I have been reading alot about the best way to get stereo out of the 1050. Although I think it sounds great is there a way I can hook up a CD/DVD player to get better 2 channel playback and still watch movies and get the surround modes...If I use the 5.1 inputs do I need to switch the CD/DVD input back to DVD to watch a movie? Can I use the DVD input and the 5.1 at the same time? This may sound like a stupid question but I am a convert from the land of 2 channel. Thanks for your time and help.

Unless you have DVD-Audio or SACD, you probably don't need to use the 5.1 input for DVD -- you'll want to use the DVD player's digital output, because the 1050's processing is typically more robust than a player's internal decoding (assuming the DVD player has onboard Dolby Digital or DTS decoding, which most players don't). That leaves the 5.1 input open, so you can connect the analog output from your CD player to the left and right channels of the 5.1 input in order to keep the signal in the analog domain. You would use the 5.1 input for CD playback, and you would still be able to use the DVD player with a digital input and have surround. This approach is most likely to benefit you if you have a CD player with a good onboard DAC -- depending on the CD player, you may get better results by using the digital output from the CD player and using the 1050's DAC.

Also, if you are using a DVD player as your CD player as well, you can still do what we described above by connecting the left and right analog outputs from the DVD player to the left and right channels of the 5.1 input and connecting the digital output from the DVD player (with the digital input on the 1050 assigned to the "DVD" input). In this scenario, if you were to find that you preferred using the 1050's DAC for CD playback and didn't want to hassle with changing surround mode from "STEREO" to "SURROUND," you could assign the same digital input to both the DVD and CD inputs. The DVD input could be left set to "SURROUND" and the CD input left set to "STEREO."

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

Gonk - thanks for the input, will definetly use the 5.1 inputs for CD playback. I have a decent DVD player (Sony 9000ES), but for CD playback I am not impressed. Also, I have not been won over with SACD...so I am looking to get every advantage I can in 2 channel. I was a die hard stereo guy with little or no HT experience. But the demands of the family and economic realities have forced me to simplify and make the move towards HT. I am very impressed with the 1050 and very happy, just looking to tweak the system. Again, thanks for your time and input

Why would you use the 5.1 channel in instead of the CD player analog inputs ? If I have the CD player connected to the CD Player In jacks am I converting from analog back to digital and then to analog again in the 1050 ? I think this is the case from what I have read on this board but I want to confirm this.

I am curious what CD player you have that has a better DAC than the 1050 ? How good of a CD player do I need to buy to get a better DAC than the 1050 ?

You have it figured out already -- the CD analog input goes through A-D and D-A conversion, but the 5.1 analog input stays in the analog domain.



My Harman/Kardon FL-8300 (~$300 retail about five years ago) sounded better to my ear when I used the 1050's DAC. I slightly preferred the DAC in my Yamaha CDC-775 (~$350 retail) to the 1050's DAC.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

Thanks Gonk how do you reply so quickly...

I though I had it figured out but it seems strange to convert the Analog to Digital and then bank to Analog when in stereo mode. I understand if you are in 3-stereo or a surround mode but not stereo.

[This message has been edited by desperado (edited October 23, 2002).]

I have a question that seems to beg an answer. If using CD analog hookup the general consensus is that it goes A-D (from player) and then D-A (at the reciever). If using a digital out it would be D-A at the reciever only. Alright if that is correct, then why is there a difference in sound when going between the 2 connection types? Supposedly in either case the reciever's DAC is the final conversion and that it should sound the same either way. But it doesn't! Why? Because of the double conversion? On the digital side isn't it only 0 and 1's?
Help me my brain is smoking!

Might want to do something about that fire there. Good way to ruin your hat...

Why is there a difference in sound between a digital connection to the receiver (CD player is transport, sends digital data directly to receiver, which applies any desired bass management and processing before converting to analog and passing it on to the volume control / amps) and an analog connection to the receiver (CD player takes digital stream and converts to analog, receiver converts back to digital before processing, then converts back to analog and passes it on to the volume control / amps)? The key is what you have added to the signal path: a DAC in the CD player and an ADC in the receiver. Digital to analog conversion (and analog to digital) is not a simple, foolproof process -- there's a lot of stuff happening in the background to get the best analog signal out of the 0's and 1's. What happens if the DAC in the CD player isn't a very good DAC? It will potentially degrade the signal, and those degradations will remain through all subsequent manipulation. What if the DAC in the CD player is really top-notch? It does a better job than the receiver could ever do, but then the receiver takes that high quality analog signal and runs it through the ADC and DAC process -- just as if the CD player's fancy DAC had never existed. It doesn't seem like that big a deal if you are dealing with more run-of-the-mill components, but if you have a nicer CD player (or you've invested some significant money in a separate DAC, like a Theta for example) then you don't want that extra A-D-A conversion in the signal path...

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

Isn't that what the "Direct" Mode for?

I appreciate everyones input. The Outlaw is fantastic in 2 channel using the 5.1 inputs. It matches up well with the Sony 9000 and Triangle speakers (which both tend to be bright).

I was in a store yesterday and listened to a setup that was about $40K and came home and listened to the same material with the Outlaw...maybe it's my imagination, but the Outlaw setup was as good or better than the $40K setup.

I am beginning to see/hear what some of the folks (JHirsch) at Stereo Review were trying to tell us.

Thaanks again.

The 1050 has one "direct" mode: that is the 5.1 inputs. The A-D-A conversion is avoided, you hear the CD player's DAC. If your CD player's DAC is really great, then as Gonk said, you'll lose out on hearing it if you let the receiver do it's A-D-A conversion; you want to use the 5.1 input to avoid that. The 1050's DAC is bypassed. You have one D-A conversion done in the CD player.

If your CD player's DAC is not as great, then you want the 1050's DAC to be used. The best way is to bypass the CD player's DAC; use the CD player's digital out, take that into the 1050 and let the 1050's DAC do the conversion. You still have one D-A conversion, done in the 1050.

The worst of both worlds is to use the CD player's analog out into one of the 1050's analog inputs, then you have two D-A conversions and one A-D conversion, for D-A-D-A. Neither unit's DAC is bypassed.

If your input source is analog, such as what comes out of your TV, or your tape player, then this may not be so bad. The 1050's DACs and ADCs are pretty good. Even with a CD player, it's not going to degrade thigns too terribly much. (One can argue that you won't even notice it with a casette because the signal is already degraded by the tape.) But if you want the very best output you can get, why put up with more A-D-A than you have to? Use only one DAC if you can.

The 950, BTW, has the ability to do a bypass on any input; the 1050 can do it only on the 5.1 input.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net