Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
  • Topic Tools
  • Display
  • Bookmark and Share

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0

    Best sound output from BDP7600

    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.

  2. #2
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    I'm hoping one of the boffins at Philips can answer my question...

  3. #3
    Diamond Member
    Points: 4,685, Level: 20
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 365
    Overall activity: 25.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience PointsNew Achievement!
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,083
    Points
    4,685
    Level
    20
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Rep Power
    6
    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....

  4. #4
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by kwinnie View Post
    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.

  5. #5
    Moderator
    Points: 10,990, Level: 31
    Level completed: 63%, Points required for next Level: 260
    Overall activity: 16.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience PointsNew Achievement!10000 Experience Points
    Philips - Remko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    555
    Points
    10,990
    Level
    31
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 2 Posts
    Rep Power
    10
    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
    Last edited by Philips - Remko; 01-10-2012 at 02:10 PM.
    Forum Mod

  6. #6
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Philips - Remko View Post
    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.

  7. #7
    Diamond Member
    Points: 4,685, Level: 20
    Level completed: 9%, Points required for next Level: 365
    Overall activity: 25.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience PointsNew Achievement!
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,083
    Points
    4,685
    Level
    20
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Rep Power
    6
    then i guess he means the analog is better, no?

  8. #8
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0

  9. #9
    Bronze Member
    Points: 924, Level: 7
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 26
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!
    maumau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    20
    Points
    924
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    thank you for the info !

    This link doesn't work on my pc:
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcurrant View Post

  10. #10
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    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"

  11. #11
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maumau View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Blackcurrant; 01-17-2012 at 08:49 PM. Reason: error

  12. #12
    Bronze Member
    Points: 924, Level: 7
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 26
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!
    maumau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    20
    Points
    924
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    the customer service told me that full HD sound is available only over HDMI, not on analog outputs
    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 ...

  13. #13
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maumau View Post
    the customer service told me that full HD sound is available only over HDMI, not on analog outputs
    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.

  14. #14
    New Member
    Points: 332, Level: 3
    Level completed: 82%, Points required for next Level: 18
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered250 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2
    Points
    332
    Level
    3
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by maumau View Post
    the customer service told me that full HD sound is available only over HDMI, not on analog outputs
    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...

  15. #15
    Bronze Member
    Points: 906, Level: 7
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    3 months registered500 Experience PointsNew Achievement!

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    24
    Points
    906
    Level
    7
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    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!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Topics

  1. PCM output on OPTICAL OUTPUT 42PFL7606K
    By tiomiguel in forum TV: Connectivity
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-27-2012, 01:51 PM
  2. Digital output on 40pfl9705h/12
    By WJJK in forum TV: Connectivity
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-21-2011, 10:53 PM
  3. PCM on the digital output
    By carlosfm in forum TV: Connectivity
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-04-2011, 02:13 PM
  4. BDP7500B2/12 audio 5.1 output
    By robby_fr in forum Blu-ray: BDP7000 Series
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-21-2011, 09:55 AM
  5. BDP7500B2/12 and 5.1 analog output
    By gman in forum Blu-ray: BDP7000 Series
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-04-2011, 10:46 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •