Originally Posted by Charles Hansen
First of all, you yourself admitted that the SSP-800 didn't sound as good as the Ref 3, but it was "close enough" that you didn't care about the shortfall. So I am not the only one who finds that the best two-channel preamps outperform the best SSP's.
Speaking of twisting words, Charles....
I knew before I ever bought the SSP-800 that it was not as good at 2ch analog as my Ref 3, and I even mentioned that here on AVS before I placed the order for the SSP-800. It's not something I "admitted."
Second of all, it is quite obvious that any system will benefit from a higher quality source. "A rising tide raises all boats."
Yes, but only up to a point, if the SSP has the limitations you've described. If those limitations exist, then wouldn't something like a $5000 Denon player be good enough?
Yes, exactly. There was no point to put eight channels of the best analog audio outs on the unit, as there are very few people who could take advantage of them. Most SSP's digitize the analog inputs so as to provide bass management, time delays, et cetera.
Most? I know of a handful that always digitize analog inputs. The majority that I have seen only digitize inputs if the user decides to do so, and there are some (such as the Classe') that do not digitize analog inputs at all. But, it probably doesn't matter for most because even if they don't digitize the inputs, the input stage sucks anyway.
I'm not sure why you are so bent on twisting my words. You make it sound as though there is some inherent incompatibility between the Ayre and the SSP-800. There is not.
Seems to me that it is YOU who is twisting MY words. I never said anything about "compatibility," as in "this won't work with that." You made several points about the inferiority of digital SSPs as opposed to 2ch analog preamps, and I've made it quite clear that I do not disagree with that portion of your statements. My question has been, and still is: if digital SSPs are so limited due to D/A conversion issues and inferior volume controls, as you have stated, why would there be a need for someone like me to buy your player, when a lesser player would probably be good enough? I am ASKING you this, because you have claimed authoritative knowledge. Instead of answering my question, you've become all combative for some reason. You act like I called your baby ugly or something.
It will provide a higher level of both video and audio quality than any other Blu-Ray player. When it is released try it for yourself and let us know.
That's what I had been planning to do before you started talking about the limitations of current SSPs. If they are so limited, what specifically
does the Ayre player do that overcomes the limitations? I want to know!
But apparently you have found that the analog inputs on the SSP-800 provide better sound than the HDMI inputs.
Where did I ever say that? I said I found the analog inputs good enough for my turntable. Can you show me where I ever said what you are claiming I said?
So it is certainly possible that you would prefer the sound of the HDMI connection (using the ultra-low jitter HDMI audio-only output) and the D/A converters in the SSP-800 to the analog inputs using the D/A converters in the DX-5. You will just need to try it and see.
I am quite sure that I would prefer
the sound of the HDMI connection FOR MULTICHANNEL MATERIAL over the D/A converters of the DX-5 since they are limited to 2ch. But again - given you have strongly stated that SSPs have limitations due to inferior D/A conversion, and inferior volume controls, why exactly would the Ayre do a better job over HDMI than a $5000 Denon, or even a $2200 Pioneer? What does it do differently that can overcome the limitations of the SSP relative to these lesser players?