Receiver that doesn't process analog input

[ssmaudio]

Hi, I'm trying to set up a multi-channel rig with a receiver with analog 5.1 channel line inputs. I have a DAC that will connect to the receiver through the line inputs. I'm trying to find a receiver that won't do any further processing on the inputs; instead just send the analog inputs straight to the speakers. For example, some receivers will convert from the analog input to digital just for the volume control. Even the ones that say they have Pure Direct etc. does processing when you dig deeper. (Let alone converting to analog to digital for its room correction/bass management/etc. and then back to analog again.)

Please let me know if you know of any?
Thanks.

 

[lovinthehd]

Why does it matter?

PS with the information offered by most manufacturers in such regard, I'd think only someone like @PENG would be able to offer much and only by confirming with a review of the circuits.

 

[PENG]

Why does it matter?

PS with the information offered by most manufacturers in such regard, I'd think only someone like @PENG would be able to offer much and only by confirming with a review of the circuits.

I am quite sure the 2016 through 2019 Marantz SR6000/7000 series would fit his bill in pure direct mode.

 

[lovinthehd]

I am quite sure the 2016 through 2019 Marantz SR6000/7000 series would fit his bill in pure direct mode.

Curious, any other brand/model ranges you could offer in this respect? How much does it matter how the volume control works? Is setting of delay/level not using dsp?

 

[ssmaudio]

Hi, I'm trying to set up a multi-channel rig with a receiver with analog 5.1 channel line inputs. I have a DAC that will connect to the receiver through the line inputs. I'm trying to find a receiver that won't do any further processing on the inputs; instead just send the analog inputs straight to the speakers. For example, some receivers will convert from the analog input to digital just for the volume control. Even the ones that say they have Pure Direct etc. does processing when you dig deeper. (Let alone converting to analog to digital for its room correction/bass management/etc. and then back to analog again.)

Please let me know if you know of any?
Thanks.

The reason it matters (to me) is that I'm going to have my multi-ch DSD downloads (and SACD rips) go through an Exasound DAC which tries to reproduce the sound in its original fidelity and I don't want a receiver to post-process it and mess it up. (The signal is as good as the worst DSP in the chain; I want to make sure the Exasound is the last thing in the chain.)

To me as a classical music audiophile, what's most important is the original sound is reproduced (please don't tell me about room correction/bass management etc.). For example, if I'm listening to a choral piece, it's extremely important that I hear the original cathedral's sound field.

 

[lovinthehd]

What DAC doesn't try to reproduce the sound in its original fidelity? You believe in magic dacs or something?

 

[ssmaudio]

Curious, any other brand/model ranges you could offer in this respect? How much does it matter how the volume control works? Is setting of delay/level not using dsp?

The reason is that for some receivers if you hit the volume up/down on your remote it fires a relay, resistance changes, attenuation etc. that can mess with the sound. Now you can argue, is that really discernible? I don't know. But I'd like to avoid it if possible.

 

[ssmaudio]

What DAC doesn't try to reproduce the sound in its original fidelity? You believe in magic dacs or something?

It depends on the quality. Not all DACs are made the same. But please, I don't want to start an argument; I want to stay on topic. Any receivers that don't distort the analog line inputs?

 

[lovinthehd]

It depends on the quality. Not all DACs are made the same. But please, I don't want to start an argument; I want to stay on topic. Any receivers that don't distort the analog line inputs?

It's extremely relevant to the topic as to audibility. You can chase specs forever.... Define distort the analog inputs audibly particularly....outside of theory.

 

[KEW]

It's extremely relevant to the topic as to audibility. You can chase specs forever.... Define distort the analog inputs audibly particularly....outside of theory.

I appreciate your desire to be practical. However, if he can do what he wants using the Marantz SR6XXX or SR7XXX series as PENG indicated, I'm not sure there is much reason not to. Denon is less money for roughly the same electronics, but Marantz is a resonable option... and all things equal, why not go for theoretical minimums?

@ssmaudio , if you want to save some money, most are very happy with buying gear from Accessories4less! You can get some good discounts for refurbbed or previous years AVR.
However, one thing to understand is that PENG is among a very short list of people here that has the expertise to actually answer your question! You can also inquire through Marantz's tech support to verify, but you may need to stay at it for a few exchanges of emails before you get an answer that gives you confidence. If you want to do this, you might ask PENG about the best way to get a response out of them. I know he has several times and I also know that some companies are more efficient over the phone while others have a better system for email questions!

 

[ssmaudio]

Great, thanks for all the answers. I'll follow up with Marantz/Denon and then ask Peng for help as needed.

Again, much appreciated.

 

[TLS Guy]

It depends on the quality. Not all DACs are made the same. But please, I don't want to start an argument; I want to stay on topic. Any receivers that don't distort the analog line inputs?

I think you have been infected by some audiophools.

Just because a volume control is digital does not mean it distorts the sound. In fact digital volume controls have been more accurate than analog ones since the eighties.

Actually by using an all analog set up you are likely getting further away from the original, as you are eschewing correct timing of the speakers.

In addition the best mutltichannel recordings are still an approximation to the original sound field. The new upmixers especially Dolby can enhance 2 and 5 channels signals by smartly analyzing the ambient field by comparing phase relationships. So digital processing can really enhance the recording and get back closer to reality. I'm a classical music lover also and I'm totally amazed at the progress of digital processing and its ability to get ever closer to the original acoustic.

Lastly DSD is a nonsense and was a bad backward step to placate lunatics who had a total misconception of digital recording. DSD is awkward to use and makes editing and mastering a nightmare. I can assure you that no one, not even BIS, is recording in DSD anymore and certainly not processing in it. There is just a final conversion from PCM do DSD to placate ignorant audiophools.

So I hope there is not a receiver that does what you want, as it certainly would not be a virtue.

 

[ssmaudio]

I think you have been infected by some audiophools.

Just because a volume control is digital does not mean it distorts the sound. In fact digital volume controls have been more accurate than analog ones since the eighties.

Actually by using an all analog set up you are likely getting further away from the original, as you are eschewing correct timing of the speakers.

In addition the best mutltichannel recordings are still an approximation to the original sound field. The new upmixers especially Dolby can enhance 2 and 5 channels signals by smartly analyzing the ambient field by comparing phase relationships. So digital processing can really enhance the recording and get back closer to reality. I'm a classical music lover also and I'm totally amazed at the progress of digital processing and its ability to get ever closer to the original acoustic.

Lastly DSD is a nonsense and was a bad backward step to placate lunatics who had a total misconception of digital recording. DSD is awkward to use and makes editing and mastering a nightmare. I can assure you that no one, not even BIS, is recording in DSD anymore and certainly not processing in it. There is just a final conversion from PCM do DSD to placate ignorant audiophools.

So I hope there is not a receiver that does what you want, as it certainly would not be a virtue.

As I said, I don't want to get into a philosophical argument. You have a strongly-held opinion, which I respect. However, it doesn't help answer my question.

 

[TLS Guy]

As I said, I don't want to get into a philosophical argument. You have a strongly-held opinion, which I respect. However, it doesn't help answer my question.

Its not philosophical but practical advice. In order not to have a digital control your unit would need a five ganged analog control. I don't think such a thing is even made any longer and for good reasons.

Parasound have an analog premap with a motorized analog control and it has been a nightmare for them, and severely damaged their reputation. The world has moved on.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I am quite sure the 2016 through 2019 Marantz SR6000/7000 series would fit his bill in pure direct mode.

I’d like to know which AVRs convert Analog to Digital in Direct Mode.

Also about the Analog-to-Digital Conversation with the Volume.

Or is this just another hearsay.

 

[M Code]

Keep in mind...
For a multi-channel processor or AVR, to control multi-channel volume levels within close tracking tolerances (+/-0.2 dB) the signal is digitized..

Just my $0.02...

 

[TLS Guy]

Keep in mind...
For a multi-channel processor or AVR, to control multi-channel volume levels within close tracking tolerances (+/-0.2 dB) the signal is digitized..

Just my $0.02...

Yes, this a sad thread. This nonsense spread by ignorant idiots is really unfortunate. Unfortunately this hobby is littered with garbage spewed by opinionated people with no technical background or "chops" what so ever. The gullible just take this nonsense as an article of faith and fail to build systems that would be superior to ones built round this sort of superstition. People say there is no harm done. That is not true and this thread is exhibit A refuting that.

The advent of the digital volume control was a huge leap forward in audio quality. I have just reviewed the 1983 paper by Dr Martin Jones of Rupert Neve on the development of the first all digital mixer. This was a joint venture by Rupert Neve and BBC engineering. The cost caused Neeve to have to be sold to Siemens. The overspend of the BBC R & D budget incurred the severe wrath of Margaret Thatcher. The first use of the Digital console was for the broadcast of the annual Christmas Eve broadcast of the Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols from Kings College Cambridge.

As Dr Jones points out in his article the analog volume control was one of the biggest points of degradation of audio quality. So the digital volume control allowed a significant increase in audio quality. It was a landmark achievement. I well remember Peter Walker of Quad hailing it and saying it would lead to significant benefits for the audio consumer. Once again he was on target.

Now we have a new member persuaded that by avoiding digital volume controls he will reduce distortion! This is the absolute reverse of the truth, especially when he would have to use five of them.

On another issue he is also misguided. The whole development of DSD was a terrible mistake and should never have happened. It has set back the acceptance of multichannel audio only recordings by decades. If we had gone with audio only PCM recordings I have to feel muitchannel recordings would be far more common place than they are now. This is another example of the harm of audiophoolery. Anyone who thinks it is harmless is severely mistaken.

I do hope the OP gets to see this post but he probably won't and more's the pity!

 

[snakeeyes]

I had mentioned in the other OP’s thread that mixing was likely done on 24bit gear (possible in older ones it was done 16bit or 20bit though.) And then after that work in PCM it becomes DSD 1bit.

I believe he was just trying to play all of his multichannel files, including multichannel DSD. The point is that a lot of multichannel DSD recordings exist and he wants to play them with their DSD format rather than converting again to PCM.

 

[TLS Guy]

I had mentioned in the other OP’s thread that mixing was likely done on 24bit gear (possible in older ones it was done 16bit or 20bit though.) And then after that work in PCM it becomes DSD 1bit.

I believe he was just trying to play all of his multichannel files, including multichannel DSD. The point is that a lot of multichannel DSD recordings exist and he wants to play them with their DSD format rather than converting again to PCM.

In that event he is still barking up the wrong tree. You can do as many conversions to PCM as you like. The Solomon code error correction is not a fudge, but restores the original signal. Digital is not like analog at all, where there is degradation with every copy. We have to rid ourselves of analog thinking when working with digital.

His biggest loss is not feeding the DSD signal from his files straight to the receiver. If he wants highest quality then he needs to keep the signal in the digital domain as long as possible. His whole concept of how to get the best out of his files is completely backwards.

 

[PENG]

I’d like to know which AVRs convert Analog to Digital in Direct Mode.

Also about the Analog-to-Digital Conversation with the Volume.

Or is this just another hearsay.

The OP's question, if I understood correctly, was whether the 5.1Ch analog input signals get "further process..." (see post#1). As far as I can tell, NAD, Marantz's that have the 5.1Ch analog inputs don't get further process. The upstream player, for example, an Oppo player would do all the processing, output it in analog, connected to the receiver's multi-channel analog input and from there it would be routed directly to the volume IC (not an ADC).

It wouldn't apply to Yamaha's RX-A receivers because last time I checked (unless I missed..) they no longer offer multi-channel analog inputs.