Just Learned of Significant Drawback to DenonLink

[ronnie 1.8]

I just learned that I must use analog cables to enjoy the superior dac's of my DVD3930CI. Via DenonLink, as I am now using, the 3930CI acts as a passthrough, and the dac's in my AVR3805 (Burr Brown PCM-1791) are used, which are inferior to the dac's in the 3930CI (Burr Brown PCM-1796). So, once I reconnect the 8 cables (5.1 ch and 2 ch), what is the use of DenonLink? The only audio it will then be passing is Dolby Digital and DTS. Any reason to use DenonLink over my good digital coax cable? Any other benefits to keeping DenonLink? No wonder I can't hear any difference in the superior dac's of my 3930CI vs the DVD2910 I previously had. With DenonLink, I'm using the dac's in my AVR, which are the exact same dac's as in the 2910!

 

[WmAx]

I just learned that I must use analog cables to enjoy the superior dac's of my DVD3930CI. Via DenonLink, as I am now using, the 3930CI acts as a passthrough, and the dac's in my AVR3805 (Burr Brown PCM-1791) are used, which are inferior to the dac's in the 3930CI (Burr Brown PCM-1796). So, once I reconnect the 8 cables (5.1 ch and 2 ch), what is the use of DenonLink? The only audio it will then be passing is Dolby Digital and DTS. Any reason to use DenonLink over my good digital coax cable? Any other benefits to keeping DenonLink? No wonder I can't hear any difference in the superior dac's of my 3930CI vs the DVD2910 I previously had. With DenonLink, I'm using the dac's in my AVR, which are the exact same dac's as in the 2910!

In reality, if there are no defects or engineering errors in either hardware, the DACs are going to sound the same, as the differences between them are far beyond what the human ear can discern.

-Chris

 

[Sheep]

Ooooo. I want to see where this thread goes.

SheepStar

 

[no. 5]

Ooooo. I want to see where this thread goes.

lol, rember people: no kicking, scratching or biting.

 

[Audioholics]

The argument here appears to be moot. It is not against DenonLink, but based on [an apparent] misunderstanding of the concept of analogue to digital outputs and connectivity between components.

If you want to use the DACs (digital to analogue converters) of the DVD-3930CI then, by default, you HAVE to use the analogue outputs. Not DenonLink. Not HDMI. Not S/PDIF or any other digital output.

It sounds like you're a good candidate for experimenting with some analogue interconnects to compare against DenonLink.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I just learned that I must use analog cables to enjoy the superior dac's of my DVD3930CI. Via DenonLink, as I am now using, the 3930CI acts as a passthrough, and the dac's in my AVR3805 (Burr Brown PCM-1791) are used, which are inferior to the dac's in the 3930CI (Burr Brown PCM-1796). So, once I reconnect the 8 cables (5.1 ch and 2 ch), what is the use of DenonLink? The only audio it will then be passing is Dolby Digital and DTS. Any reason to use DenonLink over my good digital coax cable? Any other benefits to keeping DenonLink? No wonder I can't hear any difference in the superior dac's of my 3930CI vs the DVD2910 I previously had. With DenonLink, I'm using the dac's in my AVR, which are the exact same dac's as in the 2910!

WmAx brought up the most relevant point. While you could measure differences with the right sensitive instruments to the last electron probably, we still have to listen to the sounds from the speakers and the acoustic space they are in. Are these two DAcs audibly different, in a fair comparison The odds are highly not.

 

[ronnie 1.8]

The argument here appears to be moot. It is not against DenonLink, but based on [an apparent] misunderstanding of the concept of analogue to digital outputs and connectivity between components.

If you want to use the DACs (digital to analogue converters) of the DVD-3930CI then, by default, you HAVE to use the analogue outputs. Not DenonLink. Not HDMI. Not S/PDIF or any other digital output.

Ahhh, of course! That fact hadn't occured to me when I swapped my 2910 for the 3930CI. Well, I still had my 8 analogue interconects, so yesterday I removed the DenonLink and added the analogue outputs. In theory, the PCM-1796 DACs will provide the highest quality sound (whether I can hear it or not, who knows!), so that's what I went with. In addition, it's great to know the cost of those cables has not gone to waste. Didn't have any kosher chicken fat lying around, however... Really glad I posted this question. Thanks all for your input.

Clint, your review reads the PCM-1796 DAC's are used for front channels, and there are 3 additional DACs used for 5.1 surround. What are these additional DACs?

 

[ronnie 1.8]

But this does beg the question. Using the DAC, the digital signal is being converted to analogue, then, I believe, the signal must be converted back to digital before reaching the speakers. Is that true? Wouldn't the signal be of higher quality if it remained digital throughout? Why must it be converted to analogue at all to sound it's best? I don't have a good understanding of this area.

 

[AVRat]

There is no digital speaker driver that I know of yet, so somewhere in the audio chain the digital signal requires conversion to an analog signal.

 

[mtrycrafts]

But this does beg the question. Using the DAC, the digital signal is being converted to analogue, then, I believe, the signal must be converted back to digital before reaching the speakers. Is that true? Wouldn't the signal be of higher quality if it remained digital throughout? Why must it be converted to analogue at all to sound it's best? I don't have a good understanding of this area.

This is true in some receivers for the 2 ch analog input. I am not sure that the multi channel analog would be re-digitized as no further processing will take place unlike that 2 ch analog which could be processed in Dolby Prologic or the new DPLIIx, etc. That needs to be digitized first before being processed. But, even that 2 ch analog on some receivers gets passed straight through in analog mode; then, no further processing can take place.

 

[ronnie 1.8]

Yes, of course. Using 'direct' or 'pure direct' on my Denon AVR3805 receiver, bypasses any additional processing by the receiver. 'Pure direct' shuts off all video circuitry. When using 'ext in' for 5.1 ch DVD-A or SACD, for example, the receiver cannot go into 'direct' mode, because it already is, as you suggest. But I can put it into 'pure direct' if I wish. And of course, I can also put 2 ch into 'direct' or 'pure direct'. One thing I just realized, which is a big "light-bulb" moment for me, is the type of DACs in my 3930CI, and I'm sure many DVD players, is PCM (i.e., PCM-1796). PCM is 'pulse-code modulation', which is a digital representation of an analog signal. That is what confused me. I wondered how the signal could be played without further processing if it was in analog. The answe is, it is not in analog. It is PCM, which is a digital representation of analog. So that is how it can be played "direct" without further processing.

 

[genesis471]

I have the 3910 & 3805. I have tried many times, and simply cannot tell the difference between DL3 or the analog via Ext in. The interconnects I was using for the analog route, are now being used for other needs. It's DL3 all the way for me! Sound is excellent, one cable, auto format select, simple!

Mike

 

[MACCA350]

The benefit of using a digital connection like the DenonLink or HDMI for DVD-A and SACD is that it allows you to use the Bass Management in the receiver(which in most cases is superior to DVD players), Room EQ etc. Personally I think that these benefits are significant in comparison to the difference in DAC's used in your case.

Just remember that if you are trying to compare the DAC's via Analogue/Digital, you need to make sure that you level the playing field by replicating Bass management, distance and level settings in both player and receiver and turn off any room EQ and DSP processing in the receiver(maybe use Pure Direct) so that the only difference you hear is what you are trying to compare.

cheers

 

[ronnie 1.8]

The benefit of using a digital connection like the DenonLink or HDMI for DVD-A and SACD is that it allows you to use the Bass Management in the receiver(which in most cases is superior to DVD players), Room EQ etc. Personally I think that these benefits are significant in comparison to the difference in DAC's used in your case.

Agreed. Being familiar with both the 3930CI and AVR3805, it seems the bass management of the player is quite robust, and is losing nothing to the bass management of the AVR. Even my former Denon DVD2910 had bass enhancement (sent bass from mains to subwoofer for 2 ch sources, i.e., CD's), and a +10db subwoofer bump option from the speaker level submenu. Of course, the 3930CI has both as you would expect. I don't believe the use of DenonLink offers an advantage in this example.

Just remember that if you are trying to compare the DAC's via Analogue/Digital, you need to make sure that you level the playing field by replicating Bass management, distance and level settings in both player and receiver and turn off any room EQ and DSP processing in the receiver(maybe use Pure Direct) so that the only difference you hear is what you are trying to compare.

The circuitry one considers when speaking of analogue outputs on the 3930CI, for example, is PCM-1796. What circuitry does one consider in an AVR for such a comparison? The AVR3805 uses a PCM-1804 ADC, but don't believe an ADC is used for DL3, as DL3 is already digital. The AVR3805 also uses the PCM-1791 DAC, but I'm pretty certain a DAC is not used for DL3. I'm not sure what circuitry is used by the AVR when using DL3, or even a digital coax for DD and DTS?

 

[ronnie 1.8]

I have the 3910 & 3805. I have tried many times, and simply cannot tell the difference between DL3 or the analog via Ext in. The interconnects I was using for the analog route, are now being used for other needs. It's DL3 all the way for me! Sound is excellent, one cable, auto format select, simple!

If you are pleased and content using DL3, that is what matters most! Cheers!

 

[MACCA350]

Agreed. Being familiar with both the 3930CI and AVR3805, it seems the bass management of the player is quite robust, and is losing nothing to the bass management of the AVR. Even my former Denon DVD2910 had bass enhancement (sent bass from mains to subwoofer for 2 ch sources, i.e., CD's), and a +10db subwoofer bump option from the speaker level submenu. Of course, the 3930CI has both as you would expect. I don't believe the use of DenonLink offers an advantage in this example.

What about room EQ?

cheers

 

[MACCA350]

The AVR3805 also uses the PCM-1791 DAC, but I'm pretty certain a DAC is not used for DL3. I'm not sure what circuitry is used by the AVR when using DL3, or even a digital coax for DD and DTS?

The DAC's are use for all digital inputs since it needs to convert to analogue for amplification.

cheers

 

[ronnie 1.8]

What about room EQ?

cheers

That's true, the player doesn't have room EQ settings. That's an advantage for using DL3 vs 5.1 analogue. I have my settings to "off". These remain the only settings in my AVR I've not used, and am not familiar with.

 

[ronnie 1.8]

The DAC's are use for all digital inputs since it needs to convert to analogue for amplification.

cheers

I see. Under what conditions are the AVR's ADC's used?

 

[MACCA350]

I see. Under what conditions are the AVR's ADC's used?

For all analogue inputs(unless Pure Direct(and maybe Direct) is active, IIRC) except EXT-IN. This allows the receiver to apply DSP, Bass management, Prologic IIx, Room EQ, distance, level, etc processing for inputs like VCR etc.

Basically it takes the analogue signal, converts to digital then performs all the processing then converts back to analogue for amplification. If Pure Direct(and IIRC Direct) is activated then it takes the incoming analogue signal and just passes it straight to the amp section w/o any manipulation or processing.

cheers