Art Vandelay Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Zammo said: Hey Art.Out of interest, what sort of styles of music are you listening to on SACD, and do you know what sort of mastering has been used on them (PCM-DSD, analogue tape-DSD, direct to DSD?) Zammo, Mainly popular and Jazz selections (I'm not really into classical) The early Sony 2ch non hybrid SACD's nearly all sound mediocre (in my view). I have some audiophile SACD's too including some from Heads Up, Chesky, Telarc, MFSL. All up maybe 50 SACD's, which is not many but enough to get a flavour for the format. I strongly suspect that many of the early Sony CBS releases were not mastered to DSD from the original analogue tapes, but were PCM > DSD. Nora Jones first album sounds quite good but I think that too is 16/48 PCM > DSD. The SACD experiment proved to me that RBCD was really very good after all. I had personally judged the format harshly before high res formats popped up and didn't offer significant improvements. Formats aside, the biggest problem facing high resolution formats is the really bad producing and mastering these days.
Boots-n-All Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Alan Rutlidge said: Hi Boots,Here's a link to the DVD-A (MLP) white paper. www.meridian-audio.com/w_paper/mlp_jap_aes9_1.PDF Just a brief 4 pages but it explains the basics of the encoding system. Cheers, Alan R. Thanks Alan, After looking through that paper and then looking at the few commercial DVD-A discs that I had purchased, I've noticed a few things :- 1. All of the commercial discs used a maximum of 4 channels 2. Where they also had a stereo track, it was on the flip side of a double sided DVD. 3. They had a full 70-80 minutes of play. This suggests that they are not using the MLP compression system at all and while I'm still waiting for a reply from the software house regarding the DVD-A burner, I'm guessing that they don't either. At this point I'm wondering just how many DVD-Audio discs did, in fact, use that compression system? Boots.
Monkeyboi Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Boots-n-All said: Thanks Alan,After looking through that paper and then looking at the few commercial DVD-A discs that I had purchased, I've noticed a few things :- 1. All of the commercial discs used a maximum of 4 channels 2. Where they also had a stereo track, it was on the flip side of a double sided DVD. 3. They had a full 70-80 minutes of play. This suggests that they are not using the MLP compression system at all and while I'm still waiting for a reply from the software house regarding the DVD-A burner, I'm guessing that they don't either. At this point I'm wondering just how many DVD-Audio discs did, in fact, use that compression system? Boots. Hi Boots, I've got about 100 DVD-A discs. Most are 5.1 multi-channel and stereo in varying bitrates. The lowest commercial release "hi-res" title I've got is 24bit/48kHz. This Disc is Bach - Magnifcat - Cloebury on EMI Classics 7243 4 92401 9 3. 4.0 surround and 2.0 stereo. I've also got a few non-commercial titles which are 16bit / 44.1kHz. These are 4.0 surround that have been decoded from matrix SQ and QS encoded quad CDs using Adobe Audition, then re-encoded with MLP and burned to DVD-R media. The discs you describe in in point 2 sound like they might be DualDiscs. They bear the following logo and are characterised by the fact they are always double sided. [ATTACH=CONFIG]35006[/ATTACH] Most Dual discs have two playing sides. One side is a CD (but not to Redbook standards). The other is a DVD. The DVD side can have DVD-Audio encoded as MLP (sometimes called PPCM), but many are stereo LPCM at typically 24 bit / 48kHz or surround in Dolby Digital and / or dts. Discs complying with the DVD Audio standards bear the following logo - [ATTACH=CONFIG]35007[/ATTACH] Check the covers of the discs you have. This may shed some light on identifying what types of discs you have. Cheers, Alan R.
TP1 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Art Vandelay said: Zammo,Mainly popular and Jazz selections (I'm not really into classical) The early Sony 2ch non hybrid SACD's nearly all sound mediocre (in my view). I have some audiophile SACD's too including some from Heads Up, Chesky, Telarc, MFSL. All up maybe 50 SACD's, which is not many but enough to get a flavour for the format. I strongly suspect that many of the early Sony CBS releases were not mastered to DSD from the original analogue tapes, but were PCM > DSD. Nora Jones first album sounds quite good but I think that too is 16/48 PCM > DSD. The SACD experiment proved to me that RBCD was really very good after all. I had personally judged the format harshly before high res formats popped up and didn't offer significant improvements. Formats aside, the biggest problem facing high resolution formats is the really bad producing and mastering these days. I have just come back from the Hong Kong High End HIFI and AV Show ( awesome!), and if there is one thing that stood out above all else ( apart from the fact that I can't afford a pair of the amazing Rockport Arrakis Active Speakers) is that RBCD in its current incarnation is on its way out as a high end source and is well behind the HD sources and Vinyl. Almost all the displays were using a combination of SACD, 24Bit and vinyl. I went to the show over 2 days and on the occasion that an ordinary CD was being played, it was quite noticeable in terms of the limitations placed on the sound quality. I also feel this at home where the vinyl and SACD give such a good performance and sound so much more natural, ( with the right discs). The unfortunate thing for us is that most music is not available on vinyl, SACD or 24 bit downloads so we have to make do with what is there, and hopefully by sharing info on good recordings we can make the most of it. In relation to the early SACD's , all the ones I have aren't much good , but like vinyl, the latter years have produced some gems. Even well mastered RBCD formats like XRCD, K2 etc are not widely available. Its frustrating because in Asia even their bog standard RBCD's leave ours for dead in terms of audio quality. HK's Hugo Productions has been producing what they call LPCD & LPCD 45 which is a DV-R format ( I think because the pits are slightly larger on the disc to reduce read errors and in turn improve sound quality). I was very impressed with a test disc I was given at the show. Anyway, with Apple preparing to unleash 24 bit downloads via iTunes, I think that is when the big change will come in the general approach of audiophiles. In the meantime its a case of finding those good recordings.
DoggieHowser Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 My friend was raving about how good Soluutions digital setup was playing Tracy Chapman. And he said that was only on RBCD.
TP1 Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 DoggieHowser said: My friend was raving about how good Soluutions digital setup was playing Tracy Chapman. And he said that was only on RBCD. I was talking in relative terms. The Soulution Audio player that was playing the Tracy Chapman CD ( which was an HDCD I think) is a $50K SACD player, add to that another $250k in electronics plus megabucks for speakers and yes, compared to what most of us are used to it sounds good. But, listen to the same system with SACD, 24Bit or good vinyl and the improvement is what I was talking about.
Craigandkim Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Alan Rutlidge said: The discs you describe in in point 2 sound like they might be DualDiscs. They bear the following logo and are characterised by the fact they are always double sided. [ATTACH=CONFIG]35006[/ATTACH] Most Dual discs have two playing sides. One side is a CD (but not to Redbook standards). The other is a DVD. The DVD side can have DVD-Audio encoded as MLP (sometimes called PPCM), but many are stereo LPCM at typically 24 bit / 48kHz or surround in Dolby Digital and / or dts. Cheers, Alan R. On a side note to the Dual-disc debacle, its interesting that Sony released a couple of titles but didn't provide any enhanced audio on the dvd side in the way of hi-res; Pink and AC/DC come to mind.
Monkeyboi Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 (edited) Craigandkim said: On a side note to the Dual-disc debacle,its interesting that Sony released a couple of titles but didn't provide any enhanced audio on the dvd side in the way of hi-res; Pink and AC/DC come to mind. AC/DC Back in Black is 16/48 LPCM stereo on the DVD side. Can't put my hands on the P!nk DualDisc at the moment to verify the audio. Cheers, Alan R Edited August 11, 2011 by Alan Rutlidge
Craigandkim Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Alan Rutlidge said: AC/DC Back in Black is 16/48 LPCM stereo on the DVD side. Can't put my hands on the P!ink DualDisc at the moment to verify the audioCheers, Alan R Like I said, didn't provide any enhancement in the way of hi-res. I think Pink was just DD. Cheers
Boots-n-All Posted August 11, 2011 Posted August 11, 2011 Alan Rutlidge said: Hi Boots,I've got about 100 DVD-A discs. Most are 5.1 multi-channel and stereo in varying bitrates. The lowest commercial release "hi-res" title I've got is 24bit/48kHz. This Disc is Bach - Magnifcat - Cloebury on EMI Classics 7243 4 92401 9 3. 4.0 surround and 2.0 stereo. I've also got a few non-commercial titles which are 16bit / 44.1kHz. These are 4.0 surround that have been decoded from matrix SQ and QS encoded quad CDs using Adobe Audition, then re-encoded with MLP and burned to DVD-R media. The discs you describe in in point 2 sound like they might be DualDiscs. They bear the following logo and are characterised by the fact they are always double sided. [ATTACH=CONFIG]35006[/ATTACH] Most Dual discs have two playing sides. One side is a CD (but not to Redbook standards). The other is a DVD. The DVD side can have DVD-Audio encoded as MLP (sometimes called PPCM), but many are stereo LPCM at typically 24 bit / 48kHz or surround in Dolby Digital and / or dts. Discs complying with the DVD Audio standards bear the following logo - [ATTACH=CONFIG]35007[/ATTACH] Check the covers of the discs you have. This may shed some light on identifying what types of discs you have. Cheers, Alan R. Hi Alan, Definitely DVD-Audio - and my Cambridge player identifies them as such. I only bought 4 or 5 of them, 2 of which I definely gave away when I got the same on SACD. So I certainly didn't give the format much of a go I must admit. However I have burnt quite a few hi-res downloads onto DVD-A and really these are what I'm struggling with. Personally, I don't have any problem with 16/48 (not 44.1 that I said previously) on the rear channels, if these are only being used for reflections & ambience of the concert hall, but some performances have serious music through those channels. So I'll persue the subject with the software house to see if I/they/we can come up with an answer. Boots.
Sentient Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 (edited) Boots-n-All said: However I have burnt quite a few hi-res downloads onto DVD-A and really these are what I'm struggling with. Personally, I don't have any problem with 16/48 (not 44.1 that I said previously) on the rear channels, if these are only being used for reflections & ambience of the concert hall, but some performances have serious music through those channels. So I'll persue the subject with the software house to see if I/they/we can come up with an answer. Ahhh, this could be the problem Boots. There are SOOOO many dodgy hi-res downloads floating around the internet, I see quite alot being passed off as DVD-A iso's or claimed to be DVD-A rips, but they are not the genuine article. There is loads of crap out there. I own 34 x DVD-A's (discs that I've bought). I liked the format, but there are some things I didnt like:- 1) the sampling rates were not standardised. It really p!sses me off when I get something < 24/96. It was often pot luck to what I'd actually get on disc. I have a couple of titles that were 24/44.1 , which really sh!tted me, and then another bizarre one that was 20/48 . That's right, 20bits (it's an Andre Bocelli dvd-a). 2) the reliance on having a display to drive menu's. I didnt like that. So much so, I took to re-burning my titles to menu-less DVD-R's. So I could pop in a DVD-A® to my player, hit play - and my preferred options were defaulted to. But I am yet to come across a genuine DVD-A that had different sampling rates in different channels. Edited August 12, 2011 by ozmillsy
Craigandkim Posted August 12, 2011 Posted August 12, 2011 ozmillsy said: 2) the reliance on having a display to drive menu's. I didnt like that. So much so, I took to re-burning my titles to menu-less DVD-R's. So I could pop in a DVD-A® to my player, hit play - and my preferred options were defaulted to. You don't have a player capable of setting your desired output (DVD-A content 5.1 or stereo) in the menu?? Really these days there is no need to rely on the menus other than to access additional content (video/photo's etc). Cheers
Asteroid Posted August 13, 2011 Posted August 13, 2011 What always bugged me about DVD-A, at least from a basic consumer perspective, is that discerning which players were DVD-A capable was so hard. It just wasn't obvious enough.
Sentient Posted August 13, 2011 Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Craigandkim said: You don't have a player capable of setting your desired output (DVD-A content 5.1 or stereo) in the menu?? Really these days there is no need to rely on the menus other than to access additional content (video/photo's etc). Cheers No I dont. All the players I am aware of, will downmix the dvd-a content to 2ch (when using the player setup options), and that is a freaking abortion. SACD of course is different. Cheers Edited August 13, 2011 by ozmillsy
Craigandkim Posted August 13, 2011 Posted August 13, 2011 Hey Ozmillsey, that's strange...most of the players I know (and I have owned 5) are set and forget...use the menu to set the preference for either DVD-V or DVD-A content and set whether you want 2 channel or 6 channel output. The models I own (from all price ranges and manufacturers- Toshiba, Pioneer, Oppo and Esoteric) don't down-mix unless you have that preference set. What models are you referring to? Regards
Craigandkim Posted August 13, 2011 Posted August 13, 2011 Asteroid said: What always bugged me about DVD-A, at least from a basic consumer perspective, is that discerning which players were DVD-A capable was so hard. It just wasn't obvious enough. Just gotta look for the DVD-A symbol, no different from looking for the SACD symbol really. And of course you can cross off Sony.
Sentient Posted August 14, 2011 Posted August 14, 2011 Craigandkim said: that's strange...most of the players I know (and I have owned 5) are set and forget...use the menu to set the preference for either DVD-V or DVD-A content and set whether you want 2 channel or 6 channel output. The models I own (from all price ranges and manufacturers- Toshiba, Pioneer, Oppo and Esoteric) don't down-mix unless you have that preference set. What models are you referring to? Regards Craig, which DVD-A titles do you own? It's a menu driven format. You cant pop a disc in and hit play, you have to navigate menu's - this is my gripe with it. DVD-A is not the same as SACD. I own a Oppo DV980H and a Pioneer universal, and neither can help the user overcome the menu's found on most DVD-A disc's. The Oppo will let me output 2ch, but it is downmixing to do so.
Boots-n-All Posted August 14, 2011 Posted August 14, 2011 (edited) ozmillsy said: Ahhh, this could be the problem Boots. There are SOOOO many dodgy hi-res downloads floating around the internet, I see quite alot being passed off as DVD-A iso's or claimed to be DVD-A rips, but they are not the genuine article. There is loads of crap out there. I own 34 x DVD-A's (discs that I've bought). I liked the format, but there are some things I didnt like:- 1) the sampling rates were not standardised. It really p!sses me off when I get something < 24/96. It was often pot luck to what I'd actually get on disc. I have a couple of titles that were 24/44.1 , which really sh!tted me, and then another bizarre one that was 20/48 . That's right, 20bits (it's an Andre Bocelli dvd-a). 2) the reliance on having a display to drive menu's. I didnt like that. So much so, I took to re-burning my titles to menu-less DVD-R's. So I could pop in a DVD-A® to my player, hit play - and my preferred options were defaulted to. But I am yet to come across a genuine DVD-A that had different sampling rates in different channels. Hi there, I got a reply from Cirlinca - this expands on what they told me previously:- The DVD-Audio standard allows for 6 channels of 24/96, but the maximum bit-rate at 9.6Mbit cannot support it. Therefore the standard created a unique feature in DVD-Audio, allowing a track to have two resolution groups, by such to get the optimal audio output from the bitrate limit of 9.6Mbps. For example, a 6-channel track at 24bits/96kHz, with bitrate at 13.8Mbps, is not acceptable to DVD-Audio. In order to fit, less important channels of the track can be re-sampled to a lower resolution (e.g. LFE, surround Left, surround Right), while keeping the main channels at 24bit/96kHz, yet reducing the bitrate to within 9.6Mbps. Take an example of a 5.1 channel track at 24bits/96kHz, the 6 channels are: Front Left | Front Right | Center | LFE | Surround Left | Surround Right These 6 channels can be placed in two resolution groups: Front left | Front Right | Center at 24 bits / 96 kHz LFE | Surround Left | Surround Right at 16 bits / 48 kHz Output Channel-Group resolutions supported: Group 1 resolution Output Group 2 channel resolution and channel Group 1 channel 24bit 96kHz 6 16/48@ELR FL, FR, C 6 24/48@CELR FL, FR 6 16/48@CELR FL, FR 5 24/48@LR 1C FL, FR, C 5 16/48@E FL, FR, L, R 5 24/48@ELR FL, FR 5 16/48@ELR FL, FR 5 24/48@CLR FL, FR 5 16/48@CLR FL, FR 4 24/96@LR FL, FR 24bit 88kHz 6 16/44@ELR FL, FR, C 6 16/44@CE FL, FR, L, R 6 16/44@CELR FL, FR 5 16/44@E FL, FR, L, R 5 16/44@ELR FL, FR 5 16/44@CLR FL, FR 4 24/88@LR FL, FR FL - Front Left channel FR - Front Right channel C – Center channel E – LFE channel L – surround Left channel R – surround Right channel 1C – Center channel in group 1 The one track two resolution groups is also explained in the Help, Advanced features, One track two resolutions. Best regards, The Solo Team Cirlinca Inc. www.cirlinca.com They haven't mentioned compression or why they aren't using it, but I will ask further, since so far I rather like their product and understanding it better will improve my usage of it. Boots. PS: Sorry - their table scrambled - I'll see if I can fix it later. Edited August 14, 2011 by Boots-n-All
Nada Posted August 14, 2011 Posted August 14, 2011 kajak12 said: Classic post nada your learning thats encourgaing..thanks very much I cant solder though so I think Im disabled from really getting hands on expertise
ArthurDent Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 (edited) ozmillsy said: Craig, which DVD-A titles do you own? It's a menu driven format. You cant pop a disc in and hit play, you have to navigate menu's - this is my gripe with it. DVD-A is not the same as SACD. I own a Oppo DV980H and a Pioneer universal, and neither can help the user overcome the menu's found on most DVD-A disc's. The Oppo will let me output 2ch, but it is downmixing to do so. I haven't checked all the DVD-A disks I have but all that I have checked have a dedicated 2 channel stereo track as well in most cases 4.0, 5.1 etc surround mixes. Downmixing to 2 channel is usually only done if the default for the disk is multi channel and you've told the player that you haven't got a multi channel setup, only stereo. Even so evidently not all machines will downmix. All of disks I tried started playing the first track shortly after the tray closed with no input from me or in the case of a disk that was part way through when it was last ejected, it started playing at that point. Edited August 15, 2011 by KenTripp
Monkeyboi Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 (edited) Boots-n-All said: Hi there,I got a reply from Cirlinca - this expands on what they told me previously:- The DVD-Audio standard allows for 6 channels of 24/96, but the maximum bit-rate at 9.6Mbit cannot support it. Therefore the standard created a unique feature in DVD-Audio, allowing a track to have two resolution groups, by such to get the optimal audio output from the bitrate limit of 9.6Mbps. For example, a 6-channel track at 24bits/96kHz, with bitrate at 13.8Mbps, is not acceptable to DVD-Audio. In order to fit, less important channels of the track can be re-sampled to a lower resolution (e.g. LFE, surround Left, surround Right), while keeping the main channels at 24bit/96kHz, yet reducing the bitrate to within 9.6Mbps. Take an example of a 5.1 channel track at 24bits/96kHz, the 6 channels are: Front Left | Front Right | Center | LFE | Surround Left | Surround Right These 6 channels can be placed in two resolution groups: Front left | Front Right | Center at 24 bits / 96 kHz LFE | Surround Left | Surround Right at 16 bits / 48 kHz Output Channel-Group resolutions supported: Group 1 resolution Output Group 2 channel resolution and channel Group 1 channel 24bit 96kHz 6 16/48@ELR FL, FR, C 6 24/48@CELR FL, FR 6 16/48@CELR FL, FR 5 24/48@LR 1C FL, FR, C 5 16/48@E FL, FR, L, R 5 24/48@ELR FL, FR 5 16/48@ELR FL, FR 5 24/48@CLR FL, FR 5 16/48@CLR FL, FR 4 24/96@LR FL, FR 24bit 88kHz 6 16/44@ELR FL, FR, C 6 16/44@CE FL, FR, L, R 6 16/44@CELR FL, FR 5 16/44@E FL, FR, L, R 5 16/44@ELR FL, FR 5 16/44@CLR FL, FR 4 24/88@LR FL, FR FL - Front Left channel FR - Front Right channel C – Center channel E – LFE channel L – surround Left channel R – surround Right channel 1C – Center channel in group 1 The one track two resolution groups is also explained in the Help, Advanced features, One track two resolutions. Best regards, The Solo Team Cirlinca Inc. www.cirlinca.com They haven't mentioned compression or why they aren't using it, but I will ask further, since so far I rather like their product and understanding it better will improve my usage of it. Boots. PS: Sorry - their table scrambled - I'll see if I can fix it later. Hi Boots, Circlina IMO hasn't understood the MLP white paper. MLP (Meridian Lossless Packaging) is kind of like WinZip for audio. You've probably WinZipped a Word document or another file (other than an already compressed file) to end up with a smaller files size. When you unZip it your Zipped file extracts and is complete with no information missing. So how does MLP acheive an aggregate bit rate of 13.824Mbit/s within the 10Mbits/s limitation of DVD playback? In practical music playback there are very short periods of silence between individual notes of the instruments and short pauses between the syllables of words in the vocals. Some channels may also be monentarily silent in parts of the performance. MLP uses these small periods of silence to allocate data bandwidth that would otherwise be required by other channels that aren't silent at the time without any loss of fidelity. If you look the available DVD-A test disc titles you will notice that no one offers in phase OdB reference static test ones on all 6 channels simultaneously at 24/96kHz. It would be impossible to encode using MLP within the available bandwidth. Many discs offering white noise or static test tones on all 6 channels simultaneously usually use 24/48kHz to acheive this or limit the tones to a lesser number of channels so it can be accommodated within the available playback limitations of DVD (ie 10Mbits/s or less). The alternative is to limit the bit depth if the sampling rate still needs to be maintained at 96kHz or higher. Example would be if you wanted to present two static test tones at 192kHz sampling rate the bit depth would need to be limited to 20 bits (if using one of the standard bit depths for DVD-A) to accommodate the bitrate within DVD playback limits. Hope this helps unravel the mystery of MLP encoding / decoding on DVD-Audio discs. Cheers, Alan R. Edited August 15, 2011 by Alan Rutlidge typos
Boots-n-All Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 Alan Rutlidge said: Hi Boots,Circlina IMO hasn't understood the MLP white paper. MLP (Meridian Lossless Packaging) is kind of like WinZip for audio. You've probably WinZipped a Word document or another file (other than an already compressed file) to end up with a smaller files size. When you unZip it your Zipped file extracts and is complete with no information missing. So how does MLP acheive an aggregate bit rate of 13.824Mbit/s within the 10Mbits/s limitation of DVD playback? In practical music playback there are very short periods of silence between individual notes of the instruments and short pauses between the syllables of words in the vocals. Some channels may also be monentarily silent in parts of the performance. MLP uses these small periods of silence to allocate data bandwidth that would otherwise be required by other channels that aren't silent at the time without any loss of fidelity. If you look the available DVD-A test disc titles you will notice that no one offers in phase OdB reference static test ones on all 6 channels simultaneously at 24/96kHz. It would be impossible to encode using MLP within the available bandwidth. Many discs offering white noise or static test tones on all 6 channels simultaneously usually use 24/48kHz to acheive this or limit the tones to a lesser number of channels so it can be accommodated within the available playback limitations of DVD (ie 10Mbits/s or less). The alternative is to limit the bit depth if the sampling rate still needs to be maintained at 96kHz or higher. Example would be if you wanted to present two static test tones at 192kHz sampling rate the bit depth would need to be limited to 20 bits (if using one of the standard bit depths for DVD-A) to accommodate the bitrate within DVD playback limits. Hope this helps unravel the mystery of MLP encoding / decoding on DVD-Audio discs. Cheers, Alan R. Hi Alan, The MLP paper was pretty straightforward & easily understood, however the algorithm may not be so trivial an exercise when you try to implement (and maintain) it in $20 software. I have asked Cirlinca to comment on this and I will post their reply in due course. I hope they don't get sick of me - it is cheap software after all! Boots.
Craigandkim Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 (edited) ozmillsy said: Craig, which DVD-A titles do you own? It's a menu driven format. You cant pop a disc in and hit play, you have to navigate menu's - this is my gripe with it. DVD-A is not the same as SACD. I own a Oppo DV980H and a Pioneer universal, and neither can help the user overcome the menu's found on most DVD-A disc's. The Oppo will let me output 2ch, but it is downmixing to do so. Elvis's 30 No.1's on DVD-A does not have any menu what so ever Edited August 16, 2011 by Craigandkim
Craigandkim Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 (edited) Boots-n-All said: Hi Alan,The MLP paper was pretty straightforward & easily understood, however the algorithm may not be so trivial an exercise when you try to implement (and maintain) it in $20 software. I have asked Cirlinca to comment on this and I will post their reply in due course.I hope they don't get sick of me - it is cheap software after all! Boots. Hey Boots, more likely Circlina did not want to pay the licensing involved with the MLP and decided to down-res the rears instead. As Alan describes 6 channels of 24/96 is 13.8mbs- outside the bandwidth data transfer rate of a dvd disc (9.6mbs)- therefore you need to utilise MLP compression to bring it under. And yes I guess you get what you pay for. Edited August 15, 2011 by Craigandkim
THOMO Posted August 15, 2011 Posted August 15, 2011 Nada said: does that means its really good or does it mean Oppo havepaid for a full page of advertising?Ill never forgive Stereophile for recommending the Benchmark DAC - I wont be fooled again, till next time... Any product I have heard or owned which was highly rated by Stereophile has been deeply disappointing. Very " hi fi "sounding but completely lacking in musical communication.
Recommended Posts