Listen up, Nightflier: A true universal player

[Mr Peabody]

But.... you will have to dig deep as the MVP-881BR will be released by McIntosh in October. It will play SACD/DVD-A/CD and of course, Blu-ray. I tried to search for a link with some additional information but Mac must be keeping this pretty much under wraps accept it's coming. There is a blirp on Bluray.com

[pixelthis]

Time to put the old kidney up for sale.:1:

[frahengeo]

I wonder what the similarities will be between the Mac and Denon? I read that the Denon is using a Mac designed tray mechanism. From a feature standpoint, I can't see the Mac having anything additional. Perhaps the internals will be very different, since the Mac will more than likely carry a higher price tag.

[Auricauricle]

Ah, but it's a Mac!

[Mr Peabody]

Do you know the Denon model number and if they still play DVD-A?

I would suspect Mac would keep with their typical sonic signature. Whether that justifies the additional expense only the listener can decide. For the price this unit will probably sell for I think I'd look or hold out for something with a more resolving sound, but this is being said not hearing the unit and speculation.

[atomicAdam]

if you'all ever checked the news/press section on the rest of the site you would have seen there was a 'blurb' on audioreview too - on wed of last week.

but yeah, there appears to be no other real information about it.

it made me think of something though.

blu-ray/DVD/SACD - all those codecs have been written by other companies who probably know a hell of a lot more about fine tuning the hardware to the codecs than McIntosh does.Why would a McIntosh universal player be so much more attractive?

[frahengeo]

Do you know the Denon model number and if they still play DVD-A?

I would suspect Mac would keep with their typical sonic signature. Whether that justifies the additional expense only the listener can decide. For the price this unit will probably sell for I think I'd look or hold out for something with a more resolving sound, but this is being said not hearing the unit and speculation.

Can one get the Mac signature by only having a Mac source component (i.e. no pre, no amp).

Link for Denon Universal Player, and yes it will play DVD-A

http://www.usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/4760.asp

If it could play records, 8-tracks, cassettes, then it would be a true universal player :-).

Interestingly, Mac is also following Denon by releasing a pre/pro that will handle all the HT codecs. The features between the two units seemed very similar as well. Mac MX-150 & Denon AVP-A1HDCI.

[bfalls]

You keep referring to "Mac". You do realize this is from McIntosh, not MacIntosh (Apple) right?

[nightflier]

So if I understand this right, there are still only three choices for a true universal player (well w/o records, 8-tracks, cassettes, of course):

1. The Oppo BDP-83
- msrp $499
- freakin' glowing reviews from just about everyone, albeit always with constant mention of the $499 price-point
- plays every codec except DTS-ES and DD-EX (but no one seems to care, so we'll pretend that it doesn't either).

2. The Denon DVD-A1UDCI
- msrp $1999
- has McIntosh-derived drive mechanism
- good, albeit sparse reviews, but does anyone actually own one?
- Supports DTS-ES & DD-EX

3. The new Mac/Mc
- msrp $stratosphere
- has classic McIntosh sound (whatever that means)
- has classic McIntosh looks (hopefully not like their record player)

Yes, there's also the PS3, but it doesn't play DVD-A or have analog outputs, so it doesn't make the list, sorry. Anyhow, still not much of a choice. Any rumors about any other courageous manufacturers coming out with a universal player? So far, it's pretty much a wash with Oppo taking the lead in a big way. I suspect that even with the higher price-point, Oppo's sales figures will be way over both Denon and McIntosh combined, by the end of the year. We can only hope Oppo doesn't run out of inventory.

[frahengeo]

So if I understand this right, there are still only three choices for a true universal player (well w/o records, 8-tracks, cassettes, of course):

1. The Oppo BDP-83
- msrp $499
- freakin' glowing reviews from just about everyone, albeit always with constant mention of the $499 price-point
- plays every codec except DTS-ES and DD-EX (but no one seems to care, so we'll pretend that it doesn't either).

2. The Denon DVD-A1UDCI
- msrp $1999
- has McIntosh-derived drive mechanism
- good, albeit sparse reviews, but does anyone actually own one?
- Supports DTS-ES & DD-EX




The Denon MSRP is actually: $4,500 (The Mac unit is expected to be more!!). There are Denon owners in other forums and they speak highly of it (as one would expect). Its a good match for those that own their Pre/Pro or for those with money to burn. Also, Denon has/will be releasing other models, closer to the Oppo price, that will be of the universal type.

As far as other manufacturers, Marantz comes to mind. I believe its in the $6k range. Now that's 3 universal units from one parent company (D&M)

With blu-ray being new and high potential for changes (profile 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, etc., hdmi 1.4, etc.) the Oppo seems like the sound choice for MOST.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

With blu-ray being new and high potential for changes (profile 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, etc., hdmi 1.4, etc.) the Oppo seems like the sound choice for MOST.

There will be no profile changes for Blu-ray, and you will find hdmi 1.4 unnecessary for most components selling today. Hdmi 1.4 is a forward thinking upgrade to 1.3a. Most of these upgrades are completely unnecessary for todays displays and players, as they cannot do half the things the new standard incorporates.

In terms of Blu-ray profiles, the only one that has not been implemented is the audio only profile 3.0. Since manufacturers are already installing 3.0 profile components in their high end Blu-ray players(better DAC, and the ability to shut off analog video circuits during audio only playback, and the support AVCHD without video for the audio) that profile has pretty much become absolete. High quality music only support can be acheive without this profile.

As far as HDMI 1.4, pretty soon all components will have it whether we desire it or not. As 4K video, 3D video, and two way communicating devices come online, it is only then this incarnation of HDMI becomes necessary. 4K will probably be the next big thing, perhaps 3D after that. Each still has a way to go in terms of making the cut in a viable consumer product. 4K requires very large screens(past the 100" which is the largest 1080p can support without blowing up digital artifacts not normally seen), probably 150" and above to see all the detail, and there is still no way to deliver that much video information to the screen.

Since I do not care for a manfacturers "sound", the MacIntosh equipment is not desireable for me. Having auditioned the XRT2K, I found its sound not compatible with a speaker that costs as much as a down payment on a house. I have heard better in their price range, and for less.

[frahengeo]

There will be no profile changes for Blu-ray, and you will find hdmi 1.4 unnecessary for most components selling today. Hdmi 1.4 is a forward thinking upgrade to 1.3a. Most of these upgrades are completely unnecessary for todays displays and players, as they cannot do half the things the new standard incorporates.

In terms of Blu-ray profiles, the only one that has not been implemented is the audio only profile 3.0. Since manufacturers are already installing 3.0 profile components in their high end Blu-ray players(better DAC, and the ability to shut off analog video circuits during audio only playback, and the support AVCHD without video for the audio) that profile has pretty much become absolete. High quality music only support can be acheive without this profile.

As far as HDMI 1.4, pretty soon all components will have it whether we desire it or not. As 4K video, 3D video, and two way communicating devices come online, it is only then this incarnation of HDMI becomes necessary. 4K will probably be the next big thing, perhaps 3D after that. Each still has a way to go in terms of making the cut in a viable consumer product. 4K requires very large screens(past the 100" which is the largest 1080p can support without blowing up digital artifacts not normally seen), probably 150" and above to see all the detail, and there is still no way to deliver that much video information to the screen.

Since I do not care for a manfacturers "sound", the MacIntosh equipment is not desireable for me. Having auditioned the XRT2K, I found its sound not compatible with a speaker that costs as much as a down payment on a house. I have heard better in their price range, and for less.

So as long as the blu-ray format is the latest and greatest, no one will feel "burned" buying any of the recent blu-ray player?

Never heard of 4K. For that format, the room size could also be a limiting factor. I don't know many that can accommodate a 150" screen size without speakers getting in the way.

[Mr Peabody]

Adam, who the hell reads AR :) Actually, I like seeing news, if the site wasn't so cluttered to where I could find the link I would most certainly like to keep up.

Denon sure shows the MSRP at $4.5k, that would make $2k a good deal :) Did any one notice they have a dual HDMI output, one for video and one for audio, saying something about extra clocking. I'd sure be interested to see or hear if all that makes a difference.

[pixelthis]

So as long as the blu-ray format is the latest and greatest, no one will feel "burned" buying any of the recent blu-ray player?

Never heard of 4K. For that format, the room size could also be a limiting factor. I don't know many that can accommodate a 150" screen size with speaker getting in the way.

a TAD "burned maybe.
But only because I only have one multichannel in for my receiver, and my Blu player
has ta have it, leaving my DVDA/SACD player on 2 channel.
Now I prefer my music 2 channel, but it would be nice to have a one box solution
and have the option of multichannel music without rewiring my system.
But its a quibble, really a Blu player is so much fun that its hard not to be satisfied
with it.
But if I had known about the OPPO earlier I would have made a different purchase.
And no, no one does care about EX and ES, both are, ahem...DEAD.:1:

[frahengeo]

Adam, who the hell reads AR :) Actually, I like seeing news, if the site wasn't so cluttered to where I could find the link I would most certainly like to keep up.

Denon sure shows the MSRP at $4.5k, that would make $2k a good deal :) Did any one notice they have a dual HDMI output, one for video and one for audio, saying something about extra clocking. I'd sure be interested to see or hear if all that makes a difference.

Here is a link to the Denon Universal thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1048326

Some good pictures there. Also, since its a rather long thread, you'll need to sift out the useful information.

If one wants jitter free audio via HDMI, then both HDMI and their proprietary Denon Link system must be used in conjunction with an HDMI and Denon link capable receiver or pre/pro. Otherwise, one can always use the analog outs of the Universal for the audio portion.

[Mr Peabody]

frahengeo, thanks for the links. They're worth a greenie but I must have given you one recently.

[frahengeo]

frahengeo, thanks for the links. They're worth a greenie but I must have given you one recently.

No problem. What's a greenie anyway?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

If one wants jitter free audio via HDMI, then both HDMI and their proprietary Denon Link system must be used in conjunction with an HDMI and Denon link capable receiver or pre/pro. Otherwise, one can always use the analog outs of the Universal for the audio portion.

Nobody has proven that jitter exists using HDMI, so the Denon link(which worked well for CD playback) at this connection is marketing hype.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So as long as the blu-ray format is the latest and greatest, no one will feel "burned" buying any of the recent blu-ray player?

If you have no interest in 3D(at least several years away) then any 2.0 profile player purchased today will not make you feel burned. 3D will require a new player and a new display as well. I just purchased two oppo players for my review and reference system. I had no problem with my purchase even though I also have to purchase a new player when 3D becomes available for reviewing reasons.


Never heard of 4K. For that format, the room size could also be a limiting factor. I don't know many that can accommodate a 150" screen size without speakers getting in the way.

4K is more suitable to dedicated rooms that are front projector based. Speaker placement is more akin to a professional movie theater where they are behind the screen instead of the conventional home placement of in front of the screen.

[frahengeo]

Nobody has proven that jitter exists using HDMI, so the Denon link(which worked well for CD playback) at this connection is marketing hype.

What, Denon Link worked well to reduce jitter in CD or the hype worked well in selling Denon Link?

Not sure who the Officials are regarding this topic. IEEE perhaps? Plenty of plausible explanations out there (plausible to me anyways). Just like all the other debates in A/V, everyone will need to decide for themselves.

[frahengeo]

If you have no interest in 3D(at least several years away) then any 2.0 profile player purchased today will not make you feel burned. 3D will require a new player and a new display as well. I just purchased two oppo players for my review and reference system. I had no problem with my purchase even though I also have to purchase a new player when 3D becomes available for reviewing reasons.



4K is more suitable to dedicated rooms that are front projector based. Speaker placement is more akin to a professional movie theater where they are behind the screen instead of the conventional home placement of in front of the screen.

I meant the next iteration of blu-ray if there is one. I wasn't referring to another format. We all know that the next latest and greatest are in the plans.

Again, I'm not sure how many will be able fit a 150" screen in their home.

Regarding the Oppo player, that was my point. At $500.00 who cares if it can't handle the next format in a few years? Makes those TOTL units more difficult to justify.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I meant the next iteration of blu-ray if there is one. I wasn't referring to another format. We all know that the next latest and greatest are in the plans.

4k is not another format, it is a display resolution. Blu-ray can accomodate it by providing a 1080p signal that can be upconverted to 2160p via the display device. There are also millions of Blu-ray players(all except the first generation and a few second generation players) that can read Pioneers four layer Blu-ray disc that can accomodate 4K video. We are not talking a new format here, we are talking a new connect. HDMI 1.3a cannot accomodate 4K video, so the display device must do a upconversion process.


Again, I'm not sure how many will be able fit a 150" screen in their home.

You would be surprised at how many 150" screens are already out there. I have a 130" myself even though I do not recommend using one. 1080p blown up to that size reveals all kinds of artifacts that you would not see on a 100" screen or smaller. 1080p was never designed to be blown up that size.


Regarding the Oppo player, that was my point. At $500.00 who cares if it can't handle the next format in a few years? Makes those TOTL units more difficult to justify.

I agree with you man!

[nightflier]

Oops, misquoted the price of the Denon player. Let me rephrase and add a few more comments:

1. The Oppo BDP-83
- msrp $499
- freakin' glowing reviews from just about everyone, albeit always with constant mention of the $499 price-point
- plays every codec except DTS-ES and DD-EX (but no one seems to care, so we'll pretend that it doesn't either).
- At $500, it's hard to find even a two player alternative (BR + DVD/SACD) who's combination compares on features.

2. Marantz Vaporware
- msrp $1200
- Marantz has been in the BR business for some time and their players have been very well reviewed.
- Marantz' support of SACD has consistently been 2-channel - if their BR player only supports SACD in 2-channel, this one is going to fall flat on its face. I mean why pay $1200 for only part of what a $500 player supports?

3. The Denon DVD-A1UDCI
- msrp $4500
- has McIntosh-derived drive mechanism, extra audio-focused features
- good, albeit sparse reviews, but can anyone justify the cost of one?
- Supports DTS-ES & DD-EX, and everything else.

4. The new Mac/Mc
- msrp $stratosphere - probably around $6K
- has classic McIntosh sound (whatever that means)
- has classic McIntosh looks (hopefully not like their record player)
- at $6K, even Mac owners are going to wonder if it's worth it.

IMO, the only real contender is the as yet unannounced Marantz option, and that's only if it offers multi-channel SACD support. Oppo has built up a very good reputation for performance, service and reliability. If they can produce a universal player at $500, even audiophiles and wealthy insurance execs will be asking themselves what 2-10x the price will actually add. People with deep pockets didn't get rich by making stupid investments. So if the Oppo keeps providing quality and performance at a fraction of the price, there's no reason it can't be the player of choice in a rack were it costs less than the cheapest cable, not to mention the rack itself.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Oops, misquoted the price of the Denon player. Let me rephrase and add a few more comments:

1. The Oppo BDP-83
- msrp $499
- freakin' glowing reviews from just about everyone, albeit always with constant mention of the $499 price-point
- plays every codec except DTS-ES and DD-EX (but no one seems to care, so we'll pretend that it doesn't either).
- At $500, it's hard to find even a two player alternative (BR + DVD/SACD) who's combination compares on features.

2. Marantz Vaporware
- msrp $1200
- Marantz has been in the BR business for some time and their players have been very well reviewed.
- Marantz' support of SACD has consistently been 2-channel - if their BR player only supports SACD in 2-channel, this one is going to fall flat on its face. I mean why pay $1200 for only part of what a $500 player supports?

3. The Denon DVD-A1UDCI
- msrp $4500
- has McIntosh-derived drive mechanism, extra audio-focused features
- good, albeit sparse reviews, but can anyone justify the cost of one?
- Supports DTS-ES & DD-EX, and everything else.

4. The new Mac/Mc
- msrp $stratosphere - probably around $6K
- has classic McIntosh sound (whatever that means)
- has classic McIntosh looks (hopefully not like their record player)
- at $6K, even Mac owners are going to wonder if it's worth it.

IMO, the only real contender is the as yet unannounced Marantz option, and that's only if it offers multi-channel SACD support. Oppo has built up a very good reputation for performance, service and reliability. If they can produce a universal player at $500, even audiophiles and wealthy insurance execs will be asking themselves what 2-10x the price will actually add. People with deep pockets didn't get rich by making stupid investments. So if the Oppo keeps providing quality and performance at a fraction of the price, there's no reason it can't be the player of choice in a rack were it costs less than the cheapest cable, not to mention the rack itself.

IMO there is no contender for the Oppo at its current price. It is already using the finest state of the art video processing and upconversion technology, and it can do anything audiowise you throw at it. Why pay more? How much more performance do these uber priced universal players will add with their higher price tag over the Oppo? I would say not much if any, and certainly not enough to justify their price difference.

[frahengeo]

Oops, misquoted the price of the Denon player. Let me rephrase and add a few more comments:

1. The Oppo BDP-83
- msrp $499
- freakin' glowing reviews from just about everyone, albeit always with constant mention of the $499 price-point
- plays every codec except DTS-ES and DD-EX (but no one seems to care, so we'll pretend that it doesn't either).
- At $500, it's hard to find even a two player alternative (BR + DVD/SACD) who's combination compares on features.

2. Marantz Vaporware
- msrp $1200
- Marantz has been in the BR business for some time and their players have been very well reviewed.
- Marantz' support of SACD has consistently been 2-channel - if their BR player only supports SACD in 2-channel, this one is going to fall flat on its face. I mean why pay $1200 for only part of what a $500 player supports?

3. The Denon DVD-A1UDCI
- msrp $4500
- has McIntosh-derived drive mechanism, extra audio-focused features
- good, albeit sparse reviews, but can anyone justify the cost of one?
- Supports DTS-ES & DD-EX, and everything else.

4. The new Mac/Mc
- msrp $stratosphere - probably around $6K
- has classic McIntosh sound (whatever that means)
- has classic McIntosh looks (hopefully not like their record player)
- at $6K, even Mac owners are going to wonder if it's worth it.

IMO, the only real contender is the as yet unannounced Marantz option, and that's only if it offers multi-channel SACD support. Oppo has built up a very good reputation for performance, service and reliability. If they can produce a universal player at $500, even audiophiles and wealthy insurance execs will be asking themselves what 2-10x the price will actually add. People with deep pockets didn't get rich by making stupid investments. So if the Oppo keeps providing quality and performance at a fraction of the price, there's no reason it can't be the player of choice in a rack were it costs less than the cheapest cable, not to mention the rack itself.

This from the Ad on the right-hand side of AR:

The MVP881BR also features:

* BD-Live Profile 2.0 support
* On-board audio decoders for DTS-HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD
* Multichannel analog outputs
* Custom linear power supply
* Fully balanced 2-channel audio design
* 32-bit/192kHz DACs
* 1080p/24 and 60 frame output
* Backlit, learning IR remote

Man, this looks an awful lot like the Denon...I guess the 4th bullet point will be the difference.

And the link to Marantz @ $6,000 (plays BR, SACD, DVD-A):

http://us.marantz.com/Products/2936.asp

Note: Denon, Mac, and Marantz all have a thin profile tray. I imagine a lot of cost savings in R&D.

[Mr Peabody]

If jitter is a known factor in a digital signal and HDMI transmits a digital signal what is there to make it immune from jitter? Or, are you saying jitter hasn't been proven at all?

"greenie" is a nickname given to rep points..

[pixelthis]

If jitter is a known factor in a digital signal and HDMI transmits a digital signal what is there to make it immune from jitter? Or, are you saying jitter hasn't been proven at all?

"greenie" is a nickname given to rep points..

Greenie is something I am immune to.
"jitter" sounds a lot like the "jitter" turntable types claimed was a problem for CD.
Probably will be able to measure it but not be able to tell its coming outta your player.
Doubt if it will be a major fator.:1:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

If jitter is a known factor in a digital signal and HDMI transmits a digital signal what is there to make it immune from jitter? Or, are you saying jitter hasn't been proven at all?

"greenie" is a nickname given to rep points..

Jitter is a known factor using certain input/output interfaces(SPDIF), but it has never been proven to be a factor with HDMI. As the signal enters the HDMI cable it is encoded with transition minimized differential signaling. That is the original signal(down one wire) plus a inverse signal of the original(on another wire). When they get to the destination interface(the receiver) these signals are compared, and any differences corrected. SPDIF does not work that way, it just transmits the signal through the cable with no protocol for correction of the signal. The red book standard does not require block-accurate addressing, but HDMI TMDS does.

If jitter was really a big problem with HDMI somebody would have tested and published such a fact. It is easily measured, and we would have examples all over the net. This has not happened, so I am somewhat suspect of claims of jitter over HDMI. We have seen examples of jitter on SPDIF connection everywhere. White papers have been published, examples visually shown, and the effects can be heard which is why re-clocking protocols are usually incorporated in external better quality DAC.

[Feanor]

Jitter is a known factor using certain input/output interfaces(SPDIF), but it has never been proven to be a factor with HDMI. As the signal enters the HDMI cable it is encoded with transition minimized differential signaling. That is the original signal(down one wire) plus a inverse signal of the original(on another wire). When they get to the destination interface(the receiver) these signals are compared, and any differences corrected. SPDIF does not work that way, it just transmits the signal through the cable with no protocol for correction of the signal. The red book standard does not require block-accurate addressing, but HDMI TMDS does.

If jitter was really a big problem with HDMI somebody would have tested and published such a fact. It is easily measured, and we would have examples all over the net. This has not happened, so I am somewhat suspect of claims of jitter over HDMI. We have seen examples of jitter on SPDIF connection everywhere. White papers have been published, examples visually shown, and the effects can be heard which is why re-clocking protocols are usually incorporated in external better quality DAC.

I don't pretend to understand any of it, but HERE (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=pcaudio&n=50249&highlight=JITTER,+HDMI+Charles+Hansen&r=) were some comments made by Charles Hansen of Ayre on the subject of HDMI.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I don't pretend to understand any of it, but HERE (http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=pcaudio&n=50249&highlight=JITTER,+HDMI+Charles+Hansen&r=) were some comments made by Charles Hansen of Ayre on the subject of HDMI.

Notice how he states the way the system works is stupid, but did not say it introduced jitter?

His comments were referring to the earliest submission of HDMI, the 1.1 standard. The 1.3a standard by which most of us are using now uses bit checking processes that correct for dropped bits, and the sync'ing feature(a word clock) reclocks the audio even within this imperfect standard.

Once again, if jitter was an issue in HDMI audio, there would be visual evidence and white papers on the subject all over the net. The system is not perfect, but it does well in transferring information accurately from one place to another.

[nightflier]

It's interesting too that PS Audio recommends an HDMI connection between their new PWT transport and PWD dac (of course, they have a whole new collection of special overly-expensive HDMI cables for sale that claim dramatic improvements over regular HDMI cables as well).

Regarding Marantz, I was referring to something a little less expensive than the one they've announced at $6K, hence my reference to vaporware, since no product announcements have been made. But I really do hope they come out with a mid-priced universal player, maybe in the $1000 range to add some competition to that market. Marantz has made some very decent BR players with small Marantz-unique features that typically give their players a leg up on the competition. They also have a lot of well regarded experience with CD and SACD (albeit mostly 2-channel), and I imagine they could produce a player that is both complete on features and will also sound good.

Speaking of jitter, this page is very informative and has nice colorful graphics:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/jitter1_e.html

I don't doubt the measurability & pictoral representation of jitter, but what about audibility? Frankly, I'm still a bit puzzled about what it actually does sound like. I've wondered about this for a while, but from what I can figure out, jitter is a lack of clarity, almost as if the sound was coming at me twice in a very short span of time so that each note sounds smeared. Kind of like looking at a screen who's moire is not properly adjusted. But there are a lot of different descriptions of what jitter really sounds like and semantics get in the way. Does anyone maybe know of a sound file on a website that we could listen to to hear what jitter sounds like?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Speaking of jitter, this page is very informative and has nice colorful graphics:

http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/jitter1_e.html

I don't doubt the measurability & pictoral representation of jitter, but what about audibility? Frankly, I'm still a bit puzzled about what it actually does sound like. I've wondered about this for a while, but from what I can figure out, jitter is a lack of clarity, almost as if the sound was coming at me twice in a very short span of time so that each note sounds smeared. Kind of like looking at a screen who's moire is not properly adjusted. But there are a lot of different descriptions of what jitter really sounds like and semantics get in the way. Does anyone maybe know of a sound file on a website that we could listen to to hear what jitter sounds like?

I am sure you can find a sample of jitter online somewhere, but you have probably heard it and didn't know it. Jitter makes digital sound hard and antiseptic. Imaging becomes unfocused, and timbres of certain instruments are lost. Brass sounds hard and screechy, as do some string instruments. If you have any early digital recordings on CD, jitter was pretty prominent on them. Early digital recorders had problems with jitter, which is why external DAC's were much more popular in digital recording studios long before they were available to the public.

[Feanor]

Notice how he states the way the system works is stupid, but did not say it introduced jitter?

His comments were referring to the earliest submission of HDMI, the 1.1 standard. The 1.3a standard by which most of us are using now uses bit checking processes that correct for dropped bits, and the sync'ing feature(a word clock) reclocks the audio even within this imperfect standard.

Once again, if jitter was an issue in HDMI audio, there would be visual evidence and white papers on the subject all over the net. The system is not perfect, but it does well in transferring information accurately from one place to another.

So ... with reference to your other recent post, does it matter whether the audio standard sent over the HDMI is PCM or DTS-HD as pertains to the jitter problem?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So ... with reference to your other recent post, does it matter whether the audio standard sent over the HDMI is PCM or DTS-HD as pertains to the jitter problem?

Until somebody offers up an current example of PCM with jitter coming through the HDMI connection, I would have to say no it does not matter.

[E-Stat]

Notice how he states the way the system works is stupid, but did not say it introduced jitter?
He also mentioned that the audio is clocked indirectly via the video signal. Which would seem to work fine for video based mediums, but wouldn't be relevant to audio only formats for which there is no video.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

He also mentioned that the audio is clocked indirectly via the video signal. Which would seem to work fine for video based mediums, but wouldn't be relevant to audio only formats for which there is no video.

rw

That is only if PCM audio is used, and there is video stream accompanying the audio. Neither seems to be the case. The audio only titles I have reviewed do not have a video signal present, so the clock is dedicated to the audio only in this case. Secondly, there are far more audio only titles that utilize Dts-HD Master audio than PCM. Dts HD MA is not subject to jitter because the audio is streamed in bit corrected meta-data packets as opposed to a straight bitstream. Once again, he was referring to the 1.1 HDMI standard, not the 1.3a standard.

[E-Stat]

That is only if PCM audio is used, and there is video stream accompanying the audio. Neither seems to be the case.
So, how many Blu Ray audio titles are available today?


Secondly, there are far more audio only titles that utilize Dts-HD Master audio than PCM.
Gee, that's news to me. Where do you buy non-CDs for major music titles?

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So, how many Blu Ray audio titles are available today?

Not sure of the total, but I have reviewed about 35 between Blu-ray.com and a couple of music mags aimed at the sold in Europe.. My last discussion with Alexander of Surround Records he told me they are going to get VERY aggressive with new releases heading towards Christmas.



Gee, that's news to me. Where do you buy non-CDs for major music titles?

rw

Amazon. Search 2L and Surround Records. I am not sure they have all releases from these two companies, but they certainly have quite a few. These labels are classical music only, but discussions with Sony/BMG, Warner music, and Universal Music tells me they will begin releasing Blu-ray audio titles(with video though) next year.

[E-Stat]

Not sure of the total, but I have reviewed about 35 between Blu-ray.com and a couple of music mags aimed at the sold in Europe.
Thirty-five total. Wow!!


...but discussions with Sony/BMG, Warner music, and Universal Music tells me they will begin releasing Blu-ray audio titles(with video though) next year.
With video. No problem. That only rules out 99.9% of all the music available today.

rw

[Mr Peabody]

NF, that link was a great find. That explains a lot.

This has developed into a good discussion

[nightflier]

Still would love to find an actual sound file of jitter. I've searched quite a few sites since yesterday and came up empty.

Interestingly, there's a lot of debate about jitter's audibility. Of course, many of the people who say that jitter is audible are from "the industry." Furthermore, the definition of what it actually sounds like is all over the map. So at the risk of being lambasted about this, I'll ask the white elephant question again:

What does jitter sound like to you?

...And if someone has a spare minute, upload a recording of a jittered file, because the more I read about it, the more confusing this is becoming.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Still would love to find an actual sound file of jitter. I've searched quite a few sites since yesterday and came up empty.

Files with jitter are really hard to find online. It a demo best done in person, and in a controlled environment. A computer has many areas of contamination that can make demonstrating it pretty difficult, such as a jittery sound card and drive noise.


Interestingly, there's a lot of debate about jitter's audibility. Of course, many of the people who say that jitter is audible are from "the industry." Furthermore, the definition of what it actually sounds like is all over the map. So at the risk of being lambasted about this, I'll ask the white elephant question again:

What does jitter sound like to you?

The people who work in the "industry" have better access to environments that make jitter easier to hear. (i.e. a quiet studio acoustically controlled with very good electronics). They can directly compare a signal with jitter, and without it in some cases in real time. The definition is not really all over the map, the link you provided did an excellent job of telling what it sounds like. Some folks are just not good at communicating what they hear, but they still can hear it. My description basically matches how the link you provided describes it.


...And if someone has a spare minute, upload a recording of a jittered file, because the more I read about it, the more confusing this is becoming.

I think you are confused because you have a limited understanding of digital audio as a whole. The more you understand PCM audio, the easier it is to understand jitter. It also makes it easier for you to know what to listen for when jitter is present in the signal. Even if I presented you with a jittery file, you may not be able to hear it because you do not know what to listen for, or may not have the acoustical environment to flesh it out.

[nightflier]

Not exactly the most tactful way to put it, but thanks for the info.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Not exactly the most tactful way to put it, but thanks for the info.

Sometimes you cannot always be tactful on things that are factual. You should know by now that I am not a sugar coater, I call it like I see it.

[nightflier]

Calling it like it is? How exactly is this exemplary of that:


I think you are confused... you have a limited understanding of digital audio as a whole. ...Even if I presented you with a jittery file, you may not be able to hear it because you do not know what to listen for, or may not have the acoustical environment to flesh it out.

You don't know anything about me, about my environment, or my setup, so your statement is neither factual or "like it is."

But let's remain civil and let's call your bluff, then: if you're so smart, and you have all this fancy equipment, and a solid understanding of jitter backed by years of experience in the industry, compared to the rest of us peons, why don't you upload a file with jitter for us? And just so you don't weasel out of this one again, why don't we presume that I have a friggin flawless sound card in my computer, too?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Calling it like it is? How exactly is this exemplary of that:

You have a limited understanding of PCM audio, you have never mixed or recorded in it, and definitely have never studied it. It is obvious, and you need to admit this. To those who understand PCM audio, jitter is not confusing. They know what to listen for. and can create a file with it, or without it. These are indisputable facts.

[quote]You don't know anything about me, about my environment, or my setup, so your statement is neither factual or "like it is."

I don't care to know anything about you, but I do know you don't live in a studio, and do not know much about audio in general, certainly not much about marketing or market trends, or which audio codecs and enhancements are relevant in the future. Remember I have 10 pages of debate, and multiple threads of topics that support my notions. You have not exactly hidden your lack of knowledge on so many audio issues, but let's not dwell on these details.


But let's remain civil and let's call your bluff, then: if you're so smart, and you have all this fancy equipment, and a solid understanding of jitter backed by years of experience in the industry, compared to the rest of us peons, why don't you upload a file with jitter for us? And just so you don't weasel out of this one again, why don't we presume that I have a friggin flawless sound card in my computer, too?

NF, you must know by now I am not moved by these kinds of kiddy games or inflammatory challenges designed to discredit me. I am not your teacher nor your slave. This is your journey and it's your responsibilty to take it, not for me to make it easy and just give to you. If you want something, get it. Only a child needs to have things handed to them in this fashion. If you want it, go find it yourself.

I don't presume or weasle out of anything. Years in the industry or not, it is not my job or desire to play run and fetch with anyone, especially not you. I play run and fetch with my dogs, not people. You want to call a bluff get a phone, but I do not play that. I hope we are clear about this and do not have to play these games in the future.

[nightflier]

So you are weaseling out of it?

[Feanor]

So you are weaseling out of it?

NF and SirT at it again: shoot me now. :rolleyes:

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So you are weaseling out of it?

I am not your slave dude. I am not responsible for your audio education, you are. Only a weasle and a lazy person depends on others for things they can do themselves. My suggestion to you is get those flipper like things you call hands on the keyboard and mouse and start searching the internet for what you desire. If you are waiting for me to do it, hold your breath until I move....please.

[nightflier]

So again, you're full of opinions in the dugout but when someone calls you to the plate, you're hiding in the locker room. Figures. And this isn't just for me - from what I've read, there's plenty of others who are wondering what jitter really sounds like.

So why not put your pedantic know-it-all hat on and show us what jitter sounds like. After all, you have the gear, right? You certainly believe you have the knowledge, right? You know how to upload files, right? It's not like you don't have the time, because you've spent enough time trolling around behind my posts of late. So what's the hold-up? Is it maybe that you won't be able to prove that jitter is audible? See that's what I'm thinking. So yes, you are trying to weasel out of it because you can't actually do it.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So again, you're full of opinions in the dugout but when someone calls you to the plate, you're hiding in the locker room. Figures. And this isn't just for me - from what I've read, there's plenty of others who are wondering what jitter really sounds like.

Are you a lazy mofo. If you, and others are so curious, get off your collective butts and find it. You are the laziest person I have ever seen. You want others to do everything for you while you sit around eating bon's bon's and watching Oprah. I am not your slave...let me repeat this... I am not your slaves, and I am not subject to your rants or demands.

Why don't you find it for those plenty others? You talk so much smack, and enjoy puffing out your little bird chest so much, why don't you be the big man and savior for those who have never heard jitter.

I AM NOT YOUR SLAVE, get that through your thick skull!


So why not put your pedantic know-it-all hat on and show us what jitter sounds like.

Not my job, its yours.


After all, you have the gear, right?

Yep, but I am still not going to do it. I dispise lazy people, do it yourself.


You certainly believe you have the knowledge, right?

I have the knowledge, you don't. Go to school and learn.


You know how to upload files, right?

Yep, but still not going to so it. You know how to search the internet? Do you know how to download a file? Go do it your own dang self.


It's not like you don't have the time, because you've spent enough time trolling around behind my posts of late.

How I spend my time is none of your business. And if you didn't make so many stupid uninformed statements, I wouldn't have to correct them.


So what's the hold-up?

What is YOUR hold up? When you went to school, wasn't it your responsibility to learn?


Is it maybe that you won't be able to prove that jitter is audible?

I have never been asked to prove anything. This is just your assinine way to try and get me to do your work. It failed, move on. I know jitter is audible, I have heard it. I was responsible for my own lesson. No it your turn lazy fool, get busy!


See that's what I'm thinking. So yes, you are trying to weasel out of it because you can't actually do it.

It not that I can't, I won't. I am not your slave, and therefor not subject to do your work. You are a lazy a$$ bum trying to get somebody to do something that you should be doing yourself. Please, do try and challenge your way out of your own lesson.

If you want to know what jitter sounds like, find it. No matter how many times you respond, I am not going to do this for you. No matter how many times you attempt to discredit me, I am not going to do this for you. No matter how many times you badger, challenge, whine, or pee yourself up, I am not going to do this for you. Move on, get busy, you have work to do.

I AM NOT GOING TO DO THIS FOR YOU, get that through your fat head.

[nightflier]

Are you a lazy mofo.

Mother ****er? Yeah, real professional language there, lil't.


You talk so much smack, and enjoy puffing out your little bird chest so much

Judging from the way you are carrying on in your last post, this describes you to a t, lil't.


I AM NOT YOUR SLAVE

I never called you a slave. I only asked you to put some of that fancy gear vaulted "experience" in this industry to some good. It's all fine to brag about this all over the place (you're very good at that), but why don't you actually put it to good use. Naw, I'd say you're the lazy one here.


Not my job, its yours.

Well, you're the one who's always bragging about your gear, your knowledge, and your connections. Id' say that makes it your job.


I dispise lazy people, do it yourself.

So you despise yourself? That explains a lot.


I have the knowledge, you don't.

If that isn't the very definition of arrogance....


Yep, but still not going to so it.

Yep, definitely lazy.


How I spend my time is none of your business.

When you start stalking me, you make it my business, creep.


I have never been asked to prove anything.

Well I know how you're a stickler for specifics. Shall I recount the many times people have asked you to prove something you claimed? Let's start with that whole business about how you are such an independent outsider when you also happen to work in the business. That was a real cute explanation that somehow still isn't very clear.


This is just your assinine way to try and get me to do your work.

No this is my way of asking you to back what you claim.


I know jitter is audible, I have heard it.

Prove it.


No matter how many times you badger, challenge, whine, or pee yourself up.

Judging from the ranting, it seems to me that you're the one who's badgering, challenging, whining, and (I guess) peeing all over himself. As always you started with the insults (badgering), you asked people to prove that jitter exists on HDMI (challenging), and you started complaining about how I would not know what to listen for (whining). What a hypocritical cretin you are.


get that through your fat head.

Well, far be it for me to say, but aren't you the one with the fat head? I mean you're the one with the weight problem, right? And I'm not even going to talk about how your self-aggrandizing napoleon complex adds to the effect. Let's see, I think I remember seeing a picture of you online that your girlfriend was showing off on her facebook page:

http://djatrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/ichat-image1236372291.jpeg

(I'm guessing that was before the hair-loss)

Hey, it's not like you didn't ask for it by calling me a mother-****er, bub.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Mother ****er? Yeah, real professional language there, lil't.


Judging from the way you are carrying on in your last post, this describes you to a t, lil't.



I never called you a slave. I only asked you to put some of that fancy gear vaulted "experience" in this industry to some good. It's all fine to brag about this all over the place (you're very good at that), but why don't you actually put it to good use. Naw, I'd say you're the lazy one here.



Well, you're the one who's always bragging about your gear, your knowledge, and your connections. Id' say that makes it your job.



So you despise yourself? That explains a lot.



If that isn't the very definition of arrogance....



Yep, definitely lazy.



When you start stalking me, you make it my business, creep.



Well I know how you're a stickler for specifics. Shall I recount the many times people have asked you to prove something you claimed? Let's start with that whole business about how you are such an independent outsider when you also happen to work in the business. That was a real cute explanation that somehow still isn't very clear.



No this is my way of asking you to back what you claim.



Prove it.



Judging from the ranting, it seems to me that you're the one who's badgering, challenging, whining, and (I guess) peeing all over himself. As always you started with the insults (badgering), you asked people to prove that jitter exists on HDMI (challenging), and you started complaining about how I would not know what to listen for (whining). What a hypocritical cretin you are.



Well, far be it for me to say, but aren't you the one with the fat head? I mean you're the one with the weight problem, right? And I'm not even going to talk about how your self-aggrandizing napoleon complex adds to the effect. Let's see, I think I remember seeing a picture of you online that your girlfriend was showing off on her facebook page:

http://djatrak.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/ichat-image1236372291.jpeg

(I'm guessing that was before the hair-loss)

Hey, it's not like you didn't ask for it by calling me a mother-****er, bub.

Your wasting your time stupid lazy a$$.

[nightflier]

And you're just trying to weasel out of backing what you claim.

[bobsticks]

:biggrin5: ....ahh, harkens back to the good ol' times...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

And you're just trying to weasel out of backing what you claim.

Your wasting your time. Seek and ye shall find, that what the good book tells you. It does not say tell somebody else to get it for me. If you doubt what I say, prove me wrong. But it is up to you to get the proof. In what court can you make a claim, and then tell the other guy to find the evidence for you?

Find it yourself, and prove me wrong. Or move on.

[nightflier]

Seek and ye shall find, that what the good book tells you.

Am I speaking to God? Yeah, that's rich. Hmmm, and isn't it written somewhere that to presume the likeness of god is the ultimate sin? Oh, I think this is going to spin your head right off, lil't.


In what court can you make a claim, and then tell the other guy to find the evidence for you?

Court? Am I on trial? What's the punishment, hell? This is a forum, lil't, not final judgement.


... and prove me wrong.

Delisions of grandeur. Ever heard of the term? Of course you have! It's what the townsfolk whisper under their breath when they see your pompous retinue blunder through the streets. This emperor has no clothes, folks. I threw down the gauntlet, and our highness chickened out and scampered off.

The fact is, you've been caught with your pants around your ankles in full daylight and in your terror you stumbled and fell in your own mess. It sure is starting to stink around here....

Look, I'll re-double my challenge to you, lil't: Jitter is not audible on even the most basic gear. You actually have to tweak your system or listen to the most low-end wallmart-made-in-China portable stuff to hear it. The reason you can't respond to my challenge, lil't, is because you know this. Jitter is marketing hype - yes it's measurable, but it's not audible. That's why there isn't anything but scientific explanations about it online and nary a single sound file.

C'mon lil't, you can't walk away from that can you? Prove me wrong, aren't those the words you used? Interesting how you are full of challenges, but when someone actually asks you to step up and prove something in a tangible way, you're MIA. Yeah, I think it's high time your moniker is changed back to what it should have been all along: "lil't".

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Am I speaking to God? Yeah, that's rich. Hmmm, and isn't it written somewhere that to presume the likeness of god is the ultimate sin? Oh, I think this is going to spin your head right off, lil't.



Court? Am I on trial? What's the punishment, hell? This is a forum, lil't, not final judgement.



Delisions of grandeur. Ever heard of the term? Of course you have! It's what the townsfolk whisper under their breath when they see your pompous retinue blunder through the streets. This emperor has no clothes, folks. I threw down the gauntlet, and our highness chickened out and scampered off.

The fact is, you've been caught with your pants around your ankles in full daylight and in your terror you stumbled and fell in your own mess. It sure is starting to stink around here....

Look, I'll re-double my challenge to you, lil't: Jitter is not audible on even the most basic gear. You actually have to tweak your system or listen to the most low-end wallmart-made-in-China portable stuff to hear it. The reason you can't respond to my challenge, lil't, is because you know this. Jitter is marketing hype - yes it's measurable, but it's not audible. That's why there isn't anything but scientific explanations about it online and nary a single sound file.

C'mon lil't, you can't walk away from that can you? Prove me wrong, aren't those the words you used? Interesting how you are full of challenges, but when someone actually asks you to step up and prove something in a tangible way, you're MIA. Yeah, I think it's high time your moniker is changed back to what it should have been all along: "lil't".

Your wasting your time nightliar. How can you say it is marketing hype when you don't know anything about it? How can you make claims to anything PCM related when you don't know anything about it.

You are a frustrated little peon who couldn't find anything actual examples of jitter, so now you are trying to badger somebody who can upload a jittery file any day of the week, and won't do it, into advancing your audio education for you. Nope liar, not gonna do it. Screw your little challenges, and any other tactic you may pull out of your cowardly book of kids tricks.

You didn't ask me to do anything, you ordered me to do it, and now you are badgering and challenging me to do it. Forget about it. This is your trip, enjoy it. LOL

By the way, I didn't challenge any one on anything on this thread. Were you got that from I don't know, and I don't care.

Good luck on your search dayliar, nightliar or whatever they call you.

[Mr Peabody]

For any one still interested in jitter, for your reading entertainment: http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1290jitter/

This article is old but the writer breaks things down pretty well: http://www.regonaudio.com/Jitter.html

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/BitPerfectJitter.htm

One could research the internet for years on this subject but I've seen enough to be convinced jitter can be audible but as one wise person said in an article I read tonight, a certain jitter spec doesn't mean a player will necessarily sound better than another based solely on that measurement, just as any other related spec to the player. Paraphrased, of course. If anyone takes the time to read these articles you will see a common thread.

[Feanor]

For any one still interested in jitter, for your reading entertainment: http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1290jitter/

This article is old but the writer breaks things down pretty well: http://www.regonaudio.com/Jitter.html

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/BitPerfectJitter.htm

...

Thanks, Mr Peabody, for the references.

Personally I see no reason to doubt the jitter exists and can and does affect sound quality as some level, (as does harmonic distortion by way of analogy).

Something I find interesting is jitter has become the current bugaboo among possibly imaginative, (and certainly anal), audiophiles who offer it as the explanation for sound difference they hear (or imagine) in those circumstances where bit-perfection isn't in question.

[nightflier]

Find it yourself, and prove me wrong.

lil't, these are your words aren't they? If I did find evidence that jitter was audible, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Kind of funny, actually, I challenge you to find evidence that jitter is audible, and you manage to turn it around and challenge me to disprove my own claim that it isn't. Typical of someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on, kind of like the Black Knight who wouldn't let King Arthur pass:

Black Knight: All right, we'll call it a draw.
King Arthur: [Preparing to leave] Come, Patsy.
[King Arthur and Patsy ride off]
Black Knight: [calling after King Arthur] Oh, oh, I see! Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you! I'll bite your legs off!

At least the Black Knight was willing to fight. lil't, our yellow-bellied impish little green mousquetier or batton twirler, whatever; on the other hand, won't even show up. That's right, you're all bark and no bite. Let's remember that next time you get all hooty with the next guy.

____________________________

Mr.P, Feanor, thanks for bringing this thread back on track. I agree that jitter is a bit hard to pin down. As a matter of fact, I have no way of knowing that the distortion I think I heard was the result of jitter or something else. That's really why I want to know what it sounds like. If you read Stereophile and many other magazines, they can't get enough of saying such and such player has an nth amount of jitter and that this nixes it as a possible recommended player. But if no one really knows what these "experts" are talking about, then how useful is that rating anyhow? Also, if it is audible, is it really that unpleasant or just slightly different? How does jitter differ from brightness? Perhaps jitter is masked by other more audible issues like room reflections, vibrations or cabling choices? Or maybe it['s just marketing hype - measureable but not audible? The list of questions is quite long...

Bringing this back around to the Oppo BDP-83, I'm kind of curious how well it plays CDs and SACDs. I've read the reviews, but I want to hear what people here have to say, particularly how it compares to say the Marantz, Cambridge, and Sony dedicated players out there.

I'm on the verge of buying it (mostly because there's really nothing else out there in it's price-range), but if I'm better off getting a Panasonic BR player and keeping my current SACD player, then that would be the less expensive route, right now, at least.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

lil't, these are your words aren't they? If I did find evidence that jitter was audible, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Even if you did find a file with jitter, you wouldn't know what to listen for. That file would be useless to you.


Kind of funny, actually, I challenge you to find evidence that jitter is audible, and you manage to turn it around and challenge me to disprove my own claim that it isn't. Typical of someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on, kind of like the Black Knight who wouldn't let King Arthur pass:

Black Knight: All right, we'll call it a draw.
King Arthur: [Preparing to leave] Come, Patsy.
[King Arthur and Patsy ride off]
Black Knight: [calling after King Arthur] Oh, oh, I see! Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you! I'll bite your legs off!

I would not have responded to your challenge anyway. You don't know anything about PCM audio or bitstreams, so what would be the point? I would be wasting my time, and on you, not going to happen. Jitter is not tough to pin down if you know what you are listening for. It's tough for the ignorant trying to look smart in a discussion they know nothing about.


At least the Black Knight was willing to fight. lil't, our yellow-bellied impish little green mousquetier or batton twirler, whatever; on the other hand, won't even show up. That's right, you're all bark and no bite. Let's remember that next time you get all hooty with the next guy.

Big words from a person with a Nepoleon complex. I am not going to find the file for you, and you can stuff your silly little challenge in your kester. I am not interested in satisfying your wims.

____________________________

[Mr Peabody]

NF, it's funny you say jitter can be measured but not heard where others say no difference can be heard in this or that because you can't measure it. Like differences in cables. Some of the writers describe what they heard when comparing two files, one with jitter introduced to one without. Actually the writing on jitter is one of the more consistent topics I've read up on in audio.

Feanor always plays devil's advocate but you both have to admit there is differences in at least audio gear or why do you have what you have. Bottomline is what it sounds like to us any way and who cares if we can't say why it's different. It's our goal to enjoy the music and leave building the gear to the engineers.

I happened upon a couple articles that talked about USB jitter and the multiple places it is introduced in a computer but I thought I had better leave well enough alone. Especially, one article saying a hard drive cannot compare in sound quality to a stand alone player because of the way a computer is built and the interference the digital signal would be subject to. Another confirmed the theory but did mention that some manufacturers of outboard higher end USB DAC's are addressing these issues. Now a skeptic might say all of this computer controversy is being raised to sell these higher end and most likely higher price USB DAC's with the magic to battle the evil jitter. Oh, what a tangled hobby to unweave :)

[nightflier]

lil't, I think we've already established you're the one with the Napoleon complex and the troll demeanor. I know your head is spinning pretty fast right about now, so let's keep it together, OK?

_________________________

Mr.P, did you audition other players before settling on the Marantz? Not that you would need to, but how does it play RBCDs?

[Mr Peabody]

I just have the 7003 connected to the 8003 via HDMI. I don't listen to a lot of RB through that system but what I have listened to has been pretty good. It doesn't compare to my T+A, as it shouldn't with the T+A at around $3k, nor is it as nice as the Audio Note DAC. The comparison isn't apples to apples either as the units go through diferent gear but just in general. You have a nice preamp you shouldn't sell yourself short by not emphasizing proper importance on the source. If you have a dealer who will allow auditions you should borrow a high end CD player so you can get a reference point. Right now a true high end universal player don't seem to be available. Remind which SACD you use.

In my opinion brands like Denon, Sony, Marantz although they make expensive players the sound just don't reach the level of fidelity as brands like Arcam, Krell, T+A and the like. It seems like no matter the expense the mass brands can't achieve sounding like music. This is based on what I've heard and it hasn't been everything there is to offer by the mass merchants. It's hard to explain in words but I've yet to hear a mass player no matter the expense that still didn't sound like a CD player where the latter brands seem to offer a more refined playback sound more approaching music and more palateable. I've heard some of the more expensive Marantz older models but not the 8001/8003, I'd love to compare either to a sub $1k Arcam.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

lil't, I think we've already established you're the one with the Napoleon complex and the troll demeanor. I know your head is spinning pretty fast right about now, so let's keep it together, OK?

How are you doing with your jitter search?

Since you cannot see me, how do you know my head is spinning? I guess you used the same crystal ball that said that HD-DVD would win because it was cheaper. Or how about that prediction that Blu-ray players price could suddenly increase if a shipment of them fell into Davey's locker. You might need to dump that crystal ball, it is not serving you well.

Perhaps a computer forum is more appropriate for you. You are clearly lost in a audio and video forum.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

NF, it's funny you say jitter can be measured but not heard where others say no difference can be heard in this or that because you can't measure it. Like differences in cables. Some of the writers describe what they heard when comparing two files, one with jitter introduced to one without. Actually the writing on jitter is one of the more consistent topics I've read up on in audio.

Actually Mr.P jitter can be measured, and can be visually shown on a scope. There is more than one kind of jitter. There is clock jitter, jitter introduced by interference, and data and cable jitter that occurs over long cable runs with no re-clocking done.


Feanor always plays devil's advocate but you both have to admit there is differences in at least audio gear or why do you have what you have. Bottomline is what it sounds like to us any way and who cares if we can't say why it's different. It's our goal to enjoy the music and leave building the gear to the engineers.

Most folks have a hard time distinguishing jitter from other forms of distortion. This is why it is useless to provide jitter files to those who have no knowledge of PCM audio. What they describe as jitter could just well be a poor recording, they just do not have the information, equipment and knowledge to tell the difference.


I happened upon a couple articles that talked about USB jitter and the multiple places it is introduced in a computer but I thought I had better leave well enough alone. Especially, one article saying a hard drive cannot compare in sound quality to a stand alone player because of the way a computer is built and the interference the digital signal would be subject to. Another confirmed the theory but did mention that some manufacturers of outboard higher end USB DAC's are addressing these issues. Now a skeptic might say all of this computer controversy is being raised to sell these higher end and most likely higher price USB DAC's with the magic to battle the evil jitter. Oh, what a tangled hobby to unweave :)

Another reason why I refuse to upload a jitter file. I could measure it with a certain measured time value, and the computer could wreck that value by introducing more jitter. The listener would not be able to distinguish whether the computer was introducing the jitter, or the file. There is no such thing as a "perfect" computer when audio is coming from it. Computers would have to be built completely different for that to take place.

The best sound card for combating jitter I have seen (in terms of jitter measurements) introduced spurious modulation sidebands which reduced dynamic range significantly. A computer is no place to listen for jitter, which is why providing a file for it is a complete waste of time.

[nightflier]

lil't, still beating those dead horses, aren't you?

Oops, now, that just doesn't sound right at all... but then where' talking about lil't. Our little repressed pre-pubescent imp who has so many issues, a whole team of psychologists would be needed to categorize them all, the violent aversion to ordinary tattoos not withstanding. Let's hope they're not Freudians, LOL.

lil't, you're still trying to weasel out of it. How many excuses will you come up with? I thought you had state-of-the-art gear? I guess it's not up to snuff, then? Or maybe you couldn't tell jitter from any other form of distortion either? Or are you in cahoots with the snake-oil salesmen? You're always bragging about how you are "in the industry" so it figures you wouldn't want to let it be known that jitter is actually inaudible.

And this whole trite discussion about different types of jitter and not being able to differentiate between them, is just an exercise in trying to aggrandize something that is barely there an still not audible, right? Kind of like you do with so many other personal descriptors? Every time you write a post, the story gets more ridiculous. Look, just upload the file already, let the computer add all the jitter you're fancy-schmancy system and skill can't manage to keep out. We just want to hear what jitter sounds like, and we don't particularly care what type it is or where it comes from.

Bottom line: we just want to hear it. And why don't you let the rest of us determine if it's different from other audible distortion? So stop insulting people, OK? I know you're thinking you're just insulting me by incorrectly suggesting that I don't have the wherewithal or the equipment to hear jitter, but you're really insulting everyone here who reads your posts. Because let's be frank, lil't, you do believe you're better than the rest of us, right? If not, then why not post the file for the rest of the readers here?

I know this is going to sound insurmountably oxymoronic, but just try to be the bigger man, here. Or at least the big boy... Every time you post, you have a new excuse. It's all you have really. I've called you out, and you're trying every trick you can muster to weasel out of it. Why? Because jitter is not audible on 99% of the systems out there. You know it and I know it. It's snake oil to sell more gear. You can't post a file with jitter because it won't be audible.

Why don't you back your own claim?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

lil't, still beating those dead horses, aren't you?

Oops, now, that just doesn't sound right at all... but then where' talking about lil't. Our little repressed pre-pubescent imp who has so many issues, a whole team of psychologists would be needed to categorize them all, the violent aversion to ordinary tattoos not withstanding. Let's hope they're not Freudians, LOL.

lil't, you're still trying to weasel out of it. How many excuses will you come up with? I thought you had state-of-the-art gear? I guess it's not up to snuff, then? Or maybe you couldn't tell jitter from any other form of distortion either? Or are you in cahoots with the snake-oil salesmen? You're always bragging about how you are "in the industry" so it figures you wouldn't want to let it be known that jitter is actually inaudible.

And this whole trite discussion about different types of jitter and not being able to differentiate between them, is just an exercise in trying to aggrandize something that is barely there an still not audible, right? Kind of like you do with so many other personal descriptors? Every time you write a post, the story gets more ridiculous. Look, just upload the file already, let the computer add all the jitter you're fancy-schmancy system and skill can't manage to keep out. We just want to hear what jitter sounds like, and we don't particularly care what type it is or where it comes from.

Bottom line: we just want to hear it. And why don't you let the rest of us determine if it's different from other audible distortion? So stop insulting people, OK? I know you're thinking you're just insulting me by incorrectly suggesting that I don't have the wherewithal or the equipment to hear jitter, but you're really insulting everyone here who reads your posts. Because let's be frank, lil't, you do believe you're better than the rest of us, right? If not, then why not post the file for the rest of the readers here?

I know this is going to sound insurmountably oxymoronic, but just try to be the bigger man, here. Or at least the big boy... Every time you post, you have a new excuse. It's all you have really. I've called you out, and you're trying every trick you can muster to weasel out of it. Why? Because jitter is not audible on 99% of the systems out there. You know it and I know it. It's snake oil to sell more gear. You can't post a file with jitter because it won't be audible.

Why don't you back your own claim?

Yawn, same old stuff. I'm bored. Good luck in your search ole bean. I guess when you find it, you will be able to tell source borne jitter from the jitter and distortion coming from your computer.

Good Luck dude!

[nightflier]

Mr. P, thanks for the info on the Marantz. That was very informative.

I know I can't expect T+A caliber fidelity from a $500 universal player, and probably not from any universal player that I can afford, but that does put me, and I imagine a lot of other folks< in a quandary. Surround music (from SACD, DVD-A & eventually BR) for most of us out there, is going to come from our HT setups, but to get the kind of fidelity we have come to expect after owning fine 2-channel players, we would need universal players and the associated gear at a price point that is an order of magnitude higher.

What you've experienced is that the Marantz, Denon, and Sony players (I'll refer to them as MDS for short), even at the higher price-points are still not going to provide that fidelity. Essentially, if one is going to spend upwards of $3K on a universal player, one would be better off increasing the budget slightly and going for an offering from the bigger names out there. Unfortunately, none of them make universal players.

From my perspective, there are several major issues with a $3K+ player from MDS:

1. A significant investment like this should have longevity, but technology changes too fast to make this a worthy investment. Just look at the used prices for yesterday's Faroudja players that don't have HDMI.

2. The McIntosh/Krell/Classe (& T+A) level manufacturers, while slightly higher priced than the top of the line from MDS, will keep their value much better and longer.

3. How can Oppo offer 95% of the performance for $500? After the cost of parts & engineering is figured in, how much of the higher price of the MDS models is just fluf?

4. Several reviews now rate the sound of the Oppo comparable to dedicated SACD and RBCD players at twice the price.

5. How can Oppo offer more features, considerably more in many cases, than the mid-priced MDS BR-only players for $500?

That last point is significant. For example: always late to the game is Onkyo (another MDS-type player. Their BR player is still lower-speced and more expensive than most BR players out there. Why bother? Aside from those who absolutely want an all Onkyo setup, they won't be selling many of these, I don't think.

Ironically, even people who don't listen to SACD and DVD-A are buying Oppo's BR player. They are buying it because it's such a popualr BR player and has just about every other feature they want. That says something about Oppo's brand recognition. Even Sony, the inventor of SACD and BR (well mostly) can't build a stand-alone player or universal player that is as highly regarded. Sure they'll sell more volume because of the Sony name, but as a representation of the whole product line, Oppo is selling far more units.

Even if the sound on the Oppo wasn't stellar, it would still sell like hotcakes, but the fact is, the sound is pretty friggin' good too. There simply isn't a product out there that can offer more value, period. I'm going to try and get some of the other Universal players in-house to compare, but for now, the Oppo will be my benchmark for DVD, BR, and SACD.

For RBCD, I think I can probably find something else, but there's no reason to believe the Oppo won't tie me over until I find a good player. And if RBCD is really not that good (and I don't think it will be), then I'll add a good DAC to the mix to clean that up.

... maybe even to fix some of that jitter, LOL.

[nightflier]

Yawn, same old stuff. I'm bored. Good luck in your search ole bean. I guess when you find it, you will be able to tell source borne jitter from the jitter and distortion coming from your computer. Good Luck dude!

Just as I figured. You're weaseling and chickening out. Can't stand by your claims. Same old stuff all right.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Just as I figured. You're weaseling and chickening out. Can't stand by your claims. Same old stuff all right.



Surely your sorry a$$ has a better game than this.....or maybe not.

Perhaps you need a hanky, all this cryin you are doing is wetting up the floor.

[Mr Peabody]

NF, did you pull the trigger on the Oppo?

[nightflier]

Waiting for some money to come my way. Probably within the next couple of weeks. I just got the MC1s and paid for the McCormack, so that set me back a bit.