Archive through June 01, 2004
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 595 Registered: Dec-03 | NAD T533 DVD/CD player I have one. It is ten days old, eagerly taken from dealer, hours after he received his first shipment. He nevertheless provided service and expertise. And will provide after sales and support, should I need it. But he tried to burn us with cables (see later). Why did you get it? To replace NAD T532. Nothing wrong with the T532, except it does not have DVD-Audio. Did the T533 deliver what you wanted? Yes. What is an "NAD T533"? The manual says it is a DVD/CD/MP3 player. The box says it is a DVD/VCD/CD/MP3 player. There we go already: terminology. It actually plays a whole slew of things I shall never use, including "Windows Media" (?), Kodak Picture CD, JPEG discs (that might be useful, one day, when I have a projector). What does it look like? About a centimetre shorter than the NAD T532. Clearer front panel, including button layout. Power button is no longer green, but black. Back panel is completely redesigned, of course. (I always wonder why dealers display front panels, which, for my money are much less interesting that the backs). The disc tray has "DVD Audio/Video" in place of "DVD Video". The remote control is also simpler and more logical. For a moment I thought I had acquired a second NAD HTR-2 remote control, but haven't. What does it have over the T532? DVD-Audio. And, therefore 24 bit, 192 kHz audio DACs. Dolby Digital processor, but no DTS processor. From the box and the badges "DTS digital out", I would guess they had a DTS processor planned, but NAD pulled the plug at a late stage. 6-channel analogue audio out (in addition to 2-channel analogue audio out, as before). Component video out (in addition to SCART, S-video, and composite, as before). 5.1 surround sound menu, including "Test" and settings for speaker sizes and delays. What about connectivity? Just substitute the T533 for the T532. It takes less space. Requires, extra, not supplied: 6 x RCA analogue co-axial cables to connect to "Ext 5.1" input on receiver. Rant: my relationship with the dealer is sorely tried buy his trying to sell my wife a single, digital co-axial cable "for DVD-audio" (sic) at ONE-THIRD THE PRICE OF THE PLAYER.... Fortunately, my wife has a mobile phone, trusts my judgement, and is accustomed to my forthright views on the intransigence of fools. Tip: The T533 is supplied with a single 3 x RCA cable (for Left; Right; Video composite). Get one more, or use the one from your old player, and you have 6 x, at little cost, or no cost at all. Glitch: The black stopper for the TOS-link, optical port is replaced with a little trap-door which hinges vertically, on the left. So you just push with the end of the optical cable. Quite a good idea. But the manual doesn't tell you. It took me 10 minutes to work it out (OK, I admit it, I never did: it was my wife). How easy is it to set up? No problem. But I think I know what I'm doing. So far. I read the manual, but afterwards. It is actually more difficult than you would think to get the all six channels connected to the correct plug, at both ends, but maybe that's me. I had surround R and surround L crossed the first time. "Test" will tell you if you have it right. I am not sure how friendly the manual would be to a novice. I do know you don't spell "audio" "audeo" (only a few places); they must have been getting mixed up with "rodeo". The totally amazing thing to me, given my reasons for buying it, is that you don't get to "DVD-Audio" until page 20, and it starts with a little essay, beginning with something like "DVD-Audio is a new sound format offering enhanced possibilities....." etc. etc. Also, in connections, it sort of implies that one or two owners might just derive a little extra benefit from connecting the audio analogue 5.1.... Why are they not shouting it from the rooftops?! How are the features and set-ups in normal use? A piece of cake. However, glitch and only design complaint: Speaker settings. I have two listening positions; multiple listeners on big sofa, and one listener on arm-chair moved to centre-stage. Changing the speaker delays requires one minute of intense concentration (no interruptions!), about thirty key-strokes, and no-one in the family except me can be bothered (they don't see the point). I have programmed the HTR-2 remote control with a macro to make the the speaker-delay changes from multiple to single listener. But, one missed key stroke, and you end up changing the subtitle language, instead, or something equally unpredictable. I cannot face doing that again for moving back to the sofa position. Surely it would not have cost much to give the user some speaker distance pre-sets? Further point, if you are used to setting speaker delays at the receiver: the units of speaker distance are feet, not milliseconds of required delay. You have to think about that. I always consider that the speed of sound, which is very near one foot per millisecond, could mistakenly be taken as evidence for design in nature, and may be a good reason for never going fully metric for distance (organ pipes are another - this is off-topic). What do you miss in the T532? Well, we still have it, actually. The "desktop" on the TV, with the T532, consisted of white letters "NAD" on a red square, on a bright yellow background, with a black footer. The words "Quality, value, simplicity," or similar, appear on the yellow background. I have only just discovered the words are in dark blue, not black, after upgrading the video connection. So it was a nice test card, but a bucket of cold water at the end of a movie. The T533 just has "NAD" in grey on a gentle, unobtrusive, grey-blue pattern. More restful. But ten-year-old son spoke for us all: "Hey, they can't do that!", voicing a concern for the comfort of familiarity. The screen saver in the T532 was naff. The new one is naffer. How does it sound? DVD-Audio. Incredible. I cannot find words, which is why this is so long. I have made some other posts on this. It is the dawn of a new era in sound reproduction, and the Twilight of the Compact Disc. The CD was a shoddy compromise. Perhaps they thought we needed a full hour out of 650 MB, and wouldn't hear the difference. DVD-Audio is at least equal the best analogue, but without the noise, and in 5.1. Dolby Digital AC-3. Much better than before, when I had to use the receiver's processor. I don't know why. DTS. The same, I think (pending further listening). CD. The same, or just a whisker ahead of the T532. But audiophile CD aficionados please note: the limitation is not in the player, it is in the medium. Now you have it, how does DVD-Audio really compare with CD? We have been taken for a ride for twenty years. CD was a convenience format. The key word in "Compact Disc" was "Compact". "Perfect sound that lasts forever" was bullshit. A few of us suspected it, really, but wondered if our players were any good. So we bought more players. Built-in customer dissatisfaction. Perfect marketing scam. The mass market swallowed it, and, mostly, still does. Hence terms like "CD-quality" as if to denote the benchmark for sound reproduction. This is my weakness in the discussion about formats and DVD-A vs. SACD. Why should we believe Sony-Philips? They lied before, why would they not do it again? Perhaps they saw Betamax bombing and thought the issue was playing duration (about one hour, VHS; 30 minutes, Betamax). Perhaps they decided, accordingly, to get an hour onto a CD, come what may, and bugger the sound quality. Any problems? Not yet. But I am obsessive about sound quality. I listen. Critically. Hard. Using the player's own surround processor (AC-3 or DVD-A) there is - sometimes - a very faint buzz from the centre speaker. You could imagine there is a bee, in the next room. It has once or twice been just above the threshold of audibility from the "centre stage" listening position, at > +9 dB receiver gain, into my low-efficiency speakers. Most people don't listen at those levels, and, anyway, would probably not notice. I do. It seems to be on "Pause" or "Stop", but then, only after playing certain discs. I don't understand it, and will investigate connections and other components before I say it is a fault with the receiver. And if it is a fault, I shall say so. My motto is "zero tolerance for hum". The specified Signal-to-Noise ratio is > 100 dB. There is also a hiss from surrounds, but you really have to put your ear right next to them, and you'd be deafened if someone turned on the music at those sorts of gain (> + 9 dB). I would guess the hiss is within that specified Signal-to-Noise. I am conscious of all the "NAD hum" posts referring to receivers. There is no problem with this player under practical listening conditions, and nothing under impractical ones that I have not got my eye on. I will report back on this. Recommended? Yes. The ratio of sound quality to price must be off the scale. It cost peanuts if you look at what it will do. I am tempted to compare it with my 1979 Rega Planar 3 turntable, surely the best buy in the history of audio. But it will take a few years, at least, to be sure. And there will be many other DVD-Audio players out there, by then. |
|
Bronze Member Username: JonmoonPost Number: 39 Registered: Dec-03 | John A: nice review. How about movies? Is it the same as the T532 or better? |
|
Bronze Member Username: Gatt767Malta Post Number: 31 Registered: Feb-04 | I think you have forgotten a major part within your review!:-) What about movies??? |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew york Usa Post Number: 110 Registered: Dec-03 | JohnA., Are you really telling me the T533, in 2 channel stereo mode, with a well recorded CD is going to sound as good as played through a high-end dedicated, CD player or transport????? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 602 Registered: Dec-03 | Jonathan and Robert, Thanks. When you both say "What about movies?" do you mean the audio part or the video part? If "audio" then Dolby AC-3 is a whole load better. Quite a startling improvement. I don't know how it is done. It brings Dolby up to rival DTS. Maybe that is related to my theory that NAD pulled the plug on DTS at a late stage. One could easily envisage a business scenario for that. But I guess you mean "Video". Sigh.... I stuck with audio because it is all I can comment on from my own experience, and I chose this area of the forum accordingly. Our video diplay ouput is SCART into receiver, S-video plus composite (both outputs in parallel) from receiver to an adapter for a SCART RGB socket (the highest resolution input available) on a Sony trinitron 28 " 50 Hz CRT TV. (See my note about "Quality simplicity value" appearing in dark blue!) So I have assumed the quality of our display is the limiting factor, and have not looked carefully into comparisons with video. Let me know if you think otherwise. BTW I auditioned some projectors recently, and looked into the whole question; basically you can't get anything I would take seriously under about 6 x the cost of the T533. My cheap upgrade to DVD-A is based partly on our current family economic situation. Video projectors can wait. But the audio "upgrade" is real, and a revolution. Well worth it. - for me. Robert, maybe you will soon be able to comment on the video part? You have a T531, if I remember....? Rick, Key question. You go to the heart of the matter. My answer is: I don't know. However, with due respect, and with my priorities, I don't think it matters. I have a CD-only player. A Marantz CD 873 LE. Both the T532 and the T533 are better CD players than that. But the improvement was subtle, not startling and obvious, as it is with DVD-Audio. I would guess, today, that we have pretty well reached the point where the effective limitiation in what you can get out of a CD is inherent in the format itself. I am quite willing to consider that a "high-end dedicated, CD player or transport" might squeeze a few extra drops out of what is inherently a flawed format. But the difference will be negligible compared with DVD-Audio. It is a new era, I promise you. For example, I read about up-sampling. Now upsampling is interpolation, not rendition of information in the original signal. To draw a digital graphics analogy, you can view a 100 kb JPEG file in a number of different ways, some better than others. But take the same photo, same size, and increase to resolution of the original to 1 mb (that is about the proportinal increase in audio file size from CD -> DVD-A if I understand correctly) and you will stop worrying about the best way to render the 100 kb file. The worst way of rendering the 1 mb graphic is likely to be better than the best way of rendering the 100 kb one. As with my reply to Robert, though, you will perhaps be in a position to make the direct comparison of CD performance that I cannot make. So please let me know how you rate my prediction, and, if and when the time comes, whether it correponds with reality or not! BTW I do not advocate throwing away your old CD player! All the best, John |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 605 Registered: Dec-03 | The more I think of it, the better I like the analogy with digital photography. I had an Apple Quicktake, a very early digital camera, with 640 x 480 pixels. Was it as good as conventional 35 mm photographic film emulsion? No way! You could see the pixels! You could blur their edges with software, if you liked, but you still didn't get high resolution. When does digital photography become as good as analogue photosgraphy? When the pixels are so small that they cannot be resolved with the n*ked eye, that's when. I submit that digital sound reproduction has only just become good as analogue, and that DVD-Audio is the format that does it. Like the Quicktake camera, CD was for someone's convenience. That's all! |
|
Silver Member Username: MyrantzPost Number: 136 Registered: Feb-04 | John A You almost had me dipping in to our widescreen TV savings jar. I was strong but I don't know how much longer I can hold out! |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 608 Registered: Dec-03 | My Rantz, Widescreen TVs are for people with more money than me. Personally, I'd just get a slightly less wide screen! You can always just sit closer.... Things could just sound better from there, too! |
|
Silver Member Username: AirforceonePost Number: 110 Registered: Feb-04 | Great review John. I enjoyed it. I had the same thing happen to me with the cables. One minute the dealer and I are getting along great, the next he's trying to sell me cables AFTER I've agreed to the purchase. It's almost as if they're saying you look like a sucker. I really am glad to hear about your "ear opening" experience with the T533. I gotta hear that unit one of these days. Take care all. |
|
Bronze Member Username: SeamusPost Number: 20 Registered: Feb-04 | John and the others, How does the RGB output on a SCART connection compare to the component one ? DVD player has both; TV has SCART; dealer has a component to SCART connection cable; me, I have no idea. Help appreciated. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 612 Registered: Dec-03 | AIRFORCE, Thanks, I appreciate that. The T533 is the only one from NAD with DVD-Audio at present. In their DVD player price range it is pretty cheap, I forgot to say that! Here, it is now the same price as the T512 (cheapest) was a year ago. I assume they will be bringing DVD-A into their more expensive players in due course. Seamus, As I understand it, SCART to SCART is a good choice but the signal will not then go through the receiver. Component to SCART could be better, I don't know. The component video-out is really there to go straight to component video-in on a modern TV or projector, I think. I once thought RGB SCART was a European name for "Component", which is now fairly standard in US, but it is clearly not that simple. I am more into audio than video! |
|
New member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 9 Registered: Apr-04 | Hey John, great review. I think I just got my T760 working again, so instead of spending money on a new receiver I'll get a new DVD-player with DVD-A and SACD capability instead.  I've listened to a lot of receivers the past few days, and I think the T760 can definitely hold it's own against even rather expensive current models, when it comes to stereo and clean power. The only weak point is the bit dated processing. But by using a high quality DVD-player with good built in decoders connected to the T760's pre-ins that isn't an issue. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 630 Registered: Dec-03 | Thanks, Adam. How did you fix your T760? Mine delivers "all speakers large" DVD-A like it was built for it. No clipping, no sweat, and higher volumes without getting as hot as with the DVD-Video formats. I don't know why that is. "Ext 5.1" is like having stereo all round: more detail, cleaner, tighter sound. I suppose it is using just the power amp stages and the player is doing all the processing. For a combined DVD-A/SACD player there are some recommendations here for the Denon 2200 from informed guys like Kegger and Two Cents. However, where I am it is twice the price of the NAD T533. |
|
New member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 10 Registered: Apr-04 | Well I'm not sure I did anything or if it's really fixed. Yesterday I took it apart again in frustration and still couldn't see anything wrong. I tried pushing a bit on the various connections, closed it again, meticulously attached only the center speaker wire before the others and tightened it as much as I could. Attached all the other wires, and started it up. Since then the center channel has been working. I don't understand it. Before this I tried different speaker cables and also banana plugs with no success. Anyway, I'm not complaining as long as it keeps working Yes the DVD-2200 looks like a great multi-format player. The DVD-2900 should be even better (especially as a CD-player), but pretty expensive. I have been wanting a top of the line multi-format DVD-player both with regards to sound and video (which, sadly, the NAD players don't really excell in), so I'm lusting after the DVD-2900 ;) |
|
Silver Member Username: Two_centsPost Number: 118 Registered: Feb-04 | Adam, It should be fairly simple to decide between the 2200 and 2900. Go to the nearest Denon dealer with some discs and do a side-by-side comparison. I found that there wasn't that big a difference in sound quality between the two despite the higher end audio DAC in the 2900. It may have had a little more detail than the 2200, but I wasn't sure. The slight difference in sound quality certainly didn't seem to justify the $370 price difference. What really impressed me about the 2900 was the build quality, which I found substantially better than the 2200. The picture quality of the units were identically impressive as far as I could tell. Neither unit played CDs as well as my dedicated CD player. Another universal player worth considering is the Yamaha S1500. The specs look impressive. Unfortunately, it's launch date has been delayed from April to June. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 11 Registered: Apr-04 | Two Cents Thanks for your comments. Did you try their DD/DTS decoder? What CD-player do you have? |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 632 Registered: Dec-03 | As has been discussed before, if money is an issue, are the "Universal" players as good as the dedicated ones? After a lot of reading and discussion I decided to go DVD-A only for sheer sound quality. That was my decision, I will stick with it, and I am just delighted with the result. I fully understand, though, there is a clear case here, for most people, for hedging your bets. Which is partly why I am most interested to learn your opinion on the performance of the Denon 2200, Two Cents. Though don't rush. It normally takes maybe a couple of weeks to get to know a new player thoroughly, I think. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 12 Registered: Apr-04 | John, I agree that universal players usually "abuse" SACDs by converting to PCM. However the 2200 and 2900 have separate processing for SACD and DVD-A. I've now listened to both and yeah they are very close. The build quality of the 2900 impressed me too and red book audio also sounded better to me. Is it worth the extra money? I can't speak for others, but it's very tempting for me. |
|
Silver Member Username: Two_centsPost Number: 122 Registered: Feb-04 | Adam, I have a California Audio Labs DX-2 as my dedicated player, which sounds better with redbook cds than any DVD player I've heard so far. The Denon's DD/DTS decoder is as good or better than my NAD receiver. Whether the 2900 is worth the extra money is, of course, a personal decision. I think it's another example of the law of diminishing returns in audio equipment. I chose what I think is the biggest-bang-for-the-buck point in the 2200, but if you lust after the 2900 I totally understand that feeling. John A, I just picked up some SACD discs, including Vaughn Williams' Sea Symphony at your recommendation. The store didn't have the Naxos recording, so I got a recording by the Atlanta SO and Chorus. A label on the disc states it earned Grammy awards as the best classical recording, choral recording, and engineered recording of 2003 (in the US). I'm looking forward to listening to the new discs. Adam is right about the separate processing for SACD on the Denons. They have a DSD decoder for SACD, so DVD-A and SACD should have a comparable D/A processing path, using the same analog output. No additional D/A conversion for SACD. I would think its fair to compare the two formats on a Denon universal player. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 643 Registered: Dec-03 | Adam, 2c, Yes, get the impression that it is unusual for an SACD player NOT to have a DSD decoder. "Sem" has just got a Pioneer like that. New, it was the only price competitor for me with NAD and Cambridge Audio Azur. I am looking forward to your views on the formats. I should think the Denon players present a level playing field. It is going to be difficult to find a test disc that is the same, though. 2c, I know you have read my praise for that Symphony. It is a natural candidate for surround sound treatment. I hope it does not disappoint! I have four recordings. 1 LP; 2 CD; 1 DVD-A! |
|
New member Username: ZtkavcPost Number: 4 Registered: Apr-04 | Great review! How sound from NAD T533 compares to T513? As DSD to PCM conversion goes you guys are all wrong! Even cheap player like Pioneer DV-565 has direct DSD conversion. It uses Philips SAA7893 and Burr Brown DSD1791 combo for SACD playback. You can scope at DAC chip DSD1791 and see for yourself. The high frequency noise at the RCA outs is also superimposed on the audio signal when playing a SACD. No such noise when playing other media. I belive that debate DVD-A vs SACD is pointless now as you can buy universal player. And there is where Rotels, NADs, Sonys and many other players fell short. They don't have support for both standards. |
|
michael roche Unregistered guest | hello, i always listen to music in 2-channel stereo. Is SACD and DVD-A only really improved in a 5.1 setup or can you really hear an improvement also on 2-channels? I imagine so due to the increased sampling rate and resolution. What about needing higher band amp/speakers? I read that even though humans cannot hear beyond 20kHz signals in DVD-A and SACD above 20kHz need to be fed to the speakers to 'shape' the sound!?? thanks for any info! |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 684 Registered: Dec-03 | Zoran, Thanks! The T513 does not have DVD-Audio. No-one who cares about sound should buy a DVD player, today, that does not have DVD-Audio! Yes, you can get a player that plays both formats. See also my first post on The twilight of the CD...?" here, and the "Home Audio" category "DVD-Audio & SACD". michael, Yes, you can hear a big improvement on 2 channels. Most people cannot hear beyond 14 kHz. What the increased resolution gives is a much more accurately reproduced waveform, right across the audible spectrum. You will hear it with conventional amps and speakers. Most speakers today go to 20 kHz. They went higher when the sources were all analogues, before CD was introduced (22 kHz is the max you can get from CD). Even with 20 kHz speakers you will hear much greater resolution from DVD-A: the signal fed to them is of sound at half the digital sampling frequency, giving up to 48 kHz sounds (Sampling Frequency 96 kHz) for multichannel 5.1 and up to 96 kHz sounds (S.F. 192 kHz) for two channel, as against 22 kHz (44 kHz S. F.) for CD. The other big factor is that the samples are much larger: 24 bit on DVD-A vs 16 bit on CD, so you get greatly increased workable dynamic range. BTW don't write off 5.1 as only for movies. Music can really gain a lot from 5.1. |
|
michael roche Unregistered guest | John A, thanks for confirming what I thought and enlightening me a bit more. I have rotel's 02 series [cd player, pre and final] with linn katan and for my inexpert ears music is really great. I heard SACD on 5.1 pink floyd [dark side ..] recently and was impressed by the whole surround effect. I think i'll buy either pioneer or denon for dvd to also have dvd-a and sacd. U are right to say that music can gain alot from 5.1, but for the same amount of money I am old school and think 2-ch will sound better ... and my girlfriend will still like my living room! |
|
New member Username: ZtkavcPost Number: 5 Registered: Apr-04 | Michael, I must agree with John on most what he said. But, I think that ultra high frequencies are mostly marketing hype (human ears can detect sound up to 20 KHz). Better resolution and high sampling rates are certainly not a hype. They both considerably improve sound presentation (sound signal accuracy). If you are not cinemafile then 2-ch stereo is OK for now. Only small amount of 5.1 recordings sounds better(?!?) in 5.1 mode than in stereo 2-ch mode (Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the moon is one of them). It is my personal opinion ;-) Sound from DVD-A and SACD source sounds less "compressed", less harsh with greater dynamics. Listen to drums and you will see what I meant. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 708 Registered: Dec-03 | Zoran, I agree about hearing high frequencies - very few people can hear much above 14 kHz. My personal opinion is that true 5.1 offers a much better experience than 2.0 (stereo) of what it is like being there, at the performance. Surround sound has been an desirable goal for audio for many years, with analogue formats such as ambisonic and quadraphonic recording. But surround sound has only recently become a commercial proposition, with the advent of "Home Theater" or "Home Cinema", and the DVD. This presents the possibility of having surround recordings for audio alone, with DVD-Audio. It really is something new, and very desirable. The only problem is simply that most people just don't know this. HT/HC people, who have a 5.1 system, are often more interested in the video. "Audiophiles" often look down on surround sound systems, with good reason, and are mostly happy with high quality stereo, which is certainly preferable to low-fi surround sound. See also the thread here: Twilight of the Compact Disc |
|
Silver Member Username: Two_centsPost Number: 151 Registered: Feb-04 | 5.1 can definitely enhance the listening experience. For live concert recordings, surround speakers usually carry the ambient sounds of the concert hall. For example, you may hear crowd murmurs or applause from the sides and rears instead of the front speakers, which creates a more natural effect. For studio recordings, a well-mixed 5.1 recording can widen the soundstage and also provide ambience that creates the illusion of space. I'm not sure how the latter is achieved. I've listened to excellent 5.1 mixes of classical music where there's just the subtlest use of the surround speakers. Perhaps, this acoustical effect is similar to hearing subtle reflections of sound off the walls of a concert hall. I'm not sure about the theory, but it does result in the feeling that you're in the same room as the musicians. 5.1 also benefits trippy, layered music that is not meant to sound "natural", by providing a greater separation of instruments and/or sound effects. A prime example of this Beck's Sea Change multi-channel disc. The soundstage for these types of recordings are completely artificial, but they have great pyschological and aural impact because of the surround effects. I wouldn't say that 5.1 is inherently better than stereo. There are bad 5.1 mixes out there that can actually detract from the listening experience. But a good 5.1 mix can definitely add to your enjoyment of music. Take it from me, a reformed stereo purist. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 716 Registered: Dec-03 | I agree, 2c, fellow "reformed stereo purist"! Personally, I have just become a purist about 5.1, too. Stereo and 5.1 are not really either/or. I find putting a chair equidistant between the four main speakers (L, R, and surround) gives the best surround sound, but also encourages me to listen to stereo from the main speakers in the same location, roughly from a position at an apex of an equilateral triangle. So my new interest in 5.1 has improved my experience of stereo listening, too. The "illusion of space" is mostly the time it takes to hear reflections, and how many, and how much the sound changes, and how, when it comes back to you. The brain interprets this as size and type of room. Movie makers can, and do, use this to great effect. In a "natural" surround recording of a musical performance, you can hear how big the hall is; it is much more like being there. Then there is some music intended to be performed all around the listener. A 5.1 Monteverdi Vespers would illustrate the advantages of surround sound perfectly. I have a CD of a performance recorded in St Mark's Venice, the location for which it was originally composed, and performed, in 1610. There is much out-of-phase info in the recording, so this is one of the rare Cds where matrixed surround (I like NAD EARS) really adds something, difficult for a stereo purist to admit! But this excellent stereo recording would be blown away by genuine and well-done multichannel, I am sure. There are many pieces out there just waiting to be done in this way. The "synthetic" surround can also be good. There can surely be no question that The Beatles would have chosen surround sound for Sgt. Pepper in 1967 or whenever it was, and done some amazing things with it. Whether it is possible to create that in surround now, from the original tapes, I do not know. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 740 Registered: Dec-03 | Further comments on the NAD T533 and DVD-Audio Following my first post on this thread, April 12. Buzz from centre channel and hiss from surrounds It is absent when a disc is playing, reappearing on "pause", "stop" or when the disc has finished. If is not intrusive, even then. It also seems to depend on which disc is in the tray, which I don't understand. Playing hybrid DVD-A/DVD-V discs I have some discs with DVD-A and DVD-V on the same side. Some of these give a menu which allows you to choose between DVD-A 5.1, Dolby Digital 5.1, DTS 5. Others give a menu, but the options "Dolby Digital 5.1" and "DTS 5.1", if selected, simply give a no-option screen message "Take the disc out, set your DVD-player to DVD-Video, and re-insert the disc". There seems to be no way to do this with the T533. Other discs have no menu at all: if there is DVD-A on the disc, that is what you get. The DVD-A stereo option also seems to unavailable some times. There can be a screen message is "Take the disc out, set your DVD-player to 2-channel stereo, and re-insert the disc". This might work if you reset "digital audio out" to PCM only, I have not tried it. Some discs have no 2.0 DVD-A at all. I conclude that the DVD-Audio disc format has not really settled down, especially where DVD-Audio and DVD-Video share the same side. Double-sided discs are a much better idea. The player will "see" either one or other type of disc. DVD-A/CD is also promised, but I have not seen one, yet. All LPs were double-sided. Why were there never any double-sided CDs? Turning auto-play on and off... ...does not work with some discs, which play - on DVD-A - as soon as they are inserted. I personally find this really annoying. However, it is possibly the discs, again. Turning progressive scan on and off The manual explains how and when to do this, but the option is not available from the set-up menu. Perhaps you have to connect component video to obtain it. Mistracking...? I have two DVD-A discs which jump at one point. This is repeatable, and does not have anything to do with playback volume. But it occurs when there is a loud passage in the music, even if the playback volume is turned right down on the amplifier. Naxos Rachmaninov's Piano Concerto Number 3 finally really does end (it sounds to my musical taste like 34 minutes of ending) with an almighty "crash; rum-ti-tum" figure. The "crash" seems to scare the player witless, and it skips the "rum", as if in fright. It could be the discs. It could be the player. I have no way of checking this at present. It is not acoustic feedback, despite the flimsy construction. Build quality The T533 is not the strong, steel box to which I am accustomed. The front panel is a reassuring gunmetal grey, but turns out to be made of plastic. The front panel is attached to the main carcass with some insubstantial-looking plastic clips underneath; and to the top of the cover, not at all. So with the cover on, if you press it down near the front panel, the cover bends, and creaks against the plastic. I would not put anything heavy on this unit. The T532 also has a plastic front panel, but it has a lip which engages with the front of the cover. The whole thing is much stronger. Bottom line I am still pleased with the NAD T533. It brings DVD-Audio, and, perhaps just for this reason, is remarkably inexpensive for the excellent sound quality it gives. It is certainly not the Rega turntable of 2004 - the comparison is absurd. At the price of the T533, I might now exercise some patience and look more closely at the Cambridge Audio Azur 540D, which, if nothing else, is nearly twice the weight. I read a very strong review of the Arcam DiVA DV79 in the current HiFi News: it has HDMI as well as component for video, apart form excellent sound, with DVD-Audio, AC-3 and DTS processors on board. But it is more than three times the price. Still recommended? Yes. But there will undoubtedly be more DVD-Audio players along soon. It will also be interesting to see what NAD does with its more expensive players. One has to remember that the T533 is about the same price as the T512 was about a year ago, and the T512 was then bottom of the range, without even 96/24 DACs. Pictures  NAD T533  NAD T532, for comparison The models are clearly quite different - the T533 is not just a T532 with DVD-A added. The back panel of the T533 has output sockets for 5.1 analogue audio and component video (three), and everything is in a different place, reflecting internal re-design. The disc drive is different, and there is a processor board (left of the drive) in the T533. The power supply board (right of the drive) is also changed. The T533 processor chips (source unspecified in the manual and sales material) have a large "M" in a sort of rings-of-Saturn. Close-ups available, if anyone is interested. Note also the front panel lip, which secures the cabinet of the T532, is absent from the T533, generally a lighter and flimsier unit. Why "light" is considered a virtue in a dedicated DVD player I do not know. Surely they do not intend it to be placed on top of a TV? Postscript for pedants.. The T533 is described on the back panel as a "Digital Video Disc Player", not a "Digital Versatile Disc Player". A DVD-A disc is not a video disc: more evidence that DVD-A has low priority in NAD's imagined target customer. I do wish manufacturers would decide what to call things, it really would help us to understand what they do. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew york Usa Post Number: 168 Registered: Dec-03 | JohnA., Thanks for your latest post, as it is very timely for me. I have just made my decision yesterday, on a replacement DVD player. I ordered a CA AZUR 540D. Like I have stated in past posts, sound and video quality is paramount, with build quality a close second. Once received and evaluated, I will post a first hand review. Cheers. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 742 Registered: Dec-03 | Rick, Thanks. I shall be most interested to read what you find. The mistracking issue is something that is beginning to concern me. Some of it, though not all, could still be feedback. I shall have to put the player in the next room, as an experiment, to be sure. Unfortunately, the next room is the kitchen.... Then, if that is what it is, try to find a way to isolate the player. Intrinsically, the sound is superb. Good luck, Rick. You have DVD-Audio waiting for you. I assure you it is real progress; the best thing for decades. Get a few DVD-A discs. DTS is better than CD, to me. But true DVD-A is better still. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 40 Registered: Apr-04 | Thanks for the detailed update John. I just got my first DVD-A disc in anticipation of my upcoming universal player It has both DVD-A and DTS/DD on the same side, and it seems my T550 is too old to be a 100% compatible. When I try the DTS layer, the player skips and even freeze up on some tracks. However it works fine with DD. I can't wait to try the DVD-A high res version next week. I'm ordering the player on Thursday/Friday. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 758 Registered: Dec-03 | You are welcome, Adam. BTW DTS is not a separate layer, but a directory, or folder, on the disc. I think. If you look at the disc on a computer, the DTS and AC-3 files have different names. It is odd that the player skips or freezes on DTS. I do not understand that. The files should either be read, or not read. Does the T550 play DTS on movies OK? As I understand it, there should be no player-detectable difference between the DTS audio files on a "DVD-A" disc compared to those on a "DVD-V" disc. Good luck with the new purchase. As with Rick, I think you will not be disappointed, whichever player you choose. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 44 Registered: Apr-04 | Thanks John, Now you mention it, it was pretty silly of me to think that DTS had a separate layer, as I know that there are only 2 layers on a DVD. My T550 haven't had problems with normal DTS movie tracks, other than it taking a couple of seconds to start playing after being on "pause". In DTS the player skips the first ~10 seconds (real skips, not audio cutouts because of the receiver locking on to the signal) on most tracks and on some freeze for a minute or two and then continue. On a later track it froze completely. Anyway, it's soon to be a non-issue I've almost made up my mind completely on the DVD-2900. I'll post about it when I do. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 54 Registered: Apr-04 | Well I've been enjoying my new DVD-2900 today. It was great fun until I found out that it doesn't like to play ~12% of my CD's  When it had trouble with the first one, I thought it was because the CD was dirty. It wasn't, and it also had no scratches. Hmmm I thought. A lot of CDs later, and it was apparently a bigger problem than I thought. I couldn't see any reason why they shouldn't work in the DVD-2900. All the discs can play in my NAD T550 and other CD players. If any of the CDs that I've already screened, start to have the same problem, I'll be pretty sure that something is very wrong with the player. Until then I'll assume that the CDs in question are abnormal in some way. It looks like the edges have a larger transparent zone. That is a larger area not covered by the dye layer. However I can't be sure if this is the cause. Other than this the CDs have no physical characteristics in common. There are both old and new among them. Also both singles and albums. Some are completely clean of any dirt/smudges and scratches. Others have a tiny bit of wear, but nothing out of the ordinary. Indeed my most scratched CD can be played without fuss, so this problem is quite puzzling, but also very aggravating. I've emailed the local Denon dealer to hear if they have newer firmware versions than my player. If I can't get this fixed by that, I'll have to demand a new replacement, or a full refund. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 869 Registered: Dec-03 | Sorry to hear that, Adam. I have no ideas. I cannot see how it can be a problem with firmware, but i have little knowledge on this one. You might get some ideas on the thread about the Denon 2200. |
|
Bronze Member Username: DocdatCopenhagenDenmark Post Number: 55 Registered: Apr-04 | There is a separate firmware for the transport logic. I was thinking it might have something to do with the laser not moving far enough inward, when it tries to read a new disc, and if the problem is as widespread as my results suggest, other people must have complained about it, possibly leading to an updated transport firmware. All pure speculation I know, but I guess I can hope I do have a 14 days full refund option, if all else fails... |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 871 Registered: Dec-03 | Adam, "laser not moving far enough inward" seems plausible. But I would think that would be hardware. I really do not know, though. And yes, you would think someone else would have noticed! One thing to do is take your "Difficult" CDs to the dealer, and see if his 2900 can play them. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 872 Registered: Dec-03 | Thread: Denon DVD-2200 |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 885 Registered: Dec-03 | The general question of DVD-Audio, and surround sound, from an "audiophile", and stereo, point of view, is discussed on another thread:- Teaching an old dog new tricks... |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 907 Registered: Dec-03 | Before this thread reached the end of its active life, let me say I have had the NAD T533 for six weeks now, and there is absolutely no problem. Mistracking? The "mistracking" is only on one or two recently-purchased discs. It never shows up on most, and it seems pretty clear it is the discs themselves (which explains why it is not volume-dependent). I wonder if it is what you hear from the "Watermarking" (for copy protection) that I read about. The newest disc acquisition (Tchaikovsky "Swan Lake" excerpts on Naxos) is quite a bad recording and has little pops or digital silences between tracks. I think it is fairly clear the problem is with Naxos. Buzz and hiss? No, none at all. Anything you hear with your ear against speakers at high gain is probably the price you pay for having a DVD-A processor at all. It is never audible, even in the background, and even at high volumes, from where you listen. Build quality Fine, no problem. It is probably not the one to get if you want to use it as the stand for your TV, that's all. Still recommended? Yes. Warmly. I will be interested in anyone else's opinion. A few posters now have one of these, too. I will also be interested to be directed to any professional reviews of this player. |
|
Unregistered guest | Great thread everyone! Has anyone successfully played DVD-R on the T533 (or T513) Thanks! |
|
Unregistered guest | I'd be interested in a review of the 540D from Cambridge Audio to the level of details as John A's pieces on the NAD. Has anybody got any info? The professional reviews are very positive. Thanks from me too for this thread. |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 913 Registered: Dec-03 | Thanks, Joseph and Michael. Joseph, if someone will explain to me briefly what a "DVD-R" is (do I just burn a DVD-R disc?... with what files and disc/file format...?) then I will give it a go and report back. |
|
Silver Member Username: Rick_bNew york Usa Post Number: 195 Registered: Dec-03 | michael, My ordered Azur 540D should arrive today. I hope to post an evaluation/review by the end of the weekend. |
|
michael roche Unregistered guest | Thanks Rick. I'll look forward to your post. I'm looking for a player for both dvd and dvd-a to hook initially to my 2ch rotel system hence my interest. Seems like CA is giving NAD and Rotel a run for their money in the budget hifi arena these days .... |
|
Silver Member Username: John_aPost Number: 914 Registered: Dec-03 | Rick, Great. Thanks. Brief first impressions will be much appreciated, as well as evaluation/review after mature consideration, if possible. I think the Azur 540D and T533 probably have many components in common. But we do not expect you to take it apart! |
|
dsmith901 Unregistered guest | John, I wonder if your gushing praise for DVD-A comes more from the fact you were comparing surround sound (DVD-A multichannel) with 2 channel CD. That impresses most people the first time they hear it. I heard 2 ch DVD-A early in its introduction and did not find it significantly better than my current CD (H/K FL8550). Maybe they have improved it since then, but I am not yet convinced that DVD-A and SA-CD are the great leaps forward that some claim. An improvement, probably, but not supported by any extensive AB testing. One public test done in the UK actually resulted in the audience preferring CD to SACD! I think most of us would be better served if all CD recordings used HDCD encoding (with same in players of course). However, I have yet to make an extended listening to DVD-A or SA-CD in my home system, something I will get around to sooner or later. But I am not in a hurry since very few high rez records are available from my favorite artists. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1052 Registered: Dec-03 | dsmith, Thank you. I do not mean to gush! It is sometimes difficult to tune into different idioms, and one certainly cannot cover them all at the same time. My opinion is indeed based on hearing DVD-Audio in two-channel stereo, too. There is also something called "PCM Stereo" which seems to be much the same. My own, individual experience is that DVD-A is a major step forward in the quality and resolution of recorded sound. Before I heard it for myself, I was very sceptical about this claim. I bought my first DVD-A disc less than a year ago, unsure whether it would really play on any DVD-player, "as it said on the tin". But it did; in DTS. That was so good that I argued long and hard that another step forward was hardly possible. These threads have recently been moved to "Home Audio: DVD-Audio & SACD". "What does 'DVD-Audio' mean here?" is my fighting against the idea that there could be much that is new in DVD-A. Multichannel is also something of great interest to me. Yes, I believe that is "progess", too, or can be. In my sober and, I hope, gushless view, DVD-A 5.1, when done properly, is a step comparable with that of the introduction of stereophony, soon after the vinyl LP, in the 1950s. Not much in the intervening years makes much difference, except as regards convenience. My motive for writing is that I feel people may wish to know, and should certainly be alerted, if necessary in a provocative way, in order that they may try it, and decide for themselves. You are right to point out the distinction between improved resolution and multi-channel recording. One can have each without the other. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | From Sunny South Africa. (Actually getting colder now). Got my T533 yesterday. John A's review made it so much easier to choose. Thanks. And yes, I tested with DVD-R, DVD+R and DVD+RW and all plays perfectly. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | Allmost forgot. John A, figured out which Library code to use on HTR-2? I'm too lazy to do it key by key. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1085 Registered: Dec-03 | Arno, There is a list of library codes in the user manual. Choose the code for "NAD DVD player" or similar, perhaps "T531". |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1087 Registered: Dec-03 | Amo, How do you like it? We are "early adopters". Keep your eye on the right analogue out channel with CD (L/R; not 5.1, or digital, which seem fine) - see W Persson on 10 May on https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/18212.html I will do the same. I thought I heard the same problem earlier today, but everything is OK now. So, if it is there, and I was not mistaken, then it is not reproducible. I will report, here, if it comes back. |
|
New member Username: ChristiantrollVienna, Austria Post Number: 1 Registered: May-04 | My new T533 works well with Audio, DVD-Video, ... but DVD-Audio makes problems winelight (grover washington jr.) in blue (corrs) no menue, no sound other dvd-audios are working fine |
|
New member Username: RoyjacPost Number: 1 Registered: May-04 | Arno and John A., Just received my new T763 and T533 last night... didn't sleep much... I found out that Library code 605 works with the T533 on my HTR2. Is it complete? Not sure yet. Everything is flawless so far. It's too early to give you my impressions but let's say that I'm very excited... My only concern is with the HTR2 learning feature. After entering the learning mode, and selecting a key to program, the LED is supposed to turn amber, it stays green... Anybody used this feature successfully? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1169 Registered: Dec-03 | Chistian, Disc mastering seem to be variable to me. If you get no menu, go to last track, and see if it is there, hiding (works on some Naxos discs I have). You would have to try the same disc on another player to be sure the fault is with the player. Royjac, "Anybody used this feature successfully?" Yes, I have. Does the following, from the manual, work for you? • Enter Learning Mode: On the HTR 2, simultaneously press-and-hold for 3 seconds both a Device Selector key and the [•] "record" key (just below the [DISP] key), until the Learn LED at the center of the HTR 2 turns steady green. • Press the HTR 2's Control key you wish to teach a command; the Learn LED will turn amber. |
|
New member Username: RoyjacMontralCanada Post Number: 2 Registered: May-04 | John A., I'm following those exact instructions from the manual. Step 1 is OK, the Learn LED turns steady green. But when I press the key I want to program, the LED stays steady green... ...to be continued |
|
New member Username: ChristiantrollVienna, Austria Post Number: 2 Registered: May-04 | Royjac a question which key you want to program ? i think, not all keys are possible for learning. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | Royjac, I've successfully programmed all my other remotes (6) onto my HTR-2. Now a week since I have my T533. Listened to various music and DVD's and enjoyed it every moment. Pink Floyd have never sounded so nice. |
|
New member Username: RoyjacMontralCanada Post Number: 3 Registered: May-04 | Thank you all for your answers. I tried many times with different keys, and I'm definitely doing it right... must be the unit. I'll contact my dealer and get back to you. That said, I'm very impressed by the T763/T533 combination. It's a perfect match for my Canton Karat M80 and CM40, and ErgoF. I'm experimenting with subs. I'm looking for tightness at a reasonable price. Any suggestions? (maybe in another thread?) |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1191 Registered: Dec-03 | Royjac, In your position I would certainly try the "Factory Reset" (bottom of page 5), and also replace the batteries. I confirm the back light really gobbles up the battery mA-hours, and the whole thing goes flakey when the batteries are low. BTW I really liked the remote that came with the NAD T533, and tried to program the HTR-2 to be as much like it as possible. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | Agree with John A on reset and other batteries. I've switched off my key illumination as the first set of betteries lasted only 1 month with illumination on. Second battery set is now 12 month old. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | John A, I'm running short on space on my stand and thinking of "stacking" the T533 on top of the T752. Good idea or bad idea? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1197 Registered: Dec-03 | Arno, Although that is how the NAD brochures etc. have them, I personally would not do that. If you listen like I do, your T752 is going to get hot - it should; it is built to do that. But restricting convection through the grill at the top is a great way to get it to overhead, go into thermal cut-off, and eventually fry some internal component. Also, you will be toasting the T533 as matter of course. I would have no problem putting them the other way up, except the size. The T533 doesn't need ventilation grills (because it generates little heat). You could just put a piece of wooden board between them, to spread the load of the T752: the T533 is not a strong steel box, as I said. But I still have it "sandwiched" OK. I suspect there may even be benefit in cutting down resonance from acoustic feedback. On a cabinet shelf I have an NAD 1000 pre-amp (is strong steel box; no vents) with a board on top; on that is the T533 (no vents) with another board on top; on that is a Sony VCR (has vents - need ventilation) with a small space above. That's a stack of three units, no problem, but none of them is as heavy as a receiver. Above that, resting on the load-bearing top surface of the cabinet, is only the T760 receiver, which needs all the air flow it can get. |
|
New member Username: RoyjacMontralCanada Post Number: 4 Registered: May-04 | John A., I had already changed the batterys for new Alkalines ... BUT I hadn't tried the Factory Reset! BINGO! It did the trick. I can't wait to be the proud pilot of THE master remote in my living room! Thank you very much!!! |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1203 Registered: Dec-03 | Royjac, Great! You are most welcome. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | I read the discussion of DVD-A with interest. Could anyone please clarify whether copy of vinyl into DVD-A, in stereo as well as multichannel 5.1, through PC using Creative Audigy 2 sound card and Sound Forge, will provide optimal resolution and dynamic range as provided for in the DVD-A format? Should the sampling frequency be recorded at 96khz or 192khz for 2 channels? When recordings are made in 2 channels, are the 5.5 multichannels automatically encoded and the benefit reveal only through a multichannel system? Is the receiver used in home theatre the same as receiver used for playing 5.1 in the DVD-A format? |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1220 Registered: Dec-03 | EJ, Two-channel DVD-A seems to be the same as "Stereo PCM" or "PCM Stereo", and there a programs that will produce files to write to the correct disc format (UHF I think, as all DVDs). I do not know about 5.1; there seem to be pop-up ads all over the place saying you can "rip" DVD-A files. Everything depends on the software and hardware capabilties you have. Vinyl is mostly stereo; you cannot get more real channels out than on the original, obviously. So, no, multichannel cannot be automatically encoded. You would need the master tapes from the recordings to do that, and they would have to be in more than two channels. Having said that, some record companies have analague ambisonic and other surround format masters which never really saw the light of day when CD took over, but surely will, now. There is a view that 192 kHz is a waste of space and there is no audible improvement over 96 kHz, but people want it, so they probably disagree. Yes, a home theatre receiver plays DVD-A provided it has 5.1 analogue input (exception some expensive Pioneer models). The only missing link for most people, at present, is DVD-A capability in the player, hence my "upgrade" described above. I would be interested to know how you get on. I was thinking of having a go, one day, myself. If you want the most accurate digital copy of an LP (warts and all) then DVD-A/Stereo PCM surely beats burning a CD any day. But what can be closer to an LP than the LP itself.....? |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | EJ, (This thread is getting more and more intresting). I'm currently looking at the Creative Audigy 2 card (Busy discussing it on a other SA forum) with the view to record LP's to CD's. Did you try it? If so, comment please. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1229 Registered: Dec-03 | EJ, Arno, From May HiFi News review of M-Audio transit USB audio deviice: www.maudio.co.uk www.felttip.com www.videolan.org These could be useful. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | John, Arno John, Thanks for the advice and information. I can't agree more, the superior sound quality of vinyl. For obvious reasons (like playing in my car stereo system) I intend to copy some of my more valuable vinyls into digital. I have been toying with the idea for years and now that I learnt the quality of DVD-A, I was recently inspired to transplate the intention into action. For the past 1 to 2 months, I have been working to upgrade my PC (sound card, hard discs, processor, etc), checking my turntable (Linn Sondek LP12),cartridge (Sumiko Blue Point Special), pre-am (Audible Illusion Modulus 3)and record cleaner (VPI 16.5) and getting cables to connect the pre-am to the sound card. The most frustrating task thus far is getting the right length and quality of cable (3.5mm plug on one end and RCA on the other). I need 4m and I can't find the right cable in Sydney! Such cable comes in length of 1.8m, 2.5m, but none at 4m or more. So what I did was to get an RCA to RCA adaptor and join an existing 2m long RCA Monster cable to the RCA end of a new cable and insert the 3.5mm plug at the other end into the Creative Audigy 2ZS sound card. The sound card supports DVD-A at 24-bit/192khz in stereo and 24 bit/96khz in 5.1 channels, DVD-A quality. I have Sound Forge for editng. With the help of a friend, I did my first recording of vinyl (Sheffield Lab's Lincoln Mayorga, vol 3) into a dedicated hard disc (I have a back-up hard disc in RAID formation). The recording was done in stereo, at 96khz, and, of course, in real time. I saved the master copy and then copy each track (8 in total)individually for editing. As you would expect, the 8 tracks occupy close to 800MB of space, which is 4 to 5 times more than what would be the case if the recording was done at CD frequency sampling. Since the vinyl is quite clean, I spent very little time and effort removing a few clicks from each track. In other word, I did not spent much time in the editing. It, therefore, pays to clean the vinyl thoroughly before recording commences. This will also keep the pops to a minimal. I will be saving the master and edited copy into data DVD and then copy into DVD-A when I have purchased the DVD-A player and the DVD-A authoring software. Since I do not as yet have a DVD-A player or a DVD-A authoring software (I am looking at Nad T533, which will be avaible in Australia in July/August; and Minnetonka Discwelder Bronze or Chrome DVD-A authoring software), I copied the recording into CD. In the copying process, the recording is down-sampled to CD frequency. In repect of sound quality, it is impressive, even down-sampled to CD frequency. Though I do not have a CD copy of this vinyl to compare, the recording has a sense of excelllent clarity, mid-range purity and good separation of instruments. When I play the recording in my car stereo system, I am hearding a lot more into the music and background "noise" than I have experienced listening to the vinyl. This is particularly evident in the "America" track. This may be attributed to the intimate environment of the car and the level (loud) I could play compared to the larger home living area where I could only play at sensible level. I can't wait to get to the next level - copying the recording into DVD-A. I will keep you posted. wa beleive came throughis very good and a lot of background "noise" ( getting Re to carry out have been busy working towards uam inareBecause of convenience and that |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1232 Registered: Dec-03 | EJ, Thanks. That is great to read. I am mostly of the opinion that cables don't matter so much, as long as they are well made. Just look inside the box, at what's on the other side of the connector. I would have no hestitation in recommending a T533 for playback. Mine goes on sounding better and better, none of the original reservations, above, remain. There are already car DVD-A players, but I do not think you can buy one, yet, without the car. If not, it is only a matter of time. Wonderful LP playback system you have. I always had this feeling that the CD was a step back in sound quality, but we were all outvoted by about a million to one, and one could always wonder whether the CD player was the problem. After DVD-A, I go back to my LPs, and know for sure we were absolutely right about CD. I no longer see any point in discussing different brand of CD player. BTW I have Rega planar 3; original tone arm; Ortofon VMS 30/III MM cartridge. Even on that, the superiority of LP over CD is completely obvious, once you have you have DVD-A as a reference. About seven years ago I made a direct-to-RAM recording at 16/44 from a Sony stereo microphone through the pre-amp stage of a Sony Walkman pro (on a Macintosh, just using its built-in analogue - which they once all had). The Sony microphone packed in after the first song, and has failed a second time, after an expensive "repair". That was a unique event, will never happen again, and lost forever, courtesy of Sony. That was the nearest I got to this technology. I've never much wanted to just copy things. "Sound Forge" Is that any good? May I ask which platform you are on? For "the rest of us" there is now DVD Studio Pro. It does AC-3 and DTS, but not DVD-A, as far as I can see. Thanks again for the input. Any more is most welcome. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1233 Registered: Dec-03 | "...but not DVD-A". I should have said "...but not DVD-A 5.1". 24 bit 96 kHz LPCM two-channel is no problem. I doubt it does MLP, but that does nothing except reduce file size to get more on the disc: hardly an issue of you are making your own. I think the over-ridingly important spec for CD, which they never owned up to, was "playing time: 74 minutes": the rest was compromise. Why they chose that, and why it lingers on into DVD, I have no idea. Audiophiles in pre-LP days could handle 3 minutes per side. In fact, the genre of the popular song, which we still have, was build on that assumption. It is all very strange. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | Thanks EJ, I will by my Sound Card in about 3 weeks time. I have toyed with recording with an "el cheapo" sound card but the quality is lacking big time. I'm surprised that you guys in Austria get the NAD T533 after us in SA. We do not even have DVD Audio disks yet (None that I could find). So I have not as yet listen to DVD Audio on my T533. |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | Bad Typing so early in the morning. I will BUY my sound card in 3 weeks time. and you guys in AUSTRALIA. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | John, I have version 7. I believe it is the industry standard for professional digital audio editing. I learnt of it recently, from a professional sound recording artist, when I was in Malaysia. I do not think I will ever use more than a minuscule of the substantial amount of features in this software. |
|
New member Username: ChristiantrollVienna, Austria Post Number: 3 Registered: May-04 | AUSTRIA was right for me !!! here in Austria, T533 is available since 7 weeks ! |
|
Gerrit Unregistered guest | Arno, There are quite a few DVD-A titles available in SA but it's mostly clasical. You can contact Hi-Fi Installations in Centurion. They buy their's at a shop somewhere in the new mall. (maar dis lekker duur!!) I got my T533 and T753 (14/5/2003) and they are lovely so far. To see the full potential of this little player, connect the 5.1 output to your receivers analog inputs and spin some DD stuff!! It decodes the DD stuff better than the T7xx receivers (for some reason it's even MORE dynamic and realistic) also you will notice that the noise floor, which is already VERY low in my set-up, drops even further giving a true black background from which the music and effects can flow. I have had no problems with hiss or hum but it did during the first week, ocasionally at startup, only play in the left channel?? I then switch it of and on again which rectify the problem. It has not happened lately. My system: T533 T753 H/K power amp for fronts RCD975BX for redbook Chario Constellation Cygnus (3way 2-4 Ohm!!) Kef Q9C B&W 602 (surr) B&W CC6 (Back surr) Yamaha YST SW-300 12" Sub |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1235 Registered: Dec-03 | Gerrit, You hear exactly whay I hear with the T533. The best DVD-A disc I have seems to play with a little hiss from L channel for some reason, only on first putting it in. It is not big deal. I can forgive that player anything for the sound it produces. If is a new world, for me, for sound reproduction in the home. Nothing on the scale of DVD-A has happended for many, many years, in my opinion. EJ, Thanks. Going back: "Minnetonka Discwelder Bronze or Chrome" there was a review in HiFi News recently. I can look it up if you are interested. I came away with the view that they are expensive and have some problems. All, inc Christian, Re where things get released. I think the rest of us just have to accept that US is "the big market" and they would be mad not to release there, first. The US is also the most influential; look at this forum. I have a further thought, reading about mastering/burning DVD-A. it is this: has anyone considered doing it in SACD? My first reaction is that it would be madness. Everything is more difficult; it is the last thing Sony will every allow you to do, so you won't get a consumer encoder/writer; and the best that anyone can say about the result is that SACD can sometimes approach the sound of DVD-A, on a good day. Yet, when I suggest SACD is primarily a means of audio data encryption, people get annoyed! Maybe it is the open standard of DVD-A that will swing things. That alone would be good enough for me. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | John, Yes, I am interested. Thank you for taking the trouble. |
|
Gerrit Unregistered guest | John, You also cure the problem by turning the power to all componets off and powering up again? I've found it to happen a few times during the first maybe 5 days of owning, not after that. will it go away completely after a while? regards gerrit |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1239 Registered: Dec-03 | EJ, My pleasure. I should love to hear how you get on. Gerrit, Thanks. I haven't tried that. It happens only for the first few seconds, and only with the best DVD-A disc I own: made by Disctronics; DVD-A only on one whole side of the disc, DVD-V on the other. I can sure live with it. I was just interested that you had found the same. Let us know if time and/or a reboot works with you. I get the impression it might go away with "warming up". |
|
Arno Unregistered guest | Gerrit, Thanks. I'm also in PTown (Pretoria), but have done a bit of searching on the web and found the following. http://www.take2.co.za/list.php?type=5&platform=&qsearch=dvd+audio |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 117 Registered: Apr-04 | Hello Gentlemen, I hope I'm not hijacking this thread by asking this question. If so, just let me know and I'll start a separate thread. Above some details were provided regarding recording LP's to computer to burn to CD. I'm looking for solution to do this for DVD-A and SACD (that don't have hybrid/redbook track). I want to be able to take recordings that I only have in DVD-A/SACD format and "rip" them to my computer so I'll be able to download to iPod - thus, I don't care about whether multichannel is retained, etc. Is there a solution available for Mac PowerBooks? If so, would it be software solution or does it require interfacing the mac with the audio equipment? Thanks! |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1240 Registered: Dec-03 | Hello Ghia, Welcome! just to say there seem to be pop-up ads and others around for "ripping" DVD-As. SOrry not to be more specific. You will find them. You will not be able to avoid them! Our PowerBooks will not play SACD/DVD-A, so naturally you will have to connect to an SACD/DVD-A player to get an input. They will, however, play DVD-V and the Cd layer of hybrids. I f you are going to down-sample as far as normal MP3 and AAC files, it will make no difference at all if you start with the sources you can play on a Powerbook. BTW I am an iPod fan. too. You can get CD-quality if you are OK with no more than about 15 CDs on a 10 GB disc. Why any one wants hundred or thousands, with all the loss of quality that entails, is a mystery to me, but that is me. You can over-write and replace stuff you've listened to in seconds, through the FireWire link. |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 121 Registered: Apr-04 | JohnA I agree with your assessment about the mystery of carrying thousands of low-quality files on iPod. I have the iPod Mini so the capacity is 4gb. My files are ripped 320kbps AAC and I can usually get around 400 songs to take with me which is more than enough. That quality through the headphones is sufficient for me. I love the smart lists that allow me to cycle my way through my music library as I sync the iPod with iTunes. This truly has exposed me to some long lost songs as well as songs I never gave a good listen years ago. DVD-A will play on PowerBook. Right now, I've got kd lang's "invincible summer" playing on the PB as I type this and earlier I tested Buena Vista Social Club and found it worked too. It brings up the DVD Player but not iTunes. Hence the problem. SACD only throws an error but the hybrid obviously works. Since I've got "pop-up ads" blocked in Safari, it looks like I'll need to do a google search on how to do the ripping. Maybe there's some info up on the Apple boards too. Thanks! |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 124 Registered: Apr-04 | For those interested, I found a way to rip DVD-A to Mac computers: 1. Use MacTheRipper to get the files off the DVD-A 2. Use bbDEMUX to separate the video and audio streams 3. Use bd4go to convert .ac3 to .aiff All the above steps worked. The only problem I've run in to, and it is a major problem, is no sound is coming out of the .aiff. I'm investigating this. |
|
Silver Member Username: GhiacabrioletNC Post Number: 125 Registered: Apr-04 | The steps in the last post don't seem to be the "definitive" answer. It appears the results may vary from recording to recording (sort of like stereo/multichannel, eh John?). First, instead of using MacTheRipper I'm using OSEx which allows you to get more granular on what you are extracting. Using it and bd4go allowed me to extract audio from one DVD-A but this did not work on a different DVD-A. And, OSEx doesn't seem to recognize DTS at all. I'll keep working at it and, if I find some consistency, I'll report back the detail steps - assuming y'all are interested? I think I'll start a new thread about this topic on the Home Audio DVD-A forum as that seems to be a more appropriate place for it. |
|
Italo Unregistered guest | Hi John, I read your review of the new NAD player and it's very interesting. Have you tested whether the Video/Audio settings in the setup menu of the player are storable? I had the T532 and found out that the settings disappeared after the player was switched off at the mains. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1263 Registered: Dec-03 | Italo, I leave it on standby mostly. I have unplugged it several times (see photos) and it has always come back with saved settings intact. All units like this (also computers) have an internal, rechargable battery, to power the memory and other functions. If you let that battery get discharged by leaving the thing unplugged for weeks/months, then it never charges up properly again, afterwards. Such batteries are easily replaced, however. I have never had the problem with our T532, either. Leaving the unit on standby is good practice, I think. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1265 Registered: Dec-03 | Returning to writing DVD-A vs SACD, there is a letter in June HiFi News from a man who wishes to archive analogue recordings, and who wrote to Philips asking if they had plans to introduce SACD-R. The reply was "No, definitely not". |
|
gerrit Unregistered guest | Arno, Thanks for that ref. Just be sure that what you order is actually DVD-A i.e. MLP format That site advertise all their music-only DVD's as DVD Audio, when in fact most are DD 5.1 or DTS. Not nearly the resolution of MLP. Thanks gerrit |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1266 Registered: Dec-03 | Gerrit, Arno, My understanding is that MLP is allowed, not required, for DVD-A. It is "Meridian Lossless Packing", that is, a way of decreasing file sizes in order to get more on the disc, without affecting sound quality in any way. MLP is the only permitted way of doing that, but it is still only an option. Linear PCM without MLP will sound just the same, and still count as "DVD-A". See links in my post above of May 24. When buying discs, just choosing "Format: DVD-A" should be enough. In practice, all DVD-A discs also have DTS 5.1 and/or Dolby AC-3 on a DVD-V partition, in order for them to play on DVD-V-only players, too. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | John, I am still assessing the DVD-A authoring software to buy. My understanding is that the Minnetonka's discwelder bronze is incompatible with MLP, it supports Linear PCM. Are you saying that there is no discerning difference in sound quality in both formats? Excuse my ignorance as I am not a technical person, if MLP is a way of decreasing file sizes in order to get more on the disc without affecting sound quality, how does Linear PCM operate and compare in respect of this area. I have visited the web sites you have drawn my attention to but I still have not come across any other DVD-A authoring software which I consider as a good option to purchase. Do you or anyone who have experience using any brand of DVD-A authoring software and could recommend its purchase? |
|
Gerrit Unregistered guest | John, As far as I know.. Without MLP the sampling rate of the DVD-A cannot exceed 48Khz for a multichannel recording and still fit into the DVD data bandwith. The biggest benefit of DVD-A is 24/96 through 5.1 Channels. This can only be done via MLP. EJ For 2channel the LPCM stream at 24/96 will have no deference from a MLP packaged stream except for file size. Some sources also claim that "MLP also features radically improved data validation techniques to ensure that the signal, as delivered on the DVD-A, is identical to the master signal." How much of this is hype or truth?? Gerrit |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1267 Registered: Dec-03 | EJ, My guess is that MLP is proprietory. It was developed by Meridian, and licenced, in some way with the agreement of Dolby, as the only allowed "compression" for DVD-A. I mean "compression" in the computer sense, not the audio (Dolby) sense. Everyone seems to agree that MLP is lossless, that is, the LPCM you get out after unpacking is identical to the LPCM you packed in. So you can compare MLP with binhex, zip, tar, and sit compression formats for computer files; the original is still in there, waiting to be unpacked. And you can transfer such files faster, or in the same time over narrower-band connections, without loss of data. Gerritt, I have checked; you are correct the sampling frequency limit without MLP for 2-channel is 96 kHz; with MLP it doubles to 192 kHz, and this is because of the data transfer rate (aka bandwidth). It is important to distinguish between the sampling frequency and the sound frequency: the maximum analogue sound frequency you can get out of digital sampling is half the sampling frequency. So your figure of 48 kHz looks like the maximum sound frequency you can get from DVD-A without MLP; with MLP it goes up to 96 kHz. 48 kHz is still off-scale as regards anything that anyone can actually hear (up to 20 kHz), and most people's speakers only go to 20 kHz or a little beyond. So I am fairly sure there will be no audible benefit of missing out MLP; it is just a question of disc space. Everyone, I have taken the following from the excellent document from Disctronics, and paste in their tables 7 and 8. I hope they don't mind; their expertise is a good recommendation of their company. they are professionals who obviously know the formats inside out. Source, a pdf file "New Formats for Music: DVD & SACD" from: Meridian Lossless Packing To increase the playing time of a DVD-Audio disc to at least 74 minutes per layer for the highest quality and to allow the highest quality for stereo, WG4 has chosen Meridian Lossless Packing (MLP), also referred to as Packed PCM (PPCM). MLP is easy to implement and will not alter the decoded signal in any way. Decoding MLP requires relatively little computing power even for six channels of 24-bit/96 kHz audio. But how important is MLP? DVD-Audio offers a maximum bit rate of 9.6Mb/s, higher than the 6.144Mb/s possible with DVD-Video but not high enough for 6 channels of 24-bit/96kHz audio, which would require a bit rate of 13.8 Mb/s. Using MLP reduces the bit rate to less than half this and increases the playing time from 65 minutes to at least 74 minutes and allows room for extras such as still images, menus, text and video. MLP provides many more features including the possibility to choose the quantisation in one-bit steps. The possible sampling rates, quantisation and numbers of channels for both PCM and MLP audio are shown in Table 7.  Examples of typical playback times with MLP are shown in Table 8 for high quality stereo, high quality surround sound and CD quality stereo.  |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1268 Registered: Dec-03 | Sorry, I upload the same file twice. Here is Fig 8.  By the way, I put some opinions on formats, quality, and file sizes, on May 05, on the thread, here, Teaching an old dog new tricks.... I recommend much of that thread, and thank Jan Vigne for rising to the challenge to see if we could start something that would help make sense out of surround sound and the new formats from the point of view of music. Most people posting there had something really useful to say; it is multi-author achievement. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | John, I have learnt more about the DVD format in this forum than I could gather through reading from different sources over the past months. |
|
Gold Member Username: John_aPost Number: 1274 Registered: Dec-03 | EJ, Same for me! I'd never even heard of DVD-Audio until I read it here, about last August. I do recommend that Distronics pdf file. It is worth printing out, about 25 pages I think. Please keep us/me posted on DVD-authoring software. Not many people look at it first from an audio point of view. I had never thought of the DVD-A/SACD question from the point of view of writing files and burning discs until you asked your question. I think it could be the key to the whole issue. |
|
EJ Unregistered guest | John A; Gerrit I am interested in copying into DVD-A in 2 channels as practically all my vinyls are in stereo. Looking at Table 8, using MLP and recording at high stereo quality allows a maximum playing time of 120 minutes in single layer. Am I correct that using Linear PCM for recording, which Minnetonka's Discwelder Bronze supports, the playing time in single layer is 60 minutes? If this be the case then I will be inclined to explore other DVD-A authoring software which supports MLP. Minnetonka has a top of the range, Discwelder Chrome, which supports MLP but it is priced over US$2,000. I am looking at something more affordable. The Bronze is priced at US$85 at some discount stores. Do you or does anyone has knowledge of any affordable authoring software which supports import of MLP? |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics