[Napalm]

I'll come up with an explanation right after you explain why we need 3D television.

Being aimed squarely at the american market, I would suspect it has something to do with x rated entertainment.

Nap. 

[skunark]

Don't forget that there are no standards there, it's all a moving target encumbered by patents, license fees and strong arm marketing and bullying.

Can anyone explain to me in plain english why we needed a couple of new flavors of DTS and Dolby schemes on Blu-Ray, all while there is enough space to fit LPCM directly there on the discs??? And why are Dolby and DTS still in business???

And don't forget the ever moving HDMI and HDCP "standards".

I have my own way of dealing with this. I just refrain from spending much money on such. Let the dust settle first.

Nap. 

HDCP has not changed since DVI.  HDMI really has minor changes but probably the biggest jump was HDMI 1.2 to 1.3 with more video standards to support.   HDMI 1.4 added ethernet and 3D tv support but I can always point to the Sony PS3 and point out that it was 1.2 when it was released and will be 1.4 this summer with a firmware update except for the opional Ethernet and sacd support.

[Napalm]

HDCP has not changed since DVI.  HDMI really has minor changes but probably the biggest jump was HDMI 1.2 to 1.3 with more video standards to support.   HDMI 1.4 added ethernet and 3D tv support but I can always point to the Sony PS3 and point out that it was 1.2 when it was released and will be 1.4 this summer with a firmware update except for the opional Ethernet and sacd support.

The original HDCP version used on DVI was 1.0. Since then we had 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 2.0.

HDMI went through ten different versions since 1.0.

It is not uncommon that you switch the source on your receiver (like from DVD to cable box and back) and screen goes black sound is gone and you have to restart the whole shebang.

How much money should I sink into such crap?

Nap. 

[Napalm]

I wouldnt buy the Oppo for analogue use (I own one so shoud know), the bass management is a mess. Denon at least do analogue BM properly, Oppo is fine over HDMI though.

There's lot of stuff out there these days, you only have to figure out how much you want to spend:

http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/summary.php?PID=492&Title=Azur+650BD+Blu-ray+Universal+Player

http://www.sonystyle.ca/commerce/servlet/ProductDetailDisplay?storeId=10001&langId=-1&catalogId=10001&productId=1005434&navigationPath=n45940n100265

Nap. 

[mcollin6]

Any news on the actual status of the SP-3?   I've been reading through pages of posts, and haven't seen anything other than a delay due to HDMI standards changing.   

I've been waiting for an upgrade from my SP2 for a couple years now...  How much longer will I expect to wait?

Mike.

[James Tanner]

Any news on the actual status of the SP-3?   I've been reading through pages of posts, and haven't seen anything other than a delay due to HDMI standards changing.   

I've been waiting for an upgrade from my SP2 for a couple years now...  How much longer will I expect to wait?

Mike.

Hi Mike,

Sadly I have no idea - assuming they do not hit us with more changes and licensing issues hopefully this summer.

james

[Napalm]

Hi James,

What's the final word on the room correction?

I remember discussions on having it up to 200 Hz. I was wondering why. Then these days I was looking at speaker measurements. Just to notice that many speakers designed for music have a bump around 100-120Hz. There's a good reason for that, as they need to produce energy in the bass region that is balanced with the energy in mids and treble. And since they can't produce acoustic energy below 40Hz, the balance is achieved by boosting the energy around 100 Hz. So the overall tonal balance sounds good.

Now I can see how this works bad with HT. As now you add a subwoofer which brings extra energy in the bass regions. So the bump at 120 Hz would be excessive and produce "boomy" sound. It would force you to run the subwoofer at lower volume than recommended, and the low frequency effects would be unsatisfactory. And it's not the room, it's the speakers. The only way to get rid of it would be to attenuate it in the SP3.

Of course there are speakers designed for HT that have flat response in the bass region (and would sound "dry" in a stereo system). And they will integrate with a sub "out of the box".

Can you confirm/infirm that this was one of the reasons for which you elected to have the SP3 do "room" corrections in the bass region?

Nap. 

[James Tanner]

Hi James,

What's the final word on the room correction?

I remember discussions on having it up to 200 Hz. I was wondering why. Then these days I was looking at speaker measurements. Just to notice that many speakers designed for music have a bump around 100-120Hz. There's a good reason for that, as they need to produce energy in the bass region that is balanced with the energy in mids and treble. And since they can't produce acoustic energy below 40Hz, the balance is achieved by boosting the energy around 100 Hz. So the overall tonal balance sounds good.

Now I can see how this works bad with HT. As now you add a subwoofer which brings extra energy in the bass regions. So the bump at 120 Hz would be excessive and produce "boomy" sound. It would force you to run the subwoofer at lower volume than recommended, and the low frequency effects would be unsatisfactory. And it's not the room, it's the speakers. The only way to get rid of it would be to attenuate it in the SP3.

Of course there are speakers designed for HT that have flat response in the bass region (and would sound "dry" in a stereo system). And they will integrate with a sub "out of the box".

Can you confirm/infirm that this was one of the reasons for which you elected to have the SP3 do "room" corrections in the bass region?

Nap. 

Hi Nap,

No I have considered room correction below 200Hz because I have a distain for room correction period.

james

[Napalm]

Hi Nap,

No I have considered room correction below 200Hz because I have a distain for room correction period.

james

I don't have a high esteem for them either, my experience being with Audyssey.

However, to illustrate my point, here are two typical speakers that one may buy in Canada, in similar price range:

Speaker originally designed for music reproduction in stereo systems - you may notice a bump in the 100-200 Hz range. It has a full and well balanced sound in stereo:

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/energy_rc_70/

Now a speaker designed for HT. It sounds "dry" without a subwoofer. Some people who hate "warm sound" will like it just like that. Note that the bass response is rather flat. It will integrate perfectly with a sub:

http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/paradigm_studio60_v5/

So I guess that corrections in the bass region would mitigate the "bass bumps" of certain speakers that were not originally intended for HT / sub integration.

I guess the 200 HZ limit is just right.

Nap. 

P.S. I'm not bashing speakers here. Both models are good speakers in their price range. However, the Energy will sound very good without a sub, and "boomy" when a sub is added. The Paradigm will sound dry without a sub, and very good when a sub is added.

[mv038856]

Hi Nap,

No I have considered room correction below 200Hz because I have a distain for room correction period.

james

Hi James,

wow, your previous statements regarding room correction have been a little more reserved... 

Well, this weekend, I attended the High End trade fair in Munich, Germany. Anthem has been a regular exhibitor on the booth of Audio Trade, their German distributor. They used their proprietary room correction in their top of the line pre/pro to great effect. The by far not perfect conditions for an audio presentation on a trade fair floor have been offset - at least for home cinema, the sound was impressive. (O.k., they didn't use Bryston amps, therefore, I assume there is still some room for improvement.  )

Anyway, I also talked to the German distributor for the Trinnov optimizer. They demoed with Manger (studio speakers) and the presentation didn't focus too much on the room correction. Nevertheless, the optimizer was activated and it is a quite impressive tool. An external processor like the Trinnov Optimizer, however, has a serious drawback: it is being chained beween the pre and the main amplifiers. Just think about having a digital source signal (HDMI), have it decoded and D/A converted in a SP-3 just to have it A/D converted back in a room optimization device to have the room correction applied and to be D/A converted back to be sent to the main amps. What a horror scenario!

Well, the obvious solution to this problem would be the SP-3 (or any preamp) to include the room correction... James, please don't shoot me... 

Anyway, it appears that the decision has already been made that the SP-3 won't offer a fully fledged room correction feature, neither the wide spread Audyssey, nor the more exclusive Trinnov. Besides James' aversion towards room correction as such, implementing it in a SP-3 would tie a lot of ressources at Bryston and - to put it mildely - software doesn't appear to be the strongest part of Bryston products as far as speed of development is concerned.

Let's hope the SP-3 will eventually see the light of day. I am still wondering if and how the trade-in will work out. Maybe the delay of the SP-3 already helped to get the value of the SP-1/1.7/2's out there down, so the trade in discount offered by Bryston might be lower and therefore better to digest for Bryston, economically.

Cheers!

Markus

BTW, Bryston was also presented on the High End trade fair by the German importer Sun Audio. Unfortunatelly, they didn't demo any of their products. Representing Lexicon, Mark Levinson, the high end JBL speakers, Thiel, Oracle and Revel besides Bryston, they would have had products worth listening to. 

[James Tanner]

Thanks Markus - I appreciate the input.

james

[Napalm]

So, will the SP3.0 have HDMI 1.4 or 1.4a?

http://www.audioholics.com/education/display-formats-technology/the-truth-behind-hdmi-1.4a

Nap.   

[James Tanner]

So, will the SP3.0 have HDMI 1.4 or 1.4a?

http://www.audioholics.com/education/display-formats-technology/the-truth-behind-hdmi-1.4a

Nap.   

OH GOD!

james

[werd]

OH GOD!

james

     

[Napalm]

OH GOD!

james

/* ring ring ring */

E: Engineering here
J: Hi guys just wanted to check if we can retrofit HDMI 1.4a
E: HDMI what?
J: 1.4a
E: 
J: I'm not kidding, customers just asked
E: 
J: please
E: 

/*beep beep beep*/

[Laundrew]

 

[skunark]

Are there licensing limitations on spitting out HDMI portion to a dedicated box with 5.1/9.1/12.2 balanced outs to a mutli-channel analog only pre-amp?   Ideally a BDA-1 feed by the BCD and BDP for digitial two channel and a multi-channel dac/processor with a few HDMI inputs, hdmi output to repeat the video, and analog multi-channel balanced/unbalanced outs seems like an ideal solution.  Not only would that be killer IMO it would help keep everything a bit more upgradeable for both old and new gear.   Clearly there would be issues with room correction and the mass of cables in the rear but nothing will ever be perfect, or one could say perfection has a time limit.   

[Napalm]

Well some other companies are trying this approach:

http://hometheaterreview.com/upgrade-module-program-adds-technologies-to-existing-nad-products/

However it wasn't proved yet as a working solution (some time ago there was a debacle about an upgradeable Onkyo that actually couldn't be upgraded lol).

The problem with HDMI is DRM via  HDCP. I don't know the exact rules but the basics are that you won't get a key/license for the gear you manufacture unless you can show that your stuff won't output a decrypted stream. Sony at their best - this is the same stuff they did to SACD to ensure that it won't really take off.

My personal approach is not to buy into such things unless the price is low enough that I could consider the items to be "disposable". Try to sell me a $1299 Blu ray player and see if it works. Hint: at $129 I would start considering.

nap.

[Krobar]

Are there licensing limitations on spitting out HDMI portion to a dedicated box with 5.1/9.1/12.2 balanced outs to a mutli-channel analog only pre-amp?   Ideally a BDA-1 feed by the BCD and BDP for digitial two channel and a multi-channel dac/processor with a few HDMI inputs, hdmi output to repeat the video, and analog multi-channel balanced/unbalanced outs seems like an ideal solution.  Not only would that be killer IMO it would help keep everything a bit more upgradeable for both old and new gear.   Clearly there would be issues with room correction and the mass of cables in the rear but nothing will ever be perfect, or one could say perfection has a time limit.

You can output what you like over analogue from a Bluray player including 7.1 24/96. If you were to use an unprotected digital path for audio (Eg. 4 Coax digital connections) then you are limited to 48/16 for uncompressed audio.

I have one of those Integra/Onkyo "Upgradable" units. I also have the service manual, they could have put an HDMI 1.1 7.1 card in the Multichannel analogue slot  but decided they wouldnt sell enough. It wasnt really a technical issue, it was purely an economics decsiion taken with no regard for their existing customers.

[skunark]

Well instead of an add-on card or a system that is "upgradable" I would prefer to have a surround-sound DAC just like the 2-channel DACs today.   A killer SP3 with just analog only inputs and a BDA-1 for 2-channel gear and some sort of surround sound DAC that i can feed my various HDMI sources to and with analog outs and hdmi video out.   So a separate box entirely just focused on surround sound decoding.