Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Denon Question

  1. #1
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,023

    Denon Question

    Would appreciate an answer to this from any Denon owners ( I have an AVR 3801, I assume your receiver has similar capacity on alot of things). Anyway, while updating my DVD setup- amazing how one sees they might have missed something they weren't aware of awhile ago, it asked me what limit my receiver has in regards to PCM limits: 48 mhz, 96mhz or no limits.
    I originally put down no limit, which means anything over 96. Is this correct? The DVD instruction book says the DVD player will down sample any program with higher sample rates so it is compatible with my receiver. What in plain English does this mean? Thanks for any answers.

  2. #2
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    The question's irrelevant unless you're playing DVDs that contain 96/24 resolution PCM soundtracks with copy protection that requires that the digital output downsample the signal to 48 kHz. Very few discs fit this description, so whatever option you go with won't matter 99.99% of the time.
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  3. #3
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,023
    Thanks for info

  4. #4
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Yeah, if you had a 96 kHz soundtrack, the worst that could happen is the player would downsample it to 48 Hz, which may or may not reduce sound quality to that of your basic CD/DVD, give or take. Not a big deal.

  5. #5
    Forum Regular N. Abstentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,671
    You'd have to get a thicker optical cable to support that much resolution anyway. A normal optical cable can't transmit enough light for that much resolution. Or better yet, splice two of them together to double your light output.

  6. #6
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by N. Abstentia
    You'd have to get a thicker optical cable to support that much resolution anyway. A normal optical cable can't transmit enough light for that much resolution. Or better yet, splice two of them together to double your light output.
    This is true, but most of us just bi-process 96 kHz signals, using an optical and coaxial cable. The Coax of course gets the lows, the optical the highs.

  7. #7
    AR Member JeffKnob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    WI
    Posts
    265
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    This is true, but most of us just bi-process 96 kHz signals, using an optical and coaxial cable. The Coax of course gets the lows, the optical the highs.
    I just use a high quality Monster Cable garden hose to get that kind of resolution. Only water can handle that much information. Bottled water that is. Tap water introduces too much jitter.


  8. #8
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Aren't you guys being a little rough on Ed?
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  9. #9
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Quote Originally Posted by GMichael
    Aren't you guys being a little rough on Ed?
    Rough on Ed? I thought we were just being general smart asses to nobody in particular...did I miss an inside joke somewhere? N. Abstentia's?

  10. #10
    Forum Regular N. Abstentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,671
    LOL! He's probably referring to Ed's optical cable thread that Ed lost track of when it got moved to the cable forum. Since Ed didn't follow it there to defend himself, everybody kinda teed off on him in that thread

  11. #11
    Forum Regular N. Abstentia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,671
    Quote Originally Posted by kexodusc
    This is true, but most of us just bi-process 96 kHz signals, using an optical and coaxial cable. The Coax of course gets the lows, the optical the highs.
    CRAP I never thought of bi-wiring my digital outputs! How could I have been so obtuse???


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •