Analog bass management on receiver.

[drogulus]

Briefly, here's my situation. I just bought a Sony 775 DVD/SACD player, mostly for high rez audio for my PC setup, where I also watch movies using the computers DVD player. Right now I'm using a 2 speaker plus sub arrangement, but I'll add a center channel speaker under the monitor soon. The Sony SACD output will be 3 channel stereo plus sub out.

The problem:Many (most?) SACDs, particularly the classical discs I buy, don't put bass on the LFE channel. Bass management on the Sony player is primitive-you need to select "small" in the menu to redirect bass to the LFE output (120 hz crossover). And my Onkyo receiver has no bass management on the analog inputs.

I have 2 options, I think:

1) Buy an Outlaw ICBM, and put up w/ the extra analog connections. Advantage: all the bass management I'll ever need.
2) Get a new receiver w/ analog bass management, allowing me to redirect bass at a reasonable crossover point.

My budget is limited, so can anybody suggest a receiver that will meet my needs? What brands should I consider? Is there another solution?

Thanks in advance for any suggestions!

 

[MDS]

Option 1 is probably the only real option. Very few receivers apply bass managment to the analog inputs. I think the flagship models from HK do, but they are quite expensive.

 

[drogulus]

Anonymous,

Thanks for your reply. I just got back from the H/K site....$1,299 MSRP for the AVR 635. Too much.

What about Sony? Didn't I see somewhere the Sony ES receivers have analog bass management? Or do they have the same fixed crossover as their players? Anybody familiar with them?

 

[Rob Babcock]

Buying the Outlaw ICBM is probably the most economical and practical option. It will give you all the flexibility you could ask for. Some of the snootier audiophools claim the ICBM falls a tad short of being totally transparent, but not by much. And all seem to agree the very tiny amount of coloration is more than offset by the benefits of having proper bass management.

I know of no affordable (ie under $1500) receiver that does bass managment in the analog domain for the MC inputs.

 

[drogulus]

Rob,

Thanks for your reply. However, I believe it's not quite that bad. The HK AVR 635 can be found for ~$700 on the web (I just learned). Also, I just found this on Crutchfields:

$499.99
Add To Cart
In Stock


Sony ES STR-DA1000ES 7 Channel Home Theater Receiver
Get a $100 Mail-in Rebate with a select Sony TV!
100 watts x 7 full-bandwidth rated • Dolby Digital EX, DTS-ES and Pro Logic II • analog multichannel bass management • composite-to-S-video conversion • learning/multibrand LCD remote with macros • 5-year warranty

This certainly looks like what I want, but am I reading it wrong? If I could afford it, I'd go with the HK. I tried to find more info on the Sony, but nothing so far. A high crossover would be the deal breaker.

 

[Rob Babcock]

Yeah, you'd definately be well advised to investigate it fully. I'd be pretty surprised if you had many options for the hinge point. I'd also check to be certain that the method they use really is analog- many claim it is, but when you start digging you find that the analog input feeds A/D converters which convert the input to digital. While that isn't the end of the world, it's adding another conversion cycle, which can't do anything positive to the signal.

 

[drogulus]

Rob,

Thanks again. I think you're right about the Sony, possibly the HK as well. I think for now I'll just do a nasty workaround on my old Onkyo, speaker connections from the LR fronts to the sub in parallel with the LFE out, speakers set to large. That should actually work pretty well, no A/D conversion, works on all inputs.

But that HK looks really good. A poster at AVS gave it a thorough workout against the Pio 56txi using ilink....the HK came out ahead. Room correction EQ is supposed to be outstanding.

Edit: Also in the HKs' favor, adjustable crossover point (100 hz default, with plenty of downward adjustment separately for front/center/surrounds). The lesser models have this too, but not for analog.

 

[krabapple]

Buying the Outlaw ICBM is probably the most economical and practical option. It will give you all the flexibility you could ask for. Some of the snootier audiophools claim the ICBM falls a tad short of being totally transparent, but not by much. And all seem to agree the very tiny amount of coloration is more than offset by the benefits of having proper bass management.

I know of no affordable (ie under $1500) receiver that does bass managment in the analog domain for the MC inputs.

I doubt the Outlaw ICBM (whihc I own) has real transparency issues...and how you'd differentiate them from its function as a crossover, I don't know ...however, the Outlaw folks themselves carefully note that *time aligment* (speaker delay) may not work optimally in conjunction with an ICBM. The ICBM solves one problem, but not all problems, related to the stupid way SACD and DVD-A have been implemented. For me , ilink will eventually be the way to go. I already have a Pioneer receiver with ilink, I'm just waiting for a reasonably priced player to appear. One conversion cycle to rule them all ;>

 

[drogulus]

Krabapple,

Wow, good stuff! I'm exploring the 56TXi option on another board, where I'm told by some that jitter is "inconsequential".

 

[Rob Babcock]

I'm curious if Pioneer will 1) pass the digital DSD stream with no tomfoolery and 2) incorporate proper bass management into the receiver for use with SACD & DVD-A. If your choice is between incorrect B/M done by the player vs incorrect B/M done done in the receiver, that's not the ideal situation. We'll just have to wait and see, I guess.

My thinking is that a receiver should do bass management correctly...at least that's what I'm hoping.

 

[MDS]

Krabapple,

Wow, good stuff! I'm exploring the 56TXi option on another board, where I'm told by some that jitter is "inconsequential".

Jitter is inconsequential. Do you really think that a timing error of 20 picoseconds is audible and adds a 'veil' to the sound?

 

[drogulus]

Jitter is inconsequential. Do you really think that a timing error of 20 picoseconds is audible and adds a 'veil' to the sound?

Not a chance, I "really" think.

Would 2000ps be more persuasive? 20ps, 200ps, 2000ps, it's all the same, right? And don't bother listening for the difference, that would only produce "subjective" testimony. Very unreliable on sound quality.

The question of what level of jitter produces audible effects can only be answered by investigation, not theory. I found some good sources, but I'm still working on interpreting them. I have a thread open on another forum so I'd better stop here. My fault. Go to Secrets if you're interested.

 

[MDS]

I am a regular at Secrets. Jitter is my favorite 'non-issue' that people obsess over even when they couldn't explain what Jitter is in the first place.

Just as a point of reference, for complex waveforms such as music, humans cannot detect the difference between two sounds unless they occur at least 6 milliseconds apart.

So yeah let's worry about a value that is 3 orders of magnitude shorter.

 

[drogulus]

I am a regular at Secrets. Jitter is my favorite 'non-issue' that people obsess over even when they couldn't explain what Jitter is in the first place.

Just as a point of reference, for complex waveforms such as music, humans cannot detect the difference between two sounds unless they occur at least 6 milliseconds apart.

So yeah let's worry about a value that is 3 orders of magnitude shorter.

Super. Now I know about 2 different sounds, detectable as such! Now lets put them closer together, much closer! Instead of two sounds you have one crappy sound. What would you detect under such circumstances? Since we are testing perceived sound quality, a sound quality test of the appropriate type, sufficiently rigorous, is called for. Why would you be satisfied with the test result you referred to as a jitter test?

Look, if jitter is less of a problem than I think right now, believe me, I'll find out!! Some one actually in a position to know will set me straight. With test results. How 'bout double blind listening tests? Would that help? Can you point me towards anything like that? Let's prove Katz is wrong about this, and do a service for all of those people who rely on his advice!!!

 

[krabapple]

I'm curious if Pioneer will 1) pass the digital DSD stream with no tomfoolery and 2) incorporate proper bass management into the receiver for use with SACD & DVD-A. If your choice is between incorrect B/M done by the player vs incorrect B/M done done in the receiver, that's not the ideal situation. We'll just have to wait and see, I guess.

My thinking is that a receiver should do bass management correctly...at least that's what I'm hoping.

1) AIUI, bass management *has* to be done in the PCM realm (as indicated in Denon's block diagrams, for example). But really, the conversions are usually being done at like 96 kHz/24 bit, so I honestly dont' see what the fuss is about.

2) Yes, the Pioneer receivers do BM for SACD and DVD-A, applying the same parameters to both. Dave Ranada reviewed the first ilink models more than a year ago, and reported this with some contentment.

 

[Rob Babcock]

Bass management can be done while in DSD without conversion, but not by the Denon gear, it appears. The "big deal" about the way your typical receiver does it is that you actually run the analog outputs (all 6 of 'em) into the receiver where A/D converters turn the analog into PCM. So essentially you have your SACD converting the DSD to analog, then your receiver converting the analog into PCM, then all the manipulation, then conversion back to analog to be amplified. Yikes!

Obviously I'm not talking about the iLink converting DSD to PCM- I'm referring to using the analog inputs which convert analog to PCM. I'm not overly concerned about DSD to PCM conversions; that's pretty much irrelevant IMOHO.

 

[drogulus]

Rob,


DSD to 24/96 for bass management? Not a problem, I think. I'll take it. But I'd like to avoid A/D-D/A.....fortunately, there'd be no reason to use the analogs with iLink available on the 56TXi.

krabapple,

Can you point me to the Ranada review? Thanks.

The HK AVR 635 is an attractive option... no objectionable conversions (none that concern me), possibly no conversions at all for BM. A user review comparo w/ the iLinked Pio was in the HKs favor overall, but that's one guy.

Is it too much to ask, for a <$500 universal player w/iLink??

How about a $200 uni that shunts bass to LFE at 80 hz regardless of speaker size, or shunts LFE to large w/ sub off? Just as options! Label them "Useful1" and "Useful2" in the menu!

 

[EdS]

The HK AVR635 does not perform any BM on it's DVD-A/SACD analog inputs. The manual might state that it does, but it is a typo from the AVR630 which does perform BM on it's analog inputs (via an A/D conversion).
This has been discussed in great detail by owners of the AVR635 in the AVS forums. IMO it is a large shortcoming as the AutoEq function is supposed to be about the best one available in this price range, but it does not affect the hi-res analog inputs.

 

[drogulus]

The HK AVR635 does not perform any BM on it's DVD-A/SACD analog inputs. The manual might state that it does, but it is a typo from the AVR630 which does perform BM on it's analog inputs (via an A/D conversion).
This has been discussed in great detail by owners of the AVR635 in the AVS forums. IMO it is a large shortcoming as the AutoEq function is supposed to be about the best one available in this price range, but it does not affect the hi-res analog inputs.

EdS,

Well, that's a revoltin' development! I've been to the HK website and looked at the brochure w/ the chart showing the features of the whole receiver line. It clearly shows the AVR has analog bass management while the rest of the line does not.
But I didn't stop there....I emailed HK support and ASKED them specifically if the AVR 635 had ABM!!! They said yes, only the top modal had it, not the others.
The people whose job it is to answer requests like mine have no justification for screwups like this. Why would I email them to receive the answer from the same chart I just looked at?

Now, to AVS.....

 

[drogulus]

Back from AVS,

Well I read 8 threads on the AVR 635 and found one slightly ambiguous reference to bass management. The posts were mostly devoted to minor problems (so described) with the EQ function, surround settings, popping sounds....overall people feel it's a great receiver, shortcomings notwithstanding.


EdS or anyone else,

Do you have a link? Other sources of wisdom?