Ayre DX-5 bluray player - Page 35

We do not use the BDP-93. Oppo got the idea for using a linear supply from what we did to the BDP-83. To read about the changes we make (many of them to the power supply), please re-read this post from page one of this thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post17402589

Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

PS -- I am glad that you were able to improve your system by replacing the switching power supplies. It is a relatively simple and inexpensive performance upgrade.

There is much more detail on the modifications we perform in the link in the post directly above. In fact the title of the post is "How to make an Ayre".

You can do some of the mods yourself. There are also professional modification companies that do excellent work. Normally this is quite a bit less extensive than what we do, but it is also quite a bit less expensive as well. Although I've not seen his player in action, Ric Schultz does great work at fair prices. I would recommend checking out his offerings if you want more than what a stock Oppo can do but do not wish to spend the money required for the Ayre.

http://www.tweakaudio.com/EVS-2/Oppo_95_mods.html

Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Thanks Charles, much appreciated. I wonder though, exactly which mods improve the video the most, as I use a Wadia S7i as a DAC. (Sorry )

The mods we make to the video include replacing the master 27 MHz crystal oscillator, replacing all of the switching supplies with linear ones (a huge task), and reconfiguring the grounds to isolate the video + display from the rest of the audio system (the computer also, if you are using the USB input).

I don't know which of these makes the biggest difference, but I do know it would be just about impossible to do this work as a one-off DIY project. Honestly, you would be better off to sell your DAC and put the money to the DX-5. Here is what one owner wrote me about his experiences:

"I am a 2-channel nut, but have a home theater for my family. Your player was perfect for my needs. For the longest time, my 2-channel listening was 90% analog. I own a $30K table, several $5K cartridges, a $14K phono stage.....you get the idea. I've owned many of the highly regarded stand alone digital players, some costing double what the DX-5 costs. But this player is far an away the best I have owned. When I listen to a CD, then put the same LP on, it is often a toss up. I've never felt that way before. if I didn't have 5000 LPs, I wouldn't feel the need to bother with LP anymore."

So you can have your cake and eat it too. Plus it is only one box -- fewer power cords, equipment shelves, interconnect cables, et cetera.

Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Actually, I have replaced all the switching with a DIY linear power supply kit with grounds control. I am now able to use my custom 15 amp cables.

"See my blog, I just upload Linear power modulefor OPPO 93 installlment instruction"

http://blog.paran.com/blog/list/list...?pmcId=pcaudio

Thanks again, Charles, very much appreciated. I just need to change to 27 MHZ clocks/OCXO. which is hidden back side of Main module. I will look into Ayre for my next purchase though. If I go to some of these modders, they need to make money (and rightfully so), so they always try and sell what makes them money, not what I need.

Charles,
I has been quite a while since I last wrote a post on this thread. I finally decideded to upgrade from my DWIN HD-700 to a new JVC RS65U. I am considering the DX-5 now (to replace my D-1X and Crystalio combo and oppo BDP 83) but have a question regarding the audio features. You may have answered this previsously so I appologize in advance if this is a duplicate question. My audio priority is 2ch (ARC Ref 40, Ref phono2, 210's etc.) but I do enjoy a multi channel set up with my family for movies using the Processor bypass feature on the line stage. I send the L-R front ch outputs from my old Proceed AVP (still love the sound quality) to the Ref 40. As you may know the AVP only accepts RCA or XLR digital inputs and I was wondering if the XLR output on the DX-5 will output multichannel audio that I can route to the AVP or is there some other avenue I will have to explore via HDMI? I plan to run the DX-5 video direct to the JVC. Thanks so much.

First of all, you should download the owner's manual from the Ayre website.

The analog outputs are stereo only. There are two HDMI outputs, one with both video and audio and the other with audio only.

Connect the video/audio HDMI connector to your display (it will ignore the audio data). Connect the analog outputs to your stereo preamp. Then connect the audio-only HDMI to an SSP. Send the front two channels to the stereo preamp and the rest of the channels to a multi-channel power amp and the center/surround speakers.

When listening to stereo sources, select the analog outputs with your preamplifier. When listening to multi-channel, fire up the SSP and multi-channel amp, then select the processor bypass on your preamp.

The DX-5 completely isolates the video and audio grounds (as did the D-1), resulting in the best possible quality for audio and video. Adding other video sources (eg, cable box) can defeat this isolation if you are not careful. In general you are best off to send the video straight to the display (assuming it has enough inputs). All of the other audio should go to the SSP. If your preamp isolates the grounds of the unused inputs (as do the Ayre KX-R, KX-5xeMP, and Levinson No.32), you will be all set. I don't know if the Ref 40 has isolated input grounds or not.

Have fun,
Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Charles

Your well written manual answered my original question; the AES/EBU digital connector will output compressed DD/DTS audio to my Proceed AVP (SSP), which lacks an HDMI input.

The manual also states: "Turning the Digital Audio Output off when not using it will result in slightly higher sound quality through the analog outputs.

Can you elaborate on this statement and explain the technical reason for this? I don't recall the D-1 having this limitation (recognizing HDMI was not an option at the time of that design). I would prefer not to limit 2 Ch analog performance but also don't really want to invest in a new SSP either....

Thanks,
Rob

Hello,

I tend to forget about the AES/EBU digital output. It will output uncompressed stereo and compressed (eg, Dolby Digital, dts) multi-channel. If you are not bothered by fact that the MC audio is compressed, this connection actually has less jitter than HDMI (unless you are using Audio Rate Control, which the DX-5 can but no SSP does).

So ignore parts of my previous post. Just run the AES/EBU to your Proceed AVP and everything else as I said before. You won't get the latest audio tracks, but it will be more than good enough for explosions and such, plus you will save thousands by not buying a new SSP.

All digital signals look like noise to analog circuitry, so it is best to shut down all unused digital circuitry to get the best sound quality. But the switch is on the rear panel and very inconvenient, so you will want to leave it set to "On". The difference is sound is very subtle and only noticeable by direct comparison.

It's probably more important to turn the audio on the main HDMI output to "Off". This will help the picture quality and sound quality very slightly. The single most important thing to do is make sure that your video system (display plus all video sources) are isolated from your audio system. Easy to do if you have certain components (eg, DX-5, KX-R) and more difficult with other components.

Have fun,
Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Hello Charles,

Do you think the connection to a (wired) LAN affects the audio or video?

Thanks,
George

Thanks Charles for the clarification on the AES/EBU digital out.

This is the same setup I have been running with the D-1 with great success for years. The AVP is a great sounding SSP and does exactly what is needed for movies (for me). That way I can focus on 2 Ch (for music) and pristine video.

Rob

Hello,

Good question. I don't think so, but I have never done an actual experiment (as I have done with Wi-Fi). There are several reasons that wired ethernet causes less problems than Wi-Fi:

a) Wi-Fi is designed to broadcast energy in all directions. In contrast, wired ethernet uses twisted pairs of wires. The field from each wire is cancelled by the (equal and opposite) field in its mate. The twisting ensures that they are held closely together for maximum cancellation.

b) All ethernet inputs have an isolation transformer right at the input jack. This completely eliminates 60 Hz ground loops and sharply reduces any unwanted signal coupling with your A/V equipment.

c) The wired ethernet operates at a much lower frequency (~100 MHz) than does Wi-Fi (2,400 MHz).

Plus wired ethernet is more secure and more reliable and faster than Wi-Fi.

Thanks,
Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Have fun and keep us posted as to your results. The newer generations of D-ILA are fantastic. Finally they beat CRTs for PQ and about the only adjustment needed is focus! Beats the heck out of annual calibrations...

Cheers,
Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

I know cables are a tricky subject, but has anyone had demonstrable success with a particular HDMI cable or cables (for video only) with the DX-5 and JVC projector?
Thanks, Rob

I've owned Wireworld Platinum Starlight HDMI. It easily out-perfromed other HDMI cables I've tried. I have a different setup now and needed a longer run, so I went with an optical HDMI cable. I think the DX-5 Audio improved a little from the extra isolation that optical provides. I've got a JVC RS35.

I will need an 8m run of HDMI (blu ray to JVC RS65u). If you still recommend an optical cable is there one in particular that seems best?
Thanks again, Rob

Rob, the cable I have is:

http://purelinkav.com/products/hdmi-extension-cables-and-kits/intergrated-fibercopper-hybrid-hdmi-extension-cables/

There wasn't too much choice at the time. I think Opticis was the only other one. My run was about 14 meters so I purchased the 50 foot cable. The picture quality was at least as good as the best Ultralink brand HDMI cable I compared it too.

Tim

Thanks Tim. Since I can probably live with a 7m length, I am not sure if going the optical route makes the most sense or not?

Has Ayre (Charles) done any experimentation with HDMI cables (for video quality only)?

Thanks, Rob

Hello,

I haven't played around with optical cables since the days of DVD and DVi. Back then the only choice was the Opticis, although it was also marketed under a different brand name. It was clearly superior to any DVI cable I had tried, even at short lengths. And of course it also had the advantage of virtually no length limit.

Back then they were considered expensive, but now there are copper (or silver) based cables that cost much more! If I were getting a new cable, I would probably just go ahead and get the Opticis optical cable based on my past results. They made (make?) two versions, one hybrid with optical only for the video signal and the other pure optical that has additional converters for the auxiliary signals. I'd probably go with the pure optical one just on the principle that there is no such thing as too much isolation. Let us know what you decide and also what the results are.

Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Did some checking and I believe I found the correct optical cable, but wanted to make sure? please see link

http://www.opticis.com/pdf/Brochure/Brochure%20M1-2000%20Ver2%200_071026%20_3_.pdf

Thanks, Rob

That looks similar to the one I have. If so, it doesn't require the switching power supply, which you definitely want to avoid.

Read the bottom half of the spec sheet:

M1-2000 uses an external AC/DC adapter in the transmitter side to enable the supply of +5V to the transmitter and receiver modules where the +5V A/V source power is judged to be inadequate or non-existent. If the graphic source can provide 500mA of +5V to pin 18, this AC/DC adapter is not required.

Does the DX-5, or Oppo 83, provide the power out as discussed above? or is a separate power source required to this adapter....which would create a noise issue?

Thanks, Rob

Works fine for me Rob.

I go out of my way to avoid switching power supplies anywhere in our home. I've even replaced the power for my Airport Extreme router and our telephone with linear power supplies.

Thanks again Tim
Rob

It's been a long time since I've looked at this and don't have the answer off the top of my head. I know that there is a current-limiting resistor in the BDP-83 to protect its power supply. The HDMI spec only requires enough power to turn on ROM chip on an unpowered display so that the source can determine the capabilities of the display. The current capability required by the spec is 55 mA, well below what is required for the Opticis cable.

The linear 5 volt supply we build into the DX-5 can supply a total of around 1000 to 1100 mA. Adding 500 ma to the existing current load could be marginal. In any event it would absolutely require eliminate the current limiting resistor.

If someone is really serious about doing this, I can check into it more thoroughly. to see if it is possible. The other choice would be to use an external linear PS, but these are harder and harder to find. Everyone is going to switchers, simply because they are cheaper. But I really think that the optical link is the best way to go, even for short runs, and the only way to go for long runs.

Thanks,
Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Hello -

The information for the Opticis optical cables is very confusing. There are three models listed at their website (http://www.opticis.com/english/02_product/product02.htm), plus a new one at the US distributors website (http://www.vitextech.com/hdfx-200-one-fiber-detachable-hdmi-extender.php):

a) HDFX-100. Pure fiber optic connection. Requires an adapter box at each end, each with its own +5 volt power supply (cannot send power down the optical cable). The power consumption is not specified. The system is supplied with two 5 volt @ 3 amp switching wall warts. There is no indication that this much current is actually required. If this power could be supplied with linear power supplies at each end (I would recommend some Agilent benchtop supplies from eBay) this would potentially be the very best solution. Requires a short conventional HDMI cable at each end to connect to the adapter boxes. US retail = $1500.

b) HDFX-200. Apparently not yet available, it is a slicker, more compact version of the above. Again, no mention of the actual power requirements. No price is given as the unit was just recently announced.

c) M1-2RH-TR. Similar to the HDFX-100, but a hybrid fiber/copper system. Fiber is used for the video/audio signal, and copper is used for the DDC, power and other functions. Power required is +12 volts at 200 mA for the transmitter and 300 mA for the receiver (500 mA total). There is no way for this to be self powered. US retail = $600.

d) M1-2000. This is probably the one to get without going completely overboard with the HDFX-100 (or 200) and tracking down two high quality linear supplies. Does not require additional short HDMI cables, as it plugs directly into the equipment. US retail ranges from $400 for 10 meters to $950 for 50 meters. The thing that is unclear is the power required. The user's manual says that "most" devices can supply enough power for both ends (carried from transmitter to receiver by a copper cable) and the unit comes with a +5 volt @ 1.0 amp switching wall wart to supply both ends. The datasheet contradicts itself. In one place it says that the source component must be able to supply 500 mA, but elsewhere it lists the consumption as 170 mA for the transmitter and 130 mA for the receiver (300 mA total). The Ayre DX-5 should work fine with this, AS LONG AS the unit is modified by removing the current limiting resistor.

As noted previously, I have only tried the DVI version (actually a Sumitomo product, but it used the Opticis electrical-to-optical modules). It was a hybrid cable and provided better visual quality than any other cable of that time. I would assume that the copper cables have improved since then. I would also assume that the pure optical would be better than the hybrid, as long as one used it with linear supplies at both ends. It is relatively cheap to try the M1-2000 and relatively expensive to try the HDFX-100 (or 200). All of the above solutions provide much greater "reach" than any copper cable.

Have fun,
Charles Hansen
Ayre Acoustics, Inc.

Hello Charles,

Have you given any thought to making a transport only DX-5? This would parallel your DX-7e DVD transport, which is still the finest DVD transport I have seen and especially heard, although I have yet to find a processor that can accept balanced Dolby Digital . I use a Neutrik AES to S/PDIF converter.

Anyway we seem to have hit a plateau with Blu-ray in terms of major innovations. Perhaps it would be a good time to introduce a DX-5 junior ($5k?). Perhaps base it on the BDP-93? I know I would buy one.

I also mention it because I recently learned that the Oppo BDP-95, in spite of its large toroidal transformer, uses switching supplies for its video and digital audio sections. Apparently the toroid is only used for the analog output section. An Ayre transport with all linear supplies and opto-isolaters for the video/audio sections I think would be a significant improvement (coupled with a JVB S/PDIF mod I think one would have the best transport possible today).
Edited by GGA - 6/12/12 at 6:53pm

Does connecting the HDMI A/V output to an active source disable the analog outs as does the HDMI Audio?

Charles

Thanks so much for investigating the Opticis. I also figured the MI-2000 was the best way to go. As you said, not much literature and very confusing.
Surprising there are not more company's looking to head down this route given the superior quality you (and others) have observed.

Thanks again!

Rob

I am still on the fence of trying the Opticis vs going with the Wireworld. I need a 7m run and am inclined to just go with the wireworld for now (approx the same cost as the MI-200 if I need the added power supplies) than see how things look and experiment later when I have more time. I will mull things over for a bit. If anyone else wants to do a wireworld/opticis shootout please let me know--I recall Tim saying he thought the optical cable looked better than an ultralink, but not sure about the wireworld?....Thanks, Rob