I want to buy a Blu-ray player soon, and a HDMI receiver sometime(could be a year or more). I don't know if I should buy a player with built-in decoders for HD audio, or buy one without? Isn't it a waste of money having HD decoders in receiver and player? What's my best option? I'm thinking of the Panasonic BD35 and Philips 7200 Blu-ray players. My current receiver has optical and digital inputs that I use for audio to my projector. Thanks.
Decide on receiver type first, or Blu-ray player first ?
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Unless you buy the cheapest of receivers, pretty much everything these days has the advanced codecs like TrueHD, DTS-MA, etc. If you get a $150 receiver you might have to worry about that. If your budget is higher, then the receiver has nothing to do with the Blu-Ray player.
You can let the Blu-Ray player decode the audio and send it PCM or with a nice enough Blu-Ray player that can bitstream all the codecs and let the receiver handle the decode. Both sound exactly the same so it doesn't matter which one you end up doing - Blu-Ray decode to PCM is most common.
You can let the Blu-Ray player decode the audio and send it PCM or with a nice enough Blu-Ray player that can bitstream all the codecs and let the receiver handle the decode. Both sound exactly the same so it doesn't matter which one you end up doing - Blu-Ray decode to PCM is most common.
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
I agree that the decoded audio should sound the same regardless of the component doing the decoding. However, this may not always be the case. Sometimes one piece of equipment will do a better job of decoding than another piece. If you have a receiver and blu-ray player that can both decode, then I would suggest trying it both ways and see if you can tell a difference. If you can (or think you can), then use the method that sounds best to you. Besides, as previously mentioned, unless you buy a really low-end AV receiver, odds are that it will be able to decode the newer blu-ray audio formats.
You might want to add the PS3 to your list of Blu-Ray players to look at. Great value, fantastic player, handles all current codecs, and upgrading as the newer codecs come out is simple as hell due to the wireless nature of the PS3. A LOT of us have opted for that player. There is a link on the Blu-Ray player spot that goes into infinite detail but I returned two Blu-Ray players, a Samsung and Panny and went with the PS3. To me, letting the player decode is the easiest. I simply connect via HDMI, tell it to output PCM and forget about it. I think upgrading the player is a hell of a lot easier than upgrading the receiver or prepro as newer codes come out.
You might want to add the PS3 to your list of Blu-Ray players to look at. Great value, fantastic player, handles all current codecs, and upgrading as the newer codecs come out is simple as hell due to the wireless nature of the PS3. A LOT of us have opted for that player. There is a link on the Blu-Ray player spot that goes into infinite detail but I returned two Blu-Ray players, a Samsung and Panny and went with the PS3. To me, letting the player decode is the easiest. I simply connect via HDMI, tell it to output PCM and forget about it. I think upgrading the player is a hell of a lot easier than upgrading the receiver or prepro as newer codes come out.
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
That may be, but there are still plenty of people out there who at least think they can hear a difference. I've even read where some claim they could measure a difference (not sure how exactly). I'm not saying one way or another is correct. I'm just saying try it for yourself and see what you think.
That may be, but there are still plenty of people out there who at least think they can hear a difference. I've even read where some claim they could measure a difference (not sure how exactly). I'm not saying one way or another is correct. I'm just saying try it for yourself and see what you think.
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
This would also suggest to me that all (comparable) components are created equal, but we know that isn't the case. Some components that have the same features as others simply perform functions better-video scaling for example. I know we're not talking about video here, but why would we expect audio functionality to be so different? The point is that components with "equal" features do not always perform equally.
I agree 100% that some things are just ridiculous and a total waste of money, but if the OP buys a blu-ray player and receiver that can both decode audio, are you opposed to him trying both ways for himself to see if he likes one way better?
This would also suggest to me that all (comparable) components are created equal, but we know that isn't the case. Some components that have the same features as others simply perform functions better-video scaling for example. I know we're not talking about video here, but why would we expect audio functionality to be so different? The point is that components with "equal" features do not always perform equally.
I agree 100% that some things are just ridiculous and a total waste of money, but if the OP buys a blu-ray player and receiver that can both decode audio, are you opposed to him trying both ways for himself to see if he likes one way better?
"We do?" Regarding audio I have seen or read no study, test, or data that suggests that there is any audible difference between comparable audio components such as DACS, for example. Where one decides to decode the signal is superflous to the sound. Both work equally well and once set, its really a set it and forget about it sort of thing anyway, yes?
"We do?" Regarding audio I have seen or read no study, test, or data that suggests that there is any audible difference between comparable audio components such as DACS, for example. Where one decides to decode the signal is superflous to the sound. Both work equally well and once set, its really a set it and forget about it sort of thing anyway, yes?
Joined
·
503 Posts
+1
I let the PS3 do the decoding and like most bought a AVR, the Yamaha 663 that has the new HD codecs but really only needed to buy the Yamaha 661 which doesn't but sounds exactly the same as the more expensive 663 since the PS3 is sending the signal already decoded.
The one question I have in my mind is if down the road cable companies send HD in bitstream and my reciever would need to do the decoding
+1
I let the PS3 do the decoding and like most bought a AVR, the Yamaha 663 that has the new HD codecs but really only needed to buy the Yamaha 661 which doesn't but sounds exactly the same as the more expensive 663 since the PS3 is sending the signal already decoded.
The one question I have in my mind is if down the road cable companies send HD in bitstream and my reciever would need to do the decoding
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
Ok I think this is getting blown a little out of proportion. I agree that it should sound the same no matter what component does the decoding. There is no dispute here from me whatsoever. All I'm saying, is that the OP could test it both ways for himself. I don't think there should be any difference at all. We agree on that, but he might like one way better for some reason. Who knows? My only intent was to say that since he has the option to handle his audio decoding with 2 different components, he may as well try both. I apologize to all involved here that I have caused this to "run away" alot farther than intended and to the OP for sidetracking his thread.
Ok I think this is getting blown a little out of proportion. I agree that it should sound the same no matter what component does the decoding. There is no dispute here from me whatsoever. All I'm saying, is that the OP could test it both ways for himself. I don't think there should be any difference at all. We agree on that, but he might like one way better for some reason. Who knows? My only intent was to say that since he has the option to handle his audio decoding with 2 different components, he may as well try both. I apologize to all involved here that I have caused this to "run away" alot farther than intended and to the OP for sidetracking his thread.
I wouldn't worry about it too much.
There are two camps around here, and they like to mix it up.
One side says there is no audible difference between a $200.00 Home Theatre-in-a-CrackerJack Box and a five or six figure setup with Krell (or whatever) amps and B+W speakers etc.
Others disagree.
OK, maybe I'm exagerrating a little.
![]()
There are two camps around here, and they like to mix it up.
One side says there is no audible difference between a $200.00 Home Theatre-in-a-CrackerJack Box and a five or six figure setup with Krell (or whatever) amps and B+W speakers etc.
Others disagree.
OK, maybe I'm exagerrating a little.
There are just so many around now that decode everything at a pretty reasonable price which wasn't true a year ago. So why not? I've upgraded the firware in my prepro several times already and what a pain. By contrast upgrading the FW of the PS3 took a minute. IMO I think that upgrading a player is easier than upgrading a receiver/prepro hence I let my player decode.
There are just so many around now that decode everything at a pretty reasonable price which wasn't true a year ago. So why not? I've upgraded the firware in my prepro several times already and what a pain. By contrast upgrading the FW of the PS3 took a minute. IMO I think that upgrading a player is easier than upgrading a receiver/prepro hence I let my player decode.
Just a little
![]()
Actually the one camp believes that you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between good quality receivers, regardless of the price point. Not a cracker box one. And the other side believes that despite the fact that it can't be measured or proven, their ears tell them otherwise. Both are happy in their beliefs' and the never ending argument wages
![]()
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonhawk /forum/post/15484730
I wouldn't worry about it too much.
There are two camps around here, and they like to mix it up.
One side says there is no audible difference between a $200.00 Home Theatre-in-a-CrackerJack Box and a five or six figure setup with Krell (or whatever) amps and B+W speakers etc.
Others disagree.
OK, maybe I'm exagerrating a little.![]()
Just a little
I am a long-time audiophile and have been using a Denon processor in my separates system to decode Dolby Digital when we watch movies. We recently upgraded to a 1080p system and I have been using the PS3 to watch BluRay. I was surprised to learn that the BluRay discs would not allow me to send Dolby Digital to my processor, I only get Prologic over the optical output. I have been out of the loop as far as HDMI connections. Can someone please tell me if I have a PS3 what type of processor I need to purchase that will allow me to receive 7.1 high-def audio and over what cabling I will need to send the signal. I don't need anything fancy (HDMI switching, equalization schemes, etc), just a sonically excellent processor compatible with my system which is Magnepan speakers all around. Thanks
Joined
·
18,923 Posts
Far as I know, you can stream Dolby Digital via optical with the PS3. You probably did not set it to output bitstream.
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Join the discussion
