2. home-theater
  3. 1297605852

Digital output or Analog output from Blu Ray playe


If you intend only to use the HDMI, component and/or optical & coaxial audio outputs, and NOT it’s analog outputs in conjunction with your HT receiver or PROC/PREAMP, should it matter then about the players digital to analog conversion abilities?

For ex. The New Oppo BDP 95 touts a better build power supply, and a reputedly vastly better set of audio DACs, over it’s sibling/brethren BDP 93. Otherwise, they are the same box.

If only digital interfaces are then used on either device, the owner of the more expensive BDP 95 is losing out, right? Or…. There’s that added $500 purchase price, and the cost for at least one pr of analog ICs to actually realize the full benny’s of the mo pricey 95…. RIGHT?
blindjim

Showing 3 responses by blindjim

blindjim OP
3,092 posts
 
Cmalak

Thanks much... sort of figured it that way, just checking. $500 is $500, or used to be a little while ago!

half a dime can go a long ways towards another better stand alone DAC too.

Almarg

Ooops. Got carried away there for a mo'. I was pointing towards the audio section as you surmised.

I like the idea of the DACs being used by Oppo in the '95. They're boasting some strong numbers. 32 bit... 135db dynamic range.. and ultra quiet. Should support a quite vivid audio image, placing the user exceptionally close to the music. Though the refinement and aaplomb would be a sum of the balance of the downstream parts as well... not simply the DACs in use. But it does smack of an ability to possess remarkable transparency.... depending.

The other thing that made me curious is how differing transports.... connected to differing DACs via a DIGITAL interface, will definitely yield a different sound. The actual interface being used therein too affects the resultant sound about as much as the type of connection in play.

So there's that aspect of digital to digital feeding as well.
blindjim OP
3,092 posts
 
Jwm

they're thking that long now to deliver?

I decided to go with the 93 vs. the 95 due to the way I'll use the interfaces... just HDMI... and the cost diffs between the two.

To realize the added benny's of the 95 I'd have to use the RCA/XLR outs. I might, but most likely I'll go all HDMI.

I'm wondering too now, if both HDMI outs are in use, is there also a way to sync the audio and video between them?

I saw that as another reason why not to use both HDMI outs for replay of the same content.

I should think that even via HDMI out, the 95 ought to sound a tad better audio wise, as it's improved upon power sup should show itself somewhat in that situation.
blindjim OP
3,092 posts
 

Bacardi

I'm not so sure that would improve anything.... other than tie up two cables instead of one.

I've done something along those lines by using the HDMI for video only, and the coax for sound. the diff was so marginal as to not be a concern... and it tied up two cables. The coax being a very expensive one.

the notion I got on the 93 & 95's twin HDMI outs is for use in separate zones, or as separate incidents, or just differing displays.

Of course, who knows... maybe twin HDMI cables can help. I'd simply bet aginst it... all things being equal.
More to discover