Originally posted by sikoniko
Classe' CES '08
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
I certainly didn't mean to imply that it I'd be in the market shortly after CES. In fact I thought that by saying I wasn't going to be getting a Blu-ray player for awhile was evidence that the processor wasn't coming soon either. But whatever, sorry if we got our signals crossed.
As for supporting the HD codecs, it will handle them, just not in the manner I was hoping upon release. But that's my problem apparently and isn't a concern for yourself and Sikoniko.
As for the THX info, I wasn't sure if you had the details burried in your notes somewhere and had simply forgotten about it. Whenever you can post the news will be fine, thanks.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mark-n-bBut RebelMan, what about this denon DVD-2500BT Blu-ray transport? it will only output the raw HD bitstream over the HDMI and will not pass LPCM at all.
This, in my opinion, is a good idea, because you only pay for the decoding chips once (in the SSP) and not one for each player.
Thanks again for the coverage and the info that you provide. I (we) really appreciate it. :T"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Apparently DTS is not really crazy about in player decoding, hence the reason you dont see many players that decode DTS MA. This is not just an observation because of what is available but an actual note I read from an insider. Some players will yes, but not many.
Here is one place I was able to track down. Read the first post from the insider. (first post)
Its so hard for me to picture buying something with such a price tag knowing it is already absolete in regards audio decoding (DTS MA). Actually all you would actually need is a processor that decodes DTSMA and accepts PCM since many players decode the other formats to PCM.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by hifiguymiI personally have heard big differences in standard DD and dts decoding from one company to another. If that holds true with the HD formats, then that would be the only reason to possibly want the decoding in the processor (assuming it would be better than the player).
Every Dolby (dts) encoded bit stream goes through a two step process. First, the signal is decoded into LPCM. Second, the LPCM signal is converted from a digital to an analog format. The resultant decoding process MUST be bit-for-bit identical from player to player, player to processor and processor to processor if the equipment intends to wear the Dolby logo. Every piece of equipment that goes through and passes the certification process is eligible to be licensed by Dolby. Under no circumstance will the quality of the decoded signal be different between licensed products. Only when the PCM signal enters the process of conversion (digital to analog) can variances in audio quality and performance be measured differently."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by AldoGenerally speaking, the decoder inside a good processor is always better than in the player, more so speaking about Sony, Toshiba, Philips, etc players."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by StormwatchAny interactive blu-ray or hd-dvd has to be decoded within the player to PCM. You will see very rare occasions where a raw bitstream of Dobly True HD and DTS MA can be passed over to a processor. Furthermore, DTS MA and Dolby True HD aren't mandatory standards for both Blue Ray and HD DVD. Only PCM mulitchannel is granted, which has the same resolution (bit for bit accuracy to the master) as TrueHD and DTS MA but takes a bit more space on the disc. So decoding within the player to max 8 channel PCM up to max 24/192 will be the most common transfer format - and this can be passed over with any HDMI standard down to 1.0."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Minardi2As for supporting the HD codecs, it will handle them, just not in the manner I was hoping upon release. But that's my problem apparently and isn't a concern for yourself and Sikoniko."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by VancouverApparently DTS is not really crazy about in player decoding, hence the reason you dont see many players that decode DTS MA. This is not just an observation because of what is available but an actual note I read from an insider. Some players will yes, but not many.
Its so hard for me to picture buying something with such a price tag knowing it is already absolete in regards audio decoding (DTS MA). Actually all you would actually need is a processor that decodes DTSMA and accepts PCM since many players decode the other formats to PCM."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
[QUOTE=Minardi2]Originally posted by sikonikoI'm not sure why you're flumoxed by my opinion on this. It's not like I'm wanting something that no other manufacture does, or can do. Decoding in the processor/AVR for TrueHD and DTS-HDMA will be the norm I suspect, and I just wish Classe would be doing it from the get go. That's all.
I like that word... flumoxed. I'm going to use it in a sentence somewhere today!
My suggestion then, is to wait until Classe releases the update for the ssp-800, and I'll buy it when I'm ready, decoding or not, and we will both be happy. I may be enjoying mine a few months earlier than you will though. :lol:I'm just sittin here watchin the wheels go round and round...- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by hifiguymiI do know the BDP-05FD and the DMP-BD50 are going to do both HD audio codecs. I was just listing all of the major things the Denon does. For some people, who would like all of those things, the Denon will be the right player. It is expensive, but I think it's priced competitively for what is does.
Eric
It looks cool!
Marantz is also about to release these processor:
If the idea of a receiver is just too lowbrow for you, Marantz is introducing their new AV8003 and MM8003 processor / amplifier pair. It's a nice couple: HDMI 1.3a (four in, two out), Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD MA, DeepColor and Audyssey to get things dialed in; the amp kicks out eight channels at 150-Watts. Both available Q2 2008, prices to be determined.%Gallery-13234%
Note that it is only processor, you can buy separate amps or their new MM8003 multichanel 150 watts amp.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by AldoLets see what the new Marantz BD8002 bluray player can do, I think it is going to be a great option!
It looks cool!
Eric- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by RebelManEvery Dolby (dts) encoded bit stream goes through a two step process. First, the signal is decoded into LPCM. Second, the LPCM signal is converted from a digital to an analog format. The resultant decoding process MUST be bit-for-bit identical from player to player, player to processor and processor to processor if the equipment intends to wear the Dolby logo. Every piece of equipment that goes through and passes the certification process is eligible to be licensed by Dolby. Under no circumstance will the quality of the decoded signal be different between licensed products. Only when the PCM signal enters the process of conversion (digital to analog) can variances in audio quality and performance be measured differently.
There is a huge difference in how well the information gets decoded, or unpacked, from one DD (and dts) decoder to another. The surround steering is much better in a Classe processor than in a $500.00 Denon receiver. Does that mean that the Denon does it wrong? No. It just doesn't do it as well. You of all people should have experienced the difference in surround processors. That is why companies like Classe exist. They get the most out of the DSP circuits that people like TI and Motorola build. Just because Dolby and dts have a spec for decoders (DSP engines) doesn't mean a company can't exceed them.
As I stated in my earlier post, I don't have enough experience with the new HD codecs to know if the same thing applies to them. I would think there would be better decoders than others, just like with DD and dts, but I haven't heard it yet.
Eric- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by RebelMandts-HD is optional in both specifications. dts-HD MA or Dolby TrueHD or Uncompressed LPCM are interchangeable in terms of their potential for HD audio playback. As long as one format exists and is accessible in the player or the processor is all that matters. What's obsolete is the lack of dts-HD MA titles to exploit.
This is not atually totally correct. Alll Fox titttles have DTS MA sound tracks on them and more will be released in the future. What I was refering to is DTS MA decoding is not and generally will not be as common in players as DTS believes in processer decoding raher then player decoding. This is the reason I sais its important for a processor to at least decode DTA MA.
My current situation is a perfect example. I have a Rotel 1069 which has the same capability as the Classe SSP being talked about. It works great because i can send hi rez audio by PCM. The problem is every Fox Blu Ray I have which has DTS MA only gets played in DTS because I dont own a player which can decode DTS MA. Fact is there is no player currently available which can decode DTS MA, and only a couple which can bitstream it. This is a trend which will likely continue.
Yes DTS MA will be able to be decoded in players, but its not possible today and will be rare at best in the future.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vancouver
Yes DTS MA will be able to be decoded in players, but its not possible today and will be rare at best in the future.I'm just sittin here watchin the wheels go round and round...- Bottom
Comment
-
[QUOTE=sikoniko]Originally posted by Minardi2
My suggestion then, is to wait until Classe releases the update for the ssp-800, and I'll buy it when I'm ready, decoding or not, and we will both be happy. I may be enjoying mine a few months earlier than you will though. :lol:
I'd love to see you get one first and post your impressions. It would likely benefit the other forum members who are considering purchasing the 800.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by hifiguymiI do understand how surround processing works and I do know that all DSP engines (the surround decoding, or unpacking if you will, not the digital to analog conversion) are supposed to do thing the same, but they don't. If they were the same, there would be need for different companies to make DSP engines. If everything was exactly the same there would only be a need for one company to make them.
There is a huge difference in how well the information gets decoded, or unpacked, from one DD (and dts) decoder to another. The surround steering is much better in a Classe processor than in a $500.00 Denon receiver. Does that mean that the Denon does it wrong? No. It just doesn't do it as well. You of all people should have experienced the difference in surround processors. That is why companies like Classe exist. They get the most out of the DSP circuits that people like TI and Motorola build. Just because Dolby and dts have a spec for decoders (DSP engines) doesn't mean a company can't exceed them.
Eric
If not, why the hell are we talking about spending $8k+ on a processor when we could get an Integra 9.8 for under $2k?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by hifiguymiI do understand how surround processing works and I do know that all DSP engines (the surround decoding, or unpacking if you will, not the digital to analog conversion) are supposed to do thing the same, but they don't. If they were the same, there would be need for different companies to make DSP engines. If everything was exactly the same there would only be a need for one company to make them.
There is a huge difference in how well the information gets decoded, or unpacked, from one DD (and dts) decoder to another. The surround steering is much better in a Classe processor than in a $500.00 Denon receiver. Does that mean that the Denon does it wrong? No. It just doesn't do it as well. You of all people should have experienced the difference in surround processors. That is why companies like Classe exist. They get the most out of the DSP circuits that people like TI and Motorola build. Just because Dolby and dts have a spec for decoders (DSP engines) doesn't mean a company can't exceed them.
The DAE-7 that Classe' will be using in the SSP-800 uses the TI Aureus TMS320DA610/TMS320C6713B DSP. TI does not build it's core DSPs for exclusivity but they can be built with varying performance capabilties involving speed and funtionality. The TI Aureus DSP (in all processors that use them which happens to be the vast majority) performs all of the mathematical computations but it's the MDS chipset that is feeding the instruction codes and data to the DSP. The MDS module that Classe' has chosen provides the interface between the SSP-800 and the DSP and has been designed to accept either the RAW Dolby encode or PCM. Again, it makes absolutely no difference to the DSP whether the digital signal enters the DAE-7 as RAW or PCM. The DAE-7 will properly unpack the RAW Dolby encode for processing by the DSP just as a licensed source player would decode the RAW Dolby encode and output the resultant PCM signal to the processor.
Classe' has engineered the supporting audio circuitry utilizing power supplies, PGAs, ADCs and DACs necessary to support the DAE-7 and create a high-quality sounding product. Companies like Classe' do not make their own DSP's but they do make their own unique surround sound processors.Last edited by RebelMan; 13 January 2008, 01:49 Sunday."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by VancouverThis is not atually totally correct. Alll Fox titttles have DTS MA sound tracks on them and more will be released in the future. What I was refering to is DTS MA decoding is not and generally will not be as common in players as DTS believes in processer decoding raher then player decoding.
Yes DTS MA will be able to be decoded in players, but its not possible today and will be rare at best in the future.
DTS wants to sell licenses to whomever they can. They may prefer the decoding take place in the processor but it makes no technical difference if it were in the player instead. You'll need to prove otherwise. The point of this discussion is that there is no difference where the decoding takes place ONLY what happens to the PCM signal afterwards."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Minardi2I likely will wait until I know for sure they plan to issue an update to do on-board decoding. In the meantime I'll live with my Krell and will look for other options just so I don't miss anything."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Minardi2I agree with this. Years ago I had a cheap Denon AVR that clearly did a worse job steering than a Pioneer I bought a few months later. I'm sure there are minimum requirements that Dolby and DTS have for decoding their signals, and companies have to meet them. But I would suspect it's possible that some exceed them, and subsequently sound better.
If not, why the hell are we talking about spending $8k+ on a processor when we could get an Integra 9.8 for under $2k?"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by RebelManWell, we aren't talking about processors or DSP's. We are talking about Dolby decoded and pulse code modulated digital signals and that they make no difference to the intended processor or DSP.
Jump in for $8k not certain that it will do what I want it to do? No thanks - - I'll let Sikoniko get one first and be our guinea pig. :W
You did ask what I was looking for in a player earlier. Blu-ray, pass via HDMI the bitstreams of the hi-rez audio formats on the objective side. I think why I want that has been discussed ad nauseum here. Subjectively it should be nice looking and of course sound fabulous, which are two things that really need no explanation as to why I want them.
For reasons that my girlfriend doesn't necessarily understand, I'd sort of prefer the player, pro, and amp to all be from the same company. And quite honestly I can't see pony-ing up the kind of money that Krell is going to be asking for a Blu-ray player whenever they get around to putting one out if their Evo 525 DVD player is any indication of what prices will be like ($15k). Levison is out of reach ($30k for their latest pre-pro announced at CES, the 502), Lexicon didn't have any news, or at least none that I found. So it would appear, initially at least, that Classe may fit my needs nicely if they round out their line up with a Blu-ray player.
So Rebel, here's a great lead in for you to tell us that you have the inside skinny on just such a thing . . . . LOL!- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Minardi2Jump in for $8k not certain that it will do what I want it to do? No thanks - - I'll let Sikoniko get one first and be our guinea pig. :W
You did ask what I was looking for in a player earlier. Blu-ray, pass via HDMI the bitstreams of the hi-rez audio formats on the objective side. I think why I want that has been discussed ad nauseum here. Subjectively it should be nice looking and of course sound fabulous, which are two things that really need no explanation as to why I want them.
For reasons that my girlfriend doesn't necessarily understand, I'd sort of prefer the player, pro, and amp to all be from the same company. And quite honestly I can't see pony-ing up the kind of money that Krell is going to be asking for a Blu-ray player whenever they get around to putting one out if their Evo 525 DVD player is any indication of what prices will be like ($15k). Levison is out of reach ($30k for their latest pre-pro announced at CES, the 502), Lexicon didn't have any news, or at least none that I found. So it would appear, initially at least, that Classe may fit my needs nicely if they round out their line up with a Blu-ray player.
So Rebel, here's a great lead in for you to tell us that you have the inside skinny on just such a thing . . . . LOL!Last edited by RebelMan; 12 January 2008, 03:02 Saturday."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by RebelManWhat I said is correct. Catalog all of the Fox titles and compare and you are speaking to a big fan of the format. :W
Originally posted by RebelManDTS wants to sell licenses to whomever they can. They may prefer the decoding take place in the processor but it makes no technical difference if it were in the player instead. You'll need to prove otherwise. The point of this discussion is that there is no difference where the decoding takes place ONLY what happens to the PCM signal afterwards.
I think you think I am arguing something I am not. I'm not in the camp that believes decoding in the player is "worse" then decoding in the processor. I culd care less where it gets decoded as long as it does and it seems that with a 8k processor from Classe and any BD/HD DVD player in the market (and most in the future) leaves you without being able to decode DTS MA. To me that is unreasonable.
My point in my original post was Classe should at least provide the ability to decode DTS MA as most players can not, and most in the near future (1-2 years) will not.
Yes DTS wants to sell licenses i agree, but I also know there is more to it then that and they are in partnership with CEs to not push DTS in players at this point. Fox releasing discs with DTS MA and players that today do not decode it ensures greater chances of re-purchases of players down to road. I know Fox, CEs and DTS already thought about that one. Its no surprise to me that the PS3 does not have DTS MA yet.
The most interesting thing I have learned in the format war is CEs, Studios, and companies like DTS all work together and share profits.
Did you know that CEs that sell cheap DVD players at a loss get a profit share check from studios? Of topic I know, but interesting.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by VancouverI'm not sure I get the above. The point I was trying to make was a lot of tittles have DTS MA therefor DTS MA is a big deal and getting bigger. Since no players decode it, it becomes important for pros/recievers to do so.
I think you think I am arguing something I am not. I'm not in the camp that believes decoding in the player is "worse" then decoding in the processor. I could care less where it gets decoded as long as it does and it seems that with a 8k processor from Classe and any BD/HD DVD player in the market (and most in the future) leaves you without being able to decode DTS MA. To me that is unreasonable.
My point in my original post was Classe should at least provide the ability to decode DTS MA as most players can not, and most in the near future (1-2 years) will not.
Yes DTS wants to sell licenses i agree, but I also know there is more to it then that and they are in partnership with CEs to not push DTS in players at this point. Fox releasing discs with DTS MA and players that today do not decode it ensures greater chances of re-purchases of players down to road. I know Fox, CEs and DTS already thought about that one. Its no surprise to me that the PS3 does not have DTS MA yet.
The most interesting thing I have learned in the format war is CEs, Studios, and companies like DTS all work together and share profits.
Did you know that CEs that sell cheap DVD players at a loss get a profit share check from studios? Of topic I know, but interesting."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Now that I think we have cleared the air on the indifference between player based and processor based decoded signals I would like to return to the heart of this thread regarding the exciting developments taking place at Classe'.
The SSP-800 is going to be one helluva high-performance machine for both two-channel music and multi-channel movie sources. The processor has been designed to use up to 10 layer PCBs which will provide better isolation between power and ground planes and will reduce potentially harmful interference thus improving signal integrity. There is a linear relationship between multi-layers and increasing costs but the net result will be much better performance. I have been told that the internal board layouts are stunning but this information may only matter to gear heads like myself. However, it should be understood that board design is crucial to squeezing out the most from the electric circuits and accompanying components but many people do not know this. It's this kind of attention to detail plus the combination of component choices and implementations that make all the difference in the world between SSPs.
The DAE-7 upgradeable module used in the SSP-800 is capable of supporting the optional THX Ultra 2 post-processing feature set but I have yet to confirm from Classe' that they will implement it. The DAE-7 also supports Dolby Pro Logic IIx; DPLIIx was missing in the first generation of SSPs. Another missing feature of the 1Gs that should also make it into the SSP-800 is dts-96/24.
Other than these and other previously posted technical aspects, what makes the SSP-800 a potential kick-ass product? One word, Proceed! Anyone familiar with the legacy of the Mark Levinson processors and Proceed AVPs knows how important a statement this is. The Proceed AVP2 is still recognized to this day as being one of the best if not the best processor that has been made. While the SSP-600 that Classe' produced can go toe-to-toe with the AVP2 the SSP-800 will deliver the knock out punch. Why? Because the principle engineer behind the ML and Proceed processors is part of the Classe' Design Team that built the SSP-800 from the ground up to be the best processor ever made. The SSP-600 already carries some of the ML/Proceed heritage but the SSP-800 is a direct descendant from the ML/Proceed gene pool and is the culmination of its prized legacy. When you consider the SSP-800 is the combination of Classe's prowess for high-performance stereo and bequeathed ML/Proceed multi-channel surround sound genetics, but better, you have yourself one helluva high-performance machine!
In the past Classe' has been pretty tight lipped about their plans for an HD player. But in recent weeks shifts in the format war have put Classe' into a position where they can begin to make some decisions about it going forward. While Classe' doesn't know whether they will build an HD player they do know they will make a decision about it within the next six months. Classe' is not interested nor are they willing to re-brand an HD player just to have one in their arsenal. They believe such a choice would compromise what they are all about so they just won't do it. They have a deep passion to better the existing and if making it better can't be done or if it would be to costly to do it then they won't attempt it. Classe' has formed strategic partnerships to assist in their goals of taking high-end audio to the next level and such would be the case with an HD player. If the potential investment they make can be amortized over the life cycle of a product and a profit realized while achieving the desired design goal of the product then Classe' will build an HD player, otherwise they won't. Classe' is currently working with it's partners to determine the feasibility of building a high-performance HD player and if it's doable then we should know some time later in the year.
As for the Omega Series it will be discontinued. The Omega SACD player and pre-amplifier have already been dismissed. No further SACD development or product releases will occur for either the Omega or Delta lines. For the time being Classe' is focused on filling out and improving their Delta Series line-up so no attention to the Omega Series will be paid at present. However, long term plans includes a new vision for the Omega line which will no longer be titled as such. Instead the Omega name will be reincarnated into something else yet to be determined. Development efforts for the new line are on hold until then as the team continue's to channel their efforts on the Delta Series.Last edited by RebelMan; 13 January 2008, 06:00 Sunday."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by RebelManNot true, some players do and more will later. If I recall you own a PS3. Here is an insider tip, it will too.
Can you let me know one player (HD DVD or BD) whcih can decode DTS MA. I know a couple can bitstream, but i am not aware of any that can decode and either send as PCM or via analog.
I have the PS3 and while I have heard many rumours about DTS MA coming to it via firmware I have yet to see any proof that it is coming...or that its even possible to get by just a firmware update. Did you talk to an insider which confirmed it was coming? ANy details you can share on timelines?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by VancouverCan you let me know one player (HD DVD or BD) whcih can decode DTS MA. I know a couple can bitstream, but i am not aware of any that can decode and either send as PCM or via analog.
4 have been identified in this thread... The Pioneer, the Panasonic, the denon and the marantz... as well as the PS3 possibly getting it would be 5.I'm just sittin here watchin the wheels go round and round...- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by VancouverI have the PS3 and while I have heard many rumours about DTS MA coming to it via firmware I have yet to see any proof that it is coming...or that its even possible to get by just a firmware update. Did you talk to an insider which confirmed it was coming? ANy details you can share on timelines?
I think it's time you sell your 1069 and get the 800 Nolan. :twisted:"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by RebelManYes, I got it from a Sony representative at the show. They wouldn't give me any specific timelines but they hinted in the next 2 to 3 months, around Spring time, for the Profile 2.0 update and for dts-HD support around mid-year if not sooner. Of course anything could change between now and then but they confirmed to me that the PS3 can support both so that is no longer in question. The only question is when?
I think it's time you sell your 1069 and get the 800 Nolan. :twisted:
lol...my 1069 is doing great, its a great "bridge" until the classe comes out. Have you had a chance to listen to the 1069 yet with lossless PCM via HDMI?
Dont worry I am totally in the camp of "1.1 is enough", and I will likely upgrade to the 800 in the spring. Really the only thing stopping me is wanting all of my equipment to match. Sounds dumb I know buts its important to me (and the wife). I really wish Classe would make a nice slim Classe D amp.
BTW...that is great news about the PS3!
***curiously how will the 800 perform with 2 ch stereo. I have a dedicated rotel 1072 which I am happy with. Will the 800 with the PS3 connected by HDMI do a better job then the rotel CD player going through the classe in bypass mode?- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by Vancouverlol...my 1069 is doing great, its a great "bridge" until the classe comes out. Have you had a chance to listen to the 1069 yet with lossless PCM via HDMI?
Dont worry I am totally in the camp of "1.1 is enough", and I will likely upgrade to the 800 in the spring. Really the only thing stopping me is wanting all of my equipment to match. Sounds dumb I know buts its important to me (and the wife). I really wish Classe would make a nice slim Classe D amp.
BTW...that is great news about the PS3!
***curiously how will the 800 perform with 2 ch stereo. I have a dedicated rotel 1072 which I am happy with. Will the 800 with the PS3 connected by HDMI do a better job then the rotel CD player going through the classe in bypass mode?"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by VancouverCan you let me know one player (HD DVD or BD) whcih can decode DTS MA. I know a couple can bitstream, but i am not aware of any that can decode and either send as PCM or via analog.
BD Players- Bottom
Comment
-
RebelMan, thanks for the additional details in post 72.
It's funny you bring up the Proceed AVP because I was just discussing it with my B&W/Classe dealer (and former Levinson/Proceed) over the weekend about what a great product it was. If the 800 builds on it, hopefully it exceeds everyone's expectations.
I for one would love to see Classe put out a blu-ray player in '09. Put it in the CDP-300 chassis and sell it for the same price, while dropping the -300, and they'd certainly garner interest from a decent number of folks, myself included.
Any word on how many channels the new class A/B amps will be?- Bottom
Comment
-
Indeed, a Denon and a Classé are sounding different. But comparison on that level includes all stages within a product. RebelMan states that the conversion process (from TrueHD, DTS MA codec to LPCM) will result in identical digital values, respectless which DSP engine is used. It's like using a calculater for math. All models will provide the same mathematical result for a given calculation. Comaparing entire products involves may sections, componentes and process stages (Powers supply, D/A conversion, post processing, analog circitry, connectors and so on). No surprise to have finally different sonical results.- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by hifiguymiI forgot about this player. It's the exact same player as the Denon (since Denon and Marantz are the D and M in D&M Holdings) with a Marantz face.
Eric- Bottom
Comment
-
Both units have exactly the same features and the price difference is only $100.00 (typically Marantz has a three year warranty on their products, so there is the $100.00).
The both have the Realta sxT2 HQV processor, SD card slots on the front panel (when no one else has that), and full decoding of all Dolby and dts formats (including dtsHD MA). I would be surprised if they were not the same piece.
My guess with Blu-ray still young, both companies would have to charge more if they didn't split the development costs and sell the same player with different faces. I wouldn't expect this to become the norm, but for this unit it makes sense.
I did see a CES report that basically said they were the same, but I'm having a hard time finding it. I'll post a link if I do find it.
Eric- Bottom
Comment
-
I was very excited to hear news about the SSP-800, particularly with the price drop!
but I have to be quite honest that the lack of support for truHD and DTS-MA is a real deal breaker for me. Rebelman, you made a good post on the differences between decoding in the player and decoding in the processor...however, there is a definitive place for both:
With BR 1.1 and BR 2.0 profiles coming, it has become increasingly clear the need of at least some decoding capabilities in the players, but no player, including the upcoming Denon 3800 will have the capability, acoustic performance, and post processing (including Bass management, corrections, etc) that a Classe 800 or Halcro SSP100 can have. Furthermore, one HUGE issue is connectivity! If one is to spend $8k in a dedicated processor these days with all the different formats and connections, you want versatility and connectivity....see Denon's upcoming pre/pro for a perfect example.
One a personal level, I've been in pure bliss with my Proceed AVP2+6...as Rebelman mentioned, it is arguably the finest processor ever made. Given the connectivity issues and lack of being able to apply some of the Proceed's post processing to the new formats, I've been searching and waiting for over a year for a new replacement processor......the Classe SSP-800 seemed like the answer, specially once I found out the engineers that created my Proceed AVp2 where behind this upcoming masterpiece.
Unfortunately, I don't see any gains other than MAYBE a marginal increase in acoustic performance and the ability to do LPCM over HDMI. With a good switcher, such as my current setup, and the fact that the SSP-800 is not slated to handle DTS-MA and truHD internally, just makes me sit and wait it out for perhaps an SSP-800A or something like that in about a year, when new format decoding can happen:
- Bottom
Comment
-
ssabripo,
what prog do you use to create that diagram?
With BR 1.1 and BR 2.0 profiles coming, it has become increasingly clear the need of at least some decoding capabilities in the players, but no player, including the upcoming Denon 3800 will have the capability, acoustic performance, and post processing (including Bass management, corrections, etc) that a Classe 800 or Halcro SSP100 can have. .
It is kind of like unzipping a file. Does it matter where it happens? as long as the file is actually run on the beefier machine?I'm just sittin here watchin the wheels go round and round...- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by sikonikossabripo,
what prog do you use to create that diagram?
Originally posted by sikonikoI'm not sure I get what you mean about needing bass management in the player? Even if a signal is sent using LPCM, the bass management will be done in the Proc, not the source. The signal will be sent digitally, over HDMI, not analog, via analog outputs. All processing would be done in the SSP. The only thing the source will do is convert the signal from DTSMA to LPCM.
It is kind of like unzipping a file. Does it matter where it happens? as long as the file is actually run on the beefier machine?
I meant, a player will never have the quality of Bass Management that a Processor will have. Thus, it would be best to let the processor do all the BM, auto correction, post-processing, etc, done rather than the player.
Yes, I know about how the digitial signal works- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by ssabripoI meant, a player will never have the quality of Bass Management that a Processor will have. Thus, it would be best to let the processor do all the BM, auto correction, post-processing, etc, done rather than the player.
Yes, I know about how the digitial signal works
OK, so if LPCM is being sent to the proc via hdmi, "all the BM, auto correction, post-processing, etc," would be done in the proc. So what is the issue?I'm just sittin here watchin the wheels go round and round...- Bottom
Comment
-
Originally posted by sikonikoOK, so if LPCM is being sent to the proc via hdmi, "all the BM, auto correction, post-processing, etc," would be done in the proc. So what is the issue?
With BR 1.1 and BR 2.0 profiles coming, it has become increasingly clear the need of at least some decoding capabilities in the players, but no player, including the upcoming Denon 3800 will have the capability, acoustic performance, and post processing (including Bass management, corrections, etc) that a Classe 800 or Halcro SSP100 can have.- Bottom
Comment
-
[QUOTE=ssabripo]I was very excited to hear news about the SSP-800, particularly with the price drop!
but I have to be quite honest that the lack of support for truHD and DTS-MA is a real deal breaker for me. Rebelman, you made a good post on the differences between decoding in the player and decoding in the processor...however, there is a definitive place for both:
Is this set in stone, or do we still have a chance? I have to say that at that price it should do all things & then do them well.- Bottom
Comment
-
ssabripo, you really shouldn’t look at the potential loss of an on-board SSP decoder for Dolby TrueHD and dts-HD MA as a deal breaker, that would be short sighted.
In a perfect world the player would do all of the necessary mixing of audio streams and decoding and the SSP/AVR would do all of the necessary post processing, bass management and spatial computations. Unfortunately, we don’t live in a perfect world. The marketing juggernaut that is the Internet has seen fit to alter our perceptions of what the perfect world is by convincing us to believe that on-board SSP decoding leads to the promise land.
The reality is on-board SSP decoding is not what the studios see as the promise land but rather as the land of misplaced opportunity. According to Classe’, the studios that they recently approached have no intention of allowing the audio streams to be decoded anywhere but the player. According to the studios, it is impractical to feed an outboard decoder the numerous data streams that must be mixed. Furthermore, when Classe’ approached the studios about the matter they were strangely looked at because the studio’s couldn’t understand why it was thought that the decoding should take place anywhere else but in the player!
Infrastructure support between the player and the SSP will be insufficient to support the advanced codecs if the studios won’t correctly allow the transfer of the RAW bit-streams; rendering this entire discussion a moot point. So unless the software allows it, on-board SSP decoding would go unrealized. Why incur the extra expense in an SSP for a feature that may never be utilized? I'll tell you... marketability and influence. The reality is people are persuaded by features whether they need them or not and Classe' wants to sell SSPs.
Anyone remember HDCD? Has the lack of software support deterred your non-HDCD CD spending habits? I don't think so. Likewise, the lack of software supporting the RAW bit streams enabling HD audio support for outboard decoders won’t deter your HD media spending habits either. Trust me!
If anyone is wondering what sort of impact these intentions the studios have will have on Classe’s decision to release an advanced decoder upgrade the short answer is it will probably matter very little. Ironic? Not really. It will remove any potential need for Classe' to explain away why it wasn’t necessary in the first place. As I said people have a preference for features even if they will never use them. Marketability and influence can be equally powerful as a friend or a foe. Classe’ may be smarter to have that on its side rather than to side against it for the proper reasons.
But if Classe' doesn't offer the upgrade you might be wondering what this means to the players that don’t include the necessary advanced decoders required to work in full tandem with an SSP-800? My answer would be that it means to avoid them and choose another player that does or will, ( a.k.a. PS3 ). The Blu-ray audio specification doesn't require that the advanced audio codecs be used at all, and all HD-DVD players are required to provide the advanced Dolby decoders anyway! Furthermore, most people looking for an HD player are primarily interested in HD video not HD audio and they may prefer not to spend the extra money for what they don’t think they need in a player and will choose those accordingly. Need proof? Consider the plethora of 128kbps lossy compressed iTunes music files and mp3 downloads and there you’ll have it!
For people that do want HD audio, generally enthusiasts with an insatiable need to pursue the grail of high-performance audio, they will most likely be willing to spend the extra money to get that last bit of performance from a player that offers advanced decoding as a service. However, the reality is you don’t need HD audio to fully enjoy HD video, this is something the masses already know that the rest tend to forget or neglect (Lossy vs new lossless/PCM formats.). That's why both types of players exist (some with and some without the advanced decoders) and why they will continue in this fashion for a while. Need more proof? Recall what happened to SACD and DVD-A players and there you'll have it!Last edited by RebelMan; 21 January 2008, 05:45 Monday."Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today."- Bottom
Comment
-
very good points Rebelman.
however, couple of small twists that make it easier for the processor to have the decoding done, is the lack of transport conversion. FOr example, I'm sure you are very aware of the myriads of LFE issues found on many processors with regards to xPCM (whehter LPCM or MPCM) transfers coming from players. With the exception of the Halcro SSP's, which have a "boost" feature of 10dB just for this PCM issue, most processors out there have this dreaded problem.......etc.
While there may be some marketing reasons, and some budget and price point reasons, as to why the advanced formats are not being done in the processor, it certainly cannot be brushed over as simply a gimmick.
My comments were strictly on my personal viewpoint at the moment. As I posted earlier, having the AVP2 with the +6 board, and outboard switcher (MAS7.1), and players that decode internally, certainly provides me with excellent performance at the moment. I believe the Classe ssp-800 will be the bearer of the best in class, as was the proceed. I, for one, will probably wait until the version with onboard decoding comes up.- Bottom
Comment
Comment