analog out when listening to cd's??? (1 Viewer)

[Ben Hanrahan]

I recently upgraded to a Harman Kardon 520 and I thought I might like to listen to some cd's, the manual said that the optical connection would be best since the Harman has 192bit Dac's. The manual is WRONG! If I hook up my dvd player via the analog out, it sounds great, much warmer. Stereo through the optical sounded like crap, I couldn't even bring myself to listen to it, what gives??? WHy is this?

THis also begs the question, will dd/dts sound better if routed from the analog outs of the dvd player and thus bypassing the digital connection altogether????

 

[Frank_S]

Ben, I would say that unless the receiver performs upsampling, the 192bit DAC's are only used for 2 channel DVD-Audio disc playback, not regular 16/44 CD's. Another issue could be that you simply have'nt set your bass management correctly in the receiver when using its internal DAC's to play CD's. What is your complete system, that would help? Make sure your main speakers are set to large.

 

[Rick_Brown]

I recommend that everyone connect their DVD player to their receiver via both digital and analog cables. This way, when playing CD's, they can compare the DAC's of the DVD player to the DAC's of the receiver and pick whichever sounds best. Sometimes the newer and "better" DAC does not win this showdown.

 

[Ben Hanrahan]

I appreciate your input, but I absolutely know how to set up my gear, no question about that. I just wanted to raise the point because it's never really discussed here. And the thing is, cd's sound a lot better through the analog out...not just a little but A LOT! Or maybe it's just that cd's sound like absolute crap through the digital connection....This is something that I would bet occurrs in most home theater systems which is why I wanted to raise the point.

Ben

 

[RobertCharlotte]

Ben, I think Frank was suggesting that the difference you are seeing is an effect of your specific equipment, not any failing on your part necessarily. Any chance you could list what your other equipment is like he asked, so the rest of us can get an idea of what might be going on?

 

[Ben Hanrahan]

I think everyone is missing the point here, I don't suspect that anything weird is going on with my gear, it's simply that analog outs sound better. I was talking to my retailer about being disappointed with my stereo sound and he said "always use the analog outs", I went home and bingo, nice smooth stereo sound. What sucks is that I suspect most people use their digital out which I would bet is a mistake. I'm just hoping to enlighten some people and maybe have some technical guru explain to me why this is happening. Are the DAC's in my dvd player that much better than the dac's in my receiver??? I doubt that very much!

Ben

HK AVR520

Panasonic RP56

Polk RT35i mains

 

[Rich Malloy]

I also run analog outs from my CD player. I've also got an optical connection - at first for comparisons sake, but now I just leave it there in case I ever buy that collection of pipe organ music where I might need some bass management.

And I completely agree with you, Ben. According to my completely subjective ears, the sound is much richer and more pleasing from the analog outs than the optical. There is a noticeable difference, and it definitely favors the analogs.

I asked about this and was told that I'm running a "purer" signal with (I think) one fewer digital>analog conversion. I'm told that I've bypassed all digital processing circuitry, putting only the volume knob between my source and my speakers. This, I'm told, is why it sounds better.

 

[Ben Hanrahan]

Interesting.... that seems like a good enough reason, I guess. I would love to find out if a dvd player with a built in decoder will sound better if it is hooked up to my receiver via the 6 channel input.....

 

[Ted Lee]

i must be spacing today???

if you run the analog signal from your cd player, isn't the d/a converter being used the one in the cd player?

if you run the digital connection, then the receiver does the decoding.

or am i missing something?

it sounds to me like you just prefer the converter in your cd player more.

 

[Frank_S]

Ben said, Quote:
I was talking to my retailer about being disappointed with my stereo sound and he said "always use the analog outs", I went home and bingo, nice smooth stereo sound. What sucks is that I suspect most people use their digital out which I would bet is a mistake.
That statement simply is'nt true in all cases. I'll use my system as an example. I have a Toshiba SD5109 DVD player that is connected digitally(coax)to my Classe SSP-25 pre/pro. The DAC's in the pre/pro are far superior to the DVD player DAC's, I have compared, no comparison.
The key element in using the DAC's in the CDP or DVD player is your receiver or pre/pro's ability to pass the analog signal straight through without ADC to DAC again. Many receivers and pre/pro's do not have "Analog Bypass" so, again your dealer is wrong in his assumption "always use analog outputs". Connect your gear in the manner that it sounds best but don't take everything your dealer takes verbatim, IMO.

 

[Ben Hanrahan]

Ok Ok, easy does it. You guys are like the press sometimes, I'm sure he'll retract that statement if I call him and give him a chance for a rebuttal. He asked if I'm using a dvd player for cd's and I said yes, then he said use the analog outs from the dvd. I think he was implying that a cd player might be able to pass the digital data better than a dvd player for cd music. And this all goes towards my suspicion of jitter when using the digital output on a dvd player. I was hoping someone on here could comment on that aspect, I have heard that using digital connections will introduce more jitter, let's hear some constructive opinions on this.

Ben

 

[Frank_S]

Ben, I use a Camelot jitter filter between my DVD player and my Classe pre/pro. I must say that I have a hard time noticing a significant improvement using this filter but I do not possess golden ears, I fear. Jitter is a subject beyond my knowledge, in fact anytime jitter is mentioned in a thread it usually turns into an endless debate.

 

[Ben Hanrahan]

I agree, jitter is difficult to get a good understanding of and how it applies. But in your case you have implemented a high quality jitter filter into your bitstream, maybe it helps smooth out your sound.... I'd love a few more comments on jitter and how it effects sound, and if using the analog outs will reduce jitter.

 

[Wayne Bundrick]

I don't see how using the DVD player's analog outputs will have less jitter than the digital output going to the receiver. It makes sense to me that if the DVD player has a jittery clock, it's going to affect the DVD player's own DACs just as much as the receiver's.

 

[KeithH]

Frank said:

Ben, I would say that unless the receiver performs upsampling, the 192bit DAC's are only used for 2 channel DVD-Audio disc playback, not regular 16/44 CD's.

Only if the DVD-Audio format ever offers a digital output. Even if that happens, the point is moot because no receivers or pre/pros have built-in MLP decoders. So, 24/192 DACs mean nothing in terms of their ability to decode 24/192 bitstreams. What it does mean is that you are getting the latest in DAC technology, which could mean that you are getting good DACs.

 

[RicP]

So, 24/192 DACs mean nothing in terms of their ability to decode 24/192 bitstreams. What it does mean is that you are getting the latest in DAC technology, which could mean that you are getting good DACs.

It means a lot more than that.
The reason most systems have 24/192 DACs nowadays is for oversampling. Basically oversampling just means taking the original signal and processing it at a higher rate. To not get too technical, this helps with noise-shaping and allows the DAC to produce a "cleaner" analog signal than could be accomplished with the steep analog filters that would be needed if the signal were processed at its original rate.
One good analogy I like to use to explain sampling rate is the following:
The higher the sampling rate, the lower the occurance of aliasing. Aliasing means that the signal was not captured properly and in the subsequent reconstruction of the waveform can leave information out that was in the original analog signal but lost due to a lower than needed sampling rate.
You can see the effects of aliasing visually as well. Take a motion picture for example; film is technically a sampled signal as well. A frame of film is shot 24 times a second, so the "sampling rate" of film is 24fps.
Now, one effect that's very noticeable is the "Spoked wheel effect". If a spinning wheel is filmed at 24 fps, it will appear to be moving forward as long as the rate of rotation is slower than the rate of the film. As soon as the wheel's rotation becomes faster than the film can shoot (sample) the wheel appears to slow down, stop when it makes one full rotation every 1/24th of a second, and then eventually appear as though it's moving backwards.
The virtual impression of the wheel moving backwards gets faster as the rate of rotation gets faster, and this backwards motion is caused by the aliasing of sampling at too low a rate. Now the wheel is not really moving backwards, however it appears to be because the film is an incorrect reconstruction of the original signal caused by sampling too low. The same thing happens with an audio signal.
Because of the oversampling I spoke about. The ability to process the signal at a higher rate affords you the opportunity to do better noise shaping and less steep drop off filters for the resulting analog signal.
This of course if different from upsampling DACs like the Perpetual Technologies P-3A. These kinds of DACs actually take the incoming signal and upsample it to 24/96 by interpolating the bits and samples that "would have" been present had the signal been 24/96 native. This requires massive mathematical calculations, but in the best of the DACs sounds amazingly realistic and much improved over a 16/44 signal.
A DAC that Oversamples simply applies noise filtering and drop offs in a higher range but still decodes a 16/44 signal. A DAC that upsamples is actually converting the incoming signal to 24/96 (or 24/192 in rare cases), applying noise filtering and what not, and then decoding the 24/96 signal to analog.

 

[Doug Brewster]

RicP:

I couldn't have said it better myself, but I have no idea what it means....

Regardless of the (no doubt) flawless and eloquent way that you presented your information,

Will an analog or digital connection yield a more musical sound from a CD played on a DVD player through an HK 520?

Personally, my experience is opposite of Ben's - my digital coaxial connection sounds better, but I must qualify that. I have not connected the DVD to the CD audio out. I have intended to do this but haven't had the time. I can only say that the coax out yields far better and more pleasant musicality than the analog out when playing CD's on my Toshiba 2150 through the DVD output... But I'm old and deaf and audiophilically and technologically impaired. Therefore, I will defer to those more qualified and follow any pertinent suggestions submitted.

Again, should I expect better sound quality from the analog or digital method as described above?

 

[dpippel]

It's almost entirely dependent on which is better - the quality of the DACs in your DVD/CD player or the quality of the DACs in your receiver/processor. The ONLY way to determine that is to hook your system up both ways, listen to the results and then decide for yourself. A generic blanket statement about whether or not a digital or an analog connection is better simply cannot be valid.

 

[brucek]

Again, should I expect better sound quality from the analog or digital method as described above?

This is an impossible question to answer unless we're told the equipment involved. It would be equal to asking whether 5 was a high number or not? The answer of course is, "compared to what"?
More information is needed. This is why everyone asked about the equipment situation. There are more combinations and equipment differences that swing the answer one way or another that you couldn't count them. A blanket statement that, "analog hookup is better" is quite debatable.
Most receivers today perform a "double conversion" on any analog signal they receive at their inputs. This is so the processor inside can "get its hands on" a digital signal to perform any magic it deems fit, depending on the mode the receiver is set to, i.e bass management, DSP processing, signal routing, decoding etc..
The analog signal first goes through an ADC (analog-to-digital converter). The resultant digital signal is properly processed and then fed through a DAC (digital-to-analog converter). This double converted analog signal is then fed through the volume controllers and then to the power amplifiers.
When you feed a digital signal to a receiver, the same circuitry is used except you're spared the first ADC conversion and as such, the final signal (in theory) will be superior.
Some receivers have an "analog bypass" feature that will route the pristine analog signal input directly to the power amplifiers after it has been level controlled. The rub is, that there is a morase of different techniques for performing this bypass. Some receivers will still perform the conversions, but bypass some DSP processors, or tone control stage, so they can still enact bass management. You could write a book on the different techniques. A "handle" that is used to indicate that your receiver doesn't perform any conversion on the analog signal is "true bypass". Well, this moniker is somewhat misused also, so you really need to find out what type of bypass feature you have in your particular receiver. Often with analog bypass, you will then lose bass management, relying on your speakers to provide all low frequencies.
There's also the smaller consideration of jitter that's been mentioned. Jitter is a time based error which occurs between the clock we use to get the data off the disk in a CD transport and the clock used in the DAC system. In the simple CD player we use the "same" clock for these two functions and so in this "synchronous system" jitter isn't a concern. The master clock that is in charge of getting the data off the disk is also used by the CD players internal DAC...... This is the best possible situation, and in that regard, if the DAC and analog output circuitry of the player are well made, then this situation will arguably beat the transport/DAC situation.
In the transport / DAC situation that exists when we connect the digital output of a CD player, the responsibility for clocking the digital data from the CD player (whether PCM or AC-3 or DTS) is that of the SPDIF transmission format. The SPDIF format combines the data from the disk and the CD players clock using a method called biphase-mark encoding. The clock is then recovered by the sampling and DAC circuitry in the receiver (generally using a phase locked loop). This recovered clock is then used to clock the DAC. So, since the timing of the bits for DAC clocking is determined by the zero-crossing point of the signal, then any distortions can introduce jitter. It's a very real problem. No amount of your buffering and reclocking will solve the problem that the recovered clock has jitter and is "asynchronous" with respect to the transports master clock. There will always be some jitter irregardless of the fancy jitter reducers you use..
This time-base error is up for debate whether it's audible or not though. Can you hear the effects of jitter - maybe. Personally, I don't think so, but there's lots of anecdotal data to support it.
Either way, if you have a well constructed CD player and use the analog outputs, you will not be able to take advantage of this superior signal without a true bypass on your receiver or with an analog preamp.
I think we can see why Ben was asked about his equipment.......................Sometimes the digital connection will be better and sometimes the analog connection will be better.
Frank_S said it best. "Connect your gear in the manner that it sounds best......."
brucek

 

[Bill Kane]

Brucek in his well-written post says it's equipment dependent and I say that's so...

Either way, if you have a well constructed CD player and use the analog outputs, you will not be able to take advantage of this superior signal without a true bypass on your receiver or with an analog preamp.

Right now, I am listening to some Redbook CD on my Panasonic RP-56 DVDp for the first time, and at THIS MOMENT I must say it seems a nicer, warmer, less high-fatiguing sound.

A year ago, I installed a Denon DCM-370 CDp for its vaunted Burr-Brown DACs and 20-bit HDCD capability, and added two nice BetterCables Silver Serpent interconnects. I figured this HAD to be better than the entry-level Panasonic RV-30 DVDp I was using at the time, right?

The signal is handled by a Yamaha RX-V800 as prepro with Anthem MCA5 170Wx5 (all chls driven) into Paradigm Monitor 9s.

Yamaha properly indicates "PCM" from the RP-56 CD digital path. Using the Denon analog path, the PCM goes off, and Yamaha's 2-CHL analog "style" with EFFECTS OFF still finagles with digital because I get the SMALL bass management -- sound from the Sub. Soon I'll try LARGE/NO SUB with my floorstanders.

So I say that it takes experimenting in trying to "lift the veil" to pleasing sound and there's no one-size-fits-all theory here. Now gotta resist looking at Cambridge and Ah! CDps...