[SGK]

Hi there

I am considering buying a BDP-1 to feed a Casablanca III HD. I recently found this community and, while I have done a decent amount of reading, I still have some questions or things I would like to get confirmed. In no particular order:

1. Gap-less playback

How is this handled on the BDP-1 and its interface? Is gap-less implemented properly and working well without any blips/hiccups etc. What does one need to do to indicate a gap-less album?

2. Support for multi-channel audio

Am I right in understanding that the AES/EBU interface doesn't have the capacity for multi-channel high-resolution audio? I've never really found a definitive answer to this. If it has or were it to have so, I presume the BDP-1 could simply play a multichannel FLAC/ALAC file and the channel separation and decoding would all be done by the DAC (in my case the CB III). If it doesn't, I'm a little surprised that Bryston didn't add a higher bandwidth connection such as HDMI to the BDP-1. Can I get some insight as to Bryston's thoughts re multi-channel and the use of HDMI for transporting audio?

EDIT:  even the Oppo 93 will play high-res multichannel FLAC files.  What's not clear to me is whether the constraint (if there is one) in the BDP-1 is due to the bandwidth of the provided AES/EBU / SPDIF connections or due to some other throttling imposed by Bryston (or both).

3. Wi-Fi Connectivity

I understand that the CAT-5 port is designed for connection to a network to allow control of the BDP-1 via a computer or via an iPad/iPod/iPhone etc over Wi-Fi. Are there any issues related to using one of the USB ports for a Wi-Fi dongle to avoid the hassle of running CAT-5 cable (including any risk of interference/noise because the Wi-Fi and data are running on the same USB bus). Hopefully that question makes sense.

4. Preferred Control Device/Software

I would like to control the BDP-1 from an iPad, iPhone or, possibly, an old iPod Touch. Can all of these control the BDP-1 - i.e. grab which ever is handy at any point of time - or does one have to dedicate a single device to this? Which software is currently recommended for these devices?

5. NAS Support

I understand that there is no support for NAS and that the CAT-5 port is for connection to a network only to allow remote control of the player. While I don't think this is a big negative for the BDP-1 today, I can imagine this being an issue in the future. Would NAS support in the future require different hardware?

6. Sharing a USB Drive

This may not be BDP-1 specific but is it possible to connect a drive (I have an enclosure with 2TB drive with both USB2 and eSata connections) simultaneously to both the BDP-1 and an Oppo 93? I can connect this drive via eSata to the Oppo and use the USB connection to the BPD-1.  Obviously both the Oppo and the BDP-1 won't be playing at the same time.  Thankfully, Bryston implemented NTFS compatibility as FAT32 is no good for the Oppo. I will have video files on the drive for playback on the Oppo and audio files on the drive for playback on the BDP-1.

Regards

Steve

[SHV]

Here is a BDP-1/Theta CB thread that may be of some interest:

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1374002/bryston-bdp-1-for-theta-digital-aerial-music-and-home-theater-system

Steve

[SGK]

Thanks.  Was aware of the thread.  Steve has become a big fan and Theatermax a dealer for Bryston. It was those guys which put me on to it.  I just want to iron out these questions, with a bit of luck with input from Bryston.

Cheers

Steve

[jjc1]

 Steve, as far as control device, you can run as many as you want at the same time. I usually have 2 or 3 running at the same time on 1 device like the Ipad or others running on a laptop.
 

[SGK]

Steve, as far as control device, you can run as many as you want at the same time. I usually have 2 or 3 running at the same time on 1 device like the Ipad or others running on a laptop.
 

Thanks.  I just want to make sure we mean the same thing.  I mean having an iPad, an iPhone and an iPhone Touch, each with a relevant application loaded and running, and being able to pick up anyone of them and control the BDP. I'm not talking about different apps running at the same time "on 1 device".

[James Tanner]

Thanks.  I just want to make sure we mean the same thing.  I mean having an iPad, an iPhone and an iPhone Touch, each with a relevant application loaded and running, and being able to pick up anyone of them and control the BDP. I'm not talking about different apps running at the same time "on 1 device".

Hi SGK

Yes you can have multiple devices accessing the BDP-1 at the same time with the same or different interfaces.

james

[SGK]

Thanks James. I'd love to get your thoughts one each of the points above.  Thanks in advance.

[SHV]

I'll give a shot at some of your questions but I'm just a plug and play consumer.

#2..unless things have changed the BDP-1 is two channel digital playback, only

#3 the dongle question has been asked and IIRC the answer from James is no.
Wi-Fi connectivity per Bryston #1 hard wire to router, #2 powerline device #3 wireless ie Trendnet
In addition to "control" the Wi-Fi can be used to upload music files to the BDP-1 attached drives

#4 I use MacBook , I-Pad, I-Phone all at the "same" time  My preference is I-Pad with MPad and I-Phone with MPod outside by pool, etc.

#5 & 6 I think are both no but some changes may be in the future.  I have my BDP-1 connected to a 4 drive OWC powered raid box which works quite well and is a nice cosmetic match for the silver Bryston.

Bottom line, for ease of use, music album organization and sound quality, the BDP-1 is one of the best things that I have added to my system and that  includes the newly added SP3.

Steve

[SGK]

Thanks SHV. On #2, I am really interested in understanding the "why" around this. (A $500 Oppo 93 can manage this.) On #3, ok thanks.  It's a real shame a USB bus wasn't provided for a wifi dongle so that a link for player control over wifi could be made more directly. I wouldn't expect this to involve too much engineering but perhaps James can comment. (Again, it's a simple convenience that the Oppo provides.)  On #4, so multiple remotes is ok and it sounds like Mpad and Mpod are the way to go - does anyone have a different view? What about control from a desktop computer? On #5, my question specifically relates to the hardware required were it to be adopted  as a feature. Does anyone have a view on #6?

[James Tanner]

Thanks SHV. On #2, I am really interested in understanding the "why" around this. (A $500 Oppo 93 can manage this.) On #3, ok thanks.  It's a real shame a USB bus wasn't provided for a wifi dongle so that a link for player control over wifi could be made more directly. I wouldn't expect this to involve too much engineering but perhaps James can comment. (Again, it's a simple convenience that the Oppo provides.)  On #4, so multiple remotes is ok and it sounds like Mpad and Mpod are the way to go - does anyone have a different view? What about control from a desktop computer? On #5, my question specifically relates to the hardware required were it to be adopted  as a feature. Does anyone have a view on #6?

Hi SGK,

Changing the the DAC's and circuitry to optimize for a Surround format was not the goal for the BDP-1.  The goal for the BDP-1 was to provide state of the art playback of NATIVE stereo digital files all the way up to 192/24 without noise issues or distortion.

I do not want to sound flippant but the BDP-1 has to be looked at for what it DOES do and not what it DOES NOT do.  What it does is play digital files at a quality level not available in our opinion by other means.

Hope this helps explain my very biased position.

james

[SGK]

But it has no DACs.  So it was modeled to fit the BDA (only)? I can see the sense in only producing a stereo player if your DAC products only had stereo capability but I thought Bryston had a broader range than just the BDA.

I hear what you are saying about evaluating what it does do but what it doesn't do is part of any sensible purchase decision also. I thought the player was designed to read bits from a file and send them to an external DAC/processor in the cleanest, best possible manner. What is it about multichannel that complicates this when all the decoding is external to the player?

I'm simply trying to understand whether you decided on a narrower product offering simply because you thought that was where you wanted to focus or whether certain technologies (e.g. form of connection to the DAC) or certain complications meant that narrowing the spec of the BDP-1 was a good idea. (Hence my question about Bryston's thoughts on HDMI for transporting audio.)

Perhaps an analogy would help.  I understand why companies like Bryston and Theta develop and market dedicated stereo DAC units alongside their multichannel "processor" products.  A multichannel processor with DAC components such as those in the high-end dedicated stereo DAC would likely be huge and extremely expensive, and it may well be questionable overall value increase to apply the same degree of rigour to channels other than front L/R. It might also be the case that the added components in a processor degrade the quality that would other be achieved by the front L/R DAC components were they separated. But by comparison, the BDP-1 has a much simpler job to do and so I return back to the questions herein.

[James Tanner]

But it has no DACs.  So it was modeled to fit the BDA (only)? I can see the sense in only producing a stereo player if your DAC products only had stereo capability but I thought Bryston had a broader range than just the BDA.

I hear what you are saying about evaluating what it does do but what it doesn't do is part of any sensible purchase decision also. I thought the player was designed to read bits from a file and send them to an external DAC/processor in the cleanest, best possible manner. What is it about multichannel that complicates this when all the decoding is external to the player?

I'm simply trying to understand whether you decided on a narrower product offering simply because you thought that was where you wanted to focus or whether certain technologies (e.g. form of connection to the DAC) or certain complications meant that narrowing the spec of the BDP-1 was a good idea. (Hence my question about Bryston's thoughts on HDMI for transporting audio.)

Perhaps an analogy would help.  I understand why companies like Bryston and Theta develop and market dedicated stereo DAC units alongside their multichannel "processor" products.  A multichannel processor with DAC components such as those in the high-end dedicated stereo DAC would likely be huge and extremely expensive, and it may well be questionable overall value increase to apply the same degree of rigour to channels other than front L/R. It might also be the case that the added components in a processor degrade the quality that would other be achieved by the front L/R DAC components were they separated. But by comparison, the BDP-1 has a much simpler job to do and so I return back to the questions herein.

Hi,

It was not specifically modeled to fit the BDA but that certainly was the main listening and testing parameters (AES-EBU and BNC connections for example). I assume many customers use other DAC's with the BDP-1 but we do sell a lot of 'packages' including the BDP-1 and BDA-1. 

We designed the SP-3 for those that require a surround processor so that is the product we recommend if multi-channel high resolution digital sound (Dolby HD and DTS Master) is wanted. You are correct in that the BDP-1 was designed as a dedicated 2-channel playback system so the mother board power supply circuit layout etc. were all designed with stereo in mind not multi-channel. 

I also agree that for customers wanting a more 'universal' player the BDP-1 is the wrong choice.

james

[SGK]

I also agree that for customers wanting a more 'universal' player the BDP-1 is the wrong choice.

Hi

I'm not sure I would call a desire for multi-channel audio versus 2 channel audio file playing a demand for a 'universal' player. You've developed a fabulous product.  It merely begs the question as to why Bryston didn't go that little bit further. I assure you that a lot of people wish you had. The answer has implications as to a potential purchaser's assessment of whether to expect a next generation from Bryston that adds this capability or to search for or wait for the release of a competitor product which does so to similar quality standards.

I guess I don't understand - and this is the explanation I am seeking - enough as to why multichannel capability would be so taxing. I thought, probably erroneously, that decoding of the bit-stream into channels occurred in the DAC rather than the player; that the player merely (not to suggest that this is a trivial exercise to do well) read various file formats to deliver a bit-stream out its output path (no decoding, no DAC, no channel identification or separation). A little elaboration on the delineation between player and DAC would help me greatly.

I take it from your comments that the decision not to include an HDMI interface wasn't because of an inherent dislike of it as an interface but rather simply because the BDA didn't have an HDMI interface. I hear many off-the-cuff remarks that HDMI 'isn't the best for audio' but I've never heard a quality explanation as to why not (and I find it hard to believe that it would have been selected as the digital transport for SACD DSD were to have significant shortcomings). (If you could answer the question as to whether high-res audio can even be transported over AES/EBU I'd appreciate that greatly also.)

The same sort of reasoning is behind my (less important) questions in relation to support for a USB WiFi dongle and NAS.  Potential answers include (but aren't limited to):

1. didn't think of it
2. thought of it and decided it an unnecessary feature
3. thought of it but decided it would be uneconomic to implement
4. thought of it but decided that it would compromise quality due to ....

I think you can readily imagine that an answer along the lines of 4 will yield a very different impression with the recipient than 1, 2 or 3.

Sorry to be persistent but I like to be thorough.

Regards

Steve

[James Tanner]

Hi Steve,

No problem in being thorough    I would say when we developed the BDP-1 we were concerned with the current methods of getting high resolution files played back as accurately as possible so decision where made at that time.

We have asked what other features our customers would like going forward and I think features such as NAS connectivity, more USB inputs, maybe ESATA, etc. will make sense going forward as long as it does not take away from the performance.

james

[gustavog]

1. Gap-less playback

How is this handled on the BDP-1 and its interface? Is gap-less implemented properly and working well without any blips/hiccups etc. What does one need to do to indicate a gap-less album?

James, going back to Steve's original query, can you elaborate on gap-less playback on the BDP-1?

[SGK]

From what I have read and understood at this point, I would like to see the following features added in order of priority:

1. ALAC support - I've just been reading that this is an issue.  If this isn't current please let me know. I for one won't be heading down the FLAC route because of it's lack of support by iTunes. I want to have one master high-res library, copy it to a hard drive for playing on the BDP-2    and add it to iTunes for automatic down-rezzing for on-the-go devices (iPhone, iPad).

2. Multi-channel support. No surprises there!

3. Support for a WiFi dongle (on a separate USB bus if need be) to connect the player wirelessly to the network on which remote control devices are connected. I don't care about the ability to upload audio files wirelessly to the connected drive but the ability to do firmware updates this way would be useful.

4. NAS support - maybe, others likely to value it more than me. I presume from the lack of answer that this would require a change to the hardware.

5. eSATA - not a biggie. The good thing about an eSATA enclosure is that one gets to decide on the drive that goes in it. I chose a particularly quiet, but slower, Western Digital drive for mine.  But a good enclosure has multiple connections and so USB at the BDP is fine. If because of (2) you need to upgrade to USB 3 on the player then so be it.

[James Tanner]

James, going back to Steve's original query, can you elaborate on gap-less playback on the BDP-1?

No problem with Gapless playback.

james

[James Tanner]

From what I have read and understood at this point, I would like to see the following features added in order of priority:

1. ALAC support - I've just been reading that this is an issue.  If this isn't current please let me know. I for one won't be heading down the FLAC route because of it's lack of support by iTunes. I want to have one master high-res library, copy it to a hard drive for playing on the BDP-2    and add it to iTunes for automatic down-rezzing for on-the-go devices (iPhone, iPad).

2. Multi-channel support. No surprises there!

3. Support for a WiFi dongle (on a separate USB bus if need be) to connect the player wirelessly to the network on which remote control devices are connected. I don't care about the ability to upload audio files wirelessly to the connected drive but the ability to do firmware updates this way would be useful.

4. NAS support - maybe, others likely to value it more than me. I presume from the lack of answer that this would require a change to the hardware.

5. eSATA - not a biggie. The good thing about an eSATA enclosure is that one gets to decide on the drive that goes in it. I chose a particularly quiet, but slower, Western Digital drive for mine.  But a good enclosure has multiple connections and so USB at the BDP is fine. If because of (2) you need to upgrade to USB 3 on the player then so be it.

Hi Steve,

The BDP-1 will play ALAC but as the library gets very large it has some loading issues (takes longer than FAT32 or NTSF).  I would say if you are heavily in the Apple camp the BDP-1 is probably not for you.

james

[SGK]

What does the format of the drive (FAT32, NTFS) have to do with the format of the audio file?   

[SGK]

No problem with Gapless playback.

james

How does one indicate that a group of files is a gapless album?