Integra Research RDC-7 Home Theater Processor

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>Greetings everyone,

We are pleased to announce that Audioholics has completed our detailed review of the Integra Research RDC-7 Home Theater Processor.

Check out the review and as always, we look forward to your comments.

Integra Research RDC-7 review</font>

 

[aarond]

<font color='#000000'>Did i miss something? i couldn't seem to find the list price in the article</font>

 

[Rob Babcock]

<font color='#000000'>I thought it was just me!

</font>

 

[Eric]

<font color='#000000'>I'm seeing a price of from $3,600.00 to $4,500.00. Bit beyond my reach! &nbsp;

</font>

 

[PaulF]

<font color='#000000'>Steve,

I have a couple of questions.

1. How accurate is that SPL level meter from Radio Shack? It's probably an averaging type but I'm just wondering about its own absolute accuracy.

2. I'm a little confused by your surprise on how the PLII handled the center and surround channels of the movies and concerts you watched. It's most likely the PCM signals were Dolby Surround encoded which would account for why the center seemed so discrete (cause it probably was). Also DD 2.0 is a digital version of Dolby Surround which again contains L,C,R and S. Or did I miss the point?

Paul</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>Greetings,

I did add the price of the unit to the front page of the article.  It retails for $4,500.

As for Paul's comments regarding PLII, I've listened to both, Dolby Digital 2.0 and non-Dolby Digital sources primarily from DirecTV satellite.  Firstly, my understanding is Dolby Digital 2.0 is that it is not discrete with respect to the center and rears, or it would be Dolby Digital 5.1.  Many shows are broadcasted in Dolby Digital 5.1 on satellite as well, but the processor identifies this signal and does not allow you to use PLII.

Secondly, the separation in PLII was equally as good with non-Dolby Digital sources.  I've heard other processors/receivers in this mode, and they did not offer near the separation as did the RDC-7.

Lastly, I'm using a RadioShack Sound Level Meter but it does not have a model number.  It has an analog level meter, and I have to imagine it's accurate within 1/2 dB.  It's enough to at least be able to measure the difference we noticed.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>I own the Integra Research RDC-7 and I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment. &nbsp;Interestingly enough, I also own an Aragon 8008X5 power amp reviewed in one of your archive articles. &nbsp;I am one happy camper. &nbsp;You indicated that the processor did not allow you to store different speaker level settings in the multichannel mode because it only included one set of controlls in the menu. &nbsp;You also mentioned using the &quot;on the fly&quot; settings to temporarily, change the speaker levels. &nbsp;

Well, I've found that I can set custom speaker level adjustments in the multi-channel mode with the &quot;on the fly &quot; buttons located at the bottom of the remote. &nbsp;They are stored and memorized in the analog/multichannel domain regardless of what's in the speaker level settings programed in the menu. &nbsp;

In addition there are separate tone controls (Bass &amp; Treble) for each source input located in the OSD menu. &nbsp; Maybe you missed it, but it works very well. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;

</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>To MBRiley,

Thanks for your input.  It's comments like these that help us to update our articles.  We can't always catch everything.  

You are 100% correct about the On-The-Fly adjustments for multi-channel input speaker level volumes.  They are stored and unique to multi-channel input, and do not effect the stored settings or the On-The-Fly settings for the other inputs.  Note: NOT EVEN Integra Research picked up on this!  

As for the bass and treble tone controls once again, you are correct.  I did not realize the unit allows you to store bass and treble settings for each digital input.  The manual does no justice in explaining this feature either.

I can't thank you enough for this info, and thanks for being positive about it. &nbsp;In the past, others have presented information like this by bashing us! &nbsp;

The article has been updated and I gave you credit on page 5 and page 8.

Thanks again!</font>

 

[PaulF]

<font color='#000000'>Steve,

I should have more accurately said that the Dolby Digital 2.0 encoder will preserve the surround encoding if it is already present. Thus a DD 2.0 soundtrack may or may not have surround sound, but again my guess is that you might have been listening to some content that was encoded with surround information.

Is there any way of telling from the receiver what format signal is being receiver? I know I struggle with this on my Yamaha all the time.</font>

 

[Audioholics]

<font color='#000080'>Because of the very nature of how it is encoded, I doubt this would be possile without a high degree of false positives.</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>The unit displays if the signal is Dolby Digital 2.0 and/or if the signal is Dolby Digital 5.1.

Once again, I can tell the difference between signals and what I listened to when reviewing the PLII mode simply did not have discrete center and rear channels even with a Dolby Digital 2.0 source.

I checked out the Dolby Labs internet site to see what the specifications are for Dolby Digital 2.0, which is actually designated officially as 2/0.  It is considered a Dolby Digital Stereo mode and as far as I can tell, it does NOT have discrete signals for center and rears.

The following passage is an excerpt from their site.

&quot;A 384/448 kbps data rate can be used for stereo. All Dolby® Digital decoders support up to at least 448 kbps (DVD and DVB max spec) data rate irrespective of the number of channels encoded within the Dolby Digital data stream. The final data rate used is a production choice depending on many factors, including number of audio tracks, video data rates, and available space for the audio on a DVD or within the transmission stream, among others. While 192 kbps is a common rate for the production of 2/0 (stereo) Dolby Digital data streams, there is nothing preventing the use of higher data rates, if desired.&quot;


As you can see from the above passage, there is no mention of discrete channels.  It seems the difference between a standard signal and a Dolby Digital 2/0 signal is the data rate.

In order to clarify this issue, I sent an e-mail to the Dolby Labs technical department. &nbsp;I will include their response in this forum discussion when received.</font>

 

[aarond]

<font color='#000000'>ok guys ,

newbie here so don't beat me up. this goes to the whole seperates v receiver
i own an entry level $1k denon recvr avr3803 it has up conversion and on screen display in component video. and a really good processor for the price. if i was going to upgrade what would make me want to spend $4500 on this instead of $4k on either the 5803 or rx-z9. if you have an hdtv you do not want to be switching inputs just to see your on screen display</font>

 

[steve]

<font color='#000000'>Aarond,

These are valid points.  Keep in mind that there are many who are total advocates for separates for some very valid reasons.  The biggest advantages with separates is having different power supplies for the processor and the amplifier.  By removing the amplifier section, it can help improve the Signal-to-Noise, although there are several &quot;high-end&quot; processors that are actually noiser than receivers.  Go figure.  

Denon has definately raised the bar now with the releases of the AVR-3803 and AVR-5803 offerings.  Both are great products, as Gene reviewed in his article specifically on the 5803. Denon AVR-5803 Review 

Other manufacturers have some catching up to do in order to remain competitive.

The article is tailored toward those looking toward separates, and on that, we feel the RDC-7 is by far, one of the best processors currently on the market in this price range, at least from what we've seen, especially compared to several &quot;high-end&quot; &quot;American&quot; products such as the Sunfire Theater Grand III.</font>

 

[Rob Babcock]

<font color='#000000'>One reason people prefer separates is the culture of the products. &nbsp;For whatever reason, the idea has been instilled in us that greater specialization always yeilds better performance. &nbsp;This is not always the case. &nbsp;But, even as we learn more, some biases are hard to break.

If someone tells me that since a Casio watch keeps better time than a Rolex, no one should buy a Rolex, I wouldn't necessarily agree. &nbsp;While pride and vanity aren't technical reasons for a purchase, they are valid ones: &nbsp;it's your money.

If I had all the money I'd likely buy a Lexicon MC-12 or an Uber-Processor from Meridian. &nbsp;I guess it's just conditioning. &nbsp;But if I could afford the 5803, I'd feel no real need to go any higher (although I'd still dream...).</font>

 

[PaulF]

<font color='#000000'>Hawke, couldn't have said it better myself.


As for receivers vs separates. Yet another article that stimulates this discussion. Many have seen me post in support of receivers. However &nbsp;Steve's article clearly shows that the RDC-7 in the the same league as the best receivers. One thing that tends to get overlooked is natural bunny hop progression of features and specs. At the top end, each new generation often adds new features and better performance.

You can't buy the Z9 yet, that's how new it is. When was the RDC-7 released, or at least the last hardware/software update?

Perhaps to be fair to all components reviewed the market release date should be included as part of the review.

As for DD 2.0 or 2/0, if you're interested in whether it contains Surround or not. You may refer to the following links.

Dolby Surround in the Age of Dolby Digital

Please note the second (block) diagram showing the encoding process.

DP567 Two-Channel Dolby Digital Encoder

The description of this Dolby Digital encoder contains the following.

&quot;In its stereo mode, the DP567 preserves the matrix encoding on Dolby Surround input signals&quot;.

Paul</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Rob;

You raise very valid points. People don't always buy products based solely on performance. &nbsp;There is something to be said about product appeal, brand name recognition, appearances, etc.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Steve;

Read with interest your review of the Integra research pre/pro. About 8 months ago I auditioned a full Integra Research set-up with their CD/DVD player, and the BAT designed 7 channel amp. I really don't know if the processor you tested is an upgrade from the one I auditioned, but by a long shot, it was the best Home Theater I've ever listened to. Absolutely stunning! Mark Levinson, Krell, Theta, there is a new player on the block!

Few people are aware of the sound quality of this equipment, that's because few know about the brand, and most audiophiles have no &nbsp;IR dealers anywhere near their neighbourhoods. I've listened to many a hi-end system since I've been involved in this hobby (since 1980) and with regards to a multi-channel system I haven't heard of anything that sounds as good as this equipment. My Yamaha DSP-A1 is simply Mickey Mouse stuff in comparison.

By-the-way, for a 30- something year old, you have excellent taste in music. Back in my younger years (I'm 47) I was a progressive -rock addict. I see that YES is among your selection, as well as a latter generation of progressive rockers (Marillion). Loved Steely Dan since their debut album and since now I mostly listen to New Age and Modern Jazz (in Adelphia's music channels, it is called &quot;Smooth Jazz}&quot your choice of Larry and Lee is excellent. Holly Cole, while not my favorite genre, is &quot;de rigour&quot; for audiophile auditioning.

Congratulations on your website!

very best,

Jaime

Puerto Rico, USA.</font>

 

[Jaycan]

<font color='#000000'>Thanks for an excellent review! If I were hunting for separates I would definitely want to compare this component to the Anthem AVM 20 v.2, which not only is approx $1000.00 cheaper, but has comprehensive bass management and a history of first rate customer support, including software and DSP board upgrades. These 2 would be great to compare side by side, since I've read that the anthem's sound borders on audiophile transparency.</font>

 

[gene]

<font color='#000000'>Jaycan;

It is funny that you mention the Anthem. &nbsp;We have requested a review sample of their latest. &nbsp;It looks like a HUGE improvement over their original AVM2 which we were not impressed with. &nbsp;In fact, the AVR20 looking like one of the most flexible HT Processors on the market in its price class. &nbsp;I will update everyone when we have word on a sample delivery.</font>

 

[Guest]

<font color='#000000'>Gene,

Any chance of getting a Halo C2 in for review?

-Brian</font>