or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Official OPPO BDP-103/BDP-105 Anticipation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official OPPO BDP-103/BDP-105 Anticipation Thread - Page 84

post #2491 of 2827
Waiting for more feedback on the analog audio playback compared to other CD players while I wait for my unit to arrive!biggrin.gif
post #2492 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkphader View Post

Maybe one day the Android app will be all you need for such tasks. (wishful thinking).

We'll have to see how IP control develops.

It would be cool if part of the design of this would take into account headless operation of the Oppo in a sound system.
post #2493 of 2827
I have some first impressions of the Oppo 105. I also have an 83 and a 95 (although the 95 will be going up for sale soon)

Firstly, its big and its heavy. It is very solid and feels a high-end quality product. Compared to the Oppo 83 of old, it is in a different class.

The only physical thing that the 95 had, that the 105 doesn't is plastic dust covers over all the RCA connectors!

In the box was the usual Oppo branded shopping bag, HDMI cable, new style remote, WiFi adapter and stand/cable for it, batteries and UK mains lead. And I was also given an Oppo branded 8GB USB stick and AIX 3D music and calibration disc.

One reason I wanted the 105 was to be able to simplify my set-up. I have a Lexicon MC-12 and use the analogue 5.1 inputs from my Toshiba XE1 HD DVD player, and the Oppo. To connect both things I had a high-end Zektor switcher. But this means lots of cables, and the switch must affect things no matter high-end it is. With the 105 I can connect the Toshiba XE1 through the Oppo, and use the DACs of the Oppo (which are better), thus meaning only one set of cables to the processor. I got this working very quickly, but I have had a couple of HDMI handshake hiccups that have left me with a black screen that I need to figure out what element in the chain is causing it.

Today, I spent most of the time comparing the Oppo headphone amplifier to my dedicated Burson Soloist. I have Audeze LCD-3 headphones, which are magnetic planar headphones. I am in love with them. When you want to listen to your music late at night, you don’t want to disturb others in the house (or neighbours), but you don’t want to compromise your listening either. Up until now I always thought headphones were a “poor mans” listen compared to my high-end speakers. These headphones changed my mind on that. Tonally they sound almost identical to my main set-up. They may not have quite the soundstage you get with speakers, but you do get more intimacy instead which isn’t a bad thing. They are more demanding than some headphones in terms of their power requirements. I was concerned that the Oppo would fail to drive them well. I need to eat a little humble pie. Although I have to turn up the volume to around 75 out of 100 on the Oppo, it is more than capable of driving the headphones. However, compared to the Soloist which can output watts rather than milliwatts, the Oppo is lacking some of the dynamics and texture, and ultimately realism of the original music. That is not to say it is poor in any way. Quite the opposite, the headphone output is firmly into audiophile territory. Some may love the smooth, sweet, and easy to listen to sound it produces. In fact I may choose to use it on occasions when I want to relax and unwind. It is also somewhat unfair to compare an 800 pounds (UK) headphone amplifier to a 1000 pound (UK) play-everything super player. The Oppo may do even better with easier headphones. While I would have been shocked if it had equalled or even bettered the Burson, it gets a lot closer than I thought it would!

I haven’t done much comparison yet with the 95 on the multi-channel and stereo outputs. I did notice that at the fixed output level they seemed to be a couple of dB quieter than the 95. I won't be able to A/B switch, but I will be able to ascertain if it is at least as good as the 95. The 105 removes the DAC stacking (4 per channel) on the dedicated stereo output in order to power the RCA/XLRs at the same time, and drive 2 per channel for the headphone output. Oppo claim they found no sonic benefit in stacking the DACs. This became fashionable but now seems to be falling out of favour. Also the 105 uses AC coupling rather than DC as per the 95. DC coupling has the advantage of ruler flat bass frequency responses down to 1Hz. Oppo assure us that although they have switched to AC coupling for compatibility reasons (with external amps etc), that they have still achieved very good linear bass response.

One thing I will say though, this player is fast. People bought the 83 for its speed over the Sony’s and Pioneer’s of the time. The new models really crank up the gears another notch, and even the settings menus are clearly much more zippy to use.
Edited by JonStatt - 11/16/12 at 2:02am
post #2494 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post

. . . .
One reason I wanted the 105 was to be able to simplify my set-up. I have a Lexicon MC-12 and use the analogue 5.1 inputs from my Toshiba XE1 HD DVD player, and the Oppo. To connect both things I had a high-end Zektor switcher. But this means lots of cables, and the switch must affect things no matter high-end it is. With the 105 I can connect the Toshiba XE1 through the Oppo, and use the DACs of the Oppo (which are better), thus meaning only one set of cables to the processor. I got this working very quickly, but I have had a couple of HDMI handshake hiccups that have left me with a black screen that I need to figure out what element in the chain is causing it.
. . . .

I presume your 105 arrived with the 1018 firmware pre-installed. It would be good to double-check that.

In my testing of the HDMI Inputs with the 1018 firmware, I found the HDMI handshakes more reliable if whatever Source device I was using was set to send LPCM instead of Bitstream audio. So far, I've not seen a lot of confirmation of this result, but give it a shot and see if it helps in your case. The key symptom is that the video from the Source device is muted to Black, but the video from the OPPO itself to the display is NOT muted -- as evidenced by the fact that you can still get its own, on-screen Info display to come up on top of that otherwise black screen.

Obviously any such handshake failure is a bug. OPPO engineering is on the case. But if you discover any easily reproducible failure cases, please do email OPPO with the details.
--Bob
post #2495 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitardave View Post

By display, do you mean a computer screen can be attached for this purpose? Or will I need to attach a television?

I have bought a Digitek Composite and Svideo to VGA converter, and have the composite video out from Oppo 95 to VGA in to my computer monitor via this digitek converter. Picture is low quality, but plenty clear enough to work through the Oppo menus, and browse through files on an attached USB hard drive.

This works well for me as I have my computer against the same wall as my hifi/home theatre gear, and as my computer monitor also has a DVI input, I use that for the computer (my graphics card has both VGA and DVI output). My monitor can switch from one input to the other using its menu button. I find this setup much more preferable to switching the Panny 50" plasma on and off every time I want to choose different music.

I have a post on this (with picture of Oppo output on my computer monitor) (Post 9691 on page 324) on the Oppo 95 owners thread http://www.avsforum.com/t/1311806/official-oppo-bdp-95-owners-thread/9690.

Here is a pic of the digitek unit: composite and svideo inputs, vga output:
Edited by madaudio - 11/15/12 at 5:08pm
post #2496 of 2827
Picked my 105 up yesterday, but didn't have time to even unbox it. That did happen this afternoon smile.gif

I'm upgrading from an 83SE so there is quit a difference in weight between the two, due mostly to the power supply. Am familiar with the 95, and it reminds me very much of that unit.

So I hooked it up, checked the channel id, put the disc on repeat, and turned off the amps in my audio only system.
I'll give it a listen on Sunday.

Styln
post #2497 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Styln View Post

Picked my 105 up yesterday, but didn't have time to even unbox it. That did happen this afternoon smile.gif
I'm upgrading from an 83SE so there is quit a difference in weight between the two, due mostly to the power supply. Am familiar with the 95, and it reminds me very much of that unit.
So I hooked it up, checked the channel id, put the disc on repeat, and turned off the amps in my audio only system.
I'll give it a listen on Sunday.
Styln


Looking forward to your opinion of the 105.
post #2498 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Pariseau View Post

Just to give you an idea, here's what comes up on Amazon if you enter a search in Electronics for "small hdmi monitor":
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Delectronics&field-keywords=small+hdmi+monitor
The 7" class color monitors with Composite input -- i.e., the older style of small monitor for the same sort of use on the 93/95 players -- were around $100 or less. So you can see there's still something of a price premium for these HDMI capable versions.
But again, this is the result of just 30 seconds of research. If folks here put their minds to it, I bet there are even cheaper solutions available somewhere.
--Bob

NewEgg has a handy search feature that allows you to filter by features. With it I was able to find a bunch of DVI models under $110 that support HDCP. Generally these are 17"- 20".
post #2499 of 2827
I'm in a blunder here. I understand that room correction softerware really helps with most overyones rooms. What would be more important or sound better? Using the Dac of the oppo for 5.1 or sending it to a lesser dac in a receiver and allowing it to do room correction? is there anyway to adjust individual channels in the oppo via 5.1?
post #2500 of 2827
also is the headphone volume digital or analog
post #2501 of 2827
Does the BDP-95 share the same shielded/isolated disc-drive assembly design as the BDP-105? Or is this new with the BDP-105?
post #2502 of 2827
Also, I assume you have to have a 4K capable receiver or processor to take advantage of 4K-Upscaling?
post #2503 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCoastD View Post

Also, I assume you have to have a 4K capable receiver or processor to take advantage of 4K-Upscaling?

You can cable around the Receiver (HDMI 1 direct to the display and HDMI 2 to the Receiver), but you need a 4K capable DISPLAY to take advantage of the 4K upscaling.
--Bob
post #2504 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by bthrb4u View Post

also is the headphone volume digital or analog

It is implemented inside the DACs as part of the high-precision conversion to Analog, the same as happens with the main Analog audio outputs. I.e., the digital signal is not attenuated prior to the DACs.
--Bob
post #2505 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by bthrb4u View Post

I'm in a blunder here. I understand that room correction softerware really helps with most overyones rooms. What would be more important or sound better? Using the Dac of the oppo for 5.1 or sending it to a lesser dac in a receiver and allowing it to do room correction? is there anyway to adjust individual channels in the oppo via 5.1?

There's no pat answer to this as there are all sorts of different quality levels of Room Correction processing and also Analog output stages of Receivers and pre-pros.

In the case of my Anthem Statement D2v, as just one example, the consensus opinion is that the value of Anthem Room Correction (ARC) processing greatly outweighs the value of a purely Analog, unprocessed path through the D2v. That may very well NOT be the case for other electronics.

The individual Analog output channels of the OPPO can be separately adjusted for distance and for volume trim. Crossover processing can also be enabled/disabled for the pairs of speakers (e.g., both Side Surrounds). However, although the Crossover frequency can be selected, the SAME crossover frequency is applied to all "Small" speakers. There is no Room EQ processing in the player.
--Bob
Edited by Bob Pariseau - 11/15/12 at 11:57pm
post #2506 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by madaudio View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitardave View Post

By display, do you mean a computer screen can be attached for this purpose? Or will I need to attach a television?

I have bought a Digitek Composite and Svideo to VGA converter, and have the composite video out from Oppo 95 to VGA in to my computer monitor via this digitek converter. Picture is low quality, but plenty clear enough to work through the Oppo menus, and browse through files on an attached USB hard drive.

This works well for me as I have my computer against the same wall as my hifi/home theatre gear, and as my computer monitor also has a DVI input, I use that for the computer (my graphics card has both VGA and DVI output). My monitor can switch from one input to the other using its menu button. I find this setup much more preferable to switching the Panny 50" plasma on and off every time I want to choose different music.

. . . .

The problem is that the 103/105 do not have the same type of Analog video outputs as the 93/95. Your Composite video solution would only allow you to see the Setup menus on the 103/105.

To see on-disc menus, or pop-up and context menus from the OPPO 103/105 during content playback, you will need an HDMI video solution.
--Bob
post #2507 of 2827
Does Oppo ship a calibration / test disc with the 105 like they did with 83 ?
post #2508 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by tranle View Post

Does Oppo ship a calibration / test disc with the 105 like they did with 83 ?

It does not. However OPPO offers Spears & Munsil for sale if you'd like to purchase a copy.
--Bob
post #2509 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post

I have some first impressions of the Oppo 105. I also have an 83 and a 95 (although the 95 will be going up for sale soon)
Firstly, its big and its heavy. It is very solid and feels a high-end quality product. Compared to the Oppo 83 of old, it is in a different class.
The only physical thing that the 95 had, that the 105 doesn't is plastic dust covers over all the RCA connectors!
In the box was the usual Oppo branded shopping bag, HDMI cable, new style remote, WiFi adapter and stand/cable for it, batteries and UK mains lead. And I was also given an Oppo branded 8GB USB stick and AIX 3D music and calibration disc.
One reason I wanted the 105 was to be able to simplify my set-up. I have a Lexicon MC-12 and use the analogue 5.1 inputs from my Toshiba XE1 HD DVD player, and the Oppo. To connect both things I had a high-end Zektor switcher. But this means lots of cables, and the switch must affect things no matter high-end it is. With the 105 I can connect the Toshiba XE1 through the Oppo, and use the DACs of the Oppo (which are better), thus meaning only one set of cables to the processor. I got this working very quickly, but I have had a couple of HDMI handshake hiccups that have left me with a black screen that I need to figure out what element in the chain is causing it.
Today, I spent most of the time comparing the Oppo headphone amplifier to my dedicated Burson Soloist. I have Audeze LCD-3 headphones, which are magnetic planar headphones. I am in love with them. When you want to listen to your music late at night, you don’t want to disturb others in the house (or neighbours), but you don’t want to compromise your listening either. Up until now I always thought headphones were a “poor mans” listen compared to my high-end speakers. These headphones changed my mind on that. Tonally they sound almost identical to my main set-up. They may not have quite the soundstage you get with speakers, but you do get more intimacy instead which isn’t a bad thing. They are more demanding than some headphones in terms of their power requirements. I was concerned that the Oppo would fail to drive them well. I need to eat a little humble pie. Although I have to turn up the volume to around 75 out of 100 on the Oppo, it is more than capable of driving the headphones. However, compared to the Soloist which can output watts rather than milliwatts, the Oppo is lacking some of the dynamics and texture, and ultimately realism of the original music. That is not to say it is poor in any way. Quite the opposite, the headphone output is firmly into audiophile territory. Some may love the smooth, sweet, and easy to listen to sound it produces. In fact I may choose to use it on occasions when I want to relax and unwind. It is also somewhat unfair to compare an 800 pounds headphone amplifier to a 1000 pound play-everything super player. The Oppo may do even better with easier headphones. While I would have been shocked if it had equalled or even bettered the Burson, it gets a lot closer than I thought it would!
I haven’t done much comparison yet with the 95 on the multi-channel and stereo outputs. I did notice that at the fixed output level they seemed to be a couple of dB quieter than the 95. I won't be able to A/B switch, but I will be able to ascertain if it is at least as good as the 95. The 105 removes the DAC stacking (4 per channel) on the dedicated stereo output in order to power the RCA/XLRs at the same time, and drive 2 per channel for the headphone output. Oppo claim they found no sonic benefit in stacking the DACs. This became fashionable but now seems to be falling out of favour. Also the 105 uses AC coupling rather than DC as per the 95. DC coupling has the advantage of ruler flat bass frequency responses down to 1Hz. Oppo assure us that although they have switched to AC coupling for compatibility reasons (with external amps etc), that they have still achieved very good linear bass response.
One thing I will say though, this player is fast. People bought the 83 for its speed over the Sony’s and Pioneer’s of the time. The new models really crank up the gears another notch, and even the settings menus are clearly much more zippy to use.

No Quad stacking of the dac's!eek.gif ( crawls from under rock) I'm sorry to say but I do notice a difference and Am very much in favor of this setup, But before I speak to soon I'll have to compare as I can still taste the crow from the 95's release:D
post #2510 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

No Quad stacking of the dac's!eek.gif ( crawls from under rock) I'm sorry to say but I do notice a difference and Am very much in favor of this setup, But before I speak to soon I'll have to compare as I can still taste the crow from the 95's release:D

There has been a lot of debate on this recently, not concerning Oppo, but this DAC stacking principal in general. Scientifically it increases the SNR and decreases THD. But theses numbers are so good already, that it is believed the difference is inaudible. But even if you could hear the difference, it is now believed that each DAC has slight timing differences. The end result of stacking the DACs is a very tiny smearing of the sound, as the outputs of all 4 are merged together. Are you sure what you could hear with the 95 was related to the DAC stacking, and not that there are other optimisations of the dedicated stereo pair vs the 7.1 front left and right outputs?
post #2511 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post

.......................................But even if you could hear the difference, it is now believed that each DAC has slight timing differences. The end result of stacking the DACs is a very tiny smearing of the sound, as the outputs of all 4 are merged together. Are you sure what you could hear with the 95 was related to the DAC stacking, and not that there are other optimisations of the dedicated stereo pair vs the 7.1 front left and right outputs?

Sorry, but you are wrong in this "smearing theory". There is no any "smearing" or timing difference between the DAC`s 8 channels. This (between others) is the (design) point with this high end DAC chip. The 8 DACs (8 output channels) inside the chip, are perfectly synchronized (due to the sophisticated design and clocking), and that because connecting those together (8, 4, 2) lead to a huge benefit for the resulting sound...
Edited by Coris - 11/16/12 at 4:16am
post #2512 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Pariseau View Post

In the case of my Anthem Statement D2v, as just one example
--Bob

Bob

First let me thank you for taking so much time to post answers for everyone. I've been following this post as I'm considering upgrading from my Denon DCD-A100. I have a Oppo BDP-93 that I use in my living.
My question for you is how does the BDP-105 sound compared to your Anthem Statement for two channel music or have you done a comparison?
My plans are to use the stereo outputs to my front end for for two channel listening and route the signal to my surround receiver in the back of the room over hdmi for surround duty.
Thank You

Robert
post #2513 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coris View Post

Sorry, but you are wrong in this "smearing theory". There is no any "smearing" or timing difference between the DAC`s 8 channels. This (between others) is the (design) point with this high end DAC chip. The 8 DACs (8 output channels) inside the chip, are perfectly synchronized (due to the sophisticated design and clocking), and that because connecting those together (8, 4, 2) lead to a huge benefit for the resulting sound...

I didn't say I came up with this theory..it was mentioned on other forums as being stated directly in relation to Sabre according to recent research. I will try and find the reference again.

EDIT: I am struggling to find the discussion on this before. It talked about all aspects of gains such as SNR and THD, and then went on to talk about this latest research and microscopic timing differences related to signal paths and other factors that could cause smearing. If I find it at some point later I will re-post.
Edited by JonStatt - 11/16/12 at 5:48am
post #2514 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by C17FXR View Post

Bob
First let me thank you for taking so much time to post answers for everyone. I've been following this post as I'm considering upgrading from my Denon DCD-A100. I have a Oppo BDP-93 that I use in my living.
My question for you is how does the BDP-105 sound compared to your Anthem Statement for two channel music or have you done a comparison?
My plans are to use the stereo outputs to my front end for for two channel listening and route the signal to my surround receiver in the back of the room over hdmi for surround duty.
Thank You
Robert

Are you trying to find out how using the Anthem with DRC compares to using the 105's analog output with no external processing?
post #2515 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coris View Post

Sorry, but you are wrong in this "smearing theory". There is no any "smearing" or timing difference between the DAC`s 8 channels. This (between others) is the (design) point with this high end DAC chip. The 8 DACs (8 output channels) inside the chip, are perfectly synchronized (due to the sophisticated design and clocking), and that because connecting those together (8, 4, 2) lead to a huge benefit for the resulting sound...

Coris - why do you think 8 stacked 32-bit DACs would perform better than one 32-bit DAC per channel?
Edited by MrMoM - 11/16/12 at 6:05am
post #2516 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonStatt View Post

I didn't say I came up with this theory..it was mentioned on other forums as being stated directly in relation to Sabre according to recent research. I will try and find the reference again.
EDIT: I am struggling to find the discussion on this before. It talked about all aspects of gains such as SNR and THD, and then went on to talk about this latest research and microscopic timing differences related to signal paths and other factors that could cause smearing. If I find it at some point later I will re-post.

This smearing it may be present if the connection between channels is made at quite long distance from the chip or if the designer it may not care about recommended details in the chip datasheet, or so. But such case is not real. The output channels of the DAC are connected right on the chip pin tabs. At the output pins such smearing do not occur. This is a part of producer specifications, and the way this chip is made and works.
But is fine if you can find the informations which may not confirm the above.
post #2517 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMoM View Post

Coris - why do you think 8 stacked 32-bit DACs would perform better than one 32-bit DAC per channel?
'

In short, is not what I just "think", but those things and explanations are a part of the chip data sheet, and the theory which this chip design is based. It may be a quite a job for me to put together all the informations and present it here... At last it may not be the right place in this thread for such theoretical things. But if you want a detailed explanation about, you may find quite much infos about, in the chip data sheet and many other articles.
This chip is just made to work in this way to give the max of its performance... But of course it have high performance even if every channels is used independently. Is up to the user to have max/best of it or average...
Edited by Coris - 11/16/12 at 6:29am
post #2518 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coris View Post

'
In short, is not what I just "think", but those things and explanations are a part of the chip data sheet, and the theory which this chip design is based. It may be a quite a job for me to put together all the informations and present it here... At last it may not be the right place in this thread for such theoretical things. But if you want a detailed explanation about, you may find quite much infos about, in the chip data sheet and many other articles.

Yes, Coris, i did some research on the internet and found this:

"In the past, when the technology of DAC chips were limited to only 16 bits, this [stacked DACs] method also was used in order to better the linearity of the DAC chip's performance at low signal levels. However, this linearity issue is entirely moot now that DAC chip technologies have advanced to 24 bits. You may like to know that we have tried this method of stacking DAC chips. If you continue to add converter chips, then you run into distortion and noise due to overly complex design issues. The most elegant solution is to use one converter chip per channel, but to make sure it is the very best chip and to give it pristine, even ideal, electrical conditions to work under. This includes an active output stage of the best possible quality to keep all load off of the DAC output signal leg and to guarantee the best and cleanest possible I/U conversion."
post #2519 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMoM View Post

Yes, Coris, i did some research on the internet and found this:
"In the past, when the technology of DAC chips were limited to only 16 bits, this [stacked DACs] method also was used in order to better the linearity of the DAC chip's performance at low signal levels. However, this linearity issue is entirely moot now that DAC chip technologies have advanced to 24 bits. You may like to know that we have tried this method of stacking DAC chips. If you continue to add converter chips, then you run into distortion and noise due to overly complex design issues. The most elegant solution is to use one converter chip per channel, but to make sure it is the very best chip and to give it pristine, even ideal, electrical conditions to work under. This includes an active output stage of the best possible quality to keep all load off of the DAC output signal leg and to guarantee the best and cleanest possible I/U conversion."

While I agree with the sentiment that simpler is better, this is referring to discrete chips being used in a stacked manner, rather than the configuration of an integrated single chip with a documented use case for parallelisation. However the ONLY advantages of stacking a Sabre DAC is improvement to SNR (3dB each time you double the number of DACs, so a total of 6dB for 4 DACs per channel), and a slight improvement to THD. However, while this can be measured, the counter argument is that it is inaudible because we are talking going from 110dB SNR to 116dB...can anyone really hear that? I am not attempting to answer the question by the way....just putting that question forward for debate.

What I would really like to know though is are there are OTHER benefits of the dedicated stereo circuit compared to the multi-channel one. In other words, would one expect to hear better sound from the dedicated stereo outputs on the 105 vs the front left/right outputs. As they both share the same DAC and one DAC per channel, maybe they now sound the same. Or perhaps better choices of signal layout of components means the stereo section is still better in some way. Could anyone comment on this aspect?
post #2520 of 2827
Quote:
Originally Posted by egrady View Post

Are you trying to find out how using the Anthem with DRC compares to using the 105's analog output with no external processing?

Sorry for not being clearer, I was looking more for how the 105 compares to the Anthem without DRC engaged. Not even sure if Bob has ever used his D2 as a two channel preamp.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Players
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Official OPPO BDP-103/BDP-105 Anticipation Thread