5.1 Bonanza

[Titanium Dome]

A "Perfect" statement, pun intended.


Yikes!!
Glad I own the original LP.

Holy Yikes! $299.95, then he wants $2.98 for shipping.

[toddalin]

Not to get off topic, but what bugs me most about listening to 5.1 music on my system is the physical height of the rear channels.

While it is fine for movies to have stuff circling around overhead behind you, it is kind of weird having musicans playing over your head when the front ones are normal. Guess I must be situated in the orchestra pit.

[Allanvh5150]

Hmm, I noticed I have some more DTS discs, like Eagles, Hell Freezes Over.
I guess I need to do an inventory.

Play it loud, I am sure you will enjoy it!

Allan.

[Titanium Dome]

Allan

I sent my GF and her mom off to Las Vegas for her mom's birthday.

I recently got back my Oppo BDP-83 upgraded to BDP-83SE with the superior DAC and improved multichannel analog board.

I am expecting my new JBL Performance Series AV2 today.

I shall obey your order tonight!

[Titanium Dome]

The AV2 didn't show up, but I played everything through the SDP-5. Parts of that Eagle's live disc are quite amazing and parts aren't quite. The DTS mix is a bit strained sometimes and brilliant other times.

Afterward, I played the 20th Anniversary Brothers In Arms SACD. Now THERE'S a fine disc. Holy mother of pearl bailey's irish cream your wyclef jeans!

That'll make your SAMmies sing.

[Allanvh5150]

The AV2 didn't show up, but I played everything through the SDP-5. Parts of that Eagle's live disc are quite amazing and parts aren't quite. The DTS mix is a bit strained sometimes and brilliant other times.

Afterward, I played the 20th Anniversary Brothers In Arms SACD. Now THERE'S a fine disc. Holy mother of pearl bailey's irish cream your wyclef jeans!

That'll make your SAMmies sing.

Ti,

I am sure your system far excels mine so maybe you can hear things that I cant on the hell freezes over DVD. As for Brothers in Arms I can definately see your point. This was one of the first DDD recordings ever made and it has stood the test of time extreamly well. Even the 2 channel CD sounds pretty damn good.

Allan.

P.S. The bass line in the intro to New York Minute should nearly make you loose you dinner!!

[JBLAddict]

Allan

I sent my GF and her mom off to Las Vegas for her mom's birthday.

I recently got back my Oppo BDP-83 upgraded to BDP-83SE with the superior DAC and improved multichannel analog board.

I am expecting my new JBL Performance Series AV2 today.

I shall obey your order tonight!

Hey TiD,

I'm very very close to buying the new OPPO-83, as I just discovered DTS 5.1 DVDs and now really want to start exploring SACD, DVD-A, etc.

Money aside, how much benefit do you expect from the SE upgrade? I couldn't quite understand from the OPPO website and the avsforum OPPO thread if the benefit only comes from using the internal DAC with analog outputs, or if HDMI output (which I'd like to use exclusively) negates the benefit?

Second, it's hard to gauge the generally agreed ranking of the formats. Since so much material is available in so many formats, I'd hate to buy for example Gaucho in DTS 5.1, if DVD-A is superior, or buy in DVD-A if SACD is the generally accepted superior format. I understand that there's pros and cons among formats, but can you put in some general terms which are debated as near equals vs. which are as a matter of fact the most compressed/lossy formats. Since the discs are so darn pricey, I'd rather go right for the brass ring.

Thanks, appreciate any insight

[Titanium Dome]

Generally speaking, I would rank them in this order.

DVD-A
SACD
DTS

If I had to assign points, with 10 going to the top format,

DVD-A = 10
SACD = 9
DTS = 7

DVD-A really requires a screen for navigation and access to some video material.
SACD does not need a screen for navigation, but its content is less rich and its sound IMO is slightly less satisfying than DVD-A.
DTS is lossy, and it is somewhat more "creative" in some of the mixes.

[Titanium Dome]

Specifically speaking, each variety has good discs and bad. So there are some very good DTS discs I prefer over some not-so-good SACDs and DVD-As. For example, I like most of the Sting DTS discs and the Joe Cocker DTS disc a lot.

Since there are few--if any--duplicates of the same album in all three formats, you don't have to worry about which version to get. Usually there's only one version and it's on one of the three if it exists in 5.1 at all.

Some discs will have both DTS and DVD-A on them, but I can't recall any SACD that ever had either of the others.

Of course, it's common for there to be a two-channel track on the same disc as the 5.1 mix, though this is by no means universal.

[Titanium Dome]

As for the Oppo BDP-83SE, I got it specifically to do all the decoding in the player and run the sound out the 7.1 analog pres. (Of course, it will be outputting 5.1, not 7.1.)

Until HDMI is a bit more mature and some of the irritating audio bugs are worked out, I'll limit its use to video.

[JBLAddict]

As for the Oppo BDP-83SE, I got it specifically to do all the decoding in the player and run the sound out the 7.1 analog pres. (Of course, it will be outputting 5.1, not 7.1.)

Until HDMI is a bit more mature and some of the irritating audio bugs are worked out, I'll limit its use to video.

thanks for the concise rankings, crystal clear info

on the Oppo, now that you have it upgraded, what improvement have you found analog vs. analog?

[Titanium Dome]

I'm going to cut and paste from a very long series of posts I made in an OPPO BDP-83SE thread elsewhere.

After living with the Oppo BDP-83SE for three weeks, I can record my observations and results. While many posters here feel that a “pure” analog path provides the best results from the SE’s improved analog stage, I did not find that to be true in the absolute sense. For those posters who might intone that any additional A/D/A step negates the value of the analog stage, I found that is not true in every case and it is a weak theoretical assumption to make without real world evidence to back it up.

What I did discover is that in each of my representative set ups, the SE analog stage is an impressive improvement in many but not all ways.

(Here I've edited out some paragraphs and a spreadsheet. They aren't necessary for the Lansing Heritage crowd.)

[Titanium Dome]

Most readers here will be familiar with some or most of this.

Of the three systems in the test, one is the room’s installed and calibrated JBL Synthesis® One Array electronics stack installed in an electronics closet. The two additional systems I lugged down there were set up in the adjacent room so as to not alter the listening room’s characteristics in any way. Since the equipment closet has both front and rear access, this allowed me to tap into the source and the speaker connections with no problem.

Electronics System One: This system combines the Outlaw 990 pre/pro with a JBL Performance Series AVA-7 amplifier (which is essentially a Lexicon amp badged as a JBL) and two BASH 1000W digital amps for the subs. These electronics represent the economy separates system at approximately $3000.

Electronics System Two: The Synthesis® gear includes the SDP-5 processor (which is essentially a Lexicon MC-8), the SDEC4000 (which is essentially a BSS Audio SoundWeb London BLU-32 I/O Expander and BLU-80 Signal Processor with CobraNet®) and two S800 and two S5160 amps (which are Amplifier Technologies Incorporated units custom built for JBL). These electronics represent the high end separates system at approximately $33,000.

Electronics System Three: This system uses the Fosgate Audionics FAP T1+ pre/pro, a Fosgate Audionics FAA 1000.5 amp, and a Hafler SR26000 amp for the subs. These electronics represent the mid-level separates system at approximately $8,000.

You'll note I'm not including the cost of the Synthesis® speakers in these cost estimates, since it's the same speaker set for all three systems in this experiment.

[Titanium Dome]

Continuing:

Switching was accomplished using ProCo RMS-1 and RMS-2 analog switchers, so each system could be running and switched in and out on the fly.

Each system was level matched using both an analog Radio Shack SPL meter and a Soundcraftsmen AE2000 Auto-Scan-Analyzer generating pink noise. A SAM II calibrated mic was used for all sound measurements and recorded in AudioTest and/or Fuzz Measure on a MacBook Pro running 10.6.2. Files were stored on a one terabyte FireWire800 10,000 RPM hard drive.

For the measurements and listening tests all non-audio equipment was turned off, including heat, air, and lights. The room is double walled with isolated studs, 5/8 drywall, and insulation. The floor is concrete, covered with carpet. The ceiling is double walled and insulated, with quadrants separated by wave-breaking, intersecting diffusers. In addition to the 18 acoustical panels, four bass traps, and six diffusers on the walls, there are black velvet drapes on sections of the wall, and four Ikea Poang chairs with black fabric covers. In general, the room is a HT variation of the dead end/live end studio design.

All systems were set at 75dB for a complete battery of listening and testing, Then they were set at 85dB for retesting. No one was in the room during any measurements. A listener (me) was present for listening tests. Measurements were taken at the same location as where I sat when listening.

The music used included the following discs:
Vaughan Williams, A Sea Symphony, DVD-A
Wei Li, Autumn Yearning Fantasia (SACD-DSD)
Porcupine Tree, Deadwing, DVD-A
Erich Kunzel/Cincinnati Pops, Time Warp, Telarc CD
Conjure One, Conjure One, CD
Joe Cocker, Night Calls, DTS
Bach & Vivaldi: Violin Concertos, 24/96 CD

For each recording, a measurement was taken at two pre-determined points on the disc, so that the response from each system could be compared at identical points. The software recorded 10 second clips, then these were manually aligned by the clock readings and a specific moment of the clip was captured for visual comparison. This resulted in 14 common reference points.

Halfway through the measurement process, the levels were checked to make sure no drift occurred. No adjustments were required.

[Titanium Dome]

Now to the listening and measuring:

For the listening tests, I listened through a set list of the same tracks. After each track I wrote my impressions...

(At this point I'm editing out the entire section on process methodology, since I'm just giving an opinion here, and I have no plans to get into a detailed discussion or defense with anyone.)

The Oppo BDP-83SE is a wonderful machine. The improved analog section provides a signal that in most systems will be noticeably improved from the stock board, and in a highly refined listening environment these improvements are more dramatic.

With System One (Outlaw 990), the signal remains analog once it leaves the BDP-83SE, so the character of the amplifiers, speakers, and listening environment are the main factors. The 990 has a very clean and quiet bypass. The analog signals, 7.1, 5.1, and 2.0 came through with excellent quality, and there was no sense of disappointment in the sound. Since the room and the speakers are above reproach and the amplifiers seem very quiet, I did not consider them to degrade the sound in any way.

Compared to the digital outs of the Oppo that required the Outlaw 990 to do the processing, the Oppo’s analog sound had a much more satisfying, realistic, and open feeling. It was clearly preferable to me, and it tended to measure better as well. No doubt this is due to both newer and better components doing the work in the Oppo than in the Outlaw. The one advantage of using the Outlaw’s processing: there was better over all system balance.

With System Two, it became evident that something was missing in System One, and that, of course, was the $16k of processing power in the Synthesis® SDEC4000 that introduces an additional A/D/A step. While in the case of System One and System Three, it was clear that any additional processing was a very slight degradation in sound quality, this clearly was not the case in System Two. In fact, sound quality improved. Remarkably.

I don’t know if this will be true with Audessey or other calibration methods, but the addition of 83 parametic EQ bands, time correction, distance correction, room correction, and pre-programmed profiles of every piece of Synthesis® gear in the chain is an astounding amount of complex balancing that managed to make the Oppo’s analog output even more wonderful. With all of the processing power and A/D/A bypassed, it sounded not much different than System One. With the SDEC4000 engaged, not only did it retain the satisfying, realistic, and open feeling, but coherence and clarity were much improved, balance was restored, and the room fully energized as part of the system.

When running digital direct to the SDP-5, its processing power was evident, but it was not able to match the beauty of the analog signal from the Oppo, which was a surprise. Measurements indicate there’s something (DAC? don’t know) that causes a slight rising output above about 9 kHz, even with the SDEC engaged.This is likely due to the calibration, in which we focused on the analog inputs more than the digital. There also appears to be digital noise in the system, which I attribute to the SDP-5, since it’s not evident when only the SDEC4000 is doing the processing.

When the entirety of System Two is brought into play, the SDP-5 is the weakest link. It’s still an awesome piece of equipment--one of the best of its time, but it’s time to modernize. I’ve already ordered a replacement of a newer JBL/Lexicon processor with HDMI and true 7.1 analog ins and outs. As fantastic as the system is currently with the analog sound output from the Oppo, it will be intriguing to run head to head, analog vs. HDMI.

In System Three, I wanted to hear the Oppo through the ears of analog-loving Jim Fosgate, so the last generation of the Fosgate Audionics gear was brought to play. In its incredible analog bypass mode, it’s a nearly perfect analog device. Its sound (or lack thereof) was better than the Outlaw, and nearly as good as the SDP-5/SDEC4000. The Fosgate FAP T1+ does have analog bass management, so that give it a nice edge, but of course, it still can’t match the magic of the SDEC4000. The Fosgate system did have better balance than the Outlaw, and it energized the room better.

Of course, the FAP T1+ is a premier platform for one of Jim Fosgate’s inventions, Dolby ProLogic IIx. it is incredibly well implemented, and this system had the best results in digital input/analog output using PLIIx. It really was very, very good. in this case, I could have used a regular BDP-83 and been just about as happy.