or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Datasat RS20i
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Datasat RS20i - Page 2

post #31 of 75
Personally, having a fairly small seating area, I'm going to use a bi-pole surround type speaker partly for that reason, and partly because of its low profile, that I think it will provide a less localised sound, and better spread of sound, given a low ceiling.
post #32 of 75
There are two factors to Auro. Galaxy and Barco.

The room pictured above is a galaxy room I believe. Neil of Genesis has been working with Barco when setting up his Auro room, which I will go visit on 4th July. From talks with Neil he suggests so long as the VOG is not firing directly down on your head, ie a foot infront you will be fine an avoiding what he calls the shower effect.

Left to right I do not think will be an issue, well for me anyway as my room is quite small and I'm using a B&W sig 8NT speaker which is about 1m wide.
post #33 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

Yes I remember you mentioning this before, so when you say first pair, do you mean you can only have a total of 4 or 8 usable inputs across both db25 connectors. Ie, could I connect a moded oppo using 8 spdifs or will I be limited to just four channels. I am thinking of adding an external dac to the front 2 channels and do not want to get down sampled from HDMI source so wanted to go the modded oppo route.

I does make me wonder why on earth they include these 16 aes inputs if only a few are usable. Strange.

Actually it means you can only have one AES/EBU per DB25. I use the DB25 to AES cable which gives you 4 AES connectors but only one is usable.

The reason the 16 digital inputs is there, and clocked this way, is because these connectors are normally used to connect to a digital cinema sever which has 16 parallel Digital Audio outputs all clocked at the same time connected using a cable with DB25 on each end.
post #34 of 75
So as it stands at the mo, I could not connect a moded oppo with 8 spdif channels out to the Datasat? But I can connect a single 2 channel aes source such as a USB to aes converter from a pc or some such.
post #35 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

So as it stands at the mo, I could not connect a moded oppo with 8 spdif channels out to the Datasat? But I can connect a single 2 channel aes source such as a USB to aes converter from a pc or some such.

Yes I believe that will work OK for the USB to AES.
post #36 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Stephens View Post


I just dont know about all those channels. I donno, the height channel sounds, so, i donno, strange. But you have a good point. Im going to start into development of a new room for a client this year and we really need to incorporate the ability to do Dolby Atmos as im sure thats coming to home use.

Chris, if you you haven't already read this white paper it is a good intro into understanding the need for more channels/speakers.
http://www2.barco.com/projection_systems/downloads/Auro-3D_v3.pdf
D.
post #37 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

So as it stands at the mo, I could not connect a moded oppo with 8 spdif channels out to the Datasat? But I can connect a single 2 channel aes source such as a USB to aes converter from a pc or some such.

No problem connecting a modded Oppo to the RS20i using 8 S/PDIF channels. I have been doing it for over two years, beginning with the AP20. I have gone as long as 3m without use of transformers or converters.

The discussion has been a bit of a semantic struggle. The RS20i can accept up to two sources using the the two DB25 inputs. Each source can be up to 8 channels. Or you can use one source with 16 channels. I use 1-8 for my modded Oppo and 9-10 for my balanced CD transport.

The RS20i is sorely lacking a couple of XLR inputs for AES.
post #38 of 75
Thread Starter 
Bah..... Thats a tiny little thing for a VOG speaker. Come on we all know that its best to have exactly the same speaker for every channel. So go hang a 600lb Wilson from the ceiling. And of course you need to place all the speakers a equal distance from your seated position so your gonna need a higher ceiling.

Hmmmm.... Why is there not a Voice of Satan speaker ? A VOS channel would make sense if you have a VOG. The floor would then need to be acoustically transparent of course smile.gif

Yes I see the need for more speakers. Thats a expensive prospect even for my clients. All those amps and all that wire. Man even for my clients thats a fortune.

Also Dolby Atmos might appear in homes sooner then you think smile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

Oh cool on the aes ebu inputs. That means I could run 8 chan in from modded blu ray and then on the other db25 run from say the nad m50 or perhaps the new krell streamer offering!

And the downsampling I refer to is not that of Dirac but that of using an HDMI input from an hdcp blu ray. All HDMI sources with hdcp have to downsample to 44/16 if the processor is outputting digital.

So if you were to run a 96/24 blu ray into the HDMI of the Datasat its digi outs would be downsampled to 44/16. But if you run that same blu ray via aes/ebu in then there would be no downsampling.

Just a heads up. Ive found a profound difference in sound quality with the Ayre ( Oppo based ) doing decoding and sending bitstream over and letting the Datasat decode. The datasat decoding was much better. Im not sure why. That was one of the question I forgot to ask David Kersetter the other day. But I will follow up. I have asked some other people about this and we are not sure. Im guessing there might be better math in the decoding in the Datasat or maybe better precision in the math. I dont know. But be aware I A/B'ed and letting the RS20i decode was a lot better sounding even with all the hellish mess that comes with HDMI jitter. I suppose if you could defeat the HDCP and mod the oppo with 8 digi's out then you could avoid the HDMI mess, but im not sure that would actually sound better then the decoding in the RS20i.
Edited by Chris_Stephens - 6/12/13 at 5:01pm
post #39 of 75
Hi

I have a question around how the Datasat RS20i does bass management. I am currently running a 5.1 system with Front Left and Right speakers that are Full range. Should I be setting them to be small speakers or large speakers in the datasat menus. Also what is the recommended frequency at which to pass the low frequencies to sub woofer. Also when calibrating with Dirac I take it that Dirac does not manipulate these basic settings.

Thanks
post #40 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by yapota View Post

Hi

I have a question around how the Datasat RS20i does bass management. I am currently running a 5.1 system with Front Left and Right speakers that are Full range. Should I be setting them to be small speakers or large speakers in the datasat menus. Also what is the recommended frequency at which to pass the low frequencies to sub woofer. Also when calibrating with Dirac I take it that Dirac does not manipulate these basic settings.

Thanks

Yes, unless your front speakers are truly full range (i.e. flat down to below 20Hz), and very few are, you should set them as small with a high pass filter set accordingly in the Datatsat bass management menus to direct the bass frequencies to the sub. Selection of the cross over frequency is dependent on the speakers, the in room frequency response, and to an extent personal preference. THX would have us all setting this to 80Hz, but on large floor standers this can be lower - for me personally with Aerial Acoustics LR5's fronts, I go for 60Hz. Dirac does not, at the moment, manipulate these basic settings I believe.

That said for stereo music listening I don't like to have the sub in play, so I have a separate bass management set-up for two channel listening.
post #41 of 75
post #42 of 75
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by yapota View Post

Hi

I have a question around how the Datasat RS20i does bass management. I am currently running a 5.1 system with Front Left and Right speakers that are Full range. Should I be setting them to be small speakers or large speakers in the datasat menus. Also what is the recommended frequency at which to pass the low frequencies to sub woofer. Also when calibrating with Dirac I take it that Dirac does not manipulate these basic settings.

Thanks

Hmmm.... I've been doing these settings for a very long time and I have found that the system almost always sounds better leaving the speakers set to large. Yes, I know all the technical reasons behind small and large. What I think tho is that when bass mixes in the room from multiple speakers it sounds better then when its force mixed into a mono sub. When you use bass management and set speakers to small your telling the processor to do a lot of math and select the bass from the speakers and mix it together and push it out the sub. Also how the bass from the L+C+R+LFE all mix together phase wise is important. If things end up out of phase from the source then you end up with less overall bass where in the room that most likely wont be the case. Also setting things to small also places more processing in the signal path and I always try and avoid signal processing. After countless A/B's I have found that it always seems to sound better set to large. I do however tend to deal with full range speakers. I suppose if you have Bose, then yea small it is smile.gif But its worth testing both. Tracks like the depth charge scene from U571 where you have lots of really low bass from all the channels and the sub are good tests. The Haunting has a good test as does the Apollo 13 blast off scene. If there does not seem to be much difference I would leave it set for large.

Just my 2 cents worth on bass management.

Actually I would look at the speaker response AFTER Dirac and see how the response is before even considering small/large..
post #43 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Stephens View Post

Hmmm.... I've been doing these settings for a very long time and I have found that the system almost always sounds better leaving the speakers set to large. Yes, I know all the technical reasons behind small and large. What I think tho is that when bass mixes in the room from multiple speakers it sounds better then when its force mixed into a mono sub. When you use bass management and set speakers to small your telling the processor to do a lot of math and select the bass from the speakers and mix it together and push it out the sub. Also how the bass from the L+C+R+LFE all mix together phase wise is important. If things end up out of phase from the source then you end up with less overall bass where in the room that most likely wont be the case. Also setting things to small also places more processing in the signal path and I always try and avoid signal processing. After countless A/B's I have found that it always seems to sound better set to large. I do however tend to deal with full range speakers. I suppose if you have Bose, then yea small it is smile.gif But its worth testing both. Tracks like the depth charge scene from U571 where you have lots of really low bass from all the channels and the sub are good tests. The Haunting has a good test as does the Apollo 13 blast off scene. If there does not seem to be much difference I would leave it set for large.

Just my 2 cents worth on bass management.

Actually I would look at the speaker response AFTER Dirac and see how the response is before even considering small/large..

I agree, I also set my speakers to large, hence using the x over points set by the manufacture who should know the best x over point for his speakers. I would encourage everyone who has speakers which go down to 20 - 30Hz to try this as suggested by Chris. The fewer points to adjust the better.
post #44 of 75
Yes, but guys, the whole point of the small setting is for speakers that are NOT full range - and lets be honest 99% of them aren't. Its nothing to do with the working against the cross overs set by the speakers manufacturer, its actually the opposite - its about blending the optimum roll off point at the bottom end of the speakers frequency range, as designed by the manufacturer, to the sub, so you capture all the available frequencies includes in the source material. If your speakers start rolling off heavily above 20-30Hz, and the majority of speakers roll off much higher than that, then if you set those speakers to large you are simply missing any bass in the audio track, in that frequency range, you simply won't hear it.

That's not a problem with your Alexandria XLF's Chris, but for the other 99% of speaker owners, who's speakers get no where near 20Hz, it is, and setting the speakers to large is simply not the optimal arrangement in such systems.
post #45 of 75
Thread Starter 
Yes. All those points ive been keenly aware of for what 20 years now ? It all makes complete technical sense. The problem is listening I think that systems, even with bookshelf speakers, sound better set to large. My guess as to why this is is because of how the signals are processed. Maybe the processing being introduced into the signal path degrades the signal, or maybe its the mixing of the bass from all the channels electronically with phase cancellation or something. I dont know but even on systems with bookshelf speakers setting speakers to large seemed to sound better...

That said. I have heard some rare cases where small was best for speakers that were large. I think this was because the main speakers were poor at doing bass and removing the bass energy from the speaker improved performance in other areas of speaker performance.

Even the acoustics of the room could get involved. If room modes interact with the L/R and cause a resonance simple because of placement, maybe the sub is better for the bass involved in the room mode. OR maybe the sub interacts more with the room mode and the bass is best to come from the L/R.

So I dont think large/small can be decided without careful listening and testing. A/B is important. It only takes like 15-30 mins to really try this out and be sure of settings. U571 is my test track for this. Ive been using the DTS demo discs for a long time to judge various aspects of performance.
post #46 of 75
Very interesting about the break out cables. I am using the standard DataSat ones with the RS20i, but could you explain a little as to why these should be changed? smile.gif

Cheers Dave
post #47 of 75
Thread Starter 
Analog signals have this annoying habit of being degraded by things we cant completely measure with test equipment. I can easily demo differences in analog cables. Why these differences exist and what causes them is not what we want to get into on this thread of course as the normal war will develop between the factions on either side of the wire-makes-a-difference debacle. I will say right away so everybody knows, I hear differences in cables. In fact I can hear differences in digital audio cables and now even HDMI. Im also a die hard engineer.

So... with that said.. The systems I do all have expensive good runs of cable to the amps. You kinda toss out a lot of the goodness with that last 18" of breakout cable as that cable is, just by studio standards, not that great. By high end 2 channel audio standards its horrendous. IMHO. So its gotta go. Considering the truly epic nature of what is coming out of the RS20i it deserves a great breakout cable. You may think im completely crazy but $5000 sounds reasonable to me.

Before everybody clicks reply in a rage over wire, lets just all agree to disagree, hehehehe.. I think 10% of the system total with all the gear is a very reasonable amount to spend on interconnects. So if all the gear is say $500,000 then spending $50K on interconnects is reasonable and $5k for a breakout cable fits right in there.

So go ahead and count me as crazy. But good wire makes a difference. It can make or break a system. What I learned with the Datasat at this last install was that HDMI interconnects make a clear difference and up till then I had never heard any kind of difference before. The RS20i was just so good you could hear the differences that I know I can measure in jitter that come with different HDMI cables. The power cord was a surprize, I really didn't think it would matter on the RS20i, but it did. Who knows what influence the power cable had on things ?!?.

It all mattered. It was like dealing with a super high end 2 channel preamp and a turntable or high end DAC/Server. EVERYTHING mattered.

I admit this was all on crazy high end gear, your mileage may differ. But be aware, the RS20i is just insanely good and deserves good interconnects. Spend 10% of its cost on a break out cable. Also get a good short HDMI to DirecTV and BluRay. Audioquest and Wireworld make good ones at reasonable prices. Im not to sure yet on who makes the best sounding HDMI cables, thats new to me.
post #48 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Stephens View Post

Analog signals have this annoying habit of being degraded by things we cant completely measure with test equipment. I can easily demo differences in analog cables. Why these differences exist and what causes them is not what we want to get into on this thread of course as the normal war will develop between the factions on either side of the wire-makes-a-difference debacle. I will say right away so everybody knows, I hear differences in cables. In fact I can hear differences in digital audio cables and now even HDMI. Im also a die hard engineer.

So... with that said.. The systems I do all have expensive good runs of cable to the amps. You kinda toss out a lot of the goodness with that last 18" of breakout cable as that cable is, just by studio standards, not that great. By high end 2 channel audio standards its horrendous. IMHO. So its gotta go. Considering the truly epic nature of what is coming out of the RS20i it deserves a great breakout cable. You may think im completely crazy but $5000 sounds reasonable to me.

Before everybody clicks reply in a rage over wire, lets just all agree to disagree, hehehehe.. I think 10% of the system total with all the gear is a very reasonable amount to spend on interconnects. So if all the gear is say $500,000 then spending $50K on interconnects is reasonable and $5k for a breakout cable fits right in there.

So go ahead and count me as crazy. But good wire makes a difference. It can make or break a system. What I learned with the Datasat at this last install was that HDMI interconnects make a clear difference and up till then I had never heard any kind of difference before. The RS20i was just so good you could hear the differences that I know I can measure in jitter that come with different HDMI cables. The power cord was a surprize, I really didn't think it would matter on the RS20i, but it did. Who knows what influence the power cable had on things ?!?.

It all mattered. It was like dealing with a super high end 2 channel preamp and a turntable or high end DAC/Server. EVERYTHING mattered.

I admit this was all on crazy high end gear, your mileage may differ. But be aware, the RS20i is just insanely good and deserves good interconnects. Spend 10% of its cost on a break out cable. Also get a good short HDMI to DirecTV and BluRay. Audioquest and Wireworld make good ones at reasonable prices. Im not to sure yet on who makes the best sounding HDMI cables, thats new to me.

Hi Chris, first off, like you, the last thing I don't want to get into is the whole 'cable' debate, so I'm going to avoid any conversation on that specific topic. I will declare myself as a 'fence sitter' on the subject however - I have never gone to the trouble of trying to perform my own comparisons or blind test sessions, however my approach has always been to invest a little in slightly better than the vary basic cables to hedge my bets, so to speak, and have all elements of my system somewhat in balance.

With that in mind, I think you are right Chris in that any investment in cables has to be proportional to the system cost, clearly in a $500,000 system a $5,000 breakout cable is more in line, but likewise I think that would be disproportionate in a $100,000 system, and even less so on a $50,000 system..

It is probably also worth clarifying, I think you are referring to a break out cable with the 8 channels running directly to each amp input - is that right? If so this makes a little more sense as an investment rather than simply directly substituting the short one provided by Datasat, since the cost comparison therefore is your higher grade breakout cable, versus the Datasat breakout cable plus 8 separate runs of XLR cable.

Personally I have had my doubts about the Datasat supplied breakout cable, simple due to the very thin nature of wires that come out of the back of it. The Van Damme XLR cable that I use, whilst still thin compared to many other cables, is considerably thicker due to is double twisted pairs, cotton infills, and extensive braided shielding. I suspect the stock breakout cable lacks most of these elements.

That said I would be intrigued as to how a cable manufacturer gets 8 larger cables out the back of a standard DB25 shell. Do you have any images of the ones you have obtained?
post #49 of 75
Thanks for the great report. I share your enthusiasm based on my experience with it in JapanDave's theater.

Notwithstanding the many well-deserved accolades bestowed, allow me to address one point:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Stephens View Post

The dynamics were jaw dropping. In U571 ( DTS ) the depth charge scene you clearly hear tiny drops of water dripping inside the sub, with echo and direction and crazy precise imaging. The other processors you cant even hear the drops.
If you cannot hear those drops, dump the gear, it's broken. wink.gif

Those drops are not just incidental background sounds that happened to be present inside the sub while they were recording the depth charges (that never happened). That's a sound effect element in a wholly manufactured soundtrack, and it was mixed there with one purpose: to be heard in a cinema.
Quote:
It had 4 HDMI **1.4B** inputs. Thats 1.4B folks,, for high end thats awesome. So it can DECODE surround from players rather then taking in multichannel PCM over HDMI.
Minor detail: 1.4 added support for ARC, 3D and 4k. Hi-res audio bitstreaming came long before (2006), in 1.3.
Quote:
I might add that for some reason having the Datasat do the decoding was WAY better then letting the player do it and send out multichannel PCM.
Hmmm. There's no reason, technically, why this should be true from an audio data transfer or math accuracy/resolution perspective. Jitter may differ, but that's the RS-20i's burden to deal with. T'would be interesting to drill down to some sort of objective reason for this. Maybe Mr. Kersetter would have some insights?

Are these systems 5.1 or 7.1? In either case, where are the surrounds relative to MLP? After you tweak the channel balance, if you run the test signal (as in normal SPL check), what are the readings?
Edited by Roger Dressler - 6/17/13 at 7:51pm
post #50 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

Yes, DSD for SACD would be great. But I remember reading somewhere, whether true or not, one can not apply room correction to a DSD stream?
Correct. No DSP processing with DSD.
post #51 of 75
Any experience with the Datasat on very high efficiency speakers (>105db)? I would like to be certain that the OP amps are just AWESOME in this unit as to not produce any hiss or other noise at idle or otherwise.

I have been become jaded by most home theater crap AVR's that really are not technically good enough to work on high efficiency speakers and their susceptibility to amp and pre-amp noise floor.

With the datasat, do you need any XLR attenuation pads in-line with the amplifier for high efficiency speakers? This is the workaround I am currently using on my marantz 8801.

Any specific testimonials from folks using horn speakers? Any help would be appreciated. I don't want to drop $20k on a preamp and still have the same problem.
post #52 of 75
Genesis UK use one in their 15.4 ICE suite. Running PHC pro audio horn speakers which have I think 114db sensitivity. Sublime sound. No hiss. No need for attenuation.
post #53 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

Genesis UK use one in their 15.4 ICE suite. Running PHC pro audio horn speakers which have I think 114db sensitivity. Sublime sound. No hiss. No need for attenuation.

Are you using the PHC Amps? I know they have their own A/D and D/A converters on board - I've sort of placed them in a secondary status because of that - and I'm thinking of trying a non compression driver speaker. I do like the QUesteds I have on hand

Does the DIRAC have anything like remapping or is it just another flavor of auto EQ? What is the DATASAT going for MSRP these days? Cna you actively run speakers and cross in the DATASAT?

Thanks
post #54 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Are you using the PHC Amps? I know they have their own A/D and D/A converters on board - I've sort of placed them in a secondary status because of that - and I'm thinking of trying a non compression driver speaker. I do like the QUesteds I have on hand

Does the DIRAC have anything like remapping or is it just another flavor of auto EQ? What is the DATASAT going for MSRP these days? Cna you actively run speakers and cross in the DATASAT?

Thanks

I'm not running phc gear myself. But Genesis UK do use a massive rack full of the PHC pro Audio amps, about £100k worth. You do need to use the amps due to them having the dsp settings for their speakers.

I really want to hear the quested speakers. What sort of price are we looking for the quested speakers you've eaten testing out?

And yes, you can actively run speakers direct from the Datasat RS20i I believe they were using Genelec actives at a recent show. You can run bi / tri / quad amping if you wished.

Dirac doesn't do 3D remapping, it is really just a room eq. But with Dirac unity hopefully coming out soon things could get very interesting.
post #55 of 75
What is Dirac Unity?
I really dig the Trinnov and Curt is an excellent part of the unit. He's patient and knows the unit, the science as well as anyone. I don't think anything is better in the industry from my reading and experiences. For me, it somewhat comes down to the economics. The Trinnov will be ~ $19K - same as the Datasat but there may be no upgradeability or reasonably priced SSP with newer codecs to connect it to and decode the forthcoming as well as today's codecs. SO, if I wanted the newer codecs, I'd have to sell it and reinvest in a newer product. That said, I am confident the Trinnov is better sonically due to its more advanced software. The remapping feature is just pure excellence. But the Datasat is a worthy contender.
post #56 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

What is Dirac Unity?
It is a way of using each speaker in your set-up to cancel low frequency reflections in order to mitigate room modes. Each speaker gets an out of phase cancellation signal for every other speaker, turning it into an active room treatment (electronic absorber). If low frequencies aren't reflecting off walls, then the peaks & dips created by those reflections are likewise reduced across all seats (improving seat-to-seat consistency in the bass range).
post #57 of 75
I think the best of both worlds would be to add a trinnov mc to an RS20i or LS10.
post #58 of 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by djnickuk View Post

I think the best of both worlds would be to add a trinnov mc to an RS20i or LS10.

LOL.. if I had $40K for an SSP, I still wouldn't do it!
post #59 of 75
But perhaps this is a way to get Auro, Neo X, etc decoding of up to 16 digital channels into the Trinnov (And still have Trinnov post processing)... The Trinnov will have 16 channels of digital input via a single DB-25 connector and the Storm Audio apparently has a 16 channel output BD-25 connector (below)... for a lot less than the Datasat. Theoretically, I could use a BD-25 cable to send the digital PCM output downstream from the Storm to the Trinnov.

Now if you can simply put the Storm into a bypass mode (no EQ, etc) and send out decided PCM...? Very little info on the unit and a partially constructed website.

post #60 of 75
I believe the storm is around €16995 so only slightly less than the RS20i and Auro will be a further £3000.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Datasat RS20i