HDMI not good for critical listening?

I've done extensive comparisons between HDMI with Dirac and 5.1 analog with the XMC-1 and 205. In my room HDMI with Dirac has far better overall SQ than 5.1 analog. I use the XLR output of the 205 to the XMC-1 for two channel music and it sounds great.

 

I have a lot of Emotiva gear and I think highly of the company.

The XMC-1 is quite the processor. I have had their UMC-1 and now I have their 4k processor.

 

Actually this is wrong . I have the XLR outputs of the 205 connected to a Wyred 4 Sound STP-SE preamp. Which is setup using the HT Bypass function along with the XMC-1.

 

So for 2 channels music, you found that using 205's DAC is better than htmi to XMC-1?

 

Yes. I prefer using the DACs in the 205 for two channel music. I find that Dirac is not needed for two channel music when there are no subs, surrounds or center channel in play. At least that's what I find with my room and gear.

 

Curious, can't you do analog 2 channels out to your XMC-1 also? In this case the preamp section makes a difference (XMC-1 vs Wyred 4 Sound STP-SE)?

 

I have experienced truncation at the beginning of some audio tracks but it was happening even with my 2002 Sony ES receiver which lacks HDMI. Not sure of the cause but it seems to be a common issue.

 

Most definitely. I had the XLR outputs of the 205 connected to the XMC-1 for a quite awhile and was quite happy with the SQ. Then I came across a great deal on a mint used W4S STP-SE. I've always wanted to try the STP-SE in my system as I have all W4S amps. The combination of the 205 and STP-SE is excellent and the SQ is better than the XMC-1. The differences are subtle but I prefer the STP-SE as it's a much more direct signal than that of the XMC-1. The great feature of the STP-SE is that you can configure one of the XLR inputs for the HT-Bypass input.

STP-SE
StereoTimes --

 

Is the audio track of the BD disc DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby TrueHD encoded or raw PCM? I have several BD-Audio discs and the losslessly compressed tracks with DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby TrueHD seem to sound better than plain PCM (which is often included at the same resolution as their DTS or Doby counterparts). I count on lossless codecs to use Dialogue Normalization so they sound louder than plain PCM so I don't assume than "louder sounds better". My explanation for this is that with a PCM track this is traveling "on the clear" through the HDMI cable/port while for example a DTS-HD Master Audio tracks traveling through the HDMI cable/port is mere data that has to be reconstructed into the original PCM data inside the A/V receiver, how or where the compressed data doesn't matter as long as it's been transported bit accurately, I don't think jitter is an issue with a losslessly compressed data stream, in the end the decompressing IC will decompressed the original PCM data.

 

I really haven't any idea. I just put what ever kind of disc I have into the player and play them. The player must decide how to best render them. That would be my guess?

Even regular DVD's sound better than the CD's did. With the new Oppo 203 player and the new Emotiva 4k Processor, the Cd's do sound better than they did with the old Oppo '93 player and the older UMC-1 processor.

Still CD sound best when I use the Oppo player strictly as a transport into the Peachtree iNova.

The sound quality on BD has always sounded quite excellent with music.

I'm fine with everything.

 

Interesting....

I have compared Oppo 203 via HDMI and via rca coaxial to Marantz AV8801, my subjective observation is that I could listen to coaxial longer without fatigue. Also, coaxial has wider soundstage.

I wonder what could be the cause of the differences....

 

Placebo effect.

 

Nope.

 

Critical listening using a receiver is somewhat sketchy imo. So many settings and such. To proclaim a wider soundstage in this instance leaves me very skeptical. But hey, more power to YOU for figuring it all out. It just isn't my conclusion based on my setups.

 

I don't blame you thinking that. I thought about that too. Thus, I tried the comparisons in 3 different mornings.

Nothing really scientific other than trying to pinpoint the locations of instruments. I can compare with a push of button with my remote. One button enable HDMI input. Another is coaxial input. Everything remains the same. My head position remained the same.

For example, I point my right hand toward the double bass location (with HDMI), then switch to coaxial with my left hand pressing the remote button, then observe if the double bass still located where my right hand is pointing. I then switch back and forth multiple times. With HDMI, the instruments seems limited within speakers boundaries. With coaxial, the instruments seems able to move a little bit beyond the speakers. Not much, but typically I can move my right hand wider by 6" or more.

I think it is likely hardware/software implementation related. I have read that the newer version of Marantz av preamp, 8802a, sounds better with HDMI than my 8801. 8802a uses different DAC and different preamp output boards.....

 

Well, not a receiver in my case. It is AV Preamp that originally retailed for $3K. I was hoping it would do 2 channels well too.

Not only that, one needs good amps and good speakers to really hear the minute differences.

 

Lots of bells and whistles in the way. I am absolutely positive it sounds excellent but I am still skeptical how critical you can get, especially two channel wise. YMMV.

 

I've done a number of comparisons between coaxial, optical and HDMI with a few different processors. I could never tell any audible differences between the three. I did comparisons with stereo and multichannel music. All comparisons were done using the Pure Audio mode. For some reason I expected HDMI to sound better but that wasn't the case.

 

Yeah, it is not obvious. In my case, I had to listen very attentively just to observe the slight soundstage width differences... May be with newer version of Marantz preamp, I wouldn't hear a difference at all....

 

I don't understand the skepticism and prejudices against A/V receivers, I think that belongs to the 90's. I think Top of the range A/V receivers can sound great. Pioneer Elite A/V receivers when set to Pure Direct sound great and can make justice to the music they're amplifying, and Pioneer Elite's are not the only ones. Just my 0.002 $.

 

I do agree with you and I don't use a receiver,

To have a placebo effect you must have something in place of something else, like a pill without any active ingredients in it vs. one that does.

I think that basically an HDMI input to my processor that sounds excellent with a Blu-ray disk, should also sound excellent with a CD.

But it doesn't.

But if I run the CD through a digital coax or digital optical output on the Oppo and into a digital input on the Peachtree iNova that I use as the system source selector, DAC and class "A" preamp, the CD sounds like I would expect it to sound.

Now I realize we are talking about two different units, the processor and the iNova's DAC.

But if a digital Blu-ray disk can sound excellent going in the HDMI input on the processor, my thinking is that the CD should sound excellent also.

I can think of no reason at all for this. But that is just how it sounds.

It is the only thing on my system that does not perform up to par and I have no idea why?