Farewell to OPPO Digital

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by SamS, Apr 2, 2018.

  1. Sterling1

    Sterling1 Active Member

    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    I did not know about the Marantz you mentioned. I thought pretty much it was all HDMI today. That's good to know. I like the OPPO's DAC's too. BTW, I discovered the other day that the front usb port will play multi-channel gaplessly. There are many multi-channel Seattle Symphony albums in FLAC and DSD for downloading from Acoustic Sounds which need gapless, like The Firebird. So far, those Seattle Symphony recordings are the best sounding digital recordings I've heard.
     
  2. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    For those on a budget the NAD T 758 V3 and T 777 V3 receivers both have 7.1 analogue in + they both offer Dirac room correction!
     
    Simon A and Sterling1 like this.
  3. Pizza

    Pizza With extra pepperoni

    Location:
    USA
    I understand that the 105/205 have superior DACs and sound better than using the HDMI connections, but how does the analogue outs compare to the HDMI outs for the 103/203? Any benefit using the analogue out for them or does it not matter in their case?
     
  4. tmtomh

    tmtomh Forum Resident

    The difference between analogue outputs and HDMI outputs for any disc player or digital source is that the analogue outputs use the unit's internal DAC(s), while the HDMI outputs do not. So if one wants to use the HDMI output of a digital player, then the Oppo 105/205 does not really offer any significant sonic advantage over the 103/203 (aside from an audio-only HDMI output on the 205 that is said to minimize jitter - but of course that's only a benefit if the jitter on conventional HDMI outputs is a problem).

    So using analogue vs HDMI almost always matters, because it means you're using a totally different DAC - the machine's own DAC if you're using the analogue outputs, versus the DAC of whatever you're feeding the HDMI into (usually an AV receiver, but conceivably an amplifier, preamp/processor, or outboard DAC).
     
    Soundslave, scobb, mikeyt and 3 others like this.
  5. Pizza

    Pizza With extra pepperoni

    Location:
    USA
    What’s the verdict on the 203/103 DACs? Will they make a positive difference from the hdmi?
     
  6. tmtomh

    tmtomh Forum Resident

    DACs do not come into play with HDMI. If you use the HDMI output on a 103 or 203 (or 105 or 205, or any other digital player/source), it bypasses the DAC.
     
    Soundslave, scobb and mikeyt like this.
  7. Pizza

    Pizza With extra pepperoni

    Location:
    USA
    I understand that. I’m asking in comparison to using hdmi. Are the DACs in the 203/103 worth using over using the hdmi? 203/103 Analogue DACs>=<HDMI?
     
  8. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    That's a question that can't be answered accurately (given the information at hand) because it depends entirely on the dacs on the receiving end of the HDMI cable!
     
    tmtomh likes this.
  9. TarnishedEars

    TarnishedEars Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    While what you state is correct, there is an oddball exception to this principle where the Oppo 205 is concerened. It's not that its DACs impact the sound of the HDMI output. But Oppo did add a feature to the 205s HDMI outputs (only) which allows it to not have to be synced inside of those 48kHz data frames. So this is a feature of the 205 which might make a slight difference on some systems.
     
    tmtomh likes this.
  10. tmtomh

    tmtomh Forum Resident

    Yes, in my prior comment I mentioned that jitter-reduction feature on the 205's HDMI audio-only output.
     
    TarnishedEars likes this.
  11. hobbes4444

    hobbes4444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Thanks, as always, for the useful and insightful Oppo related posts. I had been on the fence about getting a nice pair of cans for listening while the missus is in the house. So I'm going to give the PM-2's a go. Oppo is still apparently honoring the 30-day return policy if these are not to my liking. I'm not a fan of technical, analytical, mid-range forward sound which has been attributed to these, but then again, some have described them as has "warm". So who knows. But overall the reviews are pretty strong, and hey, it's Oppo!! And it's $500 vs $700 or $1100. . . plus I got some extra earpads if I decide to sell them down the road and a spare backlit remote for my ol' BDP-93. Winning start to a Monday!
     
    Billy Budapest likes this.
  12. You will NOT be disappointed. I own the PM-1’s which sound the same as the PM-2’s and to use a hackneyed (but true) audiophile descriptive, the sound is sublime. I would never call them “analytical” as the treble is smooth and compared to “analytical” cans like the HD-800, a tiny bit rolled off.
     
    hobbes4444 likes this.
  13. hobbes4444

    hobbes4444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Yes, the higher end Marantz AVRs have retained the multichannel analog inputs (6012/7012/7013/8012). But most other manufacturers have dropped that feature completely from their AVRs, or in all but their flagship. No Denon, Pioneer, Yamaha, don't think Onkyo, not sure about others in the $2k+ range. It would have been nice if Yamaha maintained it in the 3070/3080. Produce an AVR with 7.1 analog MC and balanced XLR, and that would have been my ideal replacement AVR. I'm not sure anything, and certainly not anything under $2k, has both XLR and 7.1 MC inputs. . .
     
  14. Sterling1

    Sterling1 Active Member

    Location:
    Louisville, KY
    I looked at the Marantz SR-7012 at Crutchfield, and sure enough multi-channel analog inputs. I liked their price and 60 day return policy too. I don't need one, but with my equipment now almost 20 years old, it might make sense to buy one of these. I wonder if I could discern a sound divergence between the SR-7012 and the TOTL Marantz pre/pro?
     
  15. hobbes4444

    hobbes4444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    I replaced a Pioneer SC-25 from 2010-ish with a Marantz 7012 and really like the overall improvements in sound. The Audyssey room correction software is light years ahead of what I got with the Pioneer's room correction.

    I haven't done much 2-ch listening as I have a dedicated 2-ch set up. The times I've compared, my SimAudio 2-ch amp is a clear winner (as it should be). But for movies and MC music, the Marantz is a big improvement over the Pioneer. Movie surround is a significant step up: detail and clarity in the surrounds is wonderful. But when I compare MC music via analog MC and the Oppo DAC vs the Oppo via HDMI using the Marantz DAC, the Oppo DAC is a major step up. Better soundstage with improved instrument placement, better clarity and depth. MC music sounds great via the 7.1 analog.

    While I can't comment on the pre/pro distinction and differences in sound. But in light of the price drop on the 7012, I think it's now well priced and bordering on a great value!
     
    PhantomStranger likes this.
  16. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    The way Marantz (and other Japanese manufacturers) quote their power output annoys me to the point I don't consider their receivers. The 7012 is "rated", ie Marantz claim it is a powerful 200 watt 9 channel amplifier, however on further reading it can muster 125 watts with just two channels driven so god only knows what it is with all channels driven?

    Edit: I just looked up the info. The Marantz 7012 Power Output per channel:
    6 ohm, 1 kHz, 1%, 1ch Drive 200 W
    6 ohm, 1 kHz, 0.7%, 2ch Drive 165 W
    8 ohm, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 0.08%, 2ch Drive 125 W

    So it's a 200 watt amplifier with one channel driven at 6 ohm! I wonder how many customers use it in that configuration? I still cant find what it is for 5, 7 or 9 channels driven!
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2018
  17. jhm

    jhm Forum Resident

    For what it's worth, I have a UDP-203 and a Marantz 6012 and love the combination. Unfortuately, a kind soul on this forum informed me (and then I did my research) that Audyssey downconverts any high resolution material in order to implement it's EQ processing. As a consequence, I've stopped using it and have had to play around a lot more "by ear" to get my system dialed in. It's a lot of work and educating myself, but it's been worth it. The other nice thing about this Marantz line is that it has pre-outs, so I can upgrade my amp section someday if I wish to.
     
  18. hobbes4444

    hobbes4444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Agree, their numbers are hooey. Then again, so are most AVR manufacturers' numbers. I thought I read it was 125 wpc in 5 ch mode, but that would not match up with the 125 for 2ch. I don't believe there were any reviews for the receiver that actually did lab measurements. I seem to recall some discussions in the comments following Todd Anderson's AV Nirvana review. Not entirely sure though.

    And then re jhm's audyssey note, if you are using HDMI to connect the 203 and 6012, I think that is correct. But if you are doing multichannel analog, I think audyssey is bypassed. Not sure, but thought that was mentioned in the avsforums discussion of the 7012. I've done a fair amout of reading about the 7012, but age prevents retention of it all sadly!! Bottom line, really enjoying the 205-7012 set up. i think my next upgrade will be finding a simaudio moon i3.3 that has the home theater pass through so i can integrate that with the 7012 for my front channels. sadly the i3.3 i bought is an early model that is missing that feature. or maybe a parasound hinto!!
     
  19. jhm

    jhm Forum Resident

    If that's true, then you're not getting any of the room correction you dialed in using the automatic software. Unfortunately Audessey has to be enabled to take advantage of the room correction and if it IS enabled, it's downscaling any high resolution audio. At least that's how I've read it. Glad you are enjoying your 205-7012. I'm sure it sounds amazing!
     
  20. scobb

    scobb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I don't know much about room correction having a pre HDMI receiver, however, I think it's possible for some to provide room correction on hi rez input, but what they can't do is native DSD so they convert it to PCM before they do the room correction. This conversion is not necessarily down converting but just switching the way the music is encoded. I wouldn't get too hung up on it as many SACD players do this via their analogue out!
     
    jhm likes this.
  21. Kal Rubinson

    Kal Rubinson Forum Resident

    All true. The Marantzs do not redigitize the multichannel analog inputs and, therefore, cannot apply Audyssey/EQ to those signals. OTOH, they can apply Audyssey/EQ to the HDMI input from the same source but that means downsampling to 48kHz as well as PCM conversion for the DSD stream.
     
  22. Kal Rubinson

    Kal Rubinson Forum Resident

    The closest I see is the NAD T758 v3 but it lacks XLR inputs.[​IMG]
     
    hobbes4444, tmtomh and scobb like this.
  23. Pizza likes this.
  24. Pizza

    Pizza With extra pepperoni

    Location:
    USA
    I wonder what percentage of the final batches of 205s got scooped up by retailers. A few, a lot? It’d be interesting to know out of curiosity. It seems odd how large they let the waiting list grow in the end. Still glad they gave us the chance.
     
  25. tmtomh

    tmtomh Forum Resident

    EU distribution channel is different than the North American one. A batch of 205s surfacing in France has got to be older stock that was held back by someone at the wholesale level (in order to sell them for a premium now), not a bunch of final-run units scooped up by someone.
     
    PhantomStranger, scobb and Pizza like this.

Share This Page