Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Denon receiver as processor

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
January 20, 2005 3:49:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Although I intended to buy a B&K Reference 50 to use with my new power amp I
have received several suggestions that I buy a Denon 3805 and use it to
drive the amp.

The logic seems to be that the receiver which is more then a thousand
dollars cheaper, has more powerful processing (auto room equalization) and
excellent DAC's.

I am very interested in the room equalization feature and as far as I know
the only dedicated processor that features it is the $10,000+ Lexicon.

My thought would be to get a Denon and replace it with a stand alone piece
later.

Any comments....?

Richard Smith
January 20, 2005 7:22:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Christine Allison wrote:
> Although I intended to buy a B&K Reference 50 to use with my new power amp I
> have received several suggestions that I buy a Denon 3805 and use it to
> drive the amp.
>
> The logic seems to be that the receiver which is more then a thousand
> dollars cheaper, has more powerful processing (auto room equalization) and
> excellent DAC's.
>
> I am very interested in the room equalization feature and as far as I know
> the only dedicated processor that features it is the $10,000+ Lexicon.
>
> My thought would be to get a Denon and replace it with a stand alone piece
> later.
>
> Any comments....?
>
> Richard Smith

Receivers are great preamp-processors. They usually have the latest
technologies, because of the much fiercer competition. Another receiver
to consider is the Harman Kardon AVR-635, incorporating the latest TI
DSP chip. I have read glowing reviews on the auto
equalization/room-correction capabilities of the 635; you may want to
check out the respective forum at avsforum.com for details. The 635 can
be bought for less than $900, which makes it an absolute bargain
compared to pre-pro's. Plus you can always use it to power the
surrounds. And it's nice to convert all video sources to component
outputs to reduce interconnections.
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 3:37:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

> Although I intended to buy a B&K Reference 50 to use with my new power amp I
> have received several suggestions that I buy a Denon 3805 and use it to
> drive the amp.
>
> The logic seems to be that the receiver which is more then a thousand
> dollars cheaper, has more powerful processing (auto room equalization) and
> excellent DAC's.
>
> I am very interested in the room equalization feature and as far as I know
> the only dedicated processor that features it is the $10,000+ Lexicon.
>
> My thought would be to get a Denon and replace it with a stand alone piece
> later.

Sounds intriguing. I will offer some well-worn advice: buy
it from an outfit that offers a 30-day return policy. That
way, you can see how you like it in your own system. Using the
piece will tell you much more than any suggestions anyone else
could make.


Mike Prager
North Carolina, USA
Related resources
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 7:31:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

I'm not convinced that automatic room equalization is useful. I
purchased a Rane 1/3 octave equalizer and spectrum analyzer. When I try
to "equalize" the room using the analyzer, the results are awful - much
too bright. This could be because my speakers (DBX Soundfield One) are
not adaptable to this type of measurement but I had to just try to
eliminate a few peaks and balance the bass. The end result was good.


---MIKE---
Anonymous
January 21, 2005 10:33:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

twinmountain@webtv.net (---MIKE---) wrote:


>I'm not convinced that automatic room equalization is useful. I
>purchased a Rane 1/3 octave equalizer and spectrum analyzer. When I try
>to "equalize" the room using the analyzer, the results are awful - much
>too bright. This could be because my speakers (DBX Soundfield One) are
>not adaptable to this type of measurement but I had to just try to
>eliminate a few peaks and balance the bass. The end result was good.
>
>
> ---MIKE---

Many people forget that equalization for far field response is not "flat" but
needs the downsloping shape (1-1.5 dB per octave in rooms; 3 dB in cars.) The
reason for this is not at all intuitive but you can verify the need for
yourself by equalizing a speaker for flat response in the near field (or
anechoic) and then re-measurig the speaker in the far field. You'll see that
the flat near field response has a downslope in the far field.
January 22, 2005 12:39:52 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Nousaine wrote:

> twinmountain@webtv.net (---MIKE---) wrote:
>
>
>>I'm not convinced that automatic room equalization is useful. I
>>purchased a Rane 1/3 octave equalizer and spectrum analyzer. When I try
>>to "equalize" the room using the analyzer, the results are awful - much
>>too bright. This could be because my speakers (DBX Soundfield One) are
>>not adaptable to this type of measurement but I had to just try to
>>eliminate a few peaks and balance the bass. The end result was good.
>>
>>
>> ---MIKE---
>
> Many people forget that equalization for far field response is not "flat" but
> needs the downsloping shape (1-1.5 dB per octave in rooms; 3 dB in cars.) The
> reason for this is not at all intuitive but you can verify the need for
> yourself by equalizing a speaker for flat response in the near field (or
> anechoic) and then re-measurig the speaker in the far field. You'll see that
> the flat near field response has a downslope in the far field.

The HK-AVR635 actually takes near-field and far-field measurements of
the front-stage (LCR) speakers into account when computing the proper
manipulations to the signals. In addition, it also automatically
calculates delays and cross-overs for all the channels, based on
measurements of time-domain responses. The process it uses is much, much
more complex than taking a microphone and try to flatten out the
response with a 1/3 band equalizer. It actually uses a set of parametric
equalizers for all the channels. The reviews so far are very positive,
especially in how the center-channel is much more clearer, and in how
the low-frequency response of the room is smoother.

Unfortunately, since the 6-channel input signals are not digitized,
those advantages are not available in the 6-channel direct mode, which
one would use for listening to SACD or DVD-A.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:18:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
> Nousaine wrote:

> > twinmountain@webtv.net (---MIKE---) wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I'm not convinced that automatic room equalization is useful. I
> >>purchased a Rane 1/3 octave equalizer and spectrum analyzer. When I try
> >>to "equalize" the room using the analyzer, the results are awful - much
> >>too bright. This could be because my speakers (DBX Soundfield One) are
> >>not adaptable to this type of measurement but I had to just try to
> >>eliminate a few peaks and balance the bass. The end result was good.
> >>
> >>
> >> ---MIKE---
> >
> > Many people forget that equalization for far field response is not "flat" but
> > needs the downsloping shape (1-1.5 dB per octave in rooms; 3 dB in cars.) The
> > reason for this is not at all intuitive but you can verify the need for
> > yourself by equalizing a speaker for flat response in the near field (or
> > anechoic) and then re-measurig the speaker in the far field. You'll see that
> > the flat near field response has a downslope in the far field.

> The HK-AVR635 actually takes near-field and far-field measurements of
> the front-stage (LCR) speakers into account when computing the proper
> manipulations to the signals.
> In addition, it also automatically
> calculates delays and cross-overs for all the channels, based on
> measurements of time-domain responses. The process it uses is much, much
> more complex than taking a microphone and try to flatten out the
> response with a 1/3 band equalizer. It actually uses a set of parametric
> equalizers for all the channels. The reviews so far are very positive,
> especially in how the center-channel is much more clearer, and in how
> the low-frequency response of the room is smoother.

> Unfortunately, since the 6-channel input signals are not digitized,
> those advantages are not available in the 6-channel direct mode, which
> one would use for listening to SACD or DVD-A.

Having great respect for Floyd Toole, and having heard great things about
this latest implementation of room compensation elsewhere, I'd love to
try the HK -- the deal killer for me, right now, is that it
doesn't have ilink, which would bring SACD and DVD-A into the DSP fold.
I'm really hoping they'll amend that in the next product cycle.



--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 7:24:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Mike Prager wrote:

> Sounds intriguing. I will offer some well-worn advice: buy
> it from an outfit that offers a 30-day return policy. That
> way, you can see how you like it in your own system. Using the
> piece will tell you much more than any suggestions anyone else
> could make.

I am considering the Pioneer 814. It has pre-out for all channels, so I
can use my big amps instead of theirs, and it has two component video
inputs for future HD work.

What I don't know is what sort of processing they have available for two
channel sources. Does anyone have a handle on whether this receiver does
surround processing competently for two channel sources?

Thanks,

Gary Eickmeier
January 22, 2005 10:01:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> Mike Prager wrote:
>
>> Sounds intriguing. I will offer some well-worn advice: buy
>> it from an outfit that offers a 30-day return policy. That
>> way, you can see how you like it in your own system. Using the
>> piece will tell you much more than any suggestions anyone else
>> could make.
>
> I am considering the Pioneer 814. It has pre-out for all channels, so I
> can use my big amps instead of theirs, and it has two component video
> inputs for future HD work.
>
> What I don't know is what sort of processing they have available for two
> channel sources. Does anyone have a handle on whether this receiver does
> surround processing competently for two channel sources?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gary Eickmeier

The Pioneer 814 has DTS-Neo 6 and Prologic IIx. If you are interested in
listening to 2-channel sources in surround mode, I recommend Logic-7,
which is available in Harman Kardon products. From what I have heard,
Prologic IIx seems to wwork well, too.

I am also looking at AV receivers used as preamp-processors. The
must-have feature for me is the ability to increase the audio delay to
match the video, so as to avoid lip-synch problems. If you are planning
to upgrade to HDTV and flat-panel displays, that is a feature you might
want to consider.
Anonymous
January 22, 2005 11:04:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
> Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> > Mike Prager wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds intriguing. I will offer some well-worn advice: buy
> >> it from an outfit that offers a 30-day return policy. That
> >> way, you can see how you like it in your own system. Using the
> >> piece will tell you much more than any suggestions anyone else
> >> could make.
> >
> > I am considering the Pioneer 814. It has pre-out for all channels, so I
> > can use my big amps instead of theirs, and it has two component video
> > inputs for future HD work.
> >
> > What I don't know is what sort of processing they have available for two
> > channel sources. Does anyone have a handle on whether this receiver does
> > surround processing competently for two channel sources?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gary Eickmeier

> The Pioneer 814 has DTS-Neo 6 and Prologic IIx. If you are interested in
> listening to 2-channel sources in surround mode, I recommend Logic-7,
> which is available in Harman Kardon products. From what I have heard,
> Prologic IIx seems to wwork well, too.

AFAIK all the H/K AVRs offer DPL II as well as Logic 7 (and DTS Neo)



--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
January 25, 2005 3:18:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan ssully@panix.com wrote:


>Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
>> Gary Eickmeier wrote:
>> > Mike Prager wrote:
>> >
>> >> Sounds intriguing. I will offer some well-worn advice: buy
>> >> it from an outfit that offers a 30-day return policy. That
>> >> way, you can see how you like it in your own system. Using the
>> >> piece will tell you much more than any suggestions anyone else
>> >> could make.
>> >
>> > I am considering the Pioneer 814. It has pre-out for all channels, so I
>> > can use my big amps instead of theirs, and it has two component video
>> > inputs for future HD work.
>> >
>> > What I don't know is what sort of processing they have available for two
>> > channel sources. Does anyone have a handle on whether this receiver does
>> > surround processing competently for two channel sources?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Gary Eickmeier
>
>> The Pioneer 814 has DTS-Neo 6 and Prologic IIx. If you are interested in
>> listening to 2-channel sources in surround mode, I recommend Logic-7,
>> which is available in Harman Kardon products. From what I have heard,
>> Prologic IIx seems to wwork well, too.
>
>AFAIK all the H/K AVRs offer DPL II as well as Logic 7 (and DTS Neo)

This is true but the AVRs do not have the same degree of Logic 7 adjustability
that is inherent with the Lexicon processors. I say this because I have at
least one knowlegeable friend who thinks the accuracy of DPL II and Neo-6 is
better than Logic 7 in his receiver.
January 25, 2005 3:19:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

I have the Sony strda5000es. Its processor seems pretty good. It is an
ergonomic nightmare, especially for FM, but I have to (however grudgingly)
say that I don't hate it. When I first got it, I was trying to run my KEF
104s (left right stereo) with Gallo nucleus for center and surround and I
hated it. I have since gotten the KEF "egg" set with their subwoofer and
while I don't love it, I have stopped trying to sell it to anyone that
expresses even a little interest. I digress, sorry.

It has the aforementioned lip synch delay adjustment and it converts all
video inputs to whatever video output you specify. The DSP section actually
sounds pretty good converting DVD and cablebox digital audio. I have the
SACD/DVD-Audio inputs connected to my cheapo pioneer universal player (563?)
and I have to give its handling of analog a thumbs down when it come to bass
management.

"Chung" <chunglau@covad.net> wrote in message
news:csu7tu01umk@news2.newsguy.com...
> Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> > Mike Prager wrote:
> >
> >> Sounds intriguing. I will offer some well-worn advice: buy
> >> it from an outfit that offers a 30-day return policy. That
> >> way, you can see how you like it in your own system. Using the
> >> piece will tell you much more than any suggestions anyone else
> >> could make.
> >
> > I am considering the Pioneer 814. It has pre-out for all channels, so I
> > can use my big amps instead of theirs, and it has two component video
> > inputs for future HD work.
> >
> > What I don't know is what sort of processing they have available for two
> > channel sources. Does anyone have a handle on whether this receiver does
> > surround processing competently for two channel sources?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gary Eickmeier
>
> The Pioneer 814 has DTS-Neo 6 and Prologic IIx. If you are interested in
> listening to 2-channel sources in surround mode, I recommend Logic-7,
> which is available in Harman Kardon products. From what I have heard,
> Prologic IIx seems to wwork well, too.
>
> I am also looking at AV receivers used as preamp-processors. The
> must-have feature for me is the ability to increase the audio delay to
> match the video, so as to avoid lip-synch problems. If you are planning
> to upgrade to HDTV and flat-panel displays, that is a feature you might
> want to consider.
January 25, 2005 3:23:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:
>
>
> Having great respect for Floyd Toole, and having heard great things about
> this latest implementation of room compensation elsewhere, I'd love to
> try the HK -- the deal killer for me, right now, is that it
> doesn't have ilink, which would bring SACD and DVD-A into the DSP fold.
> I'm really hoping they'll amend that in the next product cycle.
>
>
>

Is iLink emerging as the digital connection standard for hi-rez? How
much do players with iLink outputs cost now? I wonder if manufacturers
have to pay any license fees to incorporate iLink.

I think if HK could provide digitization for the direct 6-channel inputs
so that DSP could be applied, that would be good enough for me.
January 25, 2005 5:25:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

jw wrote:
> I have the Sony strda5000es. Its processor seems pretty good. It is an
> ergonomic nightmare, especially for FM, but I have to (however grudgingly)
> say that I don't hate it. When I first got it, I was trying to run my KEF
> 104s (left right stereo) with Gallo nucleus for center and surround and I
> hated it. I have since gotten the KEF "egg" set with their subwoofer and
> while I don't love it, I have stopped trying to sell it to anyone that
> expresses even a little interest. I digress, sorry.
>
> It has the aforementioned lip synch delay adjustment and it converts all
> video inputs to whatever video output you specify. The DSP section actually
> sounds pretty good converting DVD and cablebox digital audio. I have the
> SACD/DVD-Audio inputs connected to my cheapo pioneer universal player (563?)
> and I have to give its handling of analog a thumbs down when it come to bass
> management.
>
>

I had the Sony DA5ES briefly, and the user interface was unwieldy. I
much prefer the Harman Kardon UI.

Receivers like the Denon 3805, Pioneer 56TXi, Yamaha 2500 and the HK 635
at the $700-$1K price range, have raised the bar subtantially: they
all have auto room/speaker equalization and channel delay adjustments. I
don't think I will buy a receiver without those features now.
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 3:27:34 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:
> >
> >
> > Having great respect for Floyd Toole, and having heard great things about
> > this latest implementation of room compensation elsewhere, I'd love to
> > try the HK -- the deal killer for me, right now, is that it
> > doesn't have ilink, which would bring SACD and DVD-A into the DSP fold.
> > I'm really hoping they'll amend that in the next product cycle.
> >
> >
> >

> Is iLink emerging as the digital connection standard for hi-rez? How
> much do players with iLink outputs cost now? I wonder if manufacturers
> have to pay any license fees to incorporate iLink.

> I think if HK could provide digitization for the direct 6-channel inputs
> so that DSP could be applied, that would be good enough for me.


Pioneer's ilink players start at $900 MSRP IIRC, while Yamaha has a model
coming ou soon at the $750 price point. That'll be the least expensive
one out there.



--


-S If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open
one, look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
January 27, 2005 3:27:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

> Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
>> Steven Sullivan wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Having great respect for Floyd Toole, and having heard great things about
>> > this latest implementation of room compensation elsewhere, I'd love to
>> > try the HK -- the deal killer for me, right now, is that it
>> > doesn't have ilink, which would bring SACD and DVD-A into the DSP fold.
>> > I'm really hoping they'll amend that in the next product cycle.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>> Is iLink emerging as the digital connection standard for hi-rez? How
>> much do players with iLink outputs cost now? I wonder if manufacturers
>> have to pay any license fees to incorporate iLink.
>
>> I think if HK could provide digitization for the direct 6-channel inputs
>> so that DSP could be applied, that would be good enough for me.
>
>
> Pioneer's ilink players start at $900 MSRP IIRC, while Yamaha has a model
> coming ou soon at the $750 price point. That'll be the least expensive
> one out there.
>

Does Sony sell any iLink model? Given that iLink (IEEE-1394)has been
generally heavily promoted by Sony, absence of Sony players with iLink
outputs is very conspicuous, and somewhat ominous.

>
>
> --
>
>
> -S If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open
> one, look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 3:49:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote:
> Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:

>> Is iLink emerging as the digital connection standard for hi-rez? How
>> much do players with iLink outputs cost now? I wonder if manufacturers
>> have to pay any license fees to incorporate iLink.

> Pioneer's ilink players start at $900 MSRP IIRC,

In Europe the VSX-2014i (1099 Euros list price) is the cheapest
model with i.LINK (if you see references to the VSX-1014 having
i.LINK, that was a typo in their web page). The other two models
are the VSA-AX10Ai-S and VSX-AX5i-S.

http://www.pioneer-eur.com/eur/product_overview.jsp?cat...

The American models with i.LINK seem to be the VSX-55TXi, VSX-56TXi and VSX-59TXi:

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,...
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,...
http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,...

According to froogle, the VSX-55TXi costs about $900, the VSX-56TXi $1000
and the VSX-59TXi $2500 (online prices).

> while Yamaha has a model coming ou soon at the $750 price point.
> That'll be the least expensive one out there.

I am suprised by that. The most recent models (Yamaha RX-V 1500
and Yamaha RX-V 2500) which cost about 900-1100 euros don't have
i.LINK. If Yamaha keeps the same release schedule of the last couple
of years, the next round of models should be the RX-V 460, 560, 660
and 760, probably in the next summer, and it would be a bit strange
for that range to get a feature that the higher range doesn't have.

Do you have any more information about that Yamaha model ?

Sony also has models with i.LINK, IIRC. Denon started with their own
link (it uses a RJ45 plug, but I don't know if it has anything to do
with Ethernet), but now has also models with i.LINK.

--
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/

..pt is Portugal| `Whom the gods love die young'-Menander (342-292 BC)
Europe | Villeneuve 50-82, Toivonen 56-86, Senna 60-94
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 4:21:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 27 Jan 2005 00:27:07 GMT, Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:

>Does Sony sell any iLink model? Given that iLink (IEEE-1394)has been
>generally heavily promoted by Sony, absence of Sony players with iLink
>outputs is very conspicuous, and somewhat ominous.

Sure they do. My CD-XA9000ES has it. May be others.

Kal
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 3:44:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:
> On 27 Jan 2005 00:27:07 GMT, Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:

> >Does Sony sell any iLink model? Given that iLink (IEEE-1394)has been
> >generally heavily promoted by Sony, absence of Sony players with iLink
> >outputs is very conspicuous, and somewhat ominous.

> Sure they do. My CD-XA9000ES has it. May be others.


They're pretty thin on the ground, from any manufacterer, Sony

included (Pioneer possibly excluded) -- aas of aaaugust 20004 as of august
2004:


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=41...
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 3:55:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro <rps@rena.mat.uc.pt> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote:
> > Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:

> >> Is iLink emerging as the digital connection standard for hi-rez? How
> >> much do players with iLink outputs cost now? I wonder if manufacturers
> >> have to pay any license fees to incorporate iLink.

> > Pioneer's ilink players start at $900 MSRP IIRC,

> In Europe the VSX-2014i (1099 Euros list price) is the cheapest
> model with i.LINK (if you see references to the VSX-1014 having
> i.LINK, that was a typo in their web page). The other two models
> are the VSA-AX10Ai-S and VSX-AX5i-S.


> http://www.pioneer-eur.com/eur/product_overview.jsp?cat...

> The American models with i.LINK seem to be the VSX-55TXi, VSX-56TXi and VSX-59TXi:

> http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,...
> http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,...
> http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/product/detail/0,...

> According to froogle, the VSX-55TXi costs about $900, the VSX-56TXi $1000
> and the VSX-59TXi $2500 (online prices).

Those are all AV receivers, not disc players. Btw, the DV47ai price I
quoted ($900) appears to be a street price; MSRP is $1200 US.


> > while Yamaha has a model coming ou soon at the $750 price point. > >
That'll be the least expensive one out there.



> I am suprised by that. The most recent models (Yamaha RX-V 1500 > and
Yamaha RX-V 2500) which cost about 900-1100 euros don't have > i.LINK. If
Yamaha keeps the same release schedule of the last couple > of years, the
next round of models should be the RX-V 460, 560, 660 > and 760, probably
in the next summer, and it would be a bit strange > for that range to get
a feature that the higher range doesn't have.

Again, I am referring to a player, not a receiver.


> Do you have any more information about that Yamaha model ?

See Yamaha's website, also reports from CEDIA.


> Sony also has models with i.LINK, IIRC.

as of Aug 2004, one player, one receiver (and of course the player only
does SACD, and not DVD-A)


> Denon started with their own > link (it uses a RJ45 plug, but I don't
know if it has anything to do > with Ethernet), but now has also models
with i.LINK.

But IIRC their digital outs only do DVD-A, but not SACD!

So far Pioneer seems to be the only ones who have players + AVRs that
will do it all (though I'd bet they convert DSD to PCM for any digital
processing).



--

-S If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open
one, look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 7:37:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Steven Sullivan wrote:

>>Denon started with their own > link (it uses a RJ45 plug, but I don't
>
> know if it has anything to do > with Ethernet), but now has also models
> with i.LINK.
>
> But IIRC their digital outs only do DVD-A, but not SACD!
>
> So far Pioneer seems to be the only ones who have players + AVRs that
> will do it all (though I'd bet they convert DSD to PCM for any digital
> processing).

OK, now I'm royally confused. I just bought this Pioneer VSX 814 because
it has two component inputs, for future High Def switching ability. Then
I meet a salesman going out the door, who tells me that this isn't the
ultimate Hi Def switching or input type. What I want, he goes on, is DMI
or HDMI, a new digital type connection that none of their current
receivers even has. Further, he says, the local cable company's digital
box doesn't have component out, just HDMI (I think).

So what do I not understand about all this? Is component switching
sufficient for at least a few more years, into the hi def era, or not?
What is this i-link you're all talking about?

Gary Eickmeier
January 30, 2005 10:29:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Gary Eickmeier wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:
>
>>>Denon started with their own > link (it uses a RJ45 plug, but I don't
>>
>> know if it has anything to do > with Ethernet), but now has also models
>> with i.LINK.
>>
>> But IIRC their digital outs only do DVD-A, but not SACD!
>>
>> So far Pioneer seems to be the only ones who have players + AVRs that
>> will do it all (though I'd bet they convert DSD to PCM for any digital
>> processing).
>
> OK, now I'm royally confused. I just bought this Pioneer VSX 814 because
> it has two component inputs, for future High Def switching ability. Then
> I meet a salesman going out the door, who tells me that this isn't the
> ultimate Hi Def switching or input type. What I want, he goes on, is DMI
> or HDMI, a new digital type connection that none of their current
> receivers even has. Further, he says, the local cable company's digital
> box doesn't have component out, just HDMI (I think).
>
> So what do I not understand about all this? Is component switching
> sufficient for at least a few more years, into the hi def era, or not?
> What is this i-link you're all talking about?
>
> Gary Eickmeier

The confusion you have is that you are mixing video connections with
audio connections. The component switching is for video switching of
*analog* video signals. DVI or HDMI connections allow *digital* video
signals to be switched by the receiver. Certainly in the future it will
be desirable to switch video in the digital domain, but HD displays and
sources will support component inputs and outputs for a long time. In
some cases there is a noticeable difference between digital and analog
video connections.

The HDMI connection also supports digital audio connections, so there is
a real advantage of being able to connect both digital video and audio
using one cable. IIRC, receivers with HDMI switching are very rare, and
expensive. You might want to wait a while if that's what you really want
to do.

i.Link is a digital audio connection supported by some newer receivers
(such as some Pioneer Elite models starting at above $1K). I am not sure
how widely supported this connection is, the DVD/SACD/DVD-A players with
i.Link outputs are expensive, and there is a chance that HDMI will make
this connection unnecessary. The big advantage of digital audio
connections, of course, is that DSP operations, such as bass management,
can be performed in the digital domain prior to the final D-to-A
conversion. That eliminates a set of conversions in the signal path.

DVI is a digital video connection, and seems to be replaced by HDMI
(which carries both the digital video and audio signals) in the newer HD
displays.

Your Pioneer model is a basic receiver, but will switch component video.
You need about a 50 MHz bandwidth for those signals. It is also
perfectly OK to not depend on the receiver to switch video; most HD
displays have sufficent inputs to not require external switchers.

As I said earlier, it is really nice to have the audio delay feature.
The ability of the receiver to convert all video sources to components
is also desirable, as it simplifies the connection between receiver and
display. It is nice to have i.Link or some other high-rez digital audio
connection, but I would be happy if the receiver can digitize the
multi-channel analog audio signals to perform DSP functions. Good
automatic delay/equalization adjustment is also a great feature IMO. I
don't think HDMI/DVI switching is that important for me, since my HD
display has a built-in HDTV tuner, so I only need one HDMI/DVI
connection for the upconversion DVD player.
Anonymous
February 1, 2005 3:23:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Gary Eickmeier <geickmei@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> Steven Sullivan wrote:

> >>Denon started with their own > link (it uses a RJ45 plug, but I don't
> >
> > know if it has anything to do > with Ethernet), but now has also models
> > with i.LINK.
> >
> > But IIRC their digital outs only do DVD-A, but not SACD!
> >
> > So far Pioneer seems to be the only ones who have players + AVRs that
> > will do it all (though I'd bet they convert DSD to PCM for any digital
> > processing).

> OK, now I'm royally confused. I just bought this Pioneer VSX 814 because
> it has two component inputs, for future High Def switching ability.

Component input/output (3 RCA-style jacks, R/G/B)
refers to analog video information transmission,
and doesn't necessarily imply high definition (though analog high-def
connections have to be component connections) -- it's been
available on TVs/DVD players since long before there was consumer
hi-def. Two other popular analog interfaces are S-video and
composite (a single RCA-type connector, usually yellow).



> Then
> I meet a salesman going out the door, who tells me that this isn't the
> ultimate Hi Def switching or input type. What I want, he goes on, is DMI

DVI -- a Digital Video Interface

> or HDMI, a new digital type connection that none of their current
> receivers even has. Further, he says, the local cable company's digital
> box doesn't have component out, just HDMI (I think).

> So what do I not understand about all this? Is component switching
> sufficient for at least a few more years, into the hi def era, or not?
> What is this i-link you're all talking about?


Again, Component connections are analog, and can be used for
hi-def video. ilink is digital,
a single connection that can carry multichannel hi-rez audio.
ilink has been around for some years, as a computer data
transmission interface (Firewire/IEEE13940.
DVI is a digital video-only interface that can handle
high-def video.
HDMI can handle high-def digital video *and* can also carry
hi-rez multichannel audio, though AFAIK no components
employing it for such combined purpose are yet available.

here;s a nice summary page:

http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/howto-dvi-hdmi.html




--

-S
If you're a nut and knock on enough doors, eventually someone will open one,
look at you and say, Messiah, we have waited for your arrival.
Anonymous
February 1, 2005 3:25:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Chung wrote:

> The confusion you have is that you are mixing video connections with
> audio connections. The component switching is for video switching of
> *analog* video signals. DVI or HDMI connections allow *digital* video
> signals to be switched by the receiver. Certainly in the future it will
> be desirable to switch video in the digital domain, but HD displays and
> sources will support component inputs and outputs for a long time. In
> some cases there is a noticeable difference between digital and analog
> video connections.
>
> The HDMI connection also supports digital audio connections, so there is
> a real advantage of being able to connect both digital video and audio
> using one cable. IIRC, receivers with HDMI switching are very rare, and
> expensive. You might want to wait a while if that's what you really want
> to do.
>
> i.Link is a digital audio connection supported by some newer receivers
> (such as some Pioneer Elite models starting at above $1K). I am not sure
> how widely supported this connection is, the DVD/SACD/DVD-A players with
> i.Link outputs are expensive, and there is a chance that HDMI will make
> this connection unnecessary. The big advantage of digital audio
> connections, of course, is that DSP operations, such as bass management,
> can be performed in the digital domain prior to the final D-to-A
> conversion. That eliminates a set of conversions in the signal path.
>
> DVI is a digital video connection, and seems to be replaced by HDMI
> (which carries both the digital video and audio signals) in the newer HD
> displays.
>
> Your Pioneer model is a basic receiver, but will switch component video.
> You need about a 50 MHz bandwidth for those signals. It is also
> perfectly OK to not depend on the receiver to switch video; most HD
> displays have sufficent inputs to not require external switchers.
>
> As I said earlier, it is really nice to have the audio delay feature.
> The ability of the receiver to convert all video sources to components
> is also desirable, as it simplifies the connection between receiver and
> display. It is nice to have i.Link or some other high-rez digital audio
> connection, but I would be happy if the receiver can digitize the
> multi-channel analog audio signals to perform DSP functions. Good
> automatic delay/equalization adjustment is also a great feature IMO. I
> don't think HDMI/DVI switching is that important for me, since my HD
> display has a built-in HDTV tuner, so I only need one HDMI/DVI
> connection for the upconversion DVD player.

Thank you very much. So the salesman was partly correct, but needlessly
alarming me. I'm sure my cable company's digital HD box will have
component output to the projector or receiver, but I will double check
with them tomorrow.

Gary Eickmeier
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 4:00:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Could someone please provide a brief explanation of "iLink" diginal
connection? - What it is, and what it does?

Thanks,
Jim Cate

Steven Sullivan wrote:
> Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro <rps@rena.mat.uc.pt> wrote:
>
>>Steven Sullivan <ssully@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Chung <chunglau@covad.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>>Is iLink emerging as the digital connection standard for hi-rez? How
>>>>much do players with iLink outputs cost now? I wonder if manufacturers
>>>>have to pay any license fees to incorporate iLink.

[quoted text deleted -- deb]
Anonymous
February 8, 2005 6:07:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Jim Cate <jimcate@pdq.net> wrote:
> Could someone please provide a brief explanation of "iLink" diginal
> connection? - What it is, and what it does?


The important thing to know is that it's a *digital* connection that can
pass stereo and multichannel SACD and DVD-Audio, in addition to CD and DVD-Video
sound, using just a single cable.
!