[nlpearman]

There was an issue years ago when people more hotly debated the merits of bitstream vs LPCM for sending lossless audio to the AVR.


The issue was that some AVR's could apply room correction (like Audyssey) to bitstreams but not to LPCM. It seemed like some did the reverse.


We're several years on now so I'm wondering... can most (if not, all) new AVR's apply room correction to both High def bitstreams and LPCM, or are there still limitations to watch out for?


TIA

 

[jdsmoothie]

Yes, at least with Audyssey, they can without limitations.

 

[Kilian.ca]

I'm not aware MCH PCM at 16/48 and 24/48 was ever a problem with room correction, only a problem with 24/96 (possibly) and 24/192.


Now, no more limitations with incoming PCM 24/192 and dts-HD MA 24/192? No downsampling internally when decoding dts-HD MA 24/192 with RC?

 

[jdsmoothie]

AFAIK, Audyssey MultEQ XT and lower versions can handle up to 96khz while XT32 can handle up to 192khz.

 

[nlpearman]

Thanks, JD.


So, I take it that DTS HD-MA and Dolby TrueHD are 96khz?


What sources are 192khz?


And, regarding 192khz sources, an AVR with MultEQ XT would simply apply no room correction. Would bitstreaming such a source or sending LPCM (i.e. decoding in the player) get around this limitation?

 

[jdsmoothie]

Yes, BD's are generally no higher than 96khz with a few audio discs going to 192khz. Audyssey XT will not process anything above 96khz. It's not going to matter whether the audio is bitstreamed or PCM.

 

[ccotenj]

there was an issue with a few earlier avr's (i'm looking at you marantz) where the processing power in the unit was inadequate to do both the unpacking of the codec and do audyssey processing... you could do one or the other, but not both...


as noted by others in this thread, that seems to be a non-issue these days...


and yes, i remember the debate well...

a person who posts many reviews insisted that the codec unpacking in the onkyo he was reviewing at the time (the first avr include the feature of unpacking the codecs, iirc) was "better" than what was in the player... we, of course, know this is physically impossible, but that particular reviewer has many followers who hang on his every word, and it caused a lot of discussion...

 

[Kilian.ca]

IIRC the debate or controversy about SQ wasn't specifically about AVR decoding and no Audyssey vs. PCM with Audyssey, but it appeared to be narrowed down to volume difference between PCM and bitstream in Onkyos, and it seemed to happen with the PS3 as the source.

 

[ccotenj]

^^^


yes, which was the original position of many, and proven to be correct (although i don't recall the specific source, and honestly, not really sure how the source could matter)...


a simple volume difference was all it was... however, many were "convinced" otherwise by the reviewer... heck, some are still convinced to this day that "one unit does it better than another"...

 

[nlpearman]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilian.ca  /t/1420141/audyssey-eqing-dts-hd-ma-truehd-bistream-and-lpcm/0_50#post_22219213


IIRC the debate or controversy about SQ wasn't specifically about AVR decoding and no Audyssey vs. PCM with Audyssey, but it appeared to be narrowed down to volume difference between PCM and bitstream in Onkyos, and it seemed to happen with the PS3 as the source.

All true, Kilian.


My question only referenced one small issue that I was first made aware of during this debate.

 

[WiWavelength]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj  /t/1420141/audyssey-eqing-dts-hd-ma-truehd-bistream-and-lpcm#post_22217814


a person who posts many reviews insisted that the codec unpacking in the onkyo he was reviewing at the time (the first avr include the feature of unpacking the codecs, iirc) was "better" than what was in the player... we, of course, know this is physically impossible, but that particular reviewer has many followers who hang on his every word, and it caused a lot of discussion...

Let me guess: this "reviewer" is just some joeschmo.

AJ

 

[ccotenj]

^^^


your powers of deduction never cease to amaze me...

yes, that would be the "reviewer"...

glad you are back around...

 

[ss9001]

^^

I think I know who you're talking about

I never knew there were AVR's that couldn't apply room correction EQ, audyssey or other, to PCM. Certainly, the Pioneer's weren't a problem with that.


I do notice when having the Oppo 93 decode to PCM, the volume is a tad less than bitstream. On movies with robust dts-ma tracks, I'll let the Oppo decode, so I can add PLIIx in the receiver - that was a limitation in how Pioneer's implemented decoding dts-ma. Don't know if it still is. But that has nothing to do with room correction.


Interesting...

 

[ccotenj]

^^^


yea, i'm sure you do...

the issue around audyssey wasn't with pcm... it was only when trying to bitstream... there was at least 1 marantz (and likely a few other cems/avrs that it never became a big deal on) that didn't have enough processing power available to it to do both the unpacking and do room correction...


there was an obvious solution to this... as usual, that didn't stop the fury...

 

[WiWavelength]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ccotenj  /t/1420141/audyssey-eqing-dts-hd-ma-truehd-bistream-and-lpcm#post_22220018


the issue around audyssey wasn't with pcm... it was only when trying to bitstream... there was at least 1 marantz (and likely a few other cems/avrs that it never became a big deal on) that didn't have enough processing power available to it to do both the unpacking and do room correction...

there was an obvious solution to this... as usual, that didn't stop the fury...

The most notable example that I recall was the $3000 Marantz AV8003, the predecessor to the AV7005. Because its DSP horsepower was limited, the AV8003 could either decode lossless audio or apply room correction, exclusive. Furthermore, even if input LPCM, it still had a sample rate limitation on room correction. If I remember correctly, it could not apply room correction to LPCM >96 kHz, maybe even >48 kHz.


Of course, all of these DSP limitations were present before D&M Holdings (or whatever the holding company is calling itself these days) effectively merged the Marantz and Denon AVR lines into a single platform. Previously, Marantz lagged and Denon lead in DSP power. But after the consolidation to a shared platform, the Marantz DSP limitations went away.


AJ

 

[ccotenj]

^^^


yea aj, that's the one that comes to mind... there were some unhappy owners, iirc, they wanted to see those codec names on the display of the avr...

 

[judge_dredd]



Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie  /t/1420141/audyssey-eqing-dts-hd-ma-truehd-bistream-and-lpcm#post_22217572


AFAIK, Audyssey MultEQ XT and lower versions can handle up to 96khz while XT32 can handle up to 192khz.

Hey jdsmoothie,


I was wondering where you found this information. I was testing out my new Onkyo TX-616 last night and did notice that Audyssey was disabled whenever I sent anything over 96khz to it. I thought it might be a limitation of the reciever, but if it's a limitation of the Audyssey implementation I can live with it. Keeping in mind that I don't really have any source materia higher than 96khz any ways.


Thanks.

 

[jdsmoothie]

It's listed in all Denon and Marantz owner manuals.

 

[judge_dredd]



Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie  /t/1420141/audyssey-eqing-dts-hd-ma-truehd-bistream-and-lpcm#post_22905547


It's listed in all Denon and Marantz owner manuals.

Gotcha, thanks for the reply.

 

[eccoboy]

Just realized after 4 years that sometimes I wasn't getting Multeq XT on my Onkyo TX-SR876. Turns out I've been sending 192kHz from my PC so things like iTunes and Youtube played everything without Audyssey. I often thought some things sounded a little flat. I'm really irritated that I didn't check it out until today. Bummer!! Do new receivers with Audyssey handle 192 or do they plan on implementing this feature? I know most stuff isn't 192 anyway, but what about the few sources (bluray) that are?