Discussion in 'AV Receivers & Amplifiers' started by Rock Danger, Sep 26, 2013.
so when did rs start doing anthem?
don't have a link, but am currently in Preston branch and they are supplying it.
Ask em then, would be curious to know how the average RS sales guy is gonna support ARC to their customers. Not that there's anything wrong with them doing it tho.
The oppo has the ability to mix the 7.1 dts master track into a 5.1 dts master track and output it lpcm over hdmi so it will be a higher resolution than if the receiver was doing the decoding. Unfortunately as in the good old days of the original ps3's you will only see dts5.1 on the receiver's display even though you are getting the HD audio format
I know dude, I quoted you 3 posts back. My ageing BD35 does it as well and so does my HTPC.
I can totally agree. Like a fist dealer selling a ferarri! Aparently its install only, not off the shelf, but how can they demonstrate, or dicuss the gear as its pretty high end
I know but I'm not sure BUCKSTER and MATTKHAN are fully understanding the difference based on their posts above. Apologies if I am mistaken guys
I could AB test Tron Legacy if I could be bothered getting up and ripping the disc. But I did change the BD player from Bitstream to LPCM and it sounded fantastic as always.
I could then flip between, bitstream and multi pcm on the fly as it takes about 300 yrs for my BD player to do anything.
I have 3 foot from my head to the back wall and I could make it 4 and do 7.1 but... meh, It's a bit of a stretch and an extra say... £1,000-£1,500. I think I'd be better off with some kickass tripoles.
Fine, I'll get up and rip it, test it and see if I can tell the diff.
I'm under the impression that no device can mix DTS be it HD or otherwise and the audio would have to be mixed post decoding and pre DAC as LPCM? This will not degrade the audio in the slightest because the audio has to be decoded prior to the DACs anyway and the signal has to be PCM in order for the DACs to be able to handle it. The mixdown done on an AV receiver is no different to it being done onboard the receiver.
Think you should after giving us all headaches thinking about it
Hey, I'm bringing you the truth, I'm on the front line in the face of adversity and possibly in mortal danger from the illuminati in conjunction with the reverse vampires and the saucer people.
What about the people from Werther's (i.e. scientologists)?
They're all in on it.
Right, tested both formats couldn't tell the difference, be it multi channel or bitstream core.
Was only one movie granted, but it's pretty dynamic and musical. All the speech was the same, bass response and surround fx.
So assuming all is correct on the bitstream vs multi channel it's fair to say, you are unlikely to hear above 'core level'
Which means if you can live with one less front HDMI, 20 watts less and don't plan or can't have 7.1 surround then the 310 is for you.
510 for me.
Sod it, i've ordered my 510 and I don't want to wait till next year for a 310. My sofa is up against the back wall. I could always try rears above the dado rail, but that would be another £1.5K which I ain't got.
I'm gonna get a few more opinions on this Rich from Dan etc and also Rob. I could be deaf for all I know. But there ya, go tried and tested - anyone else wanna go have at it.
I dunno how long I'll have the 510, I might go 7.1- it'll hold it's value better and I'm getting a good deal on it and I get to take the 2-1 phono splitters out the back and get 20 more watts to the back.
You need to tell the bluray player to output 5.1 lpcm though and not 7.1
I don't have that option on mine, but! I can use 2 versions of MPC HC, one that bypasses the MS codecs and uses ffdshow and the other running vanilla which will output as LPCM multi channel.
edit: Still as good as each other.
should have got an Oppo
But it does less than my HTPC and is twice the price.
But the oppo has a remote that you can turn upside down, and still the Logo reads almost the same. (Mind you, the times I've tried operating it upside down)
Damn. I thought I'd an oddo and it turns out that I'd simply placed it upside down on the equipment rack. I wondered why it was so difficult to get the discs to stay in place on the transport drawer
So am I right in thinking I don't need the blutac and sticky back plastic?
Ok, stupid question time now !..........
If HDMI 1.4 can only pass up to 30 fps and HDMI 2 can go up to 60 fps (at UltraHD/4K) then what will the new MRX be able to passthrough? I assume they're going to be limited to 30 fps?
This may not be too much of an issue if all new UltraHD sources have 2 HDMI outputs so the MRX x10 can be bypassed as far as the picture is concerned, but it'll be less convenient and problematic potentially for lipsync ?
This could be something that makes me inclined to hang on to my 500 until we see if/how UltraHD sources, HDMI 2 and TVs shake out. I can't imagine some of this taking too long, so, for me, it's a shame that the new MRX isn't more of a 'no brainer'. I realise some couldn't give a stuff about UltraHD
To clarify RS Preston has been appointed a dealer for Anthem - they have a member of staff ( Darren ) who we have worked alongside previously and has the knowledge and skills to represent and support the product correctly. The products will be naturally installed by their installation team who can configure and set ARC up,
Hope this helps.
TG / Kishoo
[email protected] fps - HDMI 1.4, apparently no FW update to make it 2.0 Maybe a hardware mod down the road if they plan to keep this model alive as long as the last one.
Is Hdmi 2.0 that much of an issue?
If you want 4K buy a 4k screen/PJ for loads of £ for the next year, buy a new source that plays 4K and go straight into display. Then wait for media to become available.
By the time 4k is a valid everyday medium,2 years will prob have passed and a new Anthem MRX will prob be launching. Then there will be the new codecs ie Dolby Atmos etc which may be generally available.
IMO the new MRX range is going to be worth it for ARC 1M.
Or am I missing something Ross?
Sky are currently looking at 4K, there are no disc based players slated yet, as the introduction of the h.265 might make things less bandwidth intensive and even some current disc players compatible.
HDMI 1.4 limits what 4K can really do, but from what I remember skimming it's something to do with colour more than resolution and even then it's nothing too major.
If it does gain traction, it'll be running fairly well in a year I believe, but it will be still a very niche market, people are barely used to blu ray, Sky is still 1080i.
We in the UK won't see any advances quickly, the East and the US will get it all first and then it'll be pirated for download before it even gets launched here is my guess.
Exactly so let's assume 4K explodes onto the market in say a year,one can just bypass the MRX and go straight to the display.
Many people seem to be unsure of the new MRX range. IMO they have had a pretty big upgrade in performance, usability and connectivity.
The DTS MA issue will affect ALL receivers and processors, unless running 7.1 discrete channels, if it is even audible and no one has noticed any issues to date, let alone been aware of anything.
Yes you can't use front heights which I think was a bit of an omission but doesn't affect me.
I may be paying for 2 channels that I prob won't use but I didn't use them in the 300.
I'm glad Anthem are removing legacy inputs and have realised that media players etc are a waste in a receiver. This is why many went for the 300 as it didn't have all this extra baggage.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love a compelling reason to upgrade but, for me, I'm not sure there is one.
I don't need extra connections, I don't mind that much how long it takes to run ARC, I don't mind that much using serial. There are no significant amp improvements and the new ARC should only really benefit if your current ARC has trouble matching target and calculated curves.
No compelling reasons *for me*
You can go straight to the display, but can your audio come back? IF you could have split audio you might have lip sync issues.
Separate names with a comma.