AVS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,282 Posts
I assume you mean using analog output?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,374 Posts
there have been lots of poetry written about the sound difference, you might find some of it on the BD section.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Not necessary. Sound quality derives from speakers and room acoustics, not optical disc players. Buy the one with the features you want and will use.

Hmmm. Sound quality is a product of everything in the signal chain, and of course the transducers and the room. But everything counts. And the transport, transport suspension, laser device(s) and circuitry reading the 1's and 0's encoded on a disc collectively constitute a transducer, no?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Poesy

there have been lots of poetry written about the sound difference, you might find some of it on the BD section.;)
Thanks. It is a little hard to get at the straight 2-channel analog SQ stuff. There is so much written about every aspect of these devices.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,282 Posts
Whether you believe it or not the main selling point of the BDP-105 is the superior DAC for the analog outputs. The BDP-105 also has a number of the other features the BDP-103 doesn't have. You can essentially use the BDP-105 as a digital preamplifier as well. Choosing between the two is a matter of deciding if the additional features are worth the significant price difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ellisr63

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Believe it or not

Whether you believe it or not the main selling point of the BDP-105 is the superior DAC for the analog outputs. The BDP-105 also has a number of the other features the BDP-103 doesn't have. You can essentially use the BDP-105 as a digital preamplifier as well. Choosing between the two is a matter of deciding if the additional features are worth the significant price difference.
No need to take offense, my friend. :)

To be clear, I am asking about what people hear, and not what the (excellent) specs are. I have enjoyed my Oppo BDP-93 for quite a while, and can testify to its fine SQ from the stereo downmix at the front speaker analog outs. I have not, however, heard it alongside a 95, nor have I heard either a BDP-103 or a BDP-105 (or 105D) driving 2-channel gear w/o intermediate processing, from the units' analog unbalanced outputs.

If someone has actually listened to both in that way, I'd appreciate "hearing" what you thought the differences in SQ were.

Best regards,

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
651 Posts
I own a 103D and a 105D. I purchased the 105 for the DAC to listen to music through the analog out. Here's my opinion: the analog sound of the 105 is very clean, very precise, and very dry. What I mean by "dry" is that the sound is almost too pure. I have played many CDs that I have listened to thousands of times in my life and they all sound very different on the 105 than the sound I grew used to on just about any other device. The sound was a bit thin to my ears, especially in the bass frequencies. I have tried using both the L/R analog outputs, as well as the 7.1 analog outputs (the 105 will send out a multi-channel stereo signal over the 7.1). But after many CDs and re-listenings on the 105 using the analog outputs, I prefer to listen to my music letting the receiver's DAC do the translation (sending the music to the AVR via toslink fiber-optic line). If you want to listen to jazz or classical music with a very critical ear, the 105 may be the best tool. But if you're like me and you listen to rock 'n roll or alternative, the 105 would not be my choice for digital/analog conversion.

Now for watching Blu-ray movies, I usually use the 7.1 analog outputs on the 105 because I prefer the sound of the 105 for movies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ellisr63

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,103 Posts
To be clear, I am asking about what people hear, ...
Mike
Well, that is the problem. People can hear whatever they want to hear, no matter what. Or, they can hear what their subconscious tells them they hear.
The brain is susceptible to fool people. The only way is a head to head DBT between those two units. I doubt that has been done by anyone. Short of this, opinions most likely will be unreliable.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,470 Posts
I own a 103D and a 105D. I purchased the 105 for the DAC to listen to music through the analog out. Here's my opinion: the analog sound of the 105 is very clean, very precise, and very dry. What I mean by "dry" is that the sound is almost too pure.
For me this means a no go on the 105 as my setup already sounds almost to pure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
286 Posts
For me this means a no go on the 105 as my setup already sounds almost to pure.
If you are looking for a "musical" sounding dac, I would agree with you and not recommend the 105. I would recommend the bdp-95 if you can get a good deal on one. Although they use the same dac chip, they are implemented very differently. Music on the 95 is more lush and smooth sounding. I have 4 different devices that has the ES9018 chip - Oppo 95, 105, ha-1, and Ibasso dx100. Each sound different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I own a 103D and a 105D. I purchased the 105 for the DAC to listen to music through the analog out. Here's my opinion: the analog sound of the 105 is very clean, very precise, and very dry. What I mean by "dry" is that the sound is almost too pure. I have played many CDs that I have listened to thousands of times in my life and they all sound very different on the 105 than the sound I grew used to on just about any other device. The sound was a bit thin to my ears, especially in the bass frequencies. I have tried using both the L/R analog outputs, as well as the 7.1 analog outputs (the 105 will send out a multi-channel stereo signal over the 7.1). But after many CDs and re-listenings on the 105 using the analog outputs, I prefer to listen to my music letting the receiver's DAC do the translation (sending the music to the AVR via toslink fiber-optic line). If you want to listen to jazz or classical music with a very critical ear, the 105 may be the best tool. But if you're like me and you listen to rock 'n roll or alternative, the 105 would not be my choice for digital/analog conversion.

Now for watching Blu-ray movies, I usually use the 7.1 analog outputs on the 105 because I prefer the sound of the 105 for movies.
Thanks; that's quite helpful, and pretty consistent with what I've been reading here and there, e.g, more detailed, broader soundstage. more space between (air around) voices or instruments. I have not seen adjectives like "musical," "emotionally involving," etc.

Personally, I am in the market for a musical, foot-tap inducing, hot-damn-this-makes-me-feel- good 2-channel disc player. Maybe I should be leaning more toward something like a Sony XA5400-ES after all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I have heard somethings good about the Arcam CD players. You might want to check those out. I also saw a Anthem tube CD player on eBay and Audiogon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
I own a 103D and a 105D. I purchased the 105 for the DAC to listen to music through the analog out. Here's my opinion: the analog sound of the 105 is very clean, very precise, and very dry. What I mean by "dry" is that the sound is almost too pure. I have played many CDs that I have listened to thousands of times in my life and they all sound very different on the 105 than the sound I grew used to on just about any other device. The sound was a bit thin to my ears, especially in the bass frequencies. I have tried using both the L/R analog outputs, as well as the 7.1 analog outputs (the 105 will send out a multi-channel stereo signal over the 7.1). But after many CDs and re-listenings on the 105 using the analog outputs, I prefer to listen to my music letting the receiver's DAC do the translation (sending the music to the AVR via toslink fiber-optic line). If you want to listen to jazz or classical music with a very critical ear, the 105 may be the best tool. But if you're like me and you listen to rock 'n roll or alternative, the 105 would not be my choice for digital/analog conversion.

Now for watching Blu-ray movies, I usually use the 7.1 analog outputs on the 105 because I prefer the sound of the 105 for movies.

Same here. I bought the 105 thinking it would be an improvement.I listen to mostly rock and roll.. I hooked up the analog outs ,and tried to get that rich flavor backthat came from my AVRs dacs. After a few hours down in the den trying....my loving wife came down and said "that sounds like its coming out of a tin can"...I guess that's the dry your talking about. I sent it back, purchased a 103....
 
  • Like
Reactions: ellisr63

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,480 Posts
Hmmm. Sound quality is a product of everything in the signal chain, and of course the transducers and the room. But everything counts. And the transport, transport suspension, laser device(s) and circuitry reading the 1's and 0's encoded on a disc collectively constitute a transducer, no?

No. Transducers convert electrical energy to sound energy or sound energy to electrical energy. That would be speakers, headphones and microphones. Digital conversions are done by computers and algorithms, not transducers.


Optical disc players simply don't have a sound. They don't count in the audio chain in terms of audibility. Some amplifiers can affect the sound and tone controls and DSP can certainly affect sound but not optical disc players.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
816 Posts
I have enjoyed my Oppo BDP-93 for quite a while, and can testify to its fine SQ from the stereo downmix at the front speaker analog outs. I have not, however, heard it alongside a 95, nor have I heard either a BDP-103 or a BDP-105 (or 105D) driving 2-channel gear w/o intermediate processing, from the units' analog unbalanced outputs.
I doubt you will hear a difference between BDP-93 and BDP-105 when listened to at matched volume.



Those who claim to have heard the difference between 103 and 105 is most likely the results of listening to them at different volume level and or change of listening position even if it's little bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
No. Transducers convert electrical energy to sound energy or sound energy to electrical energy. That would be speakers, headphones and microphones. Digital conversions are done by computers and algorithms, not transducers.


Optical disc players simply don't have a sound. They don't count in the audio chain in terms of audibility. Some amplifiers can affect the sound and tone controls and DSP can certainly affect sound but not optical disc players.
Transducers convert one form of energy into another. Physical movement to electrical energy through the generator in a phono cartridge. Magnetic lines of force to electrical energy by relative movement over an electromagnet (e.g., passing a prerecorded magnetic tape over the coil in an electromagnetic tape playback head). The laser detection system of a CD player converts light energy to electrical energy (through photosensitive transistors or other photovoltaic devices).

Optical disc players detect encoded 1's and 0's. Do that wrong, and it affects the output. Optical disc players have error correction circuitry. Some do that better than others. Optical disc players have power supplies, some regulated better than others. All audio signals generated from audio gear are ultimately nothing but modulated electrical energy from a power supply. Do a better job beefing-up the power supply and regulating the power supply, and you get less distortion and cleaner signal. Change the implementation and/or characteristics of passive or active devices in the audio circuitry of any piece of audio gear and you affect the sound. Fail to dampen the otherwise vibrating chassis components of a CD player and components in the box (more) sensitive to microphonics introduce spurious energy. What am I missing here?
:wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Perfect!

I doubt you will hear a difference between BDP-93 and BDP-105 when listened to at matched volume.



Those who claim to have heard the difference between 103 and 105 is most likely the results of listening to them at different volume level and or change of listening position even if it's little bit.
That, sir, is a very helpful post. Thank you!
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top