Thread: DSD passthrough HDMI - No need for a quality player?

Posts: 371
Page: prev 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 38 next

Post by rammiepie November 30, 2010 (111 of 371)
Polly Nomial said:

What, never? :)

We're living in a world of gross generalizations........What does one think "political correctness" is? Saying what people want to hear when they want to hear it.

We're all somewhat guilty of it, as well, whether we tend to believe it or not!

DSD passhrough HDMI ---- NO need for a quality player..........

A gross generalization and a clueless statement and I'm going to be politically Incorrect and say "HOGWASH!"

Post by Polly Nomial November 30, 2010 (112 of 371)
One thinks that being PC is a good thing, being as it means (in the UK at least) essentially not saying nasty things aimed at a particular group who have no choice of being in that group (i.e. differing racial groups, gender, sexuality, age, ...)

"Saying what people want to hear when they want to hear it" is rather different IMO, either the mark of a good politician or a sycophant - one could argue there is little to distinguish between the two!

Your example could be considered a gross generalisation and I'd have to be grouped into the "clueless" set by you - I can live happily with that though!

Cheers

PN

Post by Kal Rubinson November 30, 2010 (113 of 371)
Disbeliever said:

I note from your post that you have measured Audyssey MultiEQxt (With different results than N.Keywood although you both found the treble roll off) on a Denon AVR-4806 receiver and you appear to be fairly impressed with it. However I was not suprised to see that Audyssey failed to adjust the rear speakers correctly and you had to adjust manually just as I found on the Onkyo 706 receiver.

You should note that the treble roll-off is intentionally applied by Audyssey for well-documented psycho-acoustical reasons and cannot be defeated on the cheaper AVRs. It can be adjusted to FLAT on some other machines but, unfortunately, there is a typo regarding this in the posted review for the 4806 which should read:
"I vacillated between EQ=Audyssey and EQ=FLAT. With the former, there was a larger soundspace filled with richer voices and instruments and a remarkably seamless spread of sound around, to, and across the rear. It was consistent in giving me the impression of being in an acoustic space entirely different from my room. EQ=FLAT, however, seemed clearer and more directly communicative, despite a relatively thinner tonal balance. I felt it did a better job of connecting me with individual performers but was somewhat less good at transporting me to the performance."

Thus, I am comparing Audyssey EQ with and without the rolloff and not with Audyssey bypassed.

Also, you should note that Audyssey does adjust the rear speaker levels correctly at I stated in the first part of the review:
"My feeling is that my trusty RS meter was fooled by room modes that were excited by the wideband pink noise, while the Denon's gated sweeps gave a less biased assessment of overall levels. This was confirmed by sweep measurements with the TrueRTA program."
Other programs (TEF, XTZ, etc.) have reconfirmed my conclusion.

I will leave you to read what else has been written on the topic.

Post by The Seventh Taylor November 30, 2010 (114 of 371)
Kal Rubinson said:

I do not believe in gross generalizations, anyway.

All generalizations are risky, including this one.

Post by Dogmahler November 30, 2010 (115 of 371)
Based on the comments of this forum, I purchased an Onkyo TX-SR805 used from Ebay because it 1) has direct DSD conversion and 2) has Audyseey Multi XT, 3) it fit in my budget of about $350. I found that I did not like the sound of the Audyssey as my SACDs as it did seem to roll off the high frequencies. I cannot find a way to tweak the Audyssey equalizer settings after calibration so I turned it off (flat). To me, this was an expensive unit that originally sold around $900. I thought I would share this feedback with this specific model number since I suspect that this might be considered a cheap AVR in this forum. Budget is all relative.

Post by Disbeliever November 30, 2010 (116 of 371)
Arnaldo said:

To intentionally roll-off the treble is to intentionally negate one of the main advantages of SACD over RBCD: Extended higher frequencies.

While a direct and unaltered surround setup - such as the ones used by a few posters here - offers plenty of potential in terms of reproducing multichannel recordings with high sampling-rates, the unabashed use of EQ and room-correction gimmicks seems like a total travesty of SACD's potential as a high-rez medium.

Thank you, Noel Keywood Hi-Fi World's review of the Onkyo TX-NR 1700 is correct. Audyssey is only a Pure Effect System and a waste of time for me.

Post by Kal Rubinson November 30, 2010 (117 of 371)
Arnaldo said:

To intentionally roll-off the treble is to intentionally negate one of the main advantages of SACD over RBCD: Extended higher frequencies..

Do you know why they do this?

Do you know that their roll-off does not cut HF?

Do you know that it can be changed to flat with most devices?

Oh, also, can you hear much above 20KHz? ;-)

Kal

Post by Kal Rubinson November 30, 2010 (118 of 371)
Disbeliever said:

Thank you, Noel Keywood Hi-Fi World's review of the Onkyo TX-NR 1700 is correct. Audyssey is only a Pure Effect System and a waste of time for me.

Sorry. That ends our discussion as you clearly are not interested in or capable of understanding any of the subtle issues and prefer to smear all of them with a sloppy paint brush.

I have tried to respond substantively but you ignore all. Bye.

Kal

Post by Fitzcaraldo215 November 30, 2010 (119 of 371)
Disbeliever said:

Thank you, Noel Keywood Hi-Fi World's review of the Onkyo TX-NR 1700 is correct. Audyssey is only a Pure Effect System and a waste of time for me.

Good. With that determined, why keep carping about Audyssey at every turn. You don't like it. I do. End of story.

Post by Disbeliever November 30, 2010 (120 of 371)
Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Good. With that determined, why keep carping about Audyssey at every turn. You don't like it. I do. End of story.

I am not the only one who does not like it as you can see from the last few posts. Someone in the UK sent me this . Some years ago I attended a lecture at the Heathrow HiFi Show presented by Peter Lyndorf when he was first marketing his new room correction products. He said they used effectively an infinite number of measurement points, unlike the best model Audyssey which uses 512 points of reference. One thing concerns me about Audyssey is the fact that you are plugging your high quality analogue source into it, its then digitised in an A to D converter, processed and then converted back to analogue by possibly suspect quality DACs. It looks like the Lyndorf DPA-1 can accept coax or optical from a digital source so keeps it all in the digital domain. Lyndorf also goes on about high quality signal path components and DACs whereas Audyssey pretty much just go on about tonal balance like that's the only thing that matters. I think more plugs, sockets and solder joints in the signal path the worse the quality.

Page: prev 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 ... 38 next

Closed