, 02:00 PM
BUT LET ME STATE, 2500 bucks aint bad for some things.
I had a windfall a few years back(3500 bucks), an exelent time to upgrade the B&W's.
Instead I wasted it on bills, what a bonehead thing to do.
Having to save for an uncertain future sucks, really.
BUT A DISC PLAYER?
I have seen the 2500$ dedecated CD players from people like LINN.
practically a work of art, but certainly out of my range.
You have to go for value when you are at the bottom of the fish bowl
2500 SPEAKERS?
Sure, when its time to upgrade, speakers are a major part of your system and long lasting.
Too long lasting sometimes when you have to justify new ones to the ol sperm bank.
But a 2500 disc playing anything?
PHOOEY:1:

Mr Peabody
01-30-2009, 05:38 PM
Pix, you are bassackwards again. What good are $2,500.00 speakers with a budget player? If your source isn't pulling the info off the software then your speakers isn't going to play it. You used to make fun of Rich for having B&W with a receiver, get you shtuff straight. You must be sharing the crack with your ho's. Ho's, what's the deal, you used to be a cop. Although, that is one scary thought. You'd really have a stroke to find out the price of my CDP.

For a bit of perspective, not that I'd buy the player, the Marantz 8002, Denon 3800, Sony 5000es & the new Elite flagship are BR players at or above $1999.00, so if you have a universal player for $500.00 more, it don't seem like such a bad deal.

pixelthis
02-01-2009, 08:46 PM
Pix, you are bassackwards again. What good are $2,500.00 speakers with a budget player? If your source isn't pulling the info off the software then your speakers isn't going to play it. You used to make fun of Rich for having B&W with a receiver, get you shtuff straight. You must be sharing the crack with your ho's. Ho's, what's the deal, you used to be a cop. Although, that is one scary thought. You'd really have a stroke to find out the price of my CDP.

For a bit of perspective, not that I'd buy the player, the Marantz 8002, Denon 3800, Sony 5000es & the new Elite flagship are BR players at or above $1999.00, so if you have a universal player for $500.00 more, it don't seem like such a bad deal.

Its called the law of diminishing returns.
You might think that a 2,000 CD player sounds better, but you only think so.
ALL BLU players will output basically a 1080p signal.
Unless there is something wrong with the player the picture is going to be so close to perfect that it will outperform even the most expensive monitor.
ALL you get with a 2,000 blu player is more features, maybe better build q,
and the right to brag about wasting 2000 on something you could have bought for five.
In other words brag about being a dunderass.
Maybe an aluminum faceplate.
You wanna waste money, it YOUR money, you are the crackhead sir.
I listen to most music on my comp now anyway, a computer file is a computer
file if played off of a silver disc or a hard drive, my entire lossless collection takes less than a 100 gigs, and sounds as good as any CD.
I might (emphasize might) one day get something like a CAMBRIDGE in the 500 buck range, but I doubt it, no need.
I have enough things on the list (and not enough money) to waste it on stuff, or performance only a dog could hear or an eagle could see.
I HAVE A RANGE OF 12-12AND A HALF KZ on hearing, good for someone my age,
I need a 20 to 20,000 hz cd player like you need a condom.:1:

Ajani
02-02-2009, 08:02 AM
Great response Pix... For once you and I are in TOTAL agreement. I don't know what brand of crack those guys are smokin' but they need to give it up.

Da Worfster

Seconded! (or thirded or fourthed or whatever)...

$2.5K for a Blu Ray Player is exceedingly steep... When (actually, IF, and that's a big IF) I reach to the stage where I'm dropping in excess of $10K on speakers, then I'll likely look to ditch the Benchmark (but up to that point, a $1K source is as much as I'll need)

Mr Peabody
02-02-2009, 05:33 PM
Ajani, you think a balanced system consists of speakers 10 times the price of the source? That's insane. I really don't see what you guys think you're getting out of expensive speakers with nothing to feed them.

2nd, 3rd or 4th Pix if you wish, it's no different to worship a mega buck speaker with nothing to back it up than some one who is willing to spend extra for an aluminum face and elegant looks on a BR player, or correction, "universal" player which is a big difference.

Ajani
02-03-2009, 10:38 AM
Ajani, you think a balanced system consists of speakers 10 times the price of the source? That's insane. I really don't see what you guys think you're getting out of expensive speakers with nothing to feed them.

2nd, 3rd or 4th Pix if you wish, it's no different to worship a mega buck speaker with nothing to back it up than some one who is willing to spend extra for an aluminum face and elegant looks on a BR player, or correction, "universal" player which is a big difference.

Don't get me wrong... I appreciate the value of a good source... it's just that at this stage I really can't see a reason to upgrade my source...

Also it's not 10:1 price difference, more like 6:1 (you need to count the cost of the transport and digital cable in the price of the source) - though hopefully my explanation below will make it clear that I'm not suggesting pairing a $1.5K source with a $10K pair of speakers as a balanced system...

Good sound can be had by pairing expensive speakers with a moderately priced source and the opposite is also true...

My approach is to get a really good source 1st (can be had at a much, much, much cheaper price than a really good pair of speakers) and then add a good amp and speakers...

Consider some of the major audio publications (such as Stereophile and The Absolute Sound)... according to their reviews, several real high end digital (not analog) sources can be had at less than $1.5K (as low as $900)... a handful of real high end amps (with modest power output) can be had at $1.5K+, while real high end speakers tend to start around $4.5K (unless you are willing to accept very limited dynamic range or have a smaller room)... So basically, you could spend $1K on a CD Player, $1.5K on an integrated amp and $4.5K on a pair of speakers and have a proper 'high end' setup... To really improve on the speakers, you'd need to jump to in excess of $10K (at which time you'd want to upgrade your source and amp as well)... so I'm not actually suggesting using a $1K CD player and a $10K pair of speakers...

If I was to use a price ratio (based on components I like), I'd spend about $1.5K on source, $1.5K to $2K on an Integrated amp and $3K on speakers (for a small to medium room)... I'm certain I could reverse the price of the source and speakers and still get a good sounding system (but based on components I'm familiar with, I'd expect the first ratio to be the most satisfying)...

Mr Peabody
02-03-2009, 07:04 PM
A sigh of relief.

I know you aren't a big Dynaudio fan but knowing what they can do I have to disagree on not being able to find a "high end" speaker at $1,5k. Well, I haven't seen the prices recently, we may have to bump that up to $2.5k if we can't include used. You should hear my Audience 60's pushed by an Adcom 5500. They rock, and you would not believe the amount of good clean bass from a single 6 1/2" driver. If I was buying again, I could be very happy with the Focus 110. I wouldn't put the Focus speaker on the Adcom system. It's what I call my R&R system. I'd probably check out the Excite. But the Focus in my main system I think would be fine.

Ajani
02-03-2009, 07:34 PM
A sigh of relief.

I know you aren't a big Dynaudio fan but knowing what they can do I have to disagree on not being able to find a "high end" speaker at $1,5k. Well, I haven't seen the prices recently, we may have to bump that up to $2.5k if we can't include used. You should hear my Audience 60's pushed by an Adcom 5500. They rock, and you would not believe the amount of good clean bass from a single 6 1/2" driver. If I was buying again, I could be very happy with the Focus 110. I wouldn't put the Focus speaker on the Adcom system. It's what I call my R&R system. I'd probably check out the Excite. But the Focus in my main system I think would be fine.

When I say High End, I'm referring to the major audio mags' definition... So in the case of Stereophile - Class A... At $1.5K You can get a number of excellent speakers but they will all be regarded as Class B by Stereophile (such as the Revel Concerta F12, Monitor Audio RS6 and even the Dynaudio Focus 110 you mentioned)... Now whether the difference between Class A and Class B is that big a deal is debatable... and in my opinion high end starts at Class B (or maybe even C) but SOTA is clearly A...

The Focus 110 and 220 (even though not my favorite speakers) are examples of what I'd personally consider small to medium sized room high end... in their price ranges I'd much rather the Monitor Audio Gold Series GS10 and GS20 (but that's for my specific tastes and only because I preferred the more prominent treble of the MAs to the mildly laid back treble of the Dyns)...

OzzieAudiophile
08-25-2009, 09:25 AM
Hello.

I took a look on the official denon site and downloaded the operating manual.

FINALLY a universal player which plays each type of media (HD-DVD does not count as it's a discontinued format).

According to the operating manual on the official Denon site, the region codes of the discs MUST MATCH the player for blu ray AND DVD. So "Universal" in that sense is untrue.

That means I cannot buy any blu ray movies from the UK/US regions as I live in Australia. That kind of sucks. There's no real disadvantage from anyone in the UK or US as they would be able to obtain 95% of everything worthwhile getting.

Well if I'm going to spend 3.8 to 4K + on any "Universal" players, why would I even short list this player ? I am still restricted by region on my PS3. My 60 GB can play all those now, except dvd-audio (which I can live without).

Ok it doesn't have XLR outs, which leads me to my next question...

For 2-channel audio, would one connect their "Universal" player via the XLR outs or HDMI out ?

My new power amp has xlr ins (FINALLY put myself on the xlr map lol), however the next step is to upgrade my source.

I'm still not convinced of the DVDA1US unit as it does what it claims to say "It's universal in the sense that it can play each form of media - at least most of them", but there's no upscaler, upsampler, no DA converting.

As far as the manual is concerned, there are many menu and configurations available, but it's only marketing tool seems to be the universal playback.

Well looks like there's STILL no one out there who is capable of thinking outside of the box, and deliver a source which is of "high-end" as a Universal Player. XLR connectors
alone is NOT the only feature to meet to be considered in the high end category.

No I don't consider the price tag necessarily as the indicator, but to be honest, I have never known Denon to be near the top brand in the world in the "high end" 2-channel market, and this player won't change that.

Well let's make it clear, I'm not expecting this player to be the one will will prevent me to get an upgrade later, however I have a DVD player which is completely region free, and I got it from a redemption. To buy this player is taking a serious step down in that regard. I have a great number of movies which are of another region, the Denon cannot play them.

Well Denon have some months to correct that if they wish to improve on their sales.

So there is still no universal blu ray player that is region free.

Quite a slack planet we live in. No one willing to take us to the next step of Audio technology.

frahengeo
08-25-2009, 11:50 AM
Hello.

Ok it doesn't have XLR outs, which leads me to my next question...

For 2-channel audio, would one connect their "Universal" player via the XLR outs or HDMI out ?


If XLR connections are available, then it makes sense to use it. It supposedly reduces noise, RF interferences, etc. Although I don't hear excessive noise from my source components via RCA



I'm still not convinced of the DVDA1US unit as it does what it claims to say "It's universal in the sense that it can play each form of media - at least most of them", but there's no upscaler, upsampler, no DA converting.


It utilizes one of the best for upconversion, the Silicon Optix Realta chip. As for DACs, I'm not sure. They've used Burr-Brown in the past...



No I don't consider the price tag necessarily as the indicator, but to be honest, I have never known Denon to be near the top brand in the world in the "high end" 2-channel market, and this player won't change that.


Yes. Denon seems to fall into that category much like its peers (Sony, Pioneer, Yamaha). I never understood this, but imagine that part of might be due to the fact that they cater to people of all different income levels. Its not like a Levinson, or a Krell which only a select few can afford (used market excluded). There is no feeling of exclusivity. Somehow though, I don't think that the Denon A1UDCI will disappoint.

Check out this forum. There are proponents and opponents there.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1048326

The more economically sound solution would be the Oppo BDP-83. There is an Oppo owners thread in that forum as well. Check it out, if you haven't already.

Mr Peabody
08-25-2009, 04:43 PM
I don't remember a brand but Denon's Universal player upsamples music, including Redbook CD to a 32 bit signal. As stated they do use the Silicon Optix for video but also mentions additional algorithms, and dual HDMI, one for video and one for audio.

I forgot I started this thread, now all the sudden we have two going although the 2nd was actually started because of the McIntosh unit.

OzzieAudiophile
08-26-2009, 07:30 AM
Hello frahengeo - thanks for the info about which connection type to go with, I was 99% sure that XLR would be the ideal choice for 2-channel audio. What slightly raised my doubt which is better, or are they the same since HD-Master Audio is a form of "lossess sound".

I sincerely believe that the circuitary is paramount (how the source is built), and the technology used. How it looks, what it looks like, how many features, ease of use of the remote is a far second.

To the unbrainwashed ear, you should be able to trust your own judgement. That is why it took me 7 years to finally locate a worthy Amplifier that could power my speakers. When I found my Xindak Power Amps, it look my listening experience to a totally new level. I can only improve it more on a better source. The PS3 plays back much better than my PC, and the SACD playback is noticable over CD.

I'm thinking about what was said in response to my last post on this thread, Denon, Marantz, Yamaha especially concentrate their R&D on home theatre. Are you going to find Class-A 30K+ power amps from these companies ? Maybe when man find a suitable planet outside out solar system with a breathable atmosphere.

Each brand has their place in the market. The hope of this great forum site is to help people make the right informed decisions to purchase what is best suited to their needs.

I grow tired to hear my peers/colleagues praise HDMI, this brand of cable, that brand, when they have no idea what they are talking about, nor that they wish to learn anyway.

Just because it has a HDMI socket automatically means you can buy a $5 HDMI cable to get the exceptional quality that would found the same elsewhere.

I found a good indicator is try to pick up the component. If you cannot, it's worth the purchase hahaha. Well Xindak power amps, yes trust me, you really don't want to drop that on your foot.

I am going to find it a struggle to justify this Denon universal player over a dedicated CD player with a 384 upscaler such as the Cambridge Audio 840C. I know Apples vs Oranges, but I value my overall listening experience over convenience any time and every time. I will audition the Denon and if sounds just as good at the Cambridge, I will consider it.

Pity the Denon Universal Player release could not of been more badly timed when HDMI 1.4 will spawn it's first demonstrations at the end of this year. You can already purchase cables which support nearly 15.8 Gtz that in many cases 1.4 will demand.

So would I consider a piece of equipment which will not be much use to me in 12 months time ? Don't think so.

I will wait perhaps 2 years for a good selection of HDMI 1.4 fully supported disc players, and when a good selection of 3D movies/games are in the market.

A dedicated CD player with upscaler would be my next upgrade.

frahengeo
08-26-2009, 08:46 AM
Hello frahengeo - thanks for the info about which connection type to go with, I was 99% sure that XLR would be the ideal choice for 2-channel audio. What slightly raised my doubt which is better, or are they the same since HD-Master Audio is a form of "lossess sound".
You will get your HD-Master audio via the 7.1 ch/output (RCA) for multi-channel. I'm not sure whether you can combine the balanced and unbalanced (e.g. Front Left & Right via XLR, and Center, & Surrounds via RCA) with the Denon. For redbook CDs, the XLRs would probably be best, since the DACs in the Denon should be very good.



I'm thinking about what was said in response to my last post on this thread, Denon, Marantz, Yamaha especially concentrate their R&D on home theatre. Are you going to find Class-A 30K+ power amps from these companies ? Maybe when man find a suitable planet outside out solar system with a breathable atmosphere.

Confused about this paragraph...Are saying that an amplifier needs to be Class-A (as oppose to A/B or even D) and cost 30K+ to be something worth using?

Those brands mentioned above did produce great 2-channel audio in the past. Plenty of rare statement pieces. They simply made a business decision to go in a different direction. Check out this website:

http://www.thevintageknob.org/index.html

If you haven't viewed this website and love audio, its a fun place to browse.



I grow tired to hear my peers/colleagues praise HDMI, this brand of cable, that brand, when they have no idea what they are talking about, nor that they wish to learn anyway.
For some, HDMI may not be the way. For others, its single cable convenience may outweigh any potential drawbacks. I think we can all have good debates over different controversies, but "To each his own" is probably the best attitude to have.


I found a good indicator is try to pick up the component. If you cannot, it's worth the purchase hahaha. Well Xindak power amps, yes trust me, you really don't want to drop that on your foot.

I guess if the prices are similar, you could say that you got "more" for your money.


I am going to find it a struggle to justify this Denon universal player over a dedicated CD player with a 384 upscaler such as the Cambridge Audio 840C. I know Apples vs Oranges, but I value my overall listening experience over convenience any time and every time. I will audition the Denon and if sounds just as good at the Cambridge, I will consider it.
If you use your "don't want to drop on foot" evaluation, then Denon should be a contender. It weighs ~41lbs (>18kg).


Pity the Denon Universal Player release could not of been more badly timed when HDMI 1.4 will spawn it's first demonstrations at the end of this year. You can already purchase cables which support nearly 15.8 Gtz that in many cases 1.4 will demand.
If HDMI 1.4 becomes a "must have", then Denon will probably offer it as an upgrade in the future (hardware upgrade, possibly). Denon is known for providing firmware upgrades and this unit is no exception. Sometimes its free sometimes not.

I've been following the progress of the A1UD for some time now. I have their pre/pro and amp, so the universal would've been a great match, but for now I will pass and probably get the Oppo.

You should know that the Manufacturers are way ahead of you. You can wait for the next best thing, but they'll always have the "next best thing" that you will want to wait on. Probably the best thing to do is to keep what you have or give up the hobby altogether.

Good luck

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-26-2009, 10:13 AM
I don't remember a brand but Denon's Universal player upsamples music, including Redbook CD to a 32 bit signal.

This is marketing hype. You cannot create bits that are not in the original source just like when a 1080p signal is unconverted to 2160p, it is still encoded at 1080p resolution. Now you can interpolate extra bits into the 16bit signal, but it would be a repeat of what is already there and simply smoothen the output. It is not creating a full 32bit signal no matter how you slice it. 32bits would have to be the original bitrate for full 32bit resolution to exist. You would be forced to use its analog outputs to gain any benefit, and unless it processes delay, bass management, and volume functions at 32bit precision, the signal would have to be truncated to 24bits to be processed. You could not pass a true 32bit audio signal through HDMI as it is limited to 24bits. Also most amps have a s/n levels much higher than -192db, they are more in the neighborhood of -110 or so.


As stated they do use the Silicon Optix for video but also mentions additional algorithms, and dual HDMI, one for video and one for audio.

Another unnecessary option. Audio is already carried over different wire from the video within the HDMI standard. The better option in this case is what is done by Oppo, and that is to give the user the ability to shut off the video circuitry in a pure audio direct mode. My question would be what if during use each of these HDMI becomes out of sync with each other, how do they correct it?

Denon has added alot of unnecessary options to this player just to justify a $4500 price tag, and create a market distinction between its products and others. I guess if you have enough money to spend on these unnecessary option, you probably don't care. The funny thing is one of the best 32bit DAC's on the market has a dynamic range of 120db which is 20bit performance. There is another very good 32bit DAC, but it is limited to 132db dynamic range. This is less than true 24bit performance. Limitation in intergrated circuit designs in both players and receivers limits us to 120db performance which is equivalent to 20bit performance. Unless intergrated circuit design(and analog as well) improves, 32bit DAC's are a waste of time.

frahengeo
08-26-2009, 10:37 AM
Another unnecessary option. Audio is already carried over different wire from the video within the HDMI standard. The better option in this case is what is done by Oppo, and that is to give the user the ability to shut off the video circuitry in a pure audio direct mode. My question would be what if during use each of these HDMI becomes out of sync with each other, how do they correct it?


I think that dual HDMI has another use for those with multiple monitors (plasma & front projector, etc.). This assumes that the pre/pro or receiver only has 1 hdmi output.


My question would be what if during use each of these HDMI becomes out of sync with each other, how do they correct it?

I remember reading that this is where Denon Link 4 becomes effective.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-26-2009, 11:31 AM
I think that dual HDMI has another use for those with multiple monitors (plasma & front projector, etc.). This assumes that the pre/pro or receiver only has 1 hdmi output.

There are quite a few receivers and pre/pro that double as switching devices with two HDMI outputs which make including that in a players a wasteful option. I have a 60" kuros plasma and a projector in my reference system, and my pre/pro does the switching for the system. My player does not need two HDMI outputs to accommodate this. Anyone buying a $4500 players would probably already have switching facilities included in their system which makes this option redundant and unnecessary.

If you send one HDMI output to your television and another to your receiver it makes snyc'ing your signals via the HDMI TDMS encoding impossible. This will increase the chances of your audio and video being out of snyc. Then you have to create another option designed to sync them up. This is unnecessary, and requires even more processing than is needed on your audio and video signals.



I remember reading that this is where Denon Link 4 becomes effective.

Denon Link 4 is for connecting an all Denon system. I would be curious how effective this approach would be using a downstream components for multiple manufacturers. Few people assemble entire systems from just one manufacturer.

Another issue I have with this approach is it assumes that high resolution audio will come in the form of PCM encoding. As the music reviewer at Blu-ray.com and some film industry publications I have reviewed quite a few music only titles on Blu-ray disc. The largest producer is Surround Records which has exclusively used Dts-HD master audio for their audio presentations . Since the this audio format transfers its data in packet form, it is not prone to jitter like PCM is as a bitstream. 2L which is another audio only producer does use PCM at 24/192khz, but also utilizes Dts-HD Master audio at 24/192khz on all their titles as well. Since the Dts option is bit for bit identical to the PCM option, I would choose it since there is no chance for jitter to contaminate the signal. This would make Link 4 unnecessary and a wasteful option.

frahengeo
08-26-2009, 12:44 PM
There are quite a few receivers and pre/pro that double as switching devices with two HDMI outputs which make including that in a players a wasteful option.
This so-called useless feature is apparently being pushed by their parent company and will likely be featured in the Marantz, and McIntosh Universals. Hey Man, if you can't think of a use for it, then it must not be necessary.



Denon Link 4 is for connecting an all Denon system. I would be curious how effective this approach would be using a downstream components for multiple manufacturers. Few people assemble entire systems from just one manufacturer.

I realize that its their proprietary technology. Back to the jitter discussion; it supposedly works in parallel with HDMI and reduces/eliminates potential jitter.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-26-2009, 03:30 PM
This so-called useless feature is apparently being pushed by their parent company and will likely be featured in the Marantz, and McIntosh Universals. Hey Man, if you can't think of a use for it, then it must not be necessary.

A lot of things are pushed by parent companies, that does not make them useful(see Sony and the minidisc for example)




I realize that its their proprietary technology. Back to the jitter discussion; it supposedly works in parallel with HDMI and reduces/eliminates potential jitter.

That is if one is to assume PCM audio would be the preferred format for audio only applications. That does not seem to be the case though, it looks like Dts-HD Master audio is taking up that mantel.

frahengeo
08-26-2009, 08:22 PM
A lot of things are pushed by parent companies, that does not make them useful(see Sony and the minidisc for example)

True, but pushed into a Marantz, McIntosh, and Denon unit!? Come on, despite being under one umbrella, these guys must have some influence over features. Assuming dual hdmi out will be offered by those guys, you still believe all three went along with it for no reason other than hype?

Ah minidisc!! Could've been useful, but combination of bad marketing, pricing, and timing put it to sleep. It definitely left the consumer confused, initially.

Mr Peabody
08-26-2009, 08:51 PM
Minidisc did gain some traction but mp3 players really put the nail in the cauffen.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-27-2009, 07:26 AM
True, but pushed into a Marantz, McIntosh, and Denon unit!? Come on, despite being under one umbrella, these guys must have some influence over features. Assuming dual hdmi out will be offered by those guys, you still believe all three went along with it for no reason other than hype?

Yes. All of these companies are high end manufacturers looking to distinguish their products for those from Sony, Pioneer, Panasonic and the others. None of the others offer 2 HDMI outputs because they are unnecessary, and it increases the price of manufacturing the player. The idea of sending the video and sound differently than the other players may appeal to installers, who can pitch this unnecessary option to their high end costumers. I was once an installer(and still design and calibrate systems for a couple of companies) and I know this practice well.


Ah minidisc!! Could've been useful, but combination of bad marketing, pricing, and timing put it to sleep. It definitely left the consumer confused, initially.

I don't think costumers were as confused as they were uninterested.

frahengeo
08-27-2009, 08:26 AM
I don't think costumers were as confused as they were uninterested.

Confused about the purpose of Minidisc, yes. At the time, it wasn't marketed as a replacement for the cassette when it should have been. Having pre-recorded minidisc titles available only made matters worse. It became CDs vs. Minidisc, instead of Tapes vs. Minidisc. An entry price of $500 ~ $800 for a player and high priced blanks also didn't help.

In other parts of the world (Europe, Japan) Minidisc gained popularity. Any idea why?

Sir Terrence the Terrible
08-27-2009, 12:04 PM
Confused about the purpose of Minidisc, yes. At the time, it wasn't marketed as a replacement for the cassette when it should have been. Having pre-recorded minidisc titles available only made matters worse. It became CDs vs. Minidisc, instead of Tapes vs. Minidisc. An entry price of $500 ~ $800 for a player and high priced blanks also didn't help.

In other parts of the world (Europe, Japan) Minidisc gained popularity. Any idea why?

I know the Japanese and Asia in general have a love for gadgetry, and will basically embrace new formats and electronics easier than almost anywhere in the world. I guess that is why most new electronic products originate from there.

I do not think minidisc was a success in Europe. It was never popular outside Asia, except among audio engineers to store temporary mixes for their clients.

Surprisingly Sony upgraded the minidisc format in 2004 and renamed it Hi-MD. They made lots of worthwhile improvements, but it could not really compete with lossy codecs such as MP-3, AAC, or WMA

pixelthis
08-29-2009, 02:56 AM
Confused about the purpose of Minidisc, yes. At the time, it wasn't marketed as a replacement for the cassette when it should have been. Having pre-recorded minidisc titles available only made matters worse. It became CDs vs. Minidisc, instead of Tapes vs. Minidisc. An entry price of $500 ~ $800 for a player and high priced blanks also didn't help.

In other parts of the world (Europe, Japan) Minidisc gained popularity. Any idea why?

Later versions of minidisc had the ATRAC codec, which was quite good.
I liked my minidisc, but it hit at the wrong time, like CD you had to carry a bunch of discs
around, no reason for that anymore with portable servers like IPOD.
There are a lot of different ways to do one thing, but you only need one and the best usually
surrvives.
Like plasma and LCD, and DLP.:1:

Mr Peabody
08-29-2009, 07:22 AM
Sometimes it's not "the best" that wins, sometimes it's the most convenient and the most hyped.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
09-03-2009, 10:04 AM
Later versions of minidisc had the ATRAC codec, which was quite good.
I liked my minidisc, but it hit at the wrong time, like CD you had to carry a bunch of discs
around, no reason for that anymore with portable servers like IPOD.
There are a lot of different ways to do one thing, but you only need one and the best usually
surrvives.
Like plasma and LCD, and DLP.:1:

Pix, once again you have your facts twisted. The EARLIER models of the minidisc used the ATRAC codec. The later models used PCM.

OzzieAudiophile
09-08-2009, 07:32 AM
It's very hard not to diverse onto a slightly different topic.

Going back a several conversations... it did get me thinking, one HDMI out for video, one for Audio, out of sync is a pure destruction of video/audio experience. It's like watching a foreign film, lipsync not quite right lol. Watching Stallone laugh, then hearing him 2 seconds later.

At the moment I have my PS3 HDMI cable connected to my 40 inch LCD, and an optical out to my receiver. The receiver connects to my Xindak power amps. I've enjoyed the sound through the PS3 playback in comparison to any other source.

I guess I've always wrestled not to import too many sources, and/or components, and cable too many of them together. The more formulas I add to the final equation, the more places where the signal quality can degrade and the more places I'd have to patch up when I upgrade. It would be better to get as little number of components from source to speakers as possible. It simply costs too much money (at least for Me) to add too much more.

Problem is I personally have too many formats :
1. PC
2. TV to cable/satellite to DVR
3. PS3
4. DVD-disc changer but a universal player nonetheless

I have that many cables connecting all my components, it's cost me quite a bit of money.

I know I'm still playing this same old record, but I do find the option rather appealing of the Cambridge Audio 840C, which has a build in dac, I can connect up to two components to that.

I simply don't like the idea of DAC and source as separate, that's at least 1 extra pair of cables I'd have to invest, and sooner or later either the DAC or the source as the eventual weakest component to upgrade next.

No who in their right mind would believe there's an all one 1 box solution ?

Since I'm more of a 2-channel fan than multi, the ultimate home theater experience is far from a priority.

The number one priority for me is to maximize my listening experience to music. I've taken a huge step forward by getting the Xindak Power Amps. I just know the CA-840 will be the next worthy step, and a step up from the PS3 for CD playback. I am yet to be convinced of justifying a 4-6K SACD player, it's a matter of diminishing returns. My PS3 won't become a redundant component for the next 3 to 5 years at least.

I am a believer of making a list of which components will be the least redundant then work on components which will compliment that, plus be ready for the upcoming or current new(er) technologies. I think I can live without the HDMI 1.4 experience. It sounds rather way too costly, and all new technologies always are when they first come out.

The blu-ray options for me are purely for a visual upgrade as they definately kick butt over DVD. However make no mistake, many transfers to Blu Ray have been very ordinary, not even worth buying. I was very dissappointed with Resevoir Dogs. However the James Bond movies, they did a pristine suburb job !!!

Sir Terrence the Terrible
09-08-2009, 02:24 PM
It's very hard not to diverse onto a slightly different topic.

Going back a several conversations... it did get me thinking, one HDMI out for video, one for Audio, out of sync is a pure destruction of video/audio experience. It's like watching a foreign film, lipsync not quite right lol. Watching Stallone laugh, then hearing him 2 seconds later.

I do not think I would have a problem with two HDMI outputs if your intention was to send the signal to two display devices, or straight to a display device, and one to a video processor to power a front projection system. Even then, there is a cheaper way to do this. But to market it as a way to isolate the audio signal from the video plays to the uneducated wealthy person, when the audio and video signals are already seperated via the HDMI link. They are using the two HDMI outputs as a way to steer folks to their proprietary connection, and that is marketing hype if I ever saw it.


At the moment I have my PS3 HDMI cable connected to my 40 inch LCD, and an optical out to my receiver. The receiver connects to my Xindak power amps. I've enjoyed the sound through the PS3 playback in comparison to any other source.

While we all can attest to the fact the PS3 is not a "audiophile" product, I continually find myself completely impressed with it's sound and video quality. The same folks that designed the CD and SACD format are the same folks that worked on its CD decoding software, and gave it a great upsampling software as well. Jitter is very low, and the transport is clamp as not to induce vibration. The DSD stream is trancoded to PCM (which it would have been anyway) at 24bit 176.4khz which is better performance than the SACD format allows (SACD would be the equivalent of 20bit performance at a 100khz sample rate because of noise shaping)



I am a believer of making a list of which components will be the least redundant then work on components which will compliment that, plus be ready for the upcoming or current new(er) technologies. I think I can live without the HDMI 1.4 experience. It sounds rather way too costly, and all new technologies always are when they first come out.

It is waaay to early to tell what the cost of components the utilize HDMI 1.4 will be. I'll take a wait and see attitude on some aspects, and jump right in on others. Personally, I am more interested in 3D than I am in 4K.


The blu-ray options for me are purely for a visual upgrade as they definately kick butt over DVD. However make no mistake, many transfers to Blu Ray have been very ordinary, not even worth buying. I was very dissappointed with Resevoir Dogs. However the James Bond movies, they did a pristine suburb job !!!

The thing you have to understand is the Blu-ray format has brought us much closer to the film element than DVD ever could. A lot of things blamed on a Blu-ray transfer were actually problems associated with the film elements themselves. Also consider the fact that there are more film "analysts" who present screenshots full of actifacts on Bluray films that would never be seen when the video is actually moving. Printmasters that are dirty, scratched or full of film pops, editorial and artistic decisions on lights and effects all come out and are easily seen on Blu-ray, but are masked completely by heavy compression on DVD.

bobsticks
09-08-2009, 07:05 PM
While we all can attest to the fact the PS3 is not a "audiophile" product, I continually find myself completely impressed with it's sound and video quality. The same folks that designed the CD and SACD format are the same folks that worked on its CD decoding software, and gave it a great upsampling software as well. Jitter is very low, and the transport is clamp as not to induce vibration. The DSD stream is trancoded to PCM (which it would have been anyway) at 24bit 176.4khz which is better performance than the SACD format allows (SACD would be the equivalent of 20bit performance at a 100khz sample rate because of noise shaping).

Yes.

Try the Cary. Try the Esoteric. Try the Krell...

Differences?..yes...subtle nuances?...I suppose...you tell me...

The PS3 is a fantastic, otherworldly product...