To be a bit cynical, it also provides some extra product differentiation between those receivers and the processors (AVM50v and D2v), both of which offer multichannel analog inputs. From what I've been told by a D2v owner who also beta tests players for OPPO, I think those processors convert the multichannel analog to digital for bass management and ARC.

Retaining a multichannel analog input is still desirable in my mind - even if you put a great analog section in to the receiver or processor, you still have some customers who have older players and want to use that multichannel analog input. Same with analog video inputs, which are rapidly disappearing from the equation for new source components but still deserve to be included in at least limited quantity to support legacy hardware. If manufacturing costs started getting VE'd, I'd expect any sort of analog bass management or A/D conversion for that input to have been placed on the chopping block first.


PS3 is probably a poor example. Game consoles from Sony and Microsoft have reportedly sold for less than their manufacturing costs at launch (and for a good while afterward) for the last few generations, but they do that because it makes them more competitive and allows them to make their money off game sales. Consumer electronics companies (excluding ones that also own movie studios and record labels) don't make any money from software sales. A cheap multichannel analog output on a disc player is not a huge cost increase. A really excellent analog output is pretty pricey, but it's also pretty rare. Sony didn't incur the extra cost on the PS3, probably for a number of reasons. One would be that first cost (an extra $10 in manufacturing costs, maybe). Another was rear panel space - game consoles tend to be "simple" at the rear panel, and an eight-channel cluster of RCA's would have been hard to fit. A collateral side effect that I'm sure they were happy to get was Blu-ray player sales - the only reason to have multichannel analog outputs was to support multichannel lossless audio, which means Blu-ray and (for the early PS3's) SACD. If you can't use HDMI for that because you have an older receiver, Sony would be happy to sell you a standalone BD player instead. (Oops, I'm being cynical again this morning...)

"...the only reason to have multichannel analog outputs was to support multichannel lossless audio, which means Blu-ray and (for the early PS3's) SACD. If you can't use HDMI for that because you have an older receiver, Sony would be happy to sell you a standalone BD player instead. "

And two channel 24/192.

The reason I bought the Oppo 95, and considered the Nuforce editions as well as Denon 2012, is for the best possible analog on MCH and 2 CH. But without analog inputs with bass management, I am unable to take advantage of these features. For now, I am am usable with 5.1 and have bass management working well. But two channel is either redigitized and downsampled or has no bass management. With HDMI (which my processor does not have) I am also somewhat limited on what would be lossless, no? In other words, would HDMI pass 2 channel 24/192 or downsample to 24/96?

This becomes a tad confusing for me, as you can see. Either I really do not need a new processor, or with a new processor would not have needed the advanced and extra cost analog stages of the Oppo player.

So not even discussing flac or shnf formats which I can always burn to wav or DVD-A for higher res (24 bit) files, I am unsure my best path forward to be sure I can get the best out of Cd, Blu-ray Audio, DVD-A, SACD and hi res 2 channel.

~Bob

With very very few exceptions, surround receivers and processors only do bass management in the digital domain. That's the nature of the beast. If you want 2.1 with the BDP-95's internal DACs, then you need to either use the player's 7.1 analog output and set the fronts to "small" - at which point the player's bass management will be enabled - or you need an outboard analog bass management tool such as the ICBM-1 (or the RR2150 receiver). Using the 7.1 output from the player will give you bass management, and if you disable Pro Logic II it will preserve the stereo mix (so no signal for center or surrounds).


It depends on a lot of factors. HDMI can pass 24/192 PCM stereo. Will the player output it? (Some may not.) Will the processor or receiver retain a 24/192 signal throughout the digital signal path, including room correction, bass management, surround processing, etc.? (Some may not.)

What 24/192 sources do you have? Most lossless audio on Blu-ray is not 24/192. Most of it is either 24/48 or 24/96. They are still all lossless, whether TrueHD, DTS-HD Master Audio, uncompressed PCM, MLP, or DSD.


I would argue that there is no single answer here, which is part of the problem. It's a matter of how far you plan to go when chasing optimal performance. You can upgrade your processor to something with HDMI and a really excellent analog section, or you can keep your non-HDMI processor and upgrade your source(s). Either approach will work. For example, you can use the BDP-95 with a non-HDMI processor and get tremendous analog audio performance. We don't know how the Model 978 or Model 998 will compare sonically because the don't exist, and I hate the idea of guessing how it will sound based on some newsletters - that's a dangerous road to go down. Would a used BDP-80 paired with a Model 978 sound as good as a BDP-95 paired with a Model 990? Nobody can know.

If you have or are going to get a BDP-95, I would suggest connecting both the 7.1 analog output (which you need for multichannel sources like Blu-ray, SACD, and DVD-A) and the stereo analog output to your existing processor, then compare the two with CD's to see which you prefer: the stereo output (no bass management, ESS eight-channel DAC configured with four channels each for left and right) or the 7.1 output (bass management, same model of ESS DAC using one channel per output channel). Be sure to set your processor so the stereo analog input is not being converted to digital. (By the way, what processor do you have right now?) I'd also suggest setting the BDP-95's SACD output to "DSD" so that the DSD signal goes straight to the DAC, although this means that you won't have bass management with SACD's.

Wouldn't an ICBM solve this for you? Not made anymore of course, but available used. Or the 950 prepro? I'll make you a really good deal when I finally decide on what to replace it with But it has no room correction abilities whatsoever. Actually, I'm in a somewhat similar situation regarding a new prepro, as I had my Oppo 980 modified to improve the analogue multichannel output.

Edit: Gonk beat me to it.

I have vinyl rips of 24/192. and Neil Young has now released some hi-rez stuff too. HD Tracks are also releasing some hi-rez content also. 24/192 is also a format we record in occasionally.

Well, I do have DSD set and do use the analog outs. My proc is a Parasound AVC-1800. There is no setting for analog on the stereo ins. They always do a digital conversion.

And you are correct. There is no single answer. No matter how much I thought this through, its a different story once you receive the gear and actually setup and play. The compromises are not obvious until I try all the possibilities.

~Bob

All the more reason to focus your efforts on the 5.1 analog connection, as the BDP-95 can provide bass management there for you (for both stereo and multichannel sources, SACD notwithstanding). If you wanted to get a little extreme, you could connect both the stereo analog output and the left/right channels of the 7.1 analog output into a good quality switch box of some sort. You could then feed the stereo output signal into the left/right channels of the 5.1 analog input while also getting the subwoofer signal from the 7.1 output (produced by the BDP-95's internal bass management). I don't think that I'd go that far with it, but I have no doubt that other people would.


Likewise, the possible permutations that can be used when mixing different components can seem almost limitless (see my suggestion above for an example). For what it's worth, I think you got a very nice piece of equipment when you picked up that BDP-95.

I don't know anything about the 978's bass management, but I can tell you that you can still use your sub even if there is no analog bass management. Just run your fronts full range with the sub. Now this results in what people call "double bass" but its not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, although I have the 950 which has analog bass management, I've actually achieved a flatter bass response in "double bass" mode than I have with the analog bass management enabled. The trick is getting the speaker locations, phase, and crossover settings right.

But - this is why I think its so critical for the pre/pro to have a great DAC/analog section. Its just so much easier if the pre/pro can manage bass in the digital domain. And you get the extra benefit of not having to spend $$$ on source gear with great DACs/analog peformance.

He can't do this with his Parasound without having the BDP-95's stereo analog output converted to digital.

Right. Missed that detail. And it would be a shame to redigitize that signal from the BDP-95. I simply cannot understand why any modern pre/pro wouldn't provide bypass on the analog inputs.