or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Oppo BDP-105 "Sound Quality" Check Thread for Audiophiles
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Oppo BDP-105 "Sound Quality" Check Thread for Audiophiles - Page 27

post #781 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger877 View Post

I've had my 105 for over two months now, and am overall quite pleased with it, especially the analog stereo performance that's improved dramatically with over 200+ hours o f burn-in and use.

My question (an old issue, I'm sure): would there would be any qualitative audible improvement (other than a 6dB increase in gain) using XLR vs. RCA interconnects for analog stereo out to my NAD M3 integrated amp? The distance between from my Oppo and NAD is less than 1 meter -- and there's no interference factors I'm aware of.

I ask this because it seems many posters here who use the 105 for its analog audio performance use XLR. Just checking with real-world users -- despite having an Oppo tech tell me that unless I was running inordinate lengths between the two units, there is no advantage to XLR.

It may depend upon how your processor treats a balanced signal path, i.e., if the balanced signal path gets more care and has better S/N. You might listen to both before deciding. I use balanced, but the entire chain is balanced because the amps sit between the speakers, whereas your amps are integral with the processor. Cary has been coy about the balanced path of the Cinema series except to say it's balanced from stem to stern and that I should use it for stereo if the source has balanced output.

db
post #782 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbphd View Post

It may depend upon how your processor treats a balanced signal path, i.e., if the balanced signal path gets more care and has better S/N. You might listen to both before deciding. I use balanced, but the entire chain is balanced because the amps sit between the speakers, whereas your amps are integral with the processor. Cary has been coy about the balanced path of the Cinema series except to say it's balanced from stem to stern and that I should use it for stereo if the source has balanced output.

db

Not sure I follow you...and what's Cary got to do with it? I mentioned that I have an NAD M3 (not Cary) integrated amp. Perhaps you're responding to another post -- or am I missing something?
post #783 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAcoustat View Post

Sorry Silveramp but all you will get with a turntable is - snack - crackle - and pops - if that's what quality sound is for you then fine but not for me.

Eh? Speak up, sonny! Kid's today ..... always mumbling.......
post #784 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAcoustat View Post

Sorry Silveramp but all you will get with a turntable is - snack - crackle - and pops - if that's what quality sound is for you then fine but not for me.
Geez, I have this sudden craving for a bowl of Rice Crispies with milk. smile.gif
post #785 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger877 View Post

Not sure I follow you...and what's Cary got to do with it? I mentioned that I have an NAD M3 (not Cary) integrated amp. Perhaps you're responding to another post -- or am I missing something?

Well, if you didn't understand the first two sentences of my post, I can't help you. I'm sorry if I confused you. I regret that I replied to your post.
post #786 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbphd View Post

Well, if you didn't understand the first two sentences of my post, I can't help you. I'm sorry if I confused you. I regret that I replied to your post.

As do I regret asking had I known a world-class audio maven such as you would respond to such a mundane issue. rolleyes.gif

Should anyone without troll-like tendencies care to weigh in with an opinion to my query -- is there any audible advantage of using XLR vs. RCA interconnects for analog audio out from the 105 when the distance is less than 1 meter? -- I'd appreciate it.
post #787 of 1452
^ Assuming decent quality shielded cabling is in use both ways, and that volumes are matched both ways, any difference you can hear would reflect bugs in how the amp or pre-amp at the receiving end is handling those inputs. IF NO BUGS, they SHOULD sound identical. By bug, I'm also including any engineering design bias in the amp which results in lesser performance for one type of input compared to the other. There's no good reason why a decent amp (or pre-amp) can't handle both types of input equally well, but of course that takes engineering care and maybe adds cost.

The whole point of XLR Balanced cabling is not to carry a better signal, but to aid in rejection of external interference. Typical cable lengths for "shielded interconnects" in typical home theater setups won't benefit from that in any audible way, because the SHIELDING of the cable itself does the job.

HOWEVER, until you try it, you can't know if your amp (or pre-amp) has cut corners in a way that favors one style of connection over the other. (What I called "bugs", above.)

NOTE: XLR output from the OPPO is the standard +6dB hotter than RCA. Unless you match volumes, the louder signal (XLR in this case) will almost always be perceived as "better". Even a fraction of a dB matters. To test this, raise the volume on the RCA version a bit and see if the quality improvement you thought you were hearing for XLR magically disappears.

XLR inputs sometimes adjust for this, but not always. And even those that do probably aren't trying to match levels exactly for the two types of input.
--Bob
Edited by Bob Pariseau - 7/3/13 at 7:16am
post #788 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Pariseau View Post

^ Assuming decent quality shielded cabling is in use both ways, and that volumes are matched both ways, any difference you can hear would reflect bugs in how the amp or pre-amp at the receiving end is handling those inputs. IF NO BUGS, they SHOULD sound identical. By bug, I'm also including any engineering design bias in the amp which results in lesser performance for one type of input compared to the other. There's no good reason why a decent amp (or pre-amp) can't handle both types of input equally well, but of course that takes engineering care and maybe adds cost.

The whole point of XLR Balanced cabling is not to carry a better signal, but to aid in rejection of external interference. Typical cable lengths for "shielded interconnects" in typical home theater setups won't benefit from that in any audible way, because the SHIELDING of the cable itself does the job.

HOWEVER, until you try it, you can't know if your amp (or pre-amp) has cut corners in a way that favors one style of connection over the other. (What I called "bugs", above.)

NOTE: XLR output from the OPPO is the standard +6dB hotter than RCA. Unless you match volumes, the louder signal (XLR in this case) will almost always be perceived as "better". Even a fraction of a dB matters. To test this, raise the volume on the RCA version a bit and see if the quality improvement you thought you were hearing for XLR magically disappears.

XLR inputs sometimes adjust for this, but not always. And even those that do probably aren't trying to match levels exactly for the two types of input.
--Bob

Thanks for the cogent response, Bob. You've confirmed what I was told by Oppo's tech support regarding RCA vs. XLR for the Oppo's analog audio out. And the 6dB gain resulting from XLR would impair any comparison I might make, as well as possibly blow a speaker driver or two if I didn't adjust my volume accordingly. As you correctly pointed out, a fraction of a dB would make an erroneous comparison in favor of the louder setup.

My query was prompted by the frequent mention of XLR cabling with the Oppo BDP-105 in a number of different forums as well as reviews. I suppose every situation varies, but for my particular setup high quality RCA interconnects at less than 1 meter should be optimal.

Case closed. smile.gif
post #789 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Pariseau View Post

^ Assuming decent quality shielded cabling is in use both ways, and that volumes are matched both ways, any difference you can hear would reflect bugs in how the amp or pre-amp at the receiving end is handling those inputs. IF NO BUGS, they SHOULD sound identical. By bug, I'm also including any engineering design bias in the amp which results in lesser performance for one type of input compared to the other. There's no good reason why a decent amp (or pre-amp) can't handle both types of input equally well, but of course that takes engineering care and maybe adds cost.

The whole point of XLR Balanced cabling is not to carry a better signal, but to aid in rejection of external interference. Typical cable lengths for "shielded interconnects" in typical home theater setups won't benefit from that in any audible way, because the SHIELDING of the cable itself does the job.

HOWEVER, until you try it, you can't know if your amp (or pre-amp) has cut corners in a way that favors one style of connection over the other. (What I called "bugs", above.)

NOTE: XLR output from the OPPO is the standard +6dB hotter than RCA. Unless you match volumes, the louder signal (XLR in this case) will almost always be perceived as "better". Even a fraction of a dB matters. To test this, raise the volume on the RCA version a bit and see if the quality improvement you thought you were hearing for XLR magically disappears.

XLR inputs sometimes adjust for this, but not always. And even those that do probably aren't trying to match levels exactly for the two types of input.
--Bob

Bob,

Given that OP mentioned cable length in his post, I assumed he was aware of the shielding XLR provides for long cable runs, but was concerned about XLR input to a NAD component using short cable runs. My understanding is that some components with XLR input do not keep the signal balanced internally. That's a question best addressed to NAD. When I asked Cary this question I was told the signal was maintained as balanced throughout and to use, for whatever reason, XLR input if my source had XLR output available. I assume it's conceivable a balanced path signal path may shield against noise internal to a component and improve S/N. I suppose it's also conceivable more attention is given to a balanced signal path, But I have no expertise in this matter, so my reply to OP should have been to ask NAD and listen and judge for yourself, or to not reply at all.

db
post #790 of 1452
I'm using my 105 with a Classe SSP-800 and Mark Levinson amps. All equipment is run in balanced configuration. My amps are over 20 feet away from the source so this was a not difficult to figure out. My system is dead quiet with the balanced connections. They were designed to be run in a true balanced configuration. I have yet to "blow up" a speaker,LOL In your case probably not worth it.
post #791 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbphd View Post

Given that OP mentioned cable length in his post, I assumed he was aware of the shielding XLR provides for long cable runs, but was concerned about XLR input to a NAD component using short cable runs. My understanding is that some components with XLR input do not keep the signal balanced internally. That's a question best addressed to NAD. When I asked Cary this question I was told the signal was maintained as balanced throughout and to use, for whatever reason, XLR input if my source had XLR output available. I assume it's conceivable a balanced path signal path may shield against noise internal to a component and improve S/N. I suppose it's also conceivable more attention is given to a balanced signal path, But I have no expertise in this matter, so my reply to OP should have been to ask NAD and listen and judge for yourself, or to not reply at all.

db

I didn't see anything incorrect with your reply as originally stated, but sometimes a rephrasing helps. We're all trying to deal with some pretty esoteric stuff here. And there's more than one way to "say the same thing".

Analog circuit design is not my expertise, but I've been told by people I trust that maintaining a balanced signal through the entirety of the analog audio circuit is not always the best thing to do. First of all, it's tricky -- easier to screw up. I knew that. But the surprising thing I've been told is that certain PORTIONS of the analog audio path are actually BETTER done single-ended.

Which would mean touting a circuit as exclusively balanced might not actually be the same thing as saying it is "good".

Another piece of "common wisdom" is that you shouldn't use XLR to RCA adapters in your cabling. I.e., running from the XLR outs of the OPPO to the RCA ins of a pre-amp via an adapter. Here again, it seems some details are being glossed over. A better way to state it, I think, is that it won't be any BETTER than good, shielded RCA cable from the OPPO run to those same, pre-amp RCA inputs, and there's a chance it MIGHT be worse. (I believe the technical term of art is "telescoping" the balanced connection.) So since it is unlikely any of us know enough about the circuits to predict the outcome, why try? If you are connecting to RCA inputs, use the RCA outputs of the OPPO. If you are connecting to XLR inputs use the XLR outputs of the OPPO.

Blue Jeans Cable (an AVS Forum sponsor) has a white paper on balanced connections on their web site you might want to look at.

Another point that sometimes gets raised is anecdotal evidence that people have "cured" Ground Loop problems by switching to XLR cabling. That can certainly happen simply because of the difference in the way the XLR connects to the chassis ground on any specific device, but "fixing" a Ground Loop that way only means you've blocked the current flow -- broken its path back to ground. You haven't fixed the REAL problem which is how that garbage current is getting into your set of connections in the first place (e.g., garbage coming in on the shield of a Cable TV feed line due to improper grounding where the service box brings that feed into your house). So the supposedly "fixed" Ground Loop is actually still lurking, waiting to produce HUM! again the instant you change something and provide it with a NEW path back to ground.

I tend to be of your point of view -- if the gear you have gives you the option of doing things more than one way, then try it yourself and FIND OUT whether there's something, perhaps unexplained, going on which makes one choice work better. But THE ODDS are that XLR and RCA cabling, compared fairly, will in fact produce identical results for this type of home theater "interconnect cabling". So if you DO hear a difference, before declaring victory you should at least consider what you might have screwed up in the way you compared them, or etc. For example, sufficiently accurate Volume matching. Because that's not the "expected" result.
--Bob
post #792 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by roger877 View Post

Should anyone without troll-like tendencies care to weigh in with an opinion to my query -- is there any audible advantage of using XLR vs. RCA interconnects for analog audio out from the 105 when the distance is less than 1 meter? -- I'd appreciate it.
I'll weigh in here..........if you are NOT hearing any kind of hum emanating from your speakers, decent unbalanced cables should be fine and there will most likely no audible differences between the two. However, if you are experiencing hum emanating from your speakers and you've gone through the trouble of eliminating all potential sources (ie; cable box, power cords running parallel and next to unbalanced cabling, etc) then XLR may indeed help. Case in point.........I have both options available on my pre-pro and amplifiers. After spending countless hours trying to eliminate hum I finally broke down, purchased some good but fairly inexpensive XLR cables and voila, hum was eliminated. My cable length between the pre-pro and amplifiers is 3 feet.

ETA; I am running both XLR and unbalanced from the Oppo to the pre-pro and hear no discernible differences between the two.
Edited by Torqdog - 7/3/13 at 1:43pm
post #793 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torqdog View Post

I'll weigh in here..........if you are NOT hearing any kind of hum emanating from your speakers, decent unbalanced cables should be fine and there will most likely no audible differences between the two. However, if you are experiencing hum emanating from your speakers and you've gone through the trouble of eliminating all potential sources (ie; cable box, power cords running parallel and next to unbalanced cabling, etc) then XLR may indeed help. Case in point.........I have both options available on my pre-pro and amplifiers. After spending countless hours trying to eliminate hum I finally broke down, purchased some good but fairly inexpensive XLR cables and voila, hum was eliminated. My cable length between the pre-pro and amplifiers is 3 feet.

ETA; I am running both XLR and unbalanced from the Oppo to the pre-pro and hear no discernible differences between the two.

After speaking with NAD and Oppo tech support, they concur that there would be no qualitative difference between RCA and XLR in my situation. I've never had any hum from my speakers with any of my components -- including the turntable. I'm running mid-priced Audioquest Sydney RCA Interconnects between my amp & the Oppo -- about .6 meters. So unless I want to experiment just for the sake of it, I'll leave well enough alone...especially when everything sounds so grand!
post #794 of 1452
After about 30 hours of play

CD only and SACD

What other music form can I use
post #795 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by silveramp View Post

After about 30 hours of play

CD only and SACD

What other music form can I use

Whatever is listed in the manual.

post #796 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharp1080 View Post

I'm using my 105 with a Classe SSP-800 and Mark Levinson amps. All equipment is run in balanced configuration. My amps are over 20 feet away from the source so this was a not difficult to figure out. My system is dead quiet with the balanced connections. They were designed to be run in a true balanced configuration. I have yet to "blow up" a speaker,LOL In your case probably not worth it.

Cool, my three front Classe CA-M600 amps are also +20 feet away from the SSP-800 and I use Mogami XLR cables with Neutrik EMC-XLR connectors! The three 800D2 are happy!
post #797 of 1452
Have had my 105 for a few months now, and have been very pleased with it. Picture quality and sound quality are the best I've experienced.

Recently, I have been playing music using the following signal path: MacBook Pro ---> Audirvana ----> 105 Asynch USB ----> AVM50v via Analog Direct.

Last night I picked up a 3TB Seagate networked hard drive with DLNA, and plugged it into my router (Apple Time Machine). The Oppo recognized it right away, so I loaded all my FLAC files onto it, including several 192/24 2ch, 96/24 2ch and 96/24 5.1 surround files. Playing with it last night and today, I feel like the sound quality is better through the balanced outs to the AVM50v Analog Direct, than using the Macbook/Audirvana/Asynch USB/AVM50v Analog Direct.

I've found the Asynch USB input can be a bit harsh and unforgiving on compressed source recordings, while the server over ethernet sounds a bit warmer on compressed source material, while still maintaining loads of detail.

Has anyone else found that to be the case?
post #798 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by boyce89976 View Post

Have had my 105 for a few months now, and have been very pleased with it. Picture quality and sound quality are the best I've experienced.

Recently, I have been playing music using the following signal path: MacBook Pro ---> Audirvana ----> 105 Asynch USB ----> AVM50v via Analog Direct.

Last night I picked up a 3TB Seagate networked hard drive with DLNA, and plugged it into my router (Apple Time Machine). The Oppo recognized it right away, so I loaded all my FLAC files onto it, including several 192/24 2ch, 96/24 2ch and 96/24 5.1 surround files. Playing with it last night and today, I feel like the sound quality is better through the balanced outs to the AVM50v Analog Direct, than using the Macbook/Audirvana/Asynch USB/AVM50v Analog Direct.

I've found the Asynch USB input can be a bit harsh and unforgiving on compressed source recordings, while the server over ethernet sounds a bit warmer on compressed source material, while still maintaining loads of detail.

Has anyone else found that to be the case?

Interesting! I would have thought that using the Mac as a music sever would have been much better than streaming! Bu that's just me!
post #799 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by boyce89976 View Post

Have had my 105 for a few months now, and have been very pleased with it. Picture quality and sound quality are the best I've experienced.

Recently, I have been playing music using the following signal path: MacBook Pro ---> Audirvana ----> 105 Asynch USB ----> AVM50v via Analog Direct.

Last night I picked up a 3TB Seagate networked hard drive with DLNA, and plugged it into my router (Apple Time Machine). The Oppo recognized it right away, so I loaded all my FLAC files onto it, including several 192/24 2ch, 96/24 2ch and 96/24 5.1 surround files. Playing with it last night and today, I feel like the sound quality is better through the balanced outs to the AVM50v Analog Direct, than using the Macbook/Audirvana/Asynch USB/AVM50v Analog Direct.

I've found the Asynch USB input can be a bit harsh and unforgiving on compressed source recordings, while the server over ethernet sounds a bit warmer on compressed source material, while still maintaining loads of detail.

Has anyone else found that to be the case?

You may have a settings problem in Audirvana. I've only been following the discussions of it vaguely, but I seem to recall there was some sort of setting for it accessing the hardware in the Mac more directly that produced the best results.

In addition, be aware that when you use the Asynchronous USB DAC Input the stereo LPCM coming in on that is sent DIRECTLY to the 105's DACs. So no audio processing of any sort can happen. In particular no Crossover processing.

Since you have your Anthem set to ANALOG-DIRECT, I presume you are depending on the OPPO to do things like Crossover processing, down-mixing, and speaker time alignment (distance adjustment). But when you use that Async DAC Input those can't happen in the OPPO. Meanwhile, when you play media files, any such processing you've set up in the OPPO *IS* taking effect.

And of course if you are using ARC in the AVM 50v, you need to know that ARC itself is bypassed when the input is ANALOG-DIRECT. If you are using a separate Source definition in the AVM 50v for both styles of playback (no reason why you should, but just in case), be sure that ANALOG-DIRECT is set in both for a valid comparison.

Finally, since you mentioned "harshness", be sure to check the Input Levels in the AVM 50v for this Analog input. Note that you will have to temporarily set the Source definition to ANALOG-DSP to see the bar graph in Setup in the AVM 50v to check that. What you are looking for is that you are not, perhaps, clipping the input of the AVM 50v. If you are, then adjust the Input Level for that input in the AVM 50v so that does not happen. This might be happening for your Async DAC testing (and not for media files playback) if, for example, you have negative speaker output volume trims set in the OPPO.

Just some things to consider as you are trying to sort this out.
--Bob
post #800 of 1452
Regarding HDMI vs multi-channel analog outs, I'm not so sure that I clearly prefer the latter, at least for symphonic music. While the analog connection sounds warmer and richer to an extent, I hear a lot less depth to the sound and it seems a bit congested when I do an A/B comparison. Solo instruments obviously don't suffer from this effect, so I generally prefer the analog connection for them. Has anyone had this experience?
post #801 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwv1080 View Post

Regarding HDMI vs multi-channel analog outs, I'm not so sure that I clearly prefer the latter, at least for symphonic music. While the analog connection sounds warmer and richer to an extent, I hear a lot less depth to the sound and it seems a bit congested when I do an A/B comparison. Solo instruments obviously don't suffer from this effect, so I generally prefer the analog connection for them. Has anyone had this experience?

Interesting!
post #802 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwv1080 View Post

Regarding HDMI vs multi-channel analog outs, I'm not so sure that I clearly prefer the latter, at least for symphonic music. While the analog connection sounds warmer and richer to an extent, I hear a lot less depth to the sound and it seems a bit congested when I do an A/B comparison. Solo instruments obviously don't suffer from this effect, so I generally prefer the analog connection for them. Has anyone had this experience?

I've comment on this multiple times in the 8801 thread and possibly here as well check my post wink.gif key factor being the 8801 biggrin.gif its a beast at decoding all things multichannel and an excellent platform for the 105's 2/ch performance (I use xlr here) and with some musical 2/ch performance of its own via hdmi eek.gif .

The deadliest 2/ch & multi/channel combo around cool.gif
post #803 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

I've comment on this multiple times in the 8801 thread and possibly here as well check my post wink.gif key factor being the 8801 biggrin.gif its a beast at decoding all things multichannel and an excellent platform for the 105's 2/ch performance (I use xlr here) and with some musical 2/ch performance of its own via hdmi eek.gif .

The deadliest 2/ch & multi/channel combo around cool.gif

Are you using "beast" and "deadliest" in a positive or negative sense?
post #804 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwv1080 View Post

Are you using "beast" and "deadliest" in a positive or negative sense?

Very positive wink.gif
post #805 of 1452
I have been using both my 105 and my ps3 to stream Netflix media. I'm using an airport express apple router. The picture quality through the 105 is far superior to the ps3 resolution. But it is a royal pain to get the105 to stream from Netflix. In both cases I'm using the wireless connection. I can log on to Netflix through the ps3 with very few problems but not so with the 105. Any suggestions?
post #806 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by pgordon87 View Post

I have been using both my 105 and my ps3 to stream Netflix media. I'm using an airport express apple router. The picture quality through the 105 is far superior to the ps3 resolution. But it is a royal pain to get the105 to stream from Netflix. In both cases I'm using the wireless connection. I can log on to Netflix through the ps3 with very few problems but not so with the 105. Any suggestions?

Try the -105 owner's thread: http://www.avsforum.com/t/1439524/official-oppo-bdp-105-owners-thread. Be specific about the problem you are having.

-Bill
post #807 of 1452
I have read all this thread and i just want to confirm somethings

My connections first

1 - Oppo HDMI to HDMI input on the marantz av8801. Bitstream audio

2 - 7 channel analog output from the oppo to the marantz. I use this connection for bluray shows and multi channel SACD

3 - Dedicated unbalanced stero output of the oppo to the cd input on the marantz. I listen to stereo SACD, CD, and music from the computer

My questions:

1 - I have bought an amplifier from a headphone. Can I connect the balanced stereo outputs from the oppo to this amplifier. That way, both balanced and unbalanced will be used. Is this possible? I think I have read Bob saying that it is totally possible, just want to confirm it.

2 - When the 7.1 analog on the marantz is selected, is bass management turned off? I have set the audio on the oppo and I do not want double bass management? As far as i understand when it is selected on the marantz 7.1 channel input, there is no bass management and no trim levels fro the speakers, correct? If this is correct when I send multichannel DSD from the oppo through the 7.1 output, where does the bass management happens. I know that it is not in the oppo, but i understand that it is not on the marantz too, correct?

sorry for my bad english

Thanks in advance for everybody
post #808 of 1452
Hello all

IN the set up menu what is the difference between

for stereo out

Downmix or left and right channel

I have it set for left and right

I only use it for cd and sacd playback at this time
post #809 of 1452
Quote:
Originally Posted by silveramp View Post

Hello all

IN the set up menu what is the difference between

for stereo out

Downmix or left and right channel

I have it set for left and right

I only use it for cd and sacd playback at this time

The Stereo Signal setting configures the function of the Dedicated Stereo Analog output jacks (both the RCA pair and the XLR pair). The default setting, DOWN-MIXED STEREO, configures those jacks to operate independently of the settings you make for the multi-channel Analog outputs. You will always get a Stereo down-mix (with LFE discarded), and with no Crossover processing or etc.

The ALTERNATE configuration, FRONT LEFT/RIGHT, configures the Dedicated Stereo jacks to use all of the settings that apply to the Left Front / Right Front outputs of the multi-channel Analog set. The idea is that this lets you use a Dedicated Stereo L/R jack pair in lieu of the normal LF/RF RCA pair from the multi-channel set when wiring multi-channel Analog audio.
--Bob
post #810 of 1452
so because I only use it for CD and SACD I should leave it on the DOWN-MIXED STEREO

is this correct I use the XLR
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Players
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › Oppo BDP-105 "Sound Quality" Check Thread for Audiophiles