I'd definitely prefer DVD-A/SACD with Logic 7 processing over DVD-A/SACD with a mere analog passthrough. And while I don't necessarily prefer CDs with L7 over SACDs/DVD-As per se, those multi-channel discs that I have heard (admittedly, only a handful) haven't struck me as significantly better than the CD+L7 combination.

As for DD and DTS, it's not that I prefer DD, it's just that I'm sick of this Bose-like "DTS is best" mentality. To date, there has not been a single double-blind, level-matched test that has demonstrated any superiority of DTS over DD; in fact, in the only such test that I know of, listeners were unable to distinguish between them.

Technically, DTS has been shown to be inferior to DD: in instance, a DD recording and a DTS recording were compared to the MLP master, and whereas the DD was pretty close to the original, the DTS differed strongly in many bands.

I've met the folks from DTS. I've been to their booth at numerous CES shows. They're nice folks; I like them. DTS sounds good. I have no problem with these points.

But when they say it sounds better, well, that's a different story. My answer to that is, show me the double-blind, level-matched test with a DD and DTS recording made from the same master, and then we can talk.

Jeff



[This message has been edited by D'Arbignal (edited May 20, 2003).]

For what it's worth, I took part in a controlled comparison between DD and DTS verses the original 35mm magnetic master of a movie reel (Terminator II, nuclear nightmare sequence). This was done on a large mixing stage like the one where the movie was mixed originally, and the original mixers were present. At least for this reel and this movie, which had extremely soft and extremely loud sections, I could not tell any huge difference between DD and DTS, except for the fact that the DTS version was mysteriously more "hissy" than the DD version. Neither sounded totally transparent when compared to the 35 mm magnetic master, but it was actually closer than I would have thought.

The encoding of both the DD and DTS versions were done under strict supervision, so DTS couldn't do any manipulation to surround levels or bass level, as those in attendance would have picked this up immediately.

Soundhound,

That matches what I've been reading about it. One of the reasons I think people perceive DTS as better is because for a while, DTS was "accidentally" boosting the bass on its encodings. As I'm sure you know, a psychoacoustic phenemenon is that the louder sound is perceived as the better one, all other factors being equal.

So I do think that DD is superior to DTS. Why? Because if DD is compressed more than DTS, and yet DTS sounds no better than DD, it means that DTS is simply a less efficient coder than DD, giving you no extra benefit for that added space on the disc that is consumed.

Jeff


[This message has been edited by D'Arbignal (edited May 20, 2003).]

Miss Lena, In a heartbeat! And it doesn't have to be L7 either: I'd take a 2-channel CD processed via PL II Music mode over (almost) any of the 20 or so multi-channel SACDs I've heard. Modern matrix decoders, like L7 and PL II, provide excellent envelopment and stable logic steering. Most importantly, they're adjustable to my tastes.

I mention personal tastes because, while I can hear the benefits of SACD, the increaded resolution does very little for me emotionally when listening to music. Truth is, unlike how I feel about -say- NTSC video, I've never felt that the CD format was lacking in resolution. A well made CD sounds really good to me! (Maybe I have pedestrian rather than audiophile tastes.)

The more I listen to discrete multi-channel mixes on SACD, the more I prefer the 2-channel mix via matrix decoding. Many discrete multi-channel mixes are either too tame or too distracting for my tastes. PL II Music mode, in comparison, can be dialed in to sound very natural and involving at the same time. Bite your tongue young lady!

Best,
Sanjay

Of the three choices you mentioned, I'd easily take the Outlaw; the other two simply don't have enough additional features to justify the greater expense (for me). You can take the money saved by getting the 950 and buy a lot of music (or movies).

BTW, what are your priorities in a pre-pro? Ergonomics, looks, particular features, tuner, surround processing, etc? Let us know.

Good Luck,
Sanjay

P.S. Avoid Krell. Their processors aren't junk, but they do represent an extremely poor value.

sd

Who was that masked man?

Jeff

Umm...if you process your hi-res source the same way you process a cd, i.e. Logic 7, well, the hi-res source won't sound that different. That's kinda not the point of a hi-res source. Re-digitizing (nice word!) a hi-res source makes it just the same as any other analog source your might have. Your processor is still doing the same converting. It might be cleaner, than say vinyl, but your still taking an analog source and making it digital.

I admit that SACD doesn't have all that many great multi-channel mixes on the market at the moment. I'll also admit that Logic 7 encoded 2 channel mixes may sound better than 2 channel SACD sourcs. It just when you say something like :

you're missing the point.

sanjay is no masked man...he's really agent smith, from the matrix.

no stereo matrixed dsp mode stands a chance against a good multi-channel sacd.

my challenge stands. ANY matrixed stereo CD using ANY processor vs my player/950 in sacd multi-channel. any test criteria is acceptable. you can even make me wear earplugs while the sacd is playing.

as far as DD vs DTS, i just listened to steely dan's 'gaucho' in DTS 5.1. this disc is a masterpiece of production. what's dolby got that i should use to compare?

That's the whole problem. Unless a direct comparison is set up such as the one I was involved in, there are no ways to directly compare DD to DTS with known controls on how each was processed. The only reason this one existed is so that a decision could be made on release format of a film by the producers involved. It is unlikely that you will ever get DD and DTS in the same room again to do this type of comparison, and having both formats on the same consumer disc are useless for comparisons.

"Catch me if you can" seems to be a good disk to demonstrate how the much the same dd and dts can sound.... listen to the opening credits in each...... I think I liked the higher frequency stuff in dts... but it's hard to tell.....