PDA

View Full Version : Best sound output from BDP7600



Blackcurrant
12-30-2011, 09:22 AM
I have a BDP7600 connected to an old Denon surround-sound amp that lacks HDMI inputs but does have optical (SPDIF) and analogue inputs for 5.1 surround sound. What is the best way to connect the Philips blu-ray player to the amp: by optical cable or by analogue? Am I right in thinking that the optical cable simply allows the digital signal (Dolby 5.1 or DTS) to pass through to be processed in the amp, whereas the analogue output has already been transcoded within the Philips blu-ray player? If the latter, then analogue connects might give me the best sound if the 7600 is able to transcode HD sound efficiently, but I don't know if this is the case. I can't find any information on the 7600's audio transcoding abilities anywhere in the manual or online.

Blackcurrant
01-03-2012, 11:07 PM
I'm hoping one of the boffins at Philips can answer my question...

kwinnie
01-04-2012, 01:44 AM
i think the analogue will be better than that of optical as the signal loss is less.
but when compared to HDMI, i guess the best will be used HDMI cable as it gives the least signal loss among these 3 options.

also for BDP7600, is the analogue output only left & right? since for BDP9600, it has up to 7....

Blackcurrant
01-07-2012, 05:48 PM
i think the analogue will be better than that of optical as the signal loss is less.
but when compared to HDMI, i guess the best will be used HDMI cable as it gives the least signal loss among these 3 options.

also for BDP7600, is the analogue output only left & right? since for BDP9600, it has up to 7....

The 7600 can output 7.1 surround sound in analogue. It also has HDMI and digital optical audio out. I suspect you're right that the analogue connections give the best sound when connecting to an older AV system, but it would good if someone from Philips could give a bit more info on this.

Philips - Remko
01-10-2012, 01:04 PM
Hi Blackcurrent,

All depends a bit on what you want. Analogue is better - in terms of surrounding sound
but HDMI will give you lossless.

HDMI is convenient, simple, and easy to set up. If you don't care about lossless audio and some extra set up analogue is great.

One thing in mind though that if you use this setting:

tv ---------hdmi---------> 7600--------analog--------> 7.1

then this may cause lip sync issue.

Regards

Blackcurrant
01-10-2012, 01:36 PM
Hi Blackcurrent,

All depends a bit on what you want. Analogue is better - in terms of surrounding sound
but HDMI will give you lossless.

HDMI is convenient, simple, and easy to set up. If you don't care about lossless audio and some extra set up analogue is great.

One thing in mind though that if you use this setting:

tv ---------hdmi---------> 7600--------analog--------> 7.1

then this may cause lip sync issue.

Regards

Theanks Remko. My main question is really whether I should use analogue surround or SPDIF (optical digital), as my AV receiver doesn't an in input for HDMI. I'm currently using SPDIF but wonder if analogue is better. My understanding is that SPDIF merely let through whatever digital sound format is encoded in the source, whereas using analogue outputs will cause the 7600 to transcode to analogue 7.1 first. If this is correct, then I might have fewer compatibility issues using analogue, particularly with newer digital sound formats that my amplifier might not recognize.

kwinnie
01-11-2012, 08:37 AM
then i guess he means the analog is better, no?

Blackcurrant
01-11-2012, 09:49 AM
then i guess he means the analog is better, no?

It's better than HDMI, but I was asking about SPDIF, so the answer depends in whether the optical signal is passed through or transcoded and what the bit rate is. I'm hoping one of the Philips boffins will know the answer.

Oscar
01-11-2012, 11:44 AM
Did you try both? What does your hearing tell you? Which one do you like more? I personally and especially on picture and sound go for what I like, what i feel, what I hear and see.......maybe you like your sound and picture this way and I do it the other way... Tastes are different as are flavours....

Blackcurrant
01-11-2012, 12:00 PM
Did you try both? What does your hearing tell you? Which one do you like more? I personally and especially on picture and sound go for what I like, what i feel, what I hear and see.......maybe you like your sound and picture this way and I do it the other way... Tastes are different as are flavours....

I need to invest in new cables to make a comparison but might do that. It's not just a question of sound quality though. I also want to know if using analogue outputs will give me surround sound from more audio formats than SPDIF would, since I think the Philips transcodes a wide variety of digital sound formats to 5.1 analogue, whereas my AV receiver doesn't. But that's only a suspicion as I can't find any information about the Philips's transcoding ability - which is why I raised the question on this forum.

maumau
01-13-2012, 11:07 PM
Blackcurrant, I am in your situation. I have a BDP8000 connected to Denon Receiver AVR1906 via both optical SPDIF and analog 5.1 connections.
I choose on the receiver which input has to be used.

I make some test by comparing the same lossless track (Dolby True HD or DTS-HD MA) using optical or analog inputs.
In the fist case (optical) only the "core" of the track is sended to the receiver, in the second case (analog) the player decodes the full HD track and sends it to Denon.
For this reason, the analog 5.1 should be better than SPDIF.
But honestly in my tests I did not find any appreciable difference. ANY. In both cases the sound is very good, but I hoped to hear the lossless tracks much better than the lossys.
My conclusion is that the BDP8000 sound decoder is not very good, but I cannot exclude that other home theater systems could have different results.

Blackcurrant
01-14-2012, 11:50 AM
Blackcurrant, I am in your situation. I have a BDP8000 connected to Denon Receiver AVR1906 via both optical SPDIF and analog 5.1 connections.
I choose on the receiver which input has to be used.

I make some test by comparing the same lossless track (Dolby True HD or DTS-HD MA) using optical or analog inputs.
In the fist case (optical) only the "core" of the track is sended to the receiver, in the second case (analog) the player decodes the full HD track and sends it to Denon.
For this reason, the analog 5.1 should be better than SPDIF.
But honestly in my tests I did not find any appreciable difference. ANY. In both cases the sound is very good, but I hoped to hear the lossless tracks much better than the lossys.
My conclusion is that the BDP8000 sound decoder is not very good, but I cannot exclude that other home theater systems could have different results.

Thanks maumau, that's interesting. I have a Denon AVR2106 connected to Philips BDP7600 by optical SPDIF only. I'm going to get analogue cables and try the analogue connection too.

One of the things I'm wondering is whether the optical connection from the Philips merely allows the audio signal from blu-ray discs to pass through, without transcoding it first. If so, you're likely to hear very similar sound output from optical and analogue if the audio codec is one your Denon amp can process. But things should be different if the audio signal is in a format that the Denon can't translate. Then I would expect to see something rubbish like dolby prologic fake surround sound resulting from the optical connection, but full 5.1 channel surround sound coming through the analogue cables as I think the Philips player transcodes on board before outputting to analogue. So if I'm right (but I might not be), then you should get surround sound more often if you use analogue than if you use optical, since some film formats (e.g. downloads) might have exotic audio formats that aren't compatible older Denon amps.

But it might be the case that the Philips blu-ray player transcodes audio signals before outputting over the optical connection, in which case - given your inability to detect any difference in quality - there's probably no point bothering with analogue at all. I'm hoping the Philips techies can tell us.

maumau
01-15-2012, 05:42 PM
I'm wondering is whether the optical connection from the Philips merely allows the audio signal from blu-ray discs to pass through, without transcoding it first. the optical connection sends Denon the full sound of lossy DD and DTS. My Denon can decode these formats properly.
When the audio format is lossless (DD trueHD or DTS-HD MasterAudio), the optical connection cannot manage the full message, and only the "core" (the lossy DD or DTS part) of the track is sended to Denon.
So, in my case, I do not expect any difference when using optical connection between lossy and lossless audio.


Then I would expect to see something rubbish like dolby prologic fake surround sound resulting from the optical connectionno, I have a good 5.1 sound


but full 5.1 channel surround sound coming through the analogue cables as I think the Philips player transcodes on board before outputting to analogue.correct, Philips player transcodes both lossy and lossless audio through analog connections.
The problem, in my case, is that I don't hear the (big) difference that should be.
Is it because of my HT system (actually not cheap, but not hi-end) ?
Is it because of my ears ?
Is it because the Philips lossless audio trancoder is not good enough ?
I don't know, but I bought BDP8000 mainly for the analog outputs that could have permitted to hear loosless audio even with my Denon HDMI-free.

Blackcurrant
01-15-2012, 06:22 PM
the optical connection sends Denon the full sound of lossy DD and DTS. My Denon can decode these formats properly.
When the audio format is lossless (DD trueHD or DTS-HD MasterAudio), the optical connection cannot manage the full message, and only the "core" (the lossy DD or DTS part) of the track is sended to Denon.
So, in my case, I do not expect any difference when using optical connection between lossy and lossless audio.

Thanks, I didn't know that.



correct, Philips player transcodes both lossy and lossless audio through analog connections.
The problem, in my case, is that I don't hear the (big) difference that should be.
Is it because of my HT system (actually not cheap, but not hi-end) ?
Is it because of my ears ?
Is it because the Philips lossless audio trancoder is not good enough ?
I don't know, but I bought BDP8000 mainly for the analog outputs that could have permitted to hear loosless audio even with my Denon HDMI-free.

I don't know the answer to that. I have seen a review of a Samsung blu-ray player with analogue outputs that apparently gave disappointing audio results through analogue, so if it's any consolation I think the Philips is probably just as good. You might be right in suspecting the Philips transcoder is to blame. It probably just does the minimum needed to widen Philips's market to owners of old amps. The fact that Philips won't give any info about it tends to suggest the same.

Have you tried connecting full 7.1 surround to your Denon and selecting 7.1 in the Philips menu? Might just be worth a try, even if you've only got 5 speakers and a sub. 7.1 surround is the best the Philips can do, and I think your Denon can take 7.1 inputs.

One other thought - is HD audio all it's cracked up to be or just marketing hype? Maybe there isn't much of an audible difference between lossy and lossless surround sound.

maumau
01-16-2012, 06:42 AM
Have you tried connecting full 7.1 surround to your Denon and selecting 7.1 in the Philips menu? Might just be worth a try, even if you've only got 5 speakers and a sub. 7.1 surround is the best the Philips can do, and I think your Denon can take 7.1 inputs.
My Denon has only 5.1 inputs, and they are all connected with the analog outputs of Philips player.
The optical output is also connected in the same time.
I choose in the Denon receiver wich input is to be used between the two.

I did not find in the Philips BDP8000 menu a specific voice "7.1", are you sure ?
Actually, I cannot select in the Philips player if optical or analog outputs are to be used ...

Blackcurrant
01-16-2012, 08:28 AM
I did not find in the Philips BDP8000 menu a specific voice "7.1", are you sure ?
Actually, I cannot select in the Philips player if optical or analog outputs are to be used ...

Ah, the BDP7600 has an option to choose 7.1 or 5.1, but the BDP8000 doesn't. That's a bit odd as I thought the BDP8000 was higher spec.

Have you found any official Philips literature that states that the analogue connections output HD sound and not lossy sound?

I've ordered some analogue cables and am going to see I can find an audible difference between optical and analogue on the BDP7600 when they arrive.

maumau
01-16-2012, 09:51 AM
Ah, the BDP7600 has an option to choose 7.1 or 5.1, but the BDP8000 doesn't. That's a bit odd as I thought the BDP8000 was higher spec..it is, simply it has 7.1 output instead of 5.1 + 2ch like BDP7600 (which requires the "5.1" or "7.1" setting).


Have you found any official Philips literature that states that the analogue connections output HD sound and not lossy sound?good question. It's sure that BDP8000 manages lossless sound, but it could be only through HDMI. :confused:
I have to ask to Philips.

Blackcurrant
01-16-2012, 07:05 PM
http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby_TrueHD_DTS-MA_versus_Uncompressed_PCM

Blackcurrant
01-16-2012, 07:10 PM
This article suggests the HD audio is decoded to lossless linear PCM, which is the universal audio codec used by all home cinema amps:
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-13817_7-6462511-4.html

So it's more than likely that the Philips outputs lossless sound in this format via its analogue connections. But as the article I posted earlier says, it's almost impossible to hear any difference.

So HD audio really is just a marketing gimmick!

maumau
01-17-2012, 09:25 AM
thank you for the info !

This link doesn't work on my pc:

http://www.hemagazine.com/node/Dolby_TrueHD_DTS-MA_versus_Uncompressed_PCM

Blackcurrant
01-17-2012, 09:36 AM
here's the text of the article:

"How well do the new compression schemes from Dolby and DTS stack up against uncompressed audio? We buff up our golden ears to audition and compare the latest Blu-ray audio codecs, in the design labs that developed them.
Compared to DVD, the tremendous increase in storage capacity of the Blu-ray disc format, necessary to carry the increased high definition video data payload, also provides for expanded audio options, including the ability to carry so-called lossless audio formats such as Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio.
While many of the initial Blu-ray movie titles feature conventional Dolby and DTS digital soundtracks, a number of them also feature high resolution uncompressed pulse code modulation (PCM) soundtracks to appeal to owners of high end surround sound systems.
The upgrade of the High Definition Multimedia Interface to Version 1.3 includes cable upgrades along with transmitter and receiver modifications to allow substantially higher overall bitrate flows, and allows for lossless audio formats to be sent from source components to be decoded by newer A/V receivers and processors.
As with their movie theater equivalents, both Dolby and DTS home audio formats use what is called lossy compression, in order to fit into the relatively narrow amount of data space allotted on DVDs (and in the case of Dolby, with HDTV broadcasts as well). The need to compress digital audio stems from the way conventional PCM audio works – the bitrate remains the same at all volume levels and frequencies, even when there is little or no signal actually being coded.

With Blu-ray’s five-fold increase in data storage capacity (compared to DVD), both Dolby and DTS have developed new audio encoder/decoders (codecs) that are 100% bit-for-bit identical to the original PCM master, but with substantial bitrate reduction efficiency as well, freeing up more space on the disc for added content, extended/alternate versions and the like.
To get the latest scoop on these new codecs, Editor-in-Chief Geoffrey Morrison and I made arrangements to visit both companies’ respective headquarters, where we would be able to hear definitive A/B comparisons that would be otherwise impossible to properly set up in our own facilities.
Our first stop was at Dolby Laboratories’ headquarters in San Francisco. After a short tour of their impressive facilities, our hosts ushered us into what one of their engineers called their “codec killer room.” The specially designed room adheres to the ITU-R BS.1161-1 critical listening evaluation specification and companion BS.1284-1 Annex document that together specify in great detail the precise conditions, procedures and protocols necessary to achieve repeatable and truly useful results in the on-going development of these codecs. A suitably high resolution 5.1 system resides in the room, with five Revel Ultima Studio full range loudspeakers, along with a Paradigm subwoofer and a stack of Bryston power amplifiers rounding out the gear.
The control panel allowed for selection between a number of sources, including the original PCM multi-channel audio track, as well as TrueHD, Dolby Digital Plus, high bitrate 640 kilobits per second (kbps)Dolby Digital, and lower 448 kbps DVD-format Dolby Digital choices that have all been through the full encode/decode process.
The process of codec evaluation includes pre-screening potential listeners for their aural acuity as well as their consistency after multiple trials. Panelists are asked to listen to a reference clip, and then compare it against another clip that may be the same identical reference source, or a different clip that has been codec’d. They are then asked to score their perception of the audio quality on a five point scale. The lowest 1.0 grade is rated very annoying. The 2.0 grade is annoying, while the middle 3.0 grade is rated at slightly annoying. The 4.0 grade is rated perceptible, but not annoying, while the highest 5.0 grade is rated as imperceptible – the goal of the codec designers is to make the codec itself disappear, from an audio standpoint.
The computer chooses which clips are presented to the listener on a randomized basis to ensure true subjectivity, and the post-session scoring data is then entered into a database and statistically validated against the actual presentation order of the test clips. From that, the engineers can glean a useful score as to the performance of the codec compared to the reference uncompressed source clip, and the process ensures that individual biases are eliminated along the way. It is both time-consuming, and given the repetitive nature of listening to dozens or hundreds of clips in a given listening session, mind-numbingly boring (at least to me, anyway). This is why even keen-eared reviewers simply can’t perform an honest evaluation of codec sound quality in their own home theaters – it can only be done under these most rigidly controlled conditions, with specialized equipment and software that is designed expressly for the task.
Due to the masking of sounds that inevitably occurs during complex and bombastic passages, the best evaluation results are obtained using relatively simple program clips, limited in duration to around 10 seconds or so and on constant replay. For our limited test, our hosts chose a brief audio clip from the movie American Beauty, the so-called “Spectacular” dream sequence where Kevin Spacey’s character ruminates on his life while looking upward at the inviting Mina Suvari, barely dressed in rose petals and surrounded by additional petals that fall towards him. The track features simple, center-channel anchored dialog, along with gentle percussive bell-like notes (xylophone, perhaps?) along with even more gentle triangle bell embellishments—just the ticket for an A/B codec comparison.
Neither Geoff nor I could hear any differences between the original PCM track and the TrueHD version, which should be the case, as they’re bit-for-bit identical. The lossless coding process is analogous to “zipping” computer files—it’s simply a function of more efficient packing that loses nothing along the way. With movies, TrueHD typically provides a two- or three-to-one bitrate reduction compared to the original PCM source.
Next, we compared the original to the Dolby Digital Plus version (that codec is found on numerous BD titles, and like TrueHD, is fully backward compatible with regular Dolby Digital decoders). Even on this extremely high-end system, we couldn’t hear any difference between the uncompressed and the compressed. Then, we compared the higher bitrate (640 kbps) that is found on the Dolby Digital tracks on Blu-rays to the original. "Golden Ears" Morrison was able to hear the difference, but I, and most others in the room with us, did not. Each of us had our turn in the prime listening chair, and couldn’t know the origin of the clips or their order of presentation.
The shocker came when we compared the lower 448 kbps Dolby Digital DVD bitrate to the original. There was an audible difference, but it was only ever-so-slightly noticeable (and this is with a high end audio system in an acoustically controlled environment that is so far beyond what typical home theater systems are capable of resolving). There was just the slightest decrease in presence with the DD version, not exactly a softening of the sound, but just a tad less ambience and a similarly small tightening of the front soundstage’s depth. Quite a remarkable result, I thought, and I was highly impressed with how much fidelity can be packed into such a relatively small amount of bitspace. If I was doing actual scoring, I would have awarded a 4.8 grade to the results I heard – the audible difference was that subtle.
PAGE 2: On to DTS . . .
DTS
The following week found us at DTS’ facilities in Agoura Hills, just northwest of Los Angeles. There we had a tour of their deluxe screening room, and soon found ourselves in one of their demonstration sound studios, where a 7.1 system featuring seven KRK Expose E8T monitor speakers was teamed with two Bag End PS18E subwoofers. In lieu of a stack of power amplifiers, this system was instead easily powered by a Denon AVR-2808CI audio/video receiver, and we were treated to a number of high resolution audio and HD video clips from the latest DTS Blu-ray demonstration disc.
After an informative presentation which explained the benefits of their latest codec technologies, we dove right into the A/B comparisons between the original PCM versions and the various DTS codec’d versions. The short clip chosen for us came from a DTS Blue Man Group recording, again using a spare, sparse selection for an easier and more revealing A/B comparison. Again, we found no differencebetween the uncompressed original track and the DTS-HD Master Audio version.
In addition to the DTS HD-Master Audio lossless codec, DTS also offers up a nearly lossless high bitrate format called DTS-HD High Resolution Audio, with up to four times the bitrate of their core DTS format, which we were able to audition via their Blu-ray demonstration disc. We then conducted A/B comparisons between the high resolution Blue Man Group PCM original soundtrack and the core DTS codec which has a Blu-ray and DVD bitrate of either 768 kbps or 1.5 Mb/s, in a somewhat similar but not totally blind fashion that we went through the week before.
It was déjà vu all over again. We switched back and forth between the original PCM master and the core DTS version, and here we found only the slightest, barely noticeable difference. From a frequency response standpoint, both versions were identical, with clearly delineated high frequency details, but the compressed version differed slightly only in barely noticeable presence —that sense of being “there”, with the original PCM track having just slightly greater overall richness. Whatever acoustic elements were removed in the code/decode process were clearly superfluous, at least for the most part, as the audible differences were so minor as to be almost unnoticeable—again, another testament to the capabilities of this highly refined codec.
A/V receiver and surround processor makers are quickly adding these advanced decoders in their new model offerings, and broadening the price range to a wider audience, with A/V receiver models so equipped priced at under $600 available later this summer. Owners of Sony’s Playstation 3 gaming console got the DTS-HD Master Audio decoder as a freebie this past spring, as a feature added during a PS3 system software upgrade, and more HDMI version 1.3 Blu-ray players that can pass these high resolution bitstreams to downstream high resolution surround decoders are entering the market as well.
Conclusion
From both listening sessions, I came away with a newfound respect for the abilities of these audio codecs to deliver excellent sound quality at dramatically reduced bitrates. Ideally, I’d like to see future Blu-ray releases moving away from bit-hog multi-channel PCM tracks and instead use one of these high resolution codecs, as a typical Blu-ray movie’s 5.1 channel PCM soundtrack consumes a whopping 6.9 Mb/s all the time. That’s a large chunk of a disc’s available bitspace, some of which could be better used for maximized video coding precision, for example.
These new high-resolution codecs are backwards compatible with existing decoders, but only in their most basic form. For the better sound you'll need either a player that decodes (and sends that audio out via PCM over HDMI or analog 6-channel out) or a receiver/processor that decodes the format, and a player that will output the bitstream of these codecs.
Dolby Digital Plus and DTS-HD High Resolution offer tremendous sound quality and are extremely efficient for the quality they provide. While still compressed audio, they're closer to the original master than most people will be able to hear.

For those who will settle for nothing but the best, the bit-for-bit accuracy of Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD-Master Audio provide them the confidence that what they’re listening to at home is identical as the original studio master soundtrack.


So Subtle
What impressed, or perhaps surprised, me most about these tests was how good the base codecs actually are. The difference between the original audio and the basic Dolby Digital and DTS is a lot subtler than you’d expect, given the extreme amount of compression (around 10:1, a similar ratio to that of 128 kbps MP3).
That said, I could definitely pick out the difference between the lesser (or perhaps it’s more accurate to say “better”) compressed versions and the higher compressed versions. The difference is mostly in the presence, or ambience. The lossless, Dolby Digital Plus, and DTS-HD High Resolution compressed tracks were just a little more open and airy. I hate to say it, but they just sounded more realistic and transparent. The 448 kbps Dolby Digital and standard DTS tracks were less so, a little more closed off. Between the 640 kbps Dolby Digital and the uncompressed, the difference was even less noticeable. Enough so that most people, even those trained to listen for it, probably won’t be able to hear the difference.
The core DTS call is a little harder, as there wasn’t the same blind system in place to A/B as precisely as at Dolby. Results were similar, though.So by all means go for the new codecs, as they definitely sound better than what was on DVD. Uncompressed PCM, on the other hand, is just a waste of space (though compatible with everything).
If you’ve been listening at home and are sure you can hear a difference on your favorite discs, be wary. There is absolutely no way to tell that compressed and uncompressed tracks on any disc have anything to do with each other. They could come from different masters, they could be mixed differently, or any number of other variables that makes an in-home test, unfortunately, impossible. That said, trust your ears, and go with the one that sounds best to you. –Geoffrey Morrison"

Blackcurrant
01-17-2012, 06:40 PM
thank you for the info !

This link doesn't work on my pc:


One other thing - have you chosen PCM, bitstream, or auto in digital audio options on your blu-ray player? If you choose PCM, is it possible you will get full HD audio passing through the optical link as linear PCM? If so, there won't be any difference at all between optical or analogue as both will transmit full HD sound.

edit: scrub that - just seen that PCM downsamples to 2-channel stereo.

maumau
01-18-2012, 06:27 AM
:( the customer service told me that full HD sound is available only over HDMI, not on analog outputs :mad:
Philips do not say anything in the brochures about this "strange" thing.
Very bad, as I bought BDP8000 mainly for this reason ...

This is my first Philips AV component, and I am very happy for the excellent video performance of the player.
But Philips ...

Blackcurrant
01-18-2012, 07:27 AM
:( the customer service told me that full HD sound is available only over HDMI, not on analog outputs :mad:
Philips do not say anything in the brochures about this "strange" thing.
Very bad, as I bought BDP8000 mainly for this reason ...

This is my first Philips AV component, and I am very happy for the excellent video performance of the player.
But Philips ...

That's very disappointing. It might be the same story with other manufacturers, so maybe you'll have to bite the bullet and buy an onkyo amp.

Blackcurrant
01-29-2012, 03:56 PM
Some results comparing sound output via optical and via analogue cables below. There's no right answer unfortunately. Sometimes I get surround sound only via optical; sometimes only via analogue; and sometimes through both. It seems the Philips can transcode AAC surround sound into analogue form, but not DTS. So you need to use both sets of cables and switch to whichever is most appropriate. Not ideal. Clearly the Philips bluray player has limited transcoding abilities. And as Maumau has discovered, it can't transcode HD sound at all.


Bladerunner MKV with sound encoded in Dolby 5.1.
Result with optical cable connection: Dolby 5.1 output by Denon amp
Result with analogue cables: Dolby 5.1 output by Denon amp

Wall.e with sound encoded in DTS ES 6.1
Optical cable: DTS surround
Analogue cable: stereo output by 2 speakers only

The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Next (SWA DTS 5.1 sound)
Optical: DTS surround
Analogue: stereo from 2 speakers only

Baraka (AAC 5.1)
Optical: Stereo from 2 speakers only
Analogue: surround sound

The Thin Red Line (AAC 5.1)
Optical: stereo from 2 speakers
Analogue: surround sound

MakeM
07-11-2012, 09:08 PM
:( the customer service told me that full HD sound is available only over HDMI, not on analog outputs :mad:
Philips do not say anything in the brochures about this "strange" thing.



Is this the case with BDP7700/12 as well???:( I bought this player just for this reason, would like to use my old amplifier for a few more years. What can we get out of analog 5.1, same as toslink?

Also, I don´t use subwoofer because my main speakers have 10" woofers, there is no way I can redirect the LFE to main speakers with analog 5.1? Oh boy...

Bradford
07-12-2012, 03:45 AM
Is this the case with BDP7700/12 as well???:( I bought this player just for this reason, would like to use my old amplifier for a few more years. What can we get out of analog 5.1, same as toslink?

Also, I don´t use subwoofer because my main speakers have 10" woofers, there is no way I can redirect the LFE to main speakers with analog 5.1? Oh boy...

This is not Philips specific. True HD audio can only be sent through by HDMI.

MakeM
07-12-2012, 06:37 AM
This is not Philips specific. True HD audio can only be sent through by HDMI.

Ok, so Linear PCM is the correct name for the lossless audio format we normally get from analog 5.1. Hopefully that works. :)

Now, all I need is to get that LFE to my front channels, is there a way? Receiver does that if I use toslink but not with analog inputs...