Question about Stereo DVD-A (1 Viewer)

[Nestor Vargas]

I have the Denon AVR-5800 and the Panasonic RP-91 connected for DVD-V viewing using coaxial and analog connections. For multichanel DVD-A I use 6 analog cables to the External-1 imput. My question is when using the stereo tracks on a DVD-A what input and mode should I use to get the intended high resolution stereo sound?

Thanks in advance for your recomendations.

 

[John Kotches]

If you select the stereo tracks, you should get stereo out of the Front L/R. I don't recall if the RP-91 also has stereo outputs, if it does it'll be duplicated there.

So you need do nothing to get correct playback of stereo DVD-A content.

Regards,

 

[KeithH]

John, the Panasonic DVD-RP91 has dedicated stereo analog outputs, but as you said, they need not be used if the 5.1-channel outputs are already being used for playback of surround-sound tracks. The caveat is that some feel the stereo analog outputs afford higher-resolution playback of stereo material in some cases. For example, some have said that it is better to use the stereo analog outputs on multi-channel SACD players for playback of CDs and stereo SACDs instead of the front left and right outputs within the 5.1-channel outputs. I have not heard of people making similar observations with DVD-Audio players, but I suppose it is possible. On a related note, the Sony SCD-XA777ES SACD player requires you to use the stereo analog outputs for playback of stereo material.

 

[John Kotches]

Keith,
That's just plain stupid design on Sony's part, frankly. Eight Analog ICs to hook up the player fully? How much of a cut are they getting from the cable manufacturers
Regards,

 

[RicP]

That's just plain stupid design on Sony's part, frankly

Not really. It's actually pretty smart, taking advantage of the multiple DAC's in the XA777ES to deliver the best possible stereo sound.

Stupid? I think not.

 

[John Kotches]

Ric,
I have no problem with the DACs, it's the routing of the signal
Regards,

 

[Philip Hamm]

Not really. It's actually pretty smart, taking advantage of the multiple DAC's in the XA777ES to deliver the best possible stereo sound.

Stupid? I think not.

Are you kidding me? Designing so that better quality audio in stereo mode comes through the stereo outs than the multichannel is not only stupid, it's inexcusable. What are they compromising on the multichannel outs?

 

[John Tillman]

I've got two jpeg's I was going to post. One is the back panel of the RP-91, one is the back panel of the C555ES.

Unfortunately, I'm clueless as to how to post them.

What they show, is that they both have analog 6-channel outs, plus analog 2-channel outs.

Now, I have no desire to defend Sony here but it seems to me that both machines are doing the same thing.

It also seems that people have different thoughts as to the proper way to cable for 2-channel SACD or DVD-A tracks.

I think everyone knows what to do with the 6-channel analog outs... The question seems to be, why have these OEM's also included the 2-channel analog outs? And, what's the problem with simply using the L/R fronts of the 6-channel outs when listening to 2-channel tracks?

 

[Michael_T]

The question seems to be, why have these OEM's also included the 2-channel analog outs? And, what's the problem with simply using the L/R fronts of the 6-channel outs when listening to 2-channel tracks?

The 2-channel analog outs might be there for convenience, or for the person who wants to connect his unit to more than one amplifier. In this case he can use the 5.1 outputs to hook to his dedicated home theater - and use the stereo outputs to hook to an alternate dedicated stereo system. Ask KeithH this question, since this is exactly how he hooks up alot of his surround/stereo equipment, seeing that he has both a HT set-up and a dedicated high quality stereo system.

And there is no problem whatsoever with using the L/R fronts of the 6-channel outs when listening to 2-channel tracks. This is what I do when listening to the stereo mixes on DVD-A.

I am sure if the manufacturers left off the stereo outputs, you would have other people crying foul - since this has become more or less a standard on any stereo audio equipment nowadays.

On the other hand, if the addition of all the output streams compromised overall sound quality I would say it is a bad thing - but as it stands it is merely a convience (in most cases) that has no negative effect.

 

[Philip Hamm]

Now, I have no desire to defend Sony here but it seems to me that both machines are doing the same thing.

But what John's pointing out is that on the Sony, stereo signals sound better through the L/R stereo analog outs than they do from the front L/R jacks on the 5.1 channel analog out. This is ridiculous IMO. Both should sound idenitcal. That's how my DVD-A10 works.
The inclusion of the stereo outputs is for compatability. I believe L/R audio output is part of the DVD hardwre spec, and is standard.

 

[John Kotches]

John T:
It would appear that you don't understand the true nature of my complaint.
On the Sony SCD-XA777ES the output of a Stereo SACD is only available on the Stereo outputs. The left/right output of a multi-channel SACD is only available on the 5.1 outputs.
So to listen to Stereo And Multi-Channel discs requires the use of 8 cables.
The Panasonic RP-91 outputs the Left/Right channels on both the Stereo outputs and the 5.1 outputs at all times.
Now do you understand why I feel this is a stupid design from an ergonomic point of view?
Regards,

 

[Philip Hamm]

So to listen to Stereo And Multi-Channel discs requires the use of 8 cables.

At least it's not quite as bad as I thought.
What do you do with a HT receiver that only does full analog pass-through on the 5.1 channel in?

 

[RicP]

If everyone actually understood why Sony implemented it this way, it would be a little simpler.
The Sony XA777ES has six (6) Hi Resolution DAC's. When in Multi-Channel mode, it assigns one DAC to each channel, and the circuit board is wired that way. In Stereo, the Sony takes advantage of the multiple DAC's by using three (3) per channel, providing a very hi-resolution output, however this is wired to the Stereo Analog outs and not the multi-channel L&R outs. If you want the best fidelity, then you're ecstatic that they went this route...if all youcare about is convenience, then perhps you're not so happy. Sony did put in a 2-Ch+Sub mode where you can use the L&R Multi-Channel outs + the Sub for Stereo listening, so in that case you only need to use 6 interconnects for both Stereo and Multichannel.
The Panasonic RP-91 is a completely different machine, and there is really no comparison here. The Panny uses the same DAC's for multi-channel and Stereo, it doesn't have multiple DAC's and therefore has no ability to utilize them for a higher quality stereo signal.
Hope that clears some of the misconceptions up.

 

[John Tillman]

John K:

You are correct, I didn't read the thread properly. Sorry if my comments caused confusion.

 

[Philip Hamm]

If everyone actually understood why Sony implemented it this way, it would be a little simpler.

The Sony XA777ES has six (6) Hi Resolution DAC's. When in Multi-Channel mode, it assigns one DAC to each channel, and the circuit board is wired that way. In Stereo, the Sony takes advantage of the multiple DAC's by using three (3) per channel, providing a very hi-resolution output, however this is wired to the Stereo Analog outs and not the multi-channel L&R outs. If you want the best fidelity, then you're ecstatic that they went this route...if all youcare about is convenience, then perhps you're not so happy. Sony did put in a 2-Ch+Sub mode where you can use the L&R Multi-Channel outs + the Sub for Stereo listening, so in that case you only need to use 6 interconnects for both Stereo and Multichannel.

The Panasonic RP-91 is a completely different machine, and there is really no comparison here. The Panny uses the same DAC's for multi-channel and Stereo, it doesn't have multiple DAC's and therefore has no ability to utilize them for a higher quality stereo signal.

Hope that clears some of the misconceptions up.

That doesn't clear anything up at all. There's still no good reason that they don't implement circuits to send the high quality L/R output from all those DACs to the L/R output on the 5.1 output concurrently. It would be trivial to design these circuits to split the high-res signal in the analog domain regardless of the DAC implementation.

It's just sloppy engineering, there's no excuse for it. What do you do with a preamp/receiver with analog pass-through on only the 5.1 inputs (most units)? This is similar to the bass management and time management problems that still plague both DVD-A and SACD.

 

[John Kotches]

Ric,

I understand that they're using the 6 DAC channels in a quasi-balanced mode.

It has nothing to do with signal routing.

There should be no audible degradation by routing to both, heck they're already doing that, if they allow the use of a subwoofer for 2+1 playback.

Regards,

 

[RicP]

Quote:

The XA777ES has bass management in addition to channel level balance. While not exactly the same thing as time delay, it accomplishes essentially the same thing by allowing you to balance the signal to each of your speakers in a MC setup.

 

[John Kotches]

Ric,

Level calibration and bass management are not the same as time delay.

Time delay accounts for the differences in displacement from the primary listening position, not the differences in SPL for varying sensitivities and distances, and not for routing bass as required to work around limitations in real-wrold implementations. Every 1' of differential from equidistant means approximately 1 millisecond of delay required to keep time and phase relationships correct.

It should be no major task for a "flagship" product to do signal routing. There already exists a signal path, so routing across both outputs is a fait accompli.

Regards,

 

[RicP]

the same thing

emphasis mine, perhaps I should have said "au fond."
I know what time delay management is John, but thanks for the 101 primer.
Regardless of the nitpicking, the XA777ES certainly gives you more options than a DVD-A player right now, and certainly addresses the issue of bass management. And as a Stereo player, which is what it will be used for 90% of the time it's damn near perfect.

 

[Philip Hamm]

It should be no major task for a "flagship" product to do signal routing. There already exists a signal path, so routing across both outputs is a fait accompli.

Totally agree. Please, Ric, explain again the reason this signal shouldn't be routed to both outputs at the same time. Exactly how is it going to affect quality to route the signal to both outputs, which is 100% logical and can easily be done transparrently and has absolutely nothing to do with how the signal is generated? Why are you defending this oversight? I don't understand.