So, Optical is Out, HDMI is In?

[Joe Davis]

After spending thousands in the 1990's and early 2000's on my "dream system" I am now finding out that most of that is old school and will not be useful in this new Hi Def age. I am currently using my Yamaha DSP-A1 and Polk Audio RTi towers with my 52" XBR9 and PS3. So if I am understanding and reading all this right I am not getting the full potential out of BR movies by using the optical cable from my PS3 to my DSP-A1? It sounds fantastic but if I can get a better sound I am all for that. And by better sound I am saying going with a new amp that has HDMI inputs that takes full advantage of Dolby TrueHD. Is that pretty much the skinny?

Thank you

 

[mike c]

IMO, you are not missing THAT much with the hi-def audio. (if you probably did a blind test on me, i'd still fail to indentify which is hi-def, which is "lo-def")

the convenience however, of having an HDMI receiver IS the current skinny.

 

[Joe Davis]

Thanks for the reply Mike. "Convenience"? Can you explain that to me. Do you mean an amp that you can run all your HDMI stuff to and have one cable going to the LCD? Because to some that may be convenient but not for me. I am currently running the DISH HD-DVR and PS3 to the flat screen via HDMI and the audio is going to the Yamaha amp via optical cables. Now I don't always listen to movies, DISH or games in surround sound. Most of the times I am just relaxing, using the flat screens speakers. So this is all convenient for me. If I ran both the DISH HD-DVR and PS3 through the amp first I would have to have that on to have audio.

 

[mike c]

Thanks for the reply Mike. "Convenience"? Can you explain that to me. Do you mean an amp that you can run all your HDMI stuff to and have one cable going to the LCD? Because to some that may be convenient but not for me. I am currently running the DISH HD-DVR and PS3 to the flat screen via HDMI and the audio is going to the Yamaha amp via optical cables. Now I don't always listen to movies, DISH or games in surround sound. Most of the times I am just relaxing, using the flat screens speakers. So this is all convenient for me. If I ran both the DISH HD-DVR and PS3 through the amp first I would have to have that on to have audio.

not because of the one cable thing, but because i only need the receiver remote to control which video source and audio volume.

using both the tv and receiver remote is a hassle (i still use the tv remote to turn on the display, but drop it right after)

plus, i despise tv speaker sound

 

[mtrycrafts]

.... Because to some that may be convenient but not for me. .....

In that case, no real need to upgrade You are used to your setup, sounds great to you, problem solved. Just enjoy it

 

[Knucklehead90]

In that case, no real need to upgrade You are used to your setup, sounds great to you, problem solved. Just enjoy it

+1

If your current AVR has 5.1 direct inputs you may be able to use them to get the latest audio formats. Of course you'll need to get a blu-ray player that has the 5.1/7.1 outputs - which the PS3 doesn't have. Cheap to replace considering what a decent AVR cost.

 

[Seth=L]

That's a pretty solid receiver you have there, to upgrade to something modern with HDMI would be quite costly. Honestly I'd rather have an DSP-A1 for the things it has over most of the modern receivers. The nicest feature it's got is the RF AC-3 input. New receivers don't have that. Also, that's a sexy looking receiver.

 

[3db]

After spending thousands in the 1990's and early 2000's on my "dream system" I am now finding out that most of that is old school and will not be useful in this new Hi Def age. I am currently using my Yamaha DSP-A1 and Polk Audio RTi towers with my 52" XBR9 and PS3. So if I am understanding and reading all this right I am not getting the full potential out of BR movies by using the optical cable from my PS3 to my DSP-A1? It sounds fantastic but if I can get a better sound I am all for that. And by better sound I am saying going with a new amp that has HDMI inputs that takes full advantage of Dolby TrueHD. Is that pretty much the skinny?

Thank you

If you must have HDMI, see if you can pick up a used RX-V1800. Other than that, if you have everything you need connected to your receiver, I wouldn't bother with the upgrade for convience sake.

 

[j_garcia]

I'd have to disagree. On the better audio tracks, particularly those with uncompressed PCM tracks, the audio is quite noticeably improved over dd/dts of old. If you compared something recent where the audio is already recorded/masterd well, it might not be as noticeable. So it depends on what you are really after.

 

[3db]

I'd have to disagree. On the better audio tracks, particularly those with uncompressed PCM tracks, the audio is quite noticeably improved over dd/dts of old. If you compared something recent where the audio is already recorded/masterd well, it might not be as noticeable. So it depends on what you are really after.

Sorry mate but i have to disagree with you . So far I've not detected any real noticeable improvement in sound of the lossless codecs over the older DD and DTS. I've got the latest Star Trek and although I don't have a frame of reference of listening to a regular DVD version of the same movie, I didn't notice a marked improvement over sound quality. I'd probably fail that DBT

 

[mtrycrafts]

.... I'd probably fail that DBT

In that case, it is time to return your 'golden ears' membership card and banished forever

 

[son-yah-tive]

I'm doing the same thing with my OLD Yamaha HTR-5280. I just run HDMI for video, and Optic Cable for sound. Works great. I don't think there is enough difference to go all HDMI.

 

[j_garcia]

Sorry mate but i have to disagree with you . So far I've not detected any real noticeable improvement in sound of the lossless codecs over the older DD and DTS. I've got the latest Star Trek and although I don't have a frame of reference of listening to a regular DVD version of the same movie, I didn't notice a marked improvement over sound quality. I'd probably fail that DBT

No problem, but I hear an easily noticeable difference comparing a standard DD or dts bitstream from a DVD. Like I said, with the newer tracks on something like Star Trek, the difference might not be as easily noticeable, but try something like Blade Runner on DVD with a DD stream vs the BD. The difference is unquestionable.

 

[lsiberian]

No problem, but I hear an easily noticeable difference comparing a standard DD or dts bitstream from a DVD. Like I said, with the newer tracks on something like Star Trek, the difference might not be as easily noticeable, but try something like Blade Runner on DVD with a DD stream vs the BD. The difference is unquestionable.

Are you level matching with an SPL meter and having someone DBT test you.

 

[j_garcia]

Are you level matching with an SPL meter and having someone DBT test you.

I'll level match my TV speakers between the two and let you know if there's a difference.

 

[3db]

In that case, it is time to return your 'golden ears' membership card and banished forever

phew!! Here I thought I was going to be labelled as an audiophile

 

[Kitsum]

I also have the DSP-A1 integrated amp and a BDP with 5.1 analog outputs. (Sony S5000ES). Yamaha has 6ch analog inputs labeled EXT. Decoder. What's the SQ difference i could expect in stereo mode if i use these instead of optical?

 

[Lordoftherings]

An important beneficial message for all Yamaha DSP-A1 owners.

Here's the beauty for all Yamaha DSP-A1 owners: This integrated amp has a 5.1-channel (EXT IN) RCA input jacks. And not only that, but also with bass management from that input.
So, just connect the multichannel analog outputs from a Blu-ray player that internaly decodes the newer high resolution audio codecs (Dolby TrueHD & DTS-HD MA), and you get the full benefit of these, in addition to the bass management of your Yamaha DSP-A1.
Simply connect the HDMI cable directly to your display.
Voila, full high resolution Audio & Video, from your Yamaha DSP-A1 with only the addition of a Blu-ray player with internal audio decoders and multichannel analog outputs, for about $200.

* So there is absolutely no true need for a new receiver or pre/pro to take advantage of these newer high res. audio codecs.
The DSP-A1 was unique in that it was the only one that has bass management from it's multichannel analog input. What a bonus...

 

[selden]

I also have the DSP-A1 integrated amp and a BDP with 5.1 analog outputs. (Sony S5000ES). Yamaha has 6ch analog inputs labeled EXT. Decoder. What's the SQ difference i could expect in stereo mode if i use these instead of optical?

Do you mean multichannel audio downconverted to stereo or two-channel stereo source material?

In either case, though, it depends. Only you can determine the answer for sure -- by listening to the results with your speakers in your room.

The optical output should be quite good: BD non-HDMI lossy digital outputs supposedly use significantly higher bitrates than the digital audio tracks recorded on DVDs. I.e. less is thrown away from the original movie audio. Many people can't hear any difference between them and the lossless formats that are sent over HDMI.

If you're really talking about listening to two-channel CDs or SACDs, the bitrate for either is the same as it's always been, but the bass management might be an issue.

The analog outputs of disc players have to use the player's bass management hardware which you'll have to configure. That may be less flexible than what's in your amp, and the results may be a poorer match to your speakers and listening room environment.

Separate from either of those issues is the relative quality of the DAC circuits in the player and the amp. I don't know enough about your equipment to comment on that.