Had an interesting talk tonight about DVD-A's

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Jamie Tate, Jul 14, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    It is. I don't think the thread bears reason to be deleted, but it got close!

    Thanks Jamie. There's a lot of work to put in a DVD of any kind. Frustration with making it goes with the territory....
     
  2. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    I agree. But many are adding multichannel SACD players and DVD-Audio players to a home theatre system and they do need bass management to help them.

    Regards,
    Geoff
     
  3. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    Jitter is always there and must be dealt with. It's a problem with digital to analogue conversion and applies to redbook, SACD and DVD-Audio.

    Fortunately, we have seen significant advances in the accuracy of the aftermarket clocks and this is feeding back to the industry.

    Regards,
    Geoff
     
  4. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    In this case, they can rely on the DTS or DD content found on DVD-A and use the bass management features of their receiver. This won't help these individuals with SACD, but...
     
  5. Metralla

    Metralla Joined Jan 13, 2002

    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    That's not a satisfactory solution. Even without bass management, don't you think that most would want to hear the high resolution output of their DVD-Audio discs? I would.

    What do the ellipses mean?

    Regards,
    Geoff
     
  6. MagicAlex

    MagicAlex Gort Emeritus

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I have a home-theatre speaker system and it absolutely has to have a woofer and bass management to get a good listen to hi-res music through it.
     
  7. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    The ellipses were kind of meant to carry the statement to the obvious without actually saying it; that SACD does not offer a lo-rez surround-sound option. Not a good thing or a bad thing from my perspective, but that leaves folks with no bass management option. At least with DVD-A there is the lo-rez tracks that can be used with bass management features of most HT receivers.

    All I'm saying is that compromising the integrity of hi-rez audio in order to accomodate systems that require bass management kind of defeats the purpose of hi-rez audio in the first place. I just don't see any point in going there, but that's just me.
     
  8. MagicAlex

    MagicAlex Gort Emeritus

    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Since I use my SACD player primarily on my home-theatre speaker system to have access to 5.1 if I want it....can you tell me how I am compromising my hi-rez sound? I am baffled? :confused:
     
  9. fjhuerta

    fjhuerta New Member

    Location:
    México City
    Vex, are you talking about bass management in general? I'd think a nicely configured setup with an ICBM would not compromise hi-resolution audio.
     
  10. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Any time you convert or manipulate audio, you are compromising its integrity. Of course, this is just my opinion, and the idea is certainly open to interpretation.

    Magic Alex, if you are playing SACD directly through your HT setup without any bass management, then I do not feel you are compromising the integrity of the audio at all. If you are using bass management, then I do feel you are compromsing the quality.

    Bass managment, in HT systems, for all intents and purposes, happens in the digital domain. Using SACD as an example, you take this wonderful, hi-rez analog output and connect it to your HT receiver. Your reciever must then digitize the signal, at god-knows-what sampling rate (96 kHz for newer gear, usually 48 kHz for not-so-old gear) before it can work on it. THIS STEP RIGHT HERE IS THE BIGGEST COMPROMISE OF ALL! At this point you've pretty much thrown out any reason why you would want to listen to SACD in the first place. You lose all the advantages of DSD and/or analog.

    Okay, but we're not done yet. Now that the receiver has the audio in the digital domain, it then manipulates it, redirecting bass, changing output levels, whatever. Let's call this compromise number two. Why is it a compromise? Because it is changing the original audio signal. Perhaps the end justifies the means, but I personally feel that any change to the original signal is bad.

    Finally, your HT reciever must convert the digital signal back to analog before amplification. This would be the third and final compromise in this scenario.
     
  11. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile? What's this got to do with bass management? I guess it does go BOOM! :p

    Seriously, I do not know what ICBM is...
     
  12. romanotrax

    romanotrax Forum Resident

    Location:
    Aurora IL
    So let me get this straight....

    And I'm not trying to be a smart ass...

    I hook the six outs on my Sony NV500 to the 6 multichannel direct ins on my Sony receiver. Am I not getting a straight signal to my speakers? I can use no extra eq on the channels and I only get bass to my sub if there is bass on the SACD (Ryan Adams is a good example). What is doing the bass management at this point? I have never really understood that whole thing anyway and maybe this is the wrong place to figure it out but.... you guys are knowledgeable so I thought I would ask. If there is a better place to find out about Bass Management and what is happening with my system please let me know.

    Bob
     
  13. fjhuerta

    fjhuerta New Member

    Location:
    México City
    Vex: :D

    ICBM = Integrated Controlled Bass Manager (if memory serves right), from Outlaw Audio.

    http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/icbm.html

    Sounds like the ticket for us people who just have to have our BM's to feel allright.

    EDIT: AFAIK, Vex is right. If you are doing BM with something that is not the ICBM, you are degrading the signal by passing it through a (possibly lower resolution) AD -> DA process.
     
  14. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    To Romanotrax:

    Most recievers/pre-amps do straight pass-through on the 5.1 inputs, which in my mind is a GOOD thing. The people complaining about lack of bass management (at the player level) usually have this kind of setup. It sounds like your setup probably lacks bass management on the 5.1 inputs as well.
     
  15. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA

    Looks like an interesting unit... I can't tell if it operates in the digital or analog domain. Everything points to it being an analog device... which I think is good... mostly.

    It's kind of a damned if you do and damned if you don't kind of thing. I still maintain that the best bass management is no bass management, but assuming you HAVE to do it, would a digital or analog solution for hi-rez audio be better?

    I think an analog solution is going to remain truer to the output of the player, since it never leaves the analog domain. However, I'm guessing that a digital unit would be more flexible and precise.

    Either way, though, you're altering the signal. There is just no way of getting around that if you want bass management.
     
  16. fjhuerta

    fjhuerta New Member

    Location:
    México City
    Vex, the ICBM is 100% analogue..

    And I do agree, if I had full-range speakers all around, I would not need an ICBM. I subscribe to your theory: the less you have to alter the signal from your source to your speakers, the better.

    Sadly, too many of us don't own full range speakers on every corner on our room (I wish I did!). For us, an ICBM is an acceptable compromise.

    It's not that expensive, either.
     
  17. ptaheldaoud

    ptaheldaoud Forum Resident

    Location:
    U.K
    The whole situation regarding bass-management is a minefield at the moment. Hopefully at some point the parties involved will agree on a universal digital interface, at the moment HDMI looks the most promising.

    Will
     
  18. sgraham

    sgraham New Member

    Location:
    Michigan
    Are you sure? As far as I can tell most multichannel receivers are filled with digiprocessing and you pay *extra* to get one that has no digital conversion on the 5.1 inputs.

    I bought a JVC because... well it was a cheap way to get ProLogic-II; but also because it has a feature for "bypassing the digital processing" on the analog inputs. Except that there's still a noticeable delay on the signal coming out of it (I know this because I run an audio signal to my TV, and when the TV and the stereo speakers are both playing I hear doubling). This strongly suggests to me that while the "digital processing" may be bypassed, i.e. no digital eq etc., the signal is still being digitized somewhere. NOT what I thought I was getting.

    (If this is thread pooping, I didn't start it!)
     
  19. ratskrad

    ratskrad Forum Resident

    Location:
    Heber Utah USA
    My Yamaha RX-V1300 has a processor bypass to the amps. I have my SACD or DVD-A player plugged into the 5.1 inputs (depending on what I want to listen to) and do a processor bypass with both players having speakers set to large and depending on the music choice I either turn the sub woofer up or down for desired effect. Now for 2 channel stuff I use my mains only and no sub and live with what they produce.

    Back on topic I am always interested to hear what people in the industry have to say about the formats whether it be good, bad or otherwise. What someones perception is of a format has a great deal to do with what we might see in the future in that format.
     
  20. vex

    vex New Member

    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    If this is thread crapping, I will take full responsibility. I find this to be a much more useful topic than discussing rumored downfalls of certain hi-rez digital media solutions.

    Okay, I can only speak from experience, and I've had first-hand experience with two different surround processers from Rotel, one from Anthem and one from Sherwood. All of them offered direct pass-through of analog on the 5.1 input and all of them (except the Anthem that allows you to define analog or digital on all inputs) used digital processing on ALL of the other inputs, EXCEPT the tape monitor, which remains analog.

    Now, your experience brings up another "dirty little secret" I've discovered about HT processors. Many of them use a DIGITAL VOLUME CONTROL. Even if your unit promises analog pass-through, you have to find out if it has a digital volume control. Okay, I'm no rocket scientist, but I have to question how a unit can offer analog pass-through but use a digital volume control. The two features seem incompatible to me. Maybe I'm missing something?


     
  21. tomcat

    tomcat Senior Member

    Location:
    Switzerland
    I have always thought it means "Intercontinental Ballistic Missile" - another great invention, be it American or Russian...

    Peace
    Thomas
     
  22. fjhuerta

    fjhuerta New Member

    Location:
    México City
    The world would be a great place to live if all ICBM's were made by Outlaw Audio!!! :D

    Back on topic (sorta), how can I find out whether my amp has a digital (ack) volume level control? I know my Yamaha is entirely analog (says so in the manual), but I have a Pioneer (not sold in the USA) which, now that I think of, might have a digital volume... the horror... the horror...
     
  23. Richard Feirstein

    Richard Feirstein New Member

    Location:
    Albany, NY
    I added an ICMB to my SACD into Dennon 3802 and think it was one of the best steps I have taken in years to improve my system. Some day we will have DVD/DVD-A/SACD/CD players with either iLink or HDIM interconnects and everthing from time alignment to bass management can be done right, till then we have the ICBM to handle bass management.

    Richard.
     
  24. Taurus

    Taurus Senior Member

    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    I'm basically a lazy person, so I copied/pasted my own post from a similar thread at HTF, so this may look familiar to some. :D

    Two possible reasons most hi-rez players don't have bass management for dvd-audio/sacd:

    1) Accurately & fully manipulating hi-res data streams requires a powerful, very high-speed processor chip. I have a feeling this chip isn't cheap.

    2) Multichannel mixers always stress how important it is to use five, full-range speakers (and a subwoofer) to properly listen to surround music. I can see where they are coming from: most of those 5.1 systems that use small satellites with 3 inch to 5 inch "woofers" just don't sound as full & rich as a full size system does, even if a large subwoofer is present. For movies this isn't a big deal, but for music--where the sound is all that is being paid attention to--this is a big deal. And many of these minimum systems have crossovers in the 100-200hz region. These are frequencies above which bass is non-directional--not a good thing. The result can be distorted imaging of lower frequency instruments or voices. And all the crossover processing itself can introduce it's own set of subtle problems.

    So, the player manufacturers may just be taking the surround music engineer's advice & not including any b.m.

    Personally, I don't believe when they say "full-range" speakers they literally mean a speaker flat from 20Hz to 20kHz. That would be a totally pie-in-the-sky and frigging stupid thing to ask of the typical music lover. So I think they are overstating themselves on purpose to make sure people use the largest satellites they possibly can. Again personally speaking, in a "typical" living room I have found that a quality loudspeaker with an 8" woofer can reproduce bass that is perfectly hearable, even if it doesn't rattle the family's good china to pieces. This is my definition of the minimum full-range speaker. My Boston CR9's w/8" woofers can go down to 42Hz (+/-3dB scale) and they only cost $425/pair back in 1998. Most pop/rock bass stops around 40Hz so this works out great for me & my future 5.1 full-range dvd-audio loudspeaker system. And in a bedroom, dorm room or efficiency apartment living room, I'll bet a bookshelf with a good 6.5" woofer would work out pretty well too. My buddy's stereo system that uses a pair of Infinity "SL" speakers with one 6.5" woofer apiece has gotten him in trouble several times with his neighbors!

    And the 5.1 mixers are placing full-range frequencies in those front, center & rear channels: as I've reported here before, that Linkin Park Reanimation dvd-audio has bass (drums, bass guitar & synths) in the fronts AND center channel that caused my woofers to move--at 75% full volume--at least half an inch. And my borrowed center channel's 6.5" woofer (an Infinity "SL" series bookshelf) actually bottomed out several times. And the rear channels during The Nightfly dvd-audio also were quite active, despite this album sounding so mellow & easy going. So people with small sats, beware!!!

    >>>And note to people with dvd-audio players but no full-range sats: if you want, most dvd-audio players let you listen to a dvd-audio disc's Dolby Digital or DTS tracks by choosing the player's "dvd-video playback mode". Usually this is done via the player's set-up menu. My Pioneer 656 has this option, and I know Denon's 4800 carousel player has it too (I had to switch it around at a Tweeter store once--the 5.1 analog outputs weren't hooked up).

    [T]
     
  25. Taurus

    Taurus Senior Member

    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Someone asked about their 5.1 inputs being 100% analog:

    If the receiver was from Sony & it was made in the last three years, I'll bet there is a 99.99% chance they are fully analog, as long as no DSP mode is turned on.

    Same with Panasonic and Technics receivers: if they say they are "dvd-audio ready" that means they also have pure analog 5.1 inputs. BUT read the product's webpage or manual carefully. Panasonic's entry-level receiver has a 5.1 input, but its webpage specifically says it is not dvd-audio ready.

    Pioneer? Their latest receivers have stickers on the front mentioning a 5.1 input is available for sacd/dvd-audio but on the same sticker it mentions it uses 96kHz/24bit digital-to-analog convertors. Umm, not exactly a musically horrible & destructive thing to use, but this means another analog>digital>analog conversion is being performed inside & that can subtly degrade the music. And if playing back a 192khz-derived music signal, well, you'll only hear a 96kHz version now. Again, this is not going to keep the sun from rising the next day, but the music might be missing some of those extra fine details you paid extra for!

    Manufacturers like converting to analog signals to digital form because it makes it easy to move & manipulate the signals in today's very complicated HT receivers without significant signal degradation. And it's cheaper to use digital chips for signal transportation than it would be to use analog-based circuits--another attraction of conversion (& I'm sure the accountants just looooove this characteristic!).

    Last thing: just because you have an electronic volume control does not mean you don't have a pure analog signal path. By electronic I mean one of those knobs with a corresponding digital readout or bar graph, and one that does NOT just have one hard starting point and one hard ending point (i.e., it keeps going round & round). Many companies now use analog volume circuits that are just controlled by a digital circuit--there is no conversion taking place. Quality/long lasting mechanical analog volume controls (usually called potentiometers or "pots") are expensive--digital-based ones are cheaper, more reliable and are easy to integrate with the receiver's other functions (speaker levels, muting, etc).

    This conversion issue is why I think many people say they can't hear any improvement with hi-res sources: they have systems that are converting everything to lower-res digital formats. A lot of older receivers do this at CD's rate of 16bit/44.1kHz, so you are definitely not getting hi-res anything!

    Wow--sometimes it seems like we should have stayed with 8-track: just push it in and you have music..........nah........good things always require some hard work to attain.

    [T]
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine