Would i get a better sound from my dvd player or av reciver??

dogtown

Established Member
Hi all, I'm currently using a panny bdt500 and a onkyo tx nr 509 reciver. Does anyone know if I'd be better off having the DVD player decoding the sound?? I've read some great reviews on the btd500 sound capabilitys. Any info greatly appreciated.

Thanks
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
You effectively get the same audio regardless of whether the player or the receiver is given the task of decoding the formats. The only time a player's audio capabilities come into play is if using a player's onboard DAC and utputting the resulting audio via a player's analogue outputs. In such instances then it is a matter of whether the player or the receiver has the superior DAC. This is of little if any concern when dealing with entry level players, mainly because they do not incorporate enhanced DACs or higher quality analogue output stages. Your receiver lacks multichannel analogue inputs anyway so you'd not be able to take advantage of a player's multichannel analogue outs even if it had a superior DAC.
 

dogtown

Established Member
Thanks Dante, so what would be a good upgrade to take advantage of the dacs in the DVD player?? Also would I benefit from using the dual hdmi outputs if I had one going to the tv and one to the reciver??
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Thanks Dante, so what would be a good upgrade to take advantage of the dacs in the DVD player?? Also would I benefit from using the dual hdmi outputs if I had one going to the tv and one to the reciver??

I'd suggest not bothering to try improve upon the audio via utilising the multichannel analogue outputs. I've a OPPO BDP93 that cost me £500 and I still prefer the results I get via using the player's HDMI output to the audio I got via the player's multichannel outputs. You also lose a lot of the bass management features of a receiver if you decode to use the multichannl inputs as opposed to HDMI. Spend your money on the receiver rather than the player.

There's no advantage to splitting the signal, both outputs are still reliant on the same video clock regardless of whether you are using one for just the audio and the other for the video or just the same output for both.

The receiver and the speakers will provide more noticable improvements in terms of audio than buying an expensive player.
 
Last edited:

dogtown

Established Member
Ok thanks, have you any recommendations?? I was looking at the onkyo 809's a while back. Funds are a little low ATM as I went into richer sounds for a hdmi cable and came out with a panasonic wt50! Lets just say the mrs wasn't impressed...
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Ok thanks, have you any recommendations?? I was looking at the onkyo 809's a while back. Funds are a little low ATM as I went into richer sounds for a hdmi cable and came out with a panasonic wt50! Lets just say the mrs wasn't impressed...

What kind of a budget do you have and what speakers are you currently using?
 

dogtown

Established Member
The budget is wide open aslong as the price is right ha. Speakers are kef iq60 centre, 2 iq70's for fronts and 2 iq10's in the rear.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
I think the speakers are adequate enough to survive a receiver upgrade although the iQ70 speakers can lack clarity and dynamics. If you wanted to stay with Onkyo then I'd suggest the TXNR818 and I don't really rate any current Onkyo model below this. If you wanted to look elsewhere then the current Denon models are good value for money and you can pick up an AVR2313 for well under £500 or even an AVR3313 for about £600. The Yamaha RXV673 is also another option, but not that much of a step up from where you are now and the Yamaha is expensive when compared to the Denon options. The issue to watch for is in relation to the speakers and their lack of clarity. The Yamaha and Denon receivers are better partnered with speakers that are clinical in nature and the KEFs may be a little too laid back if used with such a receiver?
 
Last edited:

dogtown

Established Member
Many thanks Dante, although network capabilitys don't really appeal to me so may there be other models at a lesser price ??
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Many thanks Dante, although network capabilitys don't really appeal to me so may there be other models at a lesser price ??

Your aren't paying extra for networking. The additional cost is in relation to better components. You may as well stick with what you already have rather than buying anything cheaper than what has been suggested. If you want improvements in audio quality then you have to spend more and buy a higher grade receiver than the receiver you already have.

I did ask you what kind of a budget you were thinking of and you did reply:

The budget is wide open aslong as the price is right


What kind of a price is the right kind of price?


Any current model you purchase lacking networking will be a lesser model than the receiver you already have.
 
Last edited:

dogtown

Established Member
Yes I see that point, I was just wondering if the recovers you'd mentioned come without the network capabilitys at a lower price :)
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Yes I see that point, I was just wondering if the recovers you'd mentioned come without the network capabilitys at a lower price :)

Nope, it is almost thrown in by way of a token gesture these days and all but the entry level models include it.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

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

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom