Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Who do you give the M/C treatment to ?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 of 21 anthony_b

anthony_b

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2000

Posted November 26 2004 - 06:24 AM

I have seperate dedicated SACD and DVD-A players, and depending on the mood I'm in, I'll hook up the SACD player in stereo and the DVD-A in 5.1 and viceversa.....My amp has only one set of 6.1 (5.1) analog inputs. So my question is, for those who are in my situation which player gets the M/C play and why ?
Think before you speak....Peace always

#2 of 21 Phil A

Phil A

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 01 2000
  • Real Name:Phil

Posted November 26 2004 - 09:23 AM

Well I have 3 systems. The bedroom which feeds multiple places has a universal player. The main and basement system have separate SACD and DVD-A players. In the main system, I picked up a Sony TA-P9000ES before they were closed out and use it to switch going into my pre/pro and analog level controls. While, I prefer stereo most of the time, I did not want to make that choice. For the basement system, I just hooked the SACD player into the rec'r down there as I have slightly better than a 4:1 ratio of SACDs to DVD-As. With a preference for stereo most of the time and that ratio, it was an easy choice and if I had to live with that in a system, that's what I personally would do. So it boils down to what and how much software you have in each format and what your stereo vs. multi-channel preferences are.

#3 of 21 PaulDA

PaulDA

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,560 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 09 2004
  • Real Name:Paul
  • LocationSt. Hubert, Quebec, Canada

Posted November 26 2004 - 11:13 AM

I have two players with m/c capability, one universal and one DVD-A. I use the universal for hi-res and the other for redbook CD (it's noticeably better at CDs, not really better with DVD-A). The player I use for CDs can be set for 2.1 use internally, allowing me to keep the sub in play without an extra A/D/A so I plug the L/R/SUB channels from each player into a switch box (Radio Shack A/V switch) and all is good. Would have two if I were without a universal player. I've tested it with and without the box and I can't tell a difference.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.

#4 of 21 anthony_b

anthony_b

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2000

Posted November 26 2004 - 12:53 PM

I wonder why reciever manufactures are not building there units with two 5.1 analog inputs ?
Think before you speak....Peace always

#5 of 21 Phil A

Phil A

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 01 2000
  • Real Name:Phil

Posted November 26 2004 - 02:20 PM

Anthony, I believe last yrs. Sony models did have 2 sets. Of course there's better swtichers like: http://www.zektor.com/mas3/index.htm

I think universal players are getting better and doing all the formats better. A friend who works in the high end industry a few weeks back brought over his Marantz 8260 to hear it on SACD vs. my 2000ES Changer I bought for use in my basement and my Modwright XA-777ES and then a couple of weeks later another friend came over with his new Sony XA-9000ES and we did comparisons. My friend learned a lot from the comparisons about qualities on his 8260 which he intends to sell and is going to get the new Marantz 9500. Yes it is $2k list but he gets accomodation sales. He said it is the first player he's heard (I've yet to hear it - waiting for him to get it and bring it over) that does what he wants on all formats. He is pretty picky.

I think the real answer is that they get products to market at a price point and if one manuf. does it and one does not then it costs them more. I see more and more high end cos. making expensive universals. Linn has a few. Teac via their Esoteric line has some. I know even cos. like Rotel are working on them and James Tanner of Bryston posted on a website that they bought a universal drive to experiment with to make a universal machine. Most consumers I would think would like the single box too.

#6 of 21 anthony_b

anthony_b

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2000

Posted November 27 2004 - 12:55 AM

I guess the point I really want to get to is....Do you prefer SACD in stereo or M/C.....or DVD-A in stereo or M/C ?
Think before you speak....Peace always

#7 of 21 Phil A

Phil A

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 01 2000
  • Real Name:Phil

Posted November 27 2004 - 02:31 AM

I prefer stereo in likely around 85% of the mixes in either format. Unless something is the type of music like Pink Floyd or Roxy Music, I find the use of aggressive rears distracting more than enhancing in most cases. On some things where there are passive or aggessive rears the way they do the front channels on a multi-channel mix collapses the dimensionality of the soundstage. That's not to say that I think that the multi-channel mix is horrible, but just becasue I have extra speakers and amp of good quality I don't feel the need to like the multi-channel better simply due to the fact I'm using stuff I spent money on. I know people who do that on movies too. They don't have the proper room to do 7.1 but do it simply since they can. I'll generally buy and disc and play a bunch of the cuts in both mixes and it usually is obvious when I'll like or not like the multi-channel. If I like the multi-channel, I'll likely not listen to the disc again in stereo.

#8 of 21 Dan Joy

Dan Joy

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 761 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 08 2001

Posted November 27 2004 - 03:12 AM

Quote:
I guess the point I really want to get to is....Do you prefer SACD in stereo or M/C.....or DVD-A in stereo or M/C ?


I listen to both at first, then determine what sounds best to my ears. Some hi-rez sounds better in surround and some in 2 channel. Ryan Adams "GOLD" sounds awesome in both so it depends on my mood.

I have a Sony DA5ES with two multichannel inputs so I don't need a switcherPosted Image
GO BLACKHAWKS !!!

#9 of 21 John Wes

John Wes

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 202 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 23 2002

Posted November 27 2004 - 07:08 AM

The solution is for a standard digital connection for both. I don't care who or what, but lets get a standard and hope that the audio companies also included a couple of connections and not just one.

Of my pedestal.:b


In the meantime, I'm using a Pioneer 47 for both and realize this solution isn't for everyone either.

#10 of 21 Craig F

Craig F

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 276 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 05 2001

Posted December 02 2004 - 02:45 AM

I would say DVD-A for multichannel. Most SACDs, I've heard, seem to have not much more than subtle ambience in the surround channels. DVD-A, in my experience, is more likely to make better use of the surrounds.

#11 of 21 AricB

AricB

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 431 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 26 2004

Posted December 02 2004 - 03:04 AM

Quote:
I would say DVD-A for multichannel. Most SACDs, I've heard, seem to have not much more than subtle ambience in the surround channels. DVD-A, in my experience, is more likely to make better use of the surrounds.


That's not really true, but it depends on the material your listening to, i suppose.

I give my analogs ins to the sacd 5 disc carousel, and output the dvd-a through digital coaxial, while not high rez, i still can access the DD or DTS tracks in 5.1, which is fine by me. Until I can afford that $500 switch box.

#12 of 21 anthony_b

anthony_b

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2000

Posted December 02 2004 - 03:12 AM

Currently I'm giving SACD the stereo treatment. Only becuase a lot of SACD's are stereo only as opposed to DVD-A's being multichannel.
Think before you speak....Peace always

#13 of 21 John Garcia

John Garcia

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 11,490 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 1999
  • Real Name:John
  • LocationNorCal

Posted December 02 2004 - 04:44 AM

Using my one m/c input for SACD.
HT: Emotiva UMC-200, Emotiva XPA-3, Carnegie Acoustics CSB-1s + CSC-1, GR Research A/V-1s, Epik Empire, Oppo BDP-105, PS4, PS3,URC R-50, APC-H10, Panamax 5100 Bluejeans Cable
System Two: Marantz PM7200, Pioneer FS52s, Panasonic BD79
(stolen) : Marantz SR-8300, GR Research A/V-2s, Sony SCD-222ES SACD, Panasonic BD-65, PS3 60G (250G)

Everybody is a genius, but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it’ll spend its whole life believing that it is stupid.” – Albert Einstein

 


#14 of 21 Perry Jonkheer

Perry Jonkheer

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 328 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 31 1999

Posted December 02 2004 - 05:02 AM

My Denon DVD-2900 lets me choose between stereo and M/C.
Once again, the Bulls have let me down...

#15 of 21 Nathan Stohler

Nathan Stohler

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 329 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 17 2004

Posted December 02 2004 - 05:50 AM

Quote:
I give my analogs ins to the sacd 5 disc carousel, and output the dvd-a through digital coaxial, while not high rez, i still can access the DD or DTS tracks in 5.1, which is fine by me. Until I can afford that $500 switch box.


Would 6 Y-adapters do the trick?

#16 of 21 John Garcia

John Garcia

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 11,490 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 1999
  • Real Name:John
  • LocationNorCal

Posted December 02 2004 - 07:49 AM

Quote:
My Denon DVD-2900 lets me choose between stereo and M/C.

With the exception of stereo only players, all of them do this. The question is not between m/c or 2ch, but which of two players gets the single m/c input on many receivers.

I use a standard stereo analog input for my DVD-A (Denon 2200), because the hi-res stereo tracks still sound better than the DD tracks, though at the expense of m/c.
HT: Emotiva UMC-200, Emotiva XPA-3, Carnegie Acoustics CSB-1s + CSC-1, GR Research A/V-1s, Epik Empire, Oppo BDP-105, PS4, PS3,URC R-50, APC-H10, Panamax 5100 Bluejeans Cable
System Two: Marantz PM7200, Pioneer FS52s, Panasonic BD79
(stolen) : Marantz SR-8300, GR Research A/V-2s, Sony SCD-222ES SACD, Panasonic BD-65, PS3 60G (250G)

Everybody is a genius, but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it’ll spend its whole life believing that it is stupid.” – Albert Einstein

 


#17 of 21 Perry Jonkheer

Perry Jonkheer

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 328 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 31 1999

Posted December 02 2004 - 08:17 AM

oops
Once again, the Bulls have let me down...

#18 of 21 Phil A

Phil A

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,735 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 01 2000
  • Real Name:Phil

Posted December 02 2004 - 08:28 AM

No 'Y' adapters won't work. You can split outputs and may lose a hair of volume or something, but you can't split inputs.

#19 of 21 PaulDA

PaulDA

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 2,560 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 09 2004
  • Real Name:Paul
  • LocationSt. Hubert, Quebec, Canada

Posted December 02 2004 - 10:42 AM

Try two Radio Shack A/V switchboxes (20$ retail/each). If you can spot a sound degradation (I'll bet you can't) you're only out 40 bucks--and you can return them, Radio Shack is friendly that way. If you can't spot a sound degradation, you're only out 40 bucks. Of course, you have to get up and slide the button from A to B on each box, but it's not that hard. I manage it without strain.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes time, and it annoys the pig.

#20 of 21 anthony_b

anthony_b

    Advanced Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 1,074 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2000

Posted December 03 2004 - 03:37 AM

I did the switchbox in the past and it worked out good, but there were soooo many cables !!
Think before you speak....Peace always


Back to Music & Soundtracks


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow