[luismanrara]

I currently own the Panasonic bd-55 and I'm very happy with its performance and have been using the player's internal decoding to get the latest surround formats. I am using the analog inputs of my Arcam receiver and I'm not about to change it any time soon for one of the new receivers that decode all the latest. I find the Panasonic internal decoder lacking a little bit and to be honest I don't hear the difference in sound using the panasonic's decoder for Hd dts when compared to the Arcam's down-convertion to regular DTS of the same blu ray discs. I usually have to dial the volume on the receiver way too high, almost to the max (96) which in the case of the Arcam is 100 in order to match the arcam's decoding's levels at around 86. Besides the volume difference I can sometimes tell the difference in favor of the Panasonic's decorder on Hd surround but I feel the sound quality difference is insignificant

and I feel it shouldn't be as subtle as it is.


Is there a blu-ray player that betters the competition in high quality audio playback through its analog outputs? or maybe the decoder in the panasonic is too limited?

 

[BIslander]

It's not the decoder, which is essentially just an unzipping job. It's the post decoding processing and the DACs that produce the differences you hear. The Pioneers get very good reviews for analog output. The new Oppo does, too.


There's one other factor. The DTS core tracks on BD are encoded at very high bitrates and they rival lossless (some say they equal it). So, you may not find a player whose lossless output sounds better than the core tracks on your Arcam.

 

[Denophile]

the denon a1, 3800, oppo, higher end pioneer, and sony 5000 should all offe close to reference performance via analog

 

[joerod]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Denophile /forum/post/16910944


the denon a1, 3800, oppo, higher end pioneer, and sony 5000 should all offe close to reference performance via analog

Put perfectly.

 

[luismanrara]

Thank you all for you response, I was actually thinking about getting the OPPO and hopefully hearing the difference.

 

[svphile]

I can relate. I have the Arcam AVR350. I used to own the Panny 55K and didn't think much of its analog performance at all. I own the Oppo 83 and use M.CH analog for BR with great results. Big improvement over 55k. If analog audio is your primary concern the Pioneer 51fd has a very good analog output stage for BR and can be had very cheap nowadays. A lot of people think it is better than Oppo 83. I am currently comparing the 51 and 83. I'll have to do some more testing before I decide which I prefer. I'm having a small issue with the 51 into my 350 but it is probably just my set-up.

 

[luismanrara]

So far my choices seem to be more between the Oppo and the Pioneer 51 price wise. I would love to hear what you have to say about your testing of the oppo and the Pioneer. I also have the Arcam AVR-350.

 

[PBonn]

Depending on your display, with analog audio out you will likely need the player to offer audio delay (lip sync). Especially if you like BR concerts. The Oppo does not yet offer this. (otherwise I'd try it out)

Paul

 

[Bachelor]



Quote:
Originally Posted by PBonn /forum/post/16916455


Depending on your display, with analog audio out you will likely need the player to offer audio delay (lip sync). Especially if you like BR concerts. The Oppo does not yet offer this. (otherwise I'd try it out)

Paul

Well, it isn't advertised in the manual but I swear it works for me with analog outs. I am currently using it at 80ms with good results. I can see/hear a difference at 0ms and cranked all the way.


I wouldn't let this keep you from buying the player any longer!

 

[PBonn]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bachelor /forum/post/16916532


Well, it isn't advertised in the manual but I swear it works for me with analog outs. I am currently using it at 80ms with good results. I can see/hear a difference at 0ms and cranked all the way.


I wouldn't let this keep you from buying the player any longer!

I didn't know this...what is the maximum delay you can set it for? I need 120 to 140ms delay for my Panny 3000 with all the processing enabled.

I may order the Oppo then.

Thanks

Paul


FYI, this is the only reference to delay in the manual:


6. A/V Sync – To add a delay to the HDMI audio output. If you experience audio/video

synchronization problem, you may use this option to add a slight delay to the audio so it is

synchronized to the video.

• Use the UP/DOWN ARROW buttons to highlight the A/V Sync menu item. Press the

ENTER button.

• Press the LEFT/RIGHT ARROW buttons to adjust delay. The audio delay can be adjusted

in 10ms steps.

• Press the ENTER button to

 

[Bachelor]

I want to say up to 200 something. I'll have to check but it won't be until later tonight. I run HDMI to my projector and analog outs to my processor.

 

[Nascar_984]



Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara /forum/post/0


Is there a blu-ray player that betters the competition in high quality audio playback through its analog outputs?

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU...ayers/BDP-09FD


If you have the money I would look at the pioneer BDP-09FD.

 

[alebonau]

suprised no ones mentioned the denon a1ud or the sony 5000es which have very decent 7.1 analog outputs.


Basically for decent analog output what is needed is decent dac implementation, analog stages and good quality power supplies. Its something most run of the mill players are typically very lacking.


Have a peep under the hood of the denon A1/3800/marantz 8002, pio 09/lx91 or sony 5000es and you'll see the discrete dac implementation, good quality dacs. decent analog stages using good quality discrete components and their quality power supplies using torroidals and R-cores and the like. Its no suprise these players excel with analog given the effort the makers have gone to in this regard.


something else to keep in mind with goign over analog is the facility of setup over analog the makers provide. again here you will find the denon/marantz, pio and sony options to be pretty decent here. The denon / marantz giving the most flexibility but will find both the sony and pio pretty decent this way as well.


Additionally also depends what you have in the way of the avr or av pre, as to the result you will get over analog. most of the run of the mill avrs though pretty decent over digital are infact pretty average over analog. hooking up even "the best" player there is over analog to one of these will be a a complete waste.


best over analog ? it would have to be the big daddy denon A1UD isnt it !

 

[twenty/twenty]

Marantz 9004 will be the best.

 

[vinodk]

It better be the best considering how much it costs.

 

[Denophile]



Quote:
Originally Posted by twenty/twenty /forum/post/16921304


Marantz 9004 will be the best.

is this puppy out yet?

 

[JimP]



Quote:
Originally Posted by luismanrara /forum/post/16916223


So far my choices seem to be more between the Oppo and the Pioneer 51 price wise. I would love to hear what you have to say about your testing of the oppo and the Pioneer. I also have the Arcam AVR-350.

I compared the two and felt that the Pioneer 51 sound better in analog multichannel and analog 2 channel. In two channel stereo on the 51(what you'd use for CDs) you'll want to go back and replay all your music.

 

[hdblu]

Pioneer 09

 

[calvin c]

I have a denon 3800 using 7.1 analogs and find it is one of best in audio quality (via analogs). TrueHD, DTS-MA, LPCM, are all superb in my opinion. I am feeding into an older denon receiver that does not have hdmi. Previously I also had a panny (the first model BD) and that was quite good *(the dacs) but lacked the newer formats so I upgraded.

 

[Monkey_Man]

How does the LG BD390 fair in the analog arena?