• 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.

Question Maybe a stupid question but have always wondered...

stripeyjoe

Established Member
Do AVRs convert their analogue inputs to digital before applying any processing such as room correction and/or delay for speaker distance and then reconvert back to analogue to go through the power amp section?
If so, is their any point in a fancy DAC if you are only have the AVR re-digitise the analogue signal to add room correction? Wouldn't it be better to use a digital connection to start with and remove 2 lots of conversion?
Is the only way to go 'all analogue' from input to output to switch on 'pure direct' or its equivalent and forgo all room correction and, I guess, the sub feed?
Cheers!
Joe
 
D

Deleted member 39241

Guest
Yes, room correction is applied in the digital domain. So there will be multiple conversions from an analogue input. The purest path from the source through an AVR is to use the AVR's pure direct mode. But, in my experience, that still can have an impact on the sound.

If you want to apply room correction, it makes more sense to do as you say, and keep the signal digital to avoid multiple conversions. Although, I doubt whether applying room correction to an analogue input as opposed to a digital input, from the same source, will sound much different.

Going direct from a DAC (eg in a CD player) to a power amp has resulted in the best sound quality for me, but I suppose it depends on how much room correction is needed / wanted. I have physically corrected my room to some extent, and find music is better with the purest possible audio path, with no room correction and no subwoofer. But it is obviously going to be different for everyone depending on room, speakers, sources, tastes etc.

I do use room correction in the AVR for movies and tv, but just on frequencies below 250hz.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ChuckMountain

Distinguished Member
Older amps, talking a large number of years used to process in the analog domain.

But as punctilio points out it's all digital now:)
 
Last edited:

stripeyjoe

Established Member
Thought that would be the case with AVRs. In the music world there's quite a few modern synths that have digital control applied to an analogue signal path, I think some high end EQs do the same.

Time to do some critical listening, with my set up in 2.0 there's a big difference between normal and straight but less between straight and direct. Normal has a lot more low end, maybe that's the room correction compensating for a few dips.
Also to see if I can hear the difference between the DAC in the AVR and the ones in my various bits of equipment though that's going to take some re-plugging to set up!
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Whether digital processing would effect the audio is a matter of the sample rate used. A higher sample rate is better because you run less risk of critical elements within the source being lost. The issue with using higher sample rates is that it requires considerably more processing power to achieve them. There's also the debate as to what can actually be lost without it actually effecting the end result? HD sound is theoretically a good idea, but there's a point at which a higher resolution will not be perceived so why waste processing power trying to attain it?
 

The latest video from AVForums

Spielberg, Shyamalan, Aronofsky, Chazelle, Eddie Murphy and Mel Gibson - all the latest movies
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom