Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
Is there any point of getting the SONY SACD SCD-XA5400ES player if I already have the best current Oppo available? Does the SONY SCD-XA5400ES player still offer any advantage for CD and SACD playing?
Thanks, Simonel |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On 25 Jul 2013 18:38:54 GMT, wrote:
Is there any point of getting the SONY SACD SCD-XA5400ES player if I already have the best current Oppo available? Does the SONY SCD-XA5400ES player still offer any advantage for CD and SACD playing? Thanks, Simonel Or you could upgrade the BDP-105: http://www.modwright.com/modificatio...dp83se-mod.php |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
Tater wrote:
On 25 Jul 2013 18:38:54 GMT, wrote: Is there any point of getting the SONY SACD SCD-XA5400ES player if I already have the best current Oppo available? Does the SONY SCD-XA5400ES player still offer any advantage for CD and SACD playing? Or you could upgrade the BDP-105: http://www.modwright.com/modificatio...dp83se-mod.php Hold on, you've got one of the best-performing players ever made, with the remarkable SaberDAC, and someone puts *tubes* into the signal path. How is that not like hitching your Lamborghini to a carthorse? Madness! Andrew. |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
In article , Tater
wrote: On 25 Jul 2013 18:38:54 GMT, wrote: Is there any point of getting the SONY SACD SCD-XA5400ES player if I already have the best current Oppo available? Does the SONY SCD-XA5400ES player still offer any advantage for CD and SACD playing? Thanks, Simonel Or you could upgrade the BDP-105: http://www.modwright.com/modificatio...dp83se-mod.php This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, It you want the best SACD playback, one of the purpose-built ES series Sony players is likely going to do a better job than any player which converts DSD before playing it. *As to whether or not this difference is better or worse than the stock Oppo BDP-105 player depends upon one's taste in playback. There are a number of mods being done to the Oppos and I've heard a few (not this one though) and even though I've never compared a modded Oppo to the same model, stock, I have compared them directly with my XA777ES and they always come off sounding second best - not by much, you understand, but enough that I would NEVER consider trading my Sony for one. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
Audio_Empire wrote:
This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? Why would downsampling to LPCM do any harm, anyway? All the damage has been done already during the DSD encoding. Andrew. |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On 7/26/2013 2:42 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? Why would downsampling to LPCM do any harm, anyway? All the damage has been done already during the DSD encoding. Andrew. Hah. In either case there appears to be some god-like hearing involved. Personally I wouldn't buy a Sony CD/DVD player anyway, but that has to do with their fussiness about CD-Rs and DVD-Rs; something fishy going on there. bl |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On Friday, July 26, 2013 12:26:53 PM UTC-7, Bob Lombard wrote:
On 7/26/2013 2:42 PM, Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? Why would downsampling to LPCM do any harm, anyway? All the damage has been done already during the DSD encoding. Andrew. Hah. In either case there appears to be some god-like hearing involved. Nah, just some critical, informed listening. Personally I wouldn't buy a Sony CD/DVD player anyway, but that has to do with their fussiness about CD-Rs and DVD-Rs; something fishy going on there. I've never owned a Sony CD/DVD player, so I can't comment on that. bl |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
In article ,
Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? They use the SabreDAC 32. It converts DSD to LPCM. My information comes from the Oppo Technical guy. Why would downsampling to LPCM do any harm, anyway? All the damage has been done already during the DSD encoding. Damage? What damage? --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On 26 Jul 2013 17:24:21 GMT, Audio_Empire
wrote: In article , Tater wrote: On 25 Jul 2013 18:38:54 GMT, wrote: Is there any point of getting the SONY SACD SCD-XA5400ES player if I already have the best current Oppo available? Does the SONY SCD-XA5400ES player still offer any advantage for CD and SACD playing? Thanks, Simonel Or you could upgrade the BDP-105: http://www.modwright.com/modificatio...dp83se-mod.php This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, It you want the best SACD playback, one of the purpose-built ES series Sony players is likely going to do a better job than any player which converts DSD before playing it. Looking at the BDP-105 manual, there is a SACD Output menu option that allows you to select either DSD or PCM to be supplied to both the HDMI output and the internal DAC for the analog outputs. Why would they have this option if the DAC always converts DSD to PCM as you claim? |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
Audio_Empire wrote:
In article , Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? They use the SabreDAC 32. It converts DSD to LPCM. My information comes from the Oppo Technical guy. Hmm. Must be true, then. Under the circumstances, I think I'll go by the ESS white paper. But even if it does, there's no reason to suspect that doing so will cause any audible damage. Why would downsampling to LPCM do any harm, anyway? All the damage has been done already during the DSD encoding. Damage? What damage? Single-bit sigma-delta converters are inherently unstable. Whether it's during analogue to digital conversion or shortening the wordlength from PCM, you must add dither to linearize the process. The problem with single-bit sigma-delta (aka DSD) is that it is impossible to add enough dither without overloading the modulator. (There wouldn't have been any problem if the designers of DSD had used two-bit sigma-delta instead of one-bit.) DSD-wide (i.e. 8-bit sigma-delta) solves the problem, but you still have to go down from wide to 1-bit to maks a SACD, and the problem recurs. This was proven by Vanderkooy and Lip****z in their clasic paper. [1] There was a rather feeble reply from Philips, but no attempt to rebut Vanderkooy and Lip****z's proof. And it is a real mathematical proof, the most reliable indication of truth there is. These days, the highest-quality audio converters use multi-bit sigma-delta modulators. (The one in the Sabre DAC is probably six bits wide, although the white paper is rather vague about that.) For these reasons, I suspect that if you want to convert DSD to analogue (and remove high-frequency spuriae) there isn't any better way to do it. As usual, I'm happy to be proved wrong by some real evdence. Andrew. [1] http://sjeng.org/ftp/SACD.pdf |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On Saturday, July 27, 2013 8:59:47 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote:
Audio_Empire wrote: In article , Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? They use the SabreDAC 32. It converts DSD to LPCM. My information comes from the Oppo Technical guy. Hmm. Must be true, then. Under the circumstances, I think I'll go by the ESS white paper. But even if it does, there's no reason to suspect that doing so will cause any audible damage. Why would downsampling to LPCM do any harm, anyway? All the damage has been done already during the DSD encoding. Damage? What damage? Single-bit sigma-delta converters are inherently unstable. Whether it's during analogue to digital conversion or shortening the wordlength from PCM, you must add dither to linearize the process. The problem with single-bit sigma-delta (aka DSD) is that it is impossible to add enough dither without overloading the modulator. (There wouldn't have been any problem if the designers of DSD had used two-bit sigma-delta instead of one-bit.) DSD-wide (i.e. 8-bit sigma-delta) solves the problem, but you still have to go down from wide to 1-bit to maks a SACD, and the problem recurs. This was proven by Vanderkooy and Lip****z in their clasic paper. [1] There was a rather feeble reply from Philips, but no attempt to rebut Vanderkooy and Lip****z's proof. And it is a real mathematical proof, the most reliable indication of truth there is. These days, the highest-quality audio converters use multi-bit sigma-delta modulators. (The one in the Sabre DAC is probably six bits wide, although the white paper is rather vague about that.) For these reasons, I suspect that if you want to convert DSD to analogue (and remove high-frequency spuriae) there isn't any better way to do it. As usual, I'm happy to be proved wrong by some real evdence. Thanks for the clarification. I'm going to have to run over to Oppo US headquarters and talk with their technical guy again (they're about a mile from here). What you say makes sense and the white paper certainly points at what you say being correct. On the other hand, it still doesn't alter the fact that my Sony XA777ES player provides the best sounding SACD and Red Book playback I've ever heard. |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On Friday, July 26, 2013 8:17:44 PM UTC-7, Tater wrote:
On 26 Jul 2013 17:24:21 GMT, Audio_Empire wrote: snip Looking at the BDP-105 manual, there is a SACD Output menu option that allows you to select either DSD or PCM to be supplied to both the HDMI output and the internal DAC for the analog outputs. Why would they have this option if the DAC always converts DSD to PCM as you claim? Damn good question. I'm going to have to look into this some more. |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
Audio_Empire wrote:
On Saturday, July 27, 2013 8:59:47 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: In article , Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? They use the SabreDAC 32. It converts DSD to LPCM. My information comes from the Oppo Technical guy. Hmm. Must be true, then. Under the circumstances, I think I'll go by the ESS white paper. But even if it does, there's no reason to suspect that doing so will cause any audible damage. Thanks for the clarification. I'm going to have to run over to Oppo US headquarters and talk with their technical guy again (they're about a mile from here). What you say makes sense and the white paper certainly points at what you say being correct. It might just be a matter of terminology. Perhaps there is some decimation going on. However, DSD runs at 2.8224 MHz and the SabreDac's anti-imaging filter runs at "up to" 40 MHz, so the obvious way to do it, if you had compute power to spare, would be to convert DSD to DSD-wide (i.e. PCM-narrow) and feed it straight into the filter. Andrew. |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
On Sunday, July 28, 2013 10:51:55 PM UTC+9, Andrew Haley wrote:
Audio_Empire wrote: On Saturday, July 27, 2013 8:59:47 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: In article , Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? They use the SabreDAC 32. It converts DSD to LPCM. My information comes from the Oppo Technical guy. Hmm. Must be true, then. Under the circumstances, I think I'll go by the ESS white paper. But even if it does, there's no reason to suspect that doing so will cause any audible damage. Thanks for the clarification. I'm going to have to run over to Oppo US headquarters and talk with their technical guy again (they're about a mile from here). What you say makes sense and the white paper certainly points at what you say being correct. It might just be a matter of terminology. Perhaps there is some decimation going on. However, DSD runs at 2.8224 MHz and the SabreDac's anti-imaging filter runs at "up to" 40 MHz, so the obvious way to do it, if you had compute power to spare, would be to convert DSD to DSD-wide (i.e. PCM-narrow) and feed it straight into the filter. Andrew. Hi Andrew, In your opinion, what would be the best choice for serious listening (Oppo 105 or XA5400ES)?. Any comments would be gratefully appreciated. I am not good with technical details. Many Thanks in Advance /Aruna |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
|
#17
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
news wrote:
I don't like the performance of my Oppo's RC, and there seem to be many others who say the same thing. It's not too responsive, as compared to many others that I use. "RC" as in Remote Control? Yes, I agree. It's not very good at all. Andrew. |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
|
|||
|
|||
Oppo BDP-105 vs. SONY SCD-XA5400ES
In article ,
wrote: On Sunday, July 28, 2013 10:51:55 PM UTC+9, Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: On Saturday, July 27, 2013 8:59:47 AM UTC-7, Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: In article , Andrew Haley wrote: Audio_Empire wrote: This is all fine and good, and perhaps you can even hear "some*" difference, but it still doesn't alter the fact that the Oppo in question still uses the same SabreDac 32 which converts DSD to LPCM before playing it, I don't think so: according to their white paper, they feed the DSD data into their anti-imaging filter, which runs at a very high frequency. There's no suggestion that they downsample it to LPCM first; or do you have some other information? They use the SabreDAC 32. It converts DSD to LPCM. My information comes from the Oppo Technical guy. Hmm. Must be true, then. Under the circumstances, I think I'll go by the ESS white paper. But even if it does, there's no reason to suspect that doing so will cause any audible damage. Thanks for the clarification. I'm going to have to run over to Oppo US headquarters and talk with their technical guy again (they're about a mile from here). What you say makes sense and the white paper certainly points at what you say being correct. It might just be a matter of terminology. Perhaps there is some decimation going on. However, DSD runs at 2.8224 MHz and the SabreDac's anti-imaging filter runs at "up to" 40 MHz, so the obvious way to do it, if you had compute power to spare, would be to convert DSD to DSD-wide (i.e. PCM-narrow) and feed it straight into the filter. Andrew. Hi Andrew, In your opinion, what would be the best choice for serious listening (Oppo 105 or XA5400ES)?. Any comments would be gratefully appreciated. I am not good with technical details. Many Thanks in Advance /Aruna I'm not Andrew and while I have heard a XA5400ES, I'm more familiar with a Sony XA77ES SACD/CD player. It is still, after 10 years, the best sounding CD player (and SACD player) I have heard. Easily besting the Oppo 105. Audio_Empire |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Sony SCD-XA5400ES CD Player | High End Audio | |||
Sony SCD-XA5400ES CD Player | Audio Opinions | |||
OPPO 970HD as a DVD-A or SACD player | High End Audio |