• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Hi res audio

vinylman

Established Member
I have connected a denon 1611 UD blu ray player to a Moon 300 D DAC with a coaxial cable. However, whichever blu ray I pick, when I select 96khz PCM in the audio menu of the disc, the DAC states that it is receiving a 48khz signal. Could anyone advise me on how to get the 96khz to come through?
 

vinylman

Established Member
bow79 said:
I think you only get hidef sound via hdmi

That can't be true. My DAC cost 1400 quid and it has 4 inputs only - 2 coax, 1 optical and 1 USB. It is apparently capable of receiving up to 192khz...
 

rorackowe

Prominent Member
I think blu ray will only output full resolution audio files via HDMI due to copy protection issues, it will be downsampled via coax and TOSLINK.
 

larkone

Distinguished Member
Your player downmixes all protected content to 16/48 for the co-ax output - nothing to do with your DAC. P39 of your manual
 

vinylman

Established Member
larkone said:
Your player downmixes all protected content to 16/48 for the co-ax output - nothing to do with your DAC. P39 of your manual

Thanks Larkone. I've lost the manual. I'm gutted because I just spent 1350 on a moon 300D DAC and now I find I can't listen to hi res audio! Is there a work round?
 

larkone

Distinguished Member

larkone

Distinguished Member
surely the denon would output up to 192khz over the optical just like a ps3 can ?

Unless I am mistaken ?

- Aaron

Specifically states 48kHz in the manual. It is there to stop copying at the full resolution. HDMI does not suffer this issue because it has HDCP.
 

sirlayabout

Established Member
Ah right I see :blush:

So maybe the easiest option for the op would be to change the disc spinner - although I'm not sure if all the newer decks have these limitations as I'm sure I've had a coupleof older ones that have output 192 before.

Is this restriction a new form of copy protection ?

- Aaron
 

larkone

Distinguished Member
Thanks Larkone. I've lost the manual. I'm gutted because I just spent 1350 on a moon 300D DAC and now I find I can't listen to hi res audio! Is there a work round?

I think you will find that not many blurays are 96kHz, most are 48kHz to start with. A workaround would be to get a modern AV receiver that has HDMI as most support up to 24/192.

Not an up to date list but useful all the same
http://www.avsforum.com/t/760714/unofficial-blu-ray-audio-and-video-specifications-thread
 
Last edited:

BlueWizard

Distinguished Member
One thing to consider is that DVD used heavily compressed audio so the sound quality did not even reach that of a standard CD. So, a BluRay that uses uncompressed standard CD quality or uses lossless compression is an improvement over DVD.

Also, while BR has good capability, the sample rate decreases as the channels increase. Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master audio have 48k, 96k, and 192k capability, for 7.1 sound tracks it is invariably 48k sample rate. Keeping in mind, the more samples, the bigger the audio file.

While 5.1 movie audio CAN BE 192k, that doesn't mean it will be.

Likely if the DAC says it is 48k, it is because it actually is 48k.

Steve/bluewizard
 
Last edited:

larkone

Distinguished Member
Likely if the DAC says it is 48k, it is because it actually is 48k.

Steve/bluewizard

It is 48kHz also because that is all his player will output on its co-ax connection as part of its copy protection even if Vinylman buys a bluray of higher resolution.
 

BlueWizard

Distinguished Member
It is 48kHz also because that is all his player will output on its co-ax connection as part of its copy protection even if Vinylman buys a bluray of higher resolution.

I'm not disputing you, but how is 48k copyright protection when the sound quality is better than Audio CD? Far more likely the original is simply encoded in 48k.

My central point was that, simply because it has 192k capability doesn't mean they are using it. Just because it can be 192k doesn't mean it is.

I do know that various media sources were trying to get them to limit the audio quality of the analog outs, again to keep people from recording the sound track.

As sound restrictions go, I don't see 48k as much of a restriction.

Steve/bluewizard
 

vinylman

Established Member
BlueWizard said:
I'm not disputing you, but how is 48k copyright protection when the sound quality is better than Audio CD? Far more likely the original is simply encoded in 48k.

My central point was that, simply because it has 192k capability doesn't mean they are using it. Just because it can be 192k doesn't mean it is.

I do know that various media sources were trying to get them to limit the audio quality of the analog outs, again to keep people from recording the sound track.

As sound restrictions go, I don't see 48k as much of a restriction.

Steve/bluewizard

Well my John Mayer blu ray gives the option to select 96 in the audio men but according to the DAC display it outputs 48.
 

larkone

Distinguished Member
I'm not disputing you, but how is 48k copyright protection when the sound quality is better than Audio CD? Far more likely the original is simply encoded in 48k.


I do know that various media sources were trying to get them to limit the audio quality of the analog outs, again to keep people from recording the sound track.


Steve/bluewizard

The denon manual states:

For rights-protected content, the audio signal is downsampled to 48kHz, 16bits, and output. (sic)
 

Avi

Distinguished Member
The denon manual states:

For rights-protected content, the audio signal is downsampled to 48kHz, 16bits, and output. (sic)

It's a common restriction I've found with the Blu-ray players I used. The only generic workaround for higher sample rate output on S/PDIF is to rip Blu-ray the content and use a different media. S/PDIF output is limited to 2 channel LPCM or a lossy codec for multi-channel.

SACD DSD playback also imposes output limitations and in most cases results in the players S/PDIF output being disabled even with 2 channel material. There are some exception due to loopholes in the SACD implementation of certain players.

There are some specialist digital output options i.e. Audiopraise Vanity that can be added to certain players that allow multi-channel high res (up to 24/192) over S/PDIF but these require an appropriate processor for multi-channel. These are not encumbered by copy protection.

Avi
 

vinylman

Established Member
I've just managed to get a number of SACDs to play digitally! An example of an SACD I've tried is Aftermath by the stones. It is playing through a Denon DBP 1611 UD which is connected to a Moon DAC via a coax. The Moon is then feeding an Arcam A28 integrated amp with chord chameleon inter connectors and finally output via B&W 684s. According to the DAC, the audio is being output at 88.2khz.
 

Doomlord_uk

Prominent Member
Downsampling to 48kHz is protection of the 'original' digital recording as it exists on the DVD Audio/BR/SACD... Record companies basically have an irrational institutional fear of allowing pirates make high quality copies of their content; completely forgetting that pirates don't give a flying monkey's about quality reproduction. It's a bit absurd, but that's basically why it happens - they're closing the 'digital hole', or at least narrowing it. Pretty stupid, but that's mindless lawyer-driven corporate interests for you.

vinylman - interesting that you are getting 88.2kHz! Any idea if the discs aren't protected then? any indication in the liner notes etc?
 

vinylman

Established Member
Doomlord_uk said:
Downsampling to 48kHz is protection of the 'original' digital recording as it exists on the DVD Audio/BR/SACD... Record companies basically have an irrational institutional fear of allowing pirates make high quality copies of their content; completely forgetting that pirates don't give a flying monkey's about quality reproduction. It's a bit absurd, but that's basically why it happens - they're closing the 'digital hole', or at least narrowing it. Pretty stupid, but that's mindless lawyer-driven corporate interests for you.

vinylman - interesting that you are getting 88.2kHz! Any idea if the discs aren't protected then? any indication in the liner notes etc?

They are pretty standard SACDs - a bunch of ABCKO stones ones released in early 2000s, dire straits - brothers in arms, bob Dylan - blood on the tracks and pink floyd - dark side.

I wonder if its because SACD is pretty much a dead format so modern equipment isn't bothering with the copy protection? It still restricts the audio on my BDs to 48khz.
 

BlueWizard

Distinguished Member
As I was pondering this a though popped into my head. If one has a SACD player, or a BluRay capable of SACD playback, then is the Analog Audio out also restricted? That would NOT make sense. I paid a fortune for a player capable of Hi-Def, FULL HiFi sound. And if the Digital out of the player is restricted, and the analog out is not, then what is to stop people from simply recording from the analog out?

If the analog out is restricted, then what am I paying all the money for?

A very high priced BluRay player like the new OPPO 105 (£1000) prides itself on the quality of its analog music playback as well as the video and audio quality for movies. It seems unreasonable that they would restrict the Digital output of music or movie tracks, and massively foolish if they restrict the analog output.

Also, who really cares about the Digital output of the player, when very very likely, the content can be RIPPED directly from the disc.

Clearly the Record Labels are operating under an ancient business model that has no place in the modern world. Yet sadly they are unable to work out their place in the modern world, so the cling to what has now become a failed business practice desperately clinging like a drowning man clinging to a twig. Admirable, but foolish.

For what it's worth.

Steve/bluewizard
 

vinylman

Established Member
BlueWizard said:
As I was pondering this a though popped into my head. If one has a SACD player, or a BluRay capable of SACD playback, then is the Analog Audio out also restricted? That would NOT make sense. I paid a fortune for a player capable of Hi-Def, FULL HiFi sound. And if the Digital out of the player is restricted, and the analog out is not, then what is to stop people from simply recording from the analog out?

If the analog out is restricted, then what am I paying all the money for?

A very high priced BluRay player like the new OPPO 105 (£1000) prides itself on the quality of its analog music playback as well as the video and audio quality for movies. It seems unreasonable that they would restrict the Digital output of music or movie tracks, and massively foolish if they restrict the analog output.

Also, who really cares about the Digital output of the player, when very very likely, the content can be RIPPED directly from the disc.

Clearly the Record Labels are operating under an ancient business model that has no place in the modern world. Yet sadly they are unable to work out their place in the modern world, so the cling to what has now become a failed business practice desperately clinging like a drowning man clinging to a twig. Admirable, but foolish.

For what it's worth.

Steve/bluewizard

Hear hear
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 8K TV dead? Philips OLED+907, Pioneer LX505 AVR plus B&W 700 S3 Reviews & Visit + AV/HiFi News
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom