anyone compare HD DD w/ DVD to 1.3a receiver in?

This is an interesting topic relevant to what I'm going through now. Though there are many HDMI 1.3 receivers on the market, only few produce good sound quality IMHO, and it seems most of the HDMI pre/pros short of $3k have their quirks and problems (i.e. popping noises when switching inputs).

There are 2 options. 1: Get a good HDMI receiver and a cheaper digital player. 2: Get an older high quality preamp for the same price, but a more costly analog player.

In my case, after being unsatisfied with the NAD T175, I'm getting a Proceed AVP2+6 and anticipate using it with a Panasonic DMP-BD55K, or the new Oppo player, should it come out in time.

Are you suggesting that passing a digital stream HDMI into the pre/pro/receiver should consistently produce significantly higher quality sound than letting the player decode and do analog conversion? If so, I have reason to be concerned... Although, I can't see where the difference is besides the DAC and THX processing (which I rarely use).

Well, I'm not at my house right now, and unfortunately won't be for another month. But I can't wait to get back there and report the results. I'm not too worried about 2-channel audio, since I could still use an optical to my Squeezebox. Supposing multichannel PCM and high resolution formats, I am merely speculating right now as to what could possibly cause a difference:

1. DAC - That is a given.

2. Analog stage - In most pre/pro's or receivers, an ADC would be necessary for bass management, etc., before the final DAC to speakers. If the pre/pro allows analog passthrough, this shouldn't be a problem. I can couple that with an analog bass management/crossover system.

3. THX Processing/DSP's - In my experience there's a tradeoff of imaging for dynamics. I wouldn't mind leaving this off.

4. Room correction - I couldn't tell exactly what Audyssey was doing. It made my already bright Monitor Audio speakers brighter, and changed the soundstage a bit. Another one with tradeoff's.

5. DD/DTS Decoding - I think most experts agree, especially with the lossless formats, that it doesn't matter which component decodes this.

I can also only assume what Kal heard was inferior analog stage in his processors, based on his comments. If the Oppo/Anthem sounds better than Oppo/Integra analog, and this is using the same player DAC's and processing, then the only difference is what's after. Please note this is only my opinion and I'm not trying to imply I know more than Kal.

Enough speculating, though! I, too, would like to hear from anyone with actual experience. I've been struggling with this decision for months now and eventually settled with going the analog route, partially from a financial standpoint.

I did not mean for you to take this so personally, Iplaynaked. I note your experiences, respectfully, but let's talk about "5. DD/DTS Decoding" for a bit, independently of all previously mentioned variables. That is, assuming all DAC's were equal, no additional THX processing applied, etc., I am merely stating that I don't logically see how there could be any difference where the formats are decoded, using DD/DTS supplied algorithms. Especially in this day and age when I could assume all processors should be perfectly capable of decoding lossy formats without fault. That may be debatable (although to a night and day difference??).

Now on the point of DAC's, I agree. DAC's often are more capable in the receiver end, and I suggest that your esteemed reviewers might be hearing this and not the format decoding. Or it could be that the average Best Buy receiver and/or digital processors (like the Anthem) have relatively weak analog stages. And by the way, Nick, the source dictates the sampling rates; pre/pros could upsample after they decode bitstream to PCM.

It's not like I have a problem with digital, though, really. What gets me into using analog, even today, is a little problem I have to HDCP (content protection with HDMI). Unfortunately, since HDMI is relatively new technology, especially to "audiophile" products, there still needs much ironing out of handshaking problems, and relays, which introduces pops in some products, in my experience. My main reason for considering analog connects is so I could get 7.1 lossless out of the player, and into an old fashioned, proven reliable, pre/pro. When it comes to lossy DD/DTS, I could just use s/pdif or optical, but then I would have redundant connections (analog for blu-ray, digital for dvd's), wouldn't I? It makes sense to use only one or the other, only with digital besides HDMI, you cannot transport lossless thanks to content protection!

My only other reason, besides faulty HDMI products, is it makes sense financially! I'd like to clarify that when Blindjim says analog audio increases costs "eight times or even six times more just for audio", he is presumably talking about the cost of the cable, which is dimes on the dollar compared to the cost of the pre/pro and the player. The options you have nowadays are:

1. Buy an HDMI receiver used or new and have it depreciate in value 50-70% in the next 5 years, and a good, cheap, player. Upgrade said receiver when new formats come out.

2. Buy an already depreciated analog receiver that might have been SOTA a couple years ago, and a good player that supports analog connections for $500-700, like the new Oppo. Upgrade only the player when new formats come out.

Cable costs are a one-time affair. A quality cable can be used for lifetime.

I should add that I was very interested in the Cary 11A, but can't afford $3.5k at this point. I'll probably pick one up later when it starts showing on Audiogon.