New Magnetar Blu Ray player has analog outs. $2500

[Owen Smith]

I was thinking of getting another one as a spare. Does anyone really need the 4K video of the 203/204 series? Most of us only care about the audio..

I went for a pair of 203s due to wanting gapless playback of FLACs (someone will now tell me the 103 does that...) Unfortunately it only works perfectly 90% of the time, the remaining 10% I get a click in one channel or more. It's disappointing.

However I have found that even though I have a 1080p TV, 4K blu rays downscaled to 1080p look better than standard blu rays. I suspect this is due to the chroma on the discs being 4:2:0 ie half resolution in one direction and quarter in the other, so I get the extra chroma resolution. EDIT: the Oppo 203 is set to output Chroma 4:4:4, without that the extra chroma resolution would be lost. I also have 12 bit set.

I've also found streaming services like Prime or Apple TV+ give a low bit rate stream with crap audio and video at 1080p. The 4K streams are much higher bit rate, so I'm feeding my Apple TV 4K into the Oppo 203 HDMI input and having the 203 downscale the video. It sounds and looks MUCH better than setting the Apple TV 4K to output 1080p. And doing this downscaling really upsets the Apple TV 4K forum users on avforums.com, they're indignant that you're not supposed to do this and it shouldn't work. But it works great for me.

 

[stereoptic]

I was thinking of getting another one as a spare. Does anyone really need the 4K video of the 203/204 series? Most of us only care about the audio.

:raises hand:

For the handful of 4Ks that I have, I do!

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

I was curious if this would have 12 analog outputs with that kind of price.
Looks like only 8 outputs for max 7.1. No Atmos decoding and analog output.

While I really like the idea of a playback device being able to decode Atmos to analogue, the big issue would be Dolby officially licensing Atmos decoding within such a device, as it's something Dolby has never permitted. Indeed, proper Atmos decoding is only licensed in AVR's and maybe a handful of soundbars (I don't keep up with soundbar technology).

Thankfully there are unofficial 'audio processors' that can decode Atmos to multi-channel analogue, such as the Emotive BasX MC1, IOTAVX AVX17 and the ToneWinner AT-300 (these devices are all made by ToneWinner in China). I've been considering getting one for a while but they are pretty bulky things. I was hoping for something much smaller with less features!

 

[barfle]

I was curious if this would have 12 analog outputs with that kind of price.
Looks like only 8 outputs for max 7.1. No Atmos decoding and analog output.

As I understand Atmos, the AVR would calibrate its decoding output during setup, when the user inputs the speaker setup to the AVR, snd runs the EQ program. That means the decode would be unique to the room it’s in.

If a disc player were to “decode” the Atmos signal into a channel-based set of outputs, then it would be no different than a channel-based input.

But then, I don’t yet have that capability, and all I know is what I’ve read and heard from those who claim to know.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

While I really like the idea of a playback device being able to decode Atmos to analogue, the big issue would be Dolby officially licensing Atmos decoding within such a device, as it's something Dolby has never permitted. Indeed, proper Atmos decoding is only licensed in AVR's and maybe a handful of soundbars (I don't keep up with soundbar technology).

Thankfully there are unofficial 'audio processors' that can decode Atmos to multi-channel analogue, such as the Emotive BasX MC1, IOTAVX AVX17 and the ToneWinner AT-300 (these devices are all made by ToneWinner in China). I've been considering getting one for a while but they are pretty bulky things. I was hoping for something much smaller with less features!

I use the Emotiva for Atmos. What makes it "unofficial"

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

I use the Emotiva for Atmos. What makes it "unofficial"

Well.... If you look in user manuals for both the IOTAVX AVX17 and the ToneWinner AT-300 they don't officially state the term 'Atmos', only the Emotive BasX MC1 does and given all of the devices are made by ToneWinner in China, it's not difficult to read between the lines...

ToneWinner make all kinds of AV devices for importers to modify and put their names on...

 

[par4ken]

ToneWinner looks like a winner!

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Well.... If you look in user manuals for both the IOTAVX AVX17 and the ToneWinner AT-300 they don't officially state the term 'Atmos', only the Emotive BasX MC1 does and given all of the devices are made by ToneWinner in China, it's not difficult to read between the lines...

ToneWinner make all kinds of AV devices for importers to modify and put their names on...

So the implication is Emotiva had to pay royalties but the others didn't. Interesting considering the pricing.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

ToneWinner looks like a winner!

They are all low build quality Chinese gear. But they do get you into Atmos at a reasonable price. And used without the auto room correction, it sounds pretty good. Probably on par with the preamp section of most AVRs I would guess. And it has had virtually no hiccups in my rig.

The big deal with the Tonewinner is it has balanced outputs and I think the analog inputs can be configured as MCH. The Emotiva lacks those features but is US$400 cheaper. So pick your features. I didn't need either of those capabilities.

 

[Owen Smith]

The big deal with the Tonewinner is it has balanced outputs and I think the analog inputs can be configured as MCH.

MCH inputs to HDMI? If so where do I buy one?

 

[LuvMyQuad]

MCH inputs to HDMI? If so where do I buy one?

No. It has several pairs of stereo analog inputs that can be combined/converted to 8ch in. I believe the only way out is through the analog outputs. But there may well be a conversion to and from digital somewhere in the chain.

 

[Tribby2001]

I was curious if this would have 12 analog outputs with that kind of price.
Looks like only 8 outputs for max 7.1. No Atmos decoding and analog output.

The whole enchilada regarding having analogue outputs is to have the DAC in the player (A top of the heap Sabre ES9028PRO in this case) perform SACDs DSD decoding "direct" to audio without it being decimated by conversion to PCM by a HT/AVR over an HDMI interface, or a room correction algorithm (instead fix your room's acoustics) or anything that requires converting DSD to PCM (decimation). It has absolutely nothing to do with Atmos (PCM).

 

[jimfisheye]

What anyone chooses to do with their gear is up to them. Virtually lossless transcode of DSD to PCM is an option if you do computer based home theater. Choose your adventure and all!

I was just taking inventory.
8 channels of DAC and a bluray drive in a box for $2500

So it just seemed a bit expansive since you can get 12 or more channels of high end DAC and a bluray drive and even a computer along with that for less. Hardware decoding of Atmos files is in vogue right now apparently so it seems fair to question if they included that. Looks like no.

Dolby obviously isn't going to allow anyone to sell an affordable hardware Atmos decoder with digital outputs! (Where you could simply get the master file output 1:1 digitally to your computer. Piracy! Everyone panic, right?)
There IS an Atmos decoding audio interface aimed at theater install that has AES outputs available though but I think it's a 5 figure pro device. No worries of consumer piracy there apparently.

The apparent strong support of hardware Atmos decoding makes me poke around and check out some of the hardware here and there. Could there be a system design that makes sense with hardware decoding? Should I just give in to that? The answer every time is a hard hell no that's absolutely crazy!

 

[Tribby2001]

What anyone chooses to do with their gear is up to them. Virtually lossless transcode of DSD to PCM is an option if you do computer based home theater. Choose your adventure and all!

You can't convert DSD to PCM without avoiding the decimation penalty. Hence the term Pure Direct DSD.

 

[Owen Smith]

You can't convert DSD to PCM without avoiding the decimation penalty. Hence the term Pure Direct DSD.

The irony being a lot of this stuff was either mixed in PCM or analogue in the first place and therefore converting to DSD was either detrimental (for PCM) or unnecessary (for analogue). There is very little that was recorded and mixed entirely in DSD/DXD (you can't mix in DSD). I really wish DSD would crawl under a rock and die, it was a pointless digression that won't go away.

 

[jimfisheye]

The irony being a lot of this stuff was either mixed in PCM or analogue in the first place and therefore converting to DSD was either detrimental (for PCM) or unnecessary (for analogue). There is very little that was recorded and mixed entirely in DSD/DXD (you can't mix in DSD). I really wish DSD would crawl under a rock and die, it was a pointless digression that won't go away.

Yep! Exactly this.
There are in fact some DSD titles that are analog masters direct to DSD AD converters. But anything recorded to multitrack (at least digitally) is PCM. All but a couple niche DAW apps work with PCM. So the mix masters are PCM. Most of those SACD's being fussed over are PCM -> DSD conversions to begin with.

Might as well just transcode them cleanly back to PCM!
That's the thing with this one. "Liberating" DSD recordings to many people means transcoding to PCM. Get them out of the niche format that requires different DACs to play back natively otherwise.

Sony had some balls! They aimed to have the entire industry buy new DSD converters. Recording studios said no. Then they got caught degrading the CD program on their SACD discs because otherwise people were not being able to hear the DSD program sounding any better. Crawl under a rock and die, yes! Sony apparently agrees since they returned to PCM with bluray. Or gave up anyway.

 

[DrKlahn]

A while back I played with DSD to PCM and native DSD and couldn't tell a difference. If you can, that's great and the less conversions made the better. But it's not something I would be concerned with.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I was just taking inventory.
8 channels of DAC and a bluray drive in a box for $2500

So it just seemed a bit expansive since you can get 12 or more channels of high end DAC and a bluray drive and even a computer along with that for less.

Yep. Consider also if this already expensive disc player did come with an Atmos badge along with an additional 4 channels of DACs and analog outs. The price might double with all that.

This gear has the same appeal as the late model Oppos did. They will play and decode nearly any optical disc, and that is how many still play back music media. It can also pass nearly any MCH file based audio as well for those who want that. Since you can't buy a new Oppo anymore, they are filling a niche they know is there, and until somebody markets a comparable unit for less money, they will sell enough of these to make a profit. Their only competition right now are used Oppos.

 

[~dave~~wave~]

...A Behringer/Midas UMC-1820 audio interface with 10 analog outputs (balanced or unbalanced) is $300...

...If I knew a good deal for an audio interface with 12 analog outputs, I'd share!...

Here is one way to get twelve analog outputs from a UMC-1820:
Put a ten-dollar stereo DAC on the SPDIF output.

https://a.co/d/e6ghFRr

 

[jimfisheye]

Here is one way to get twelve analog outputs from a UMC-1820:
Put a ten-dollar stereo DAC on the SPDIF output.

https://a.co/d/e6ghFRr

View attachment 98887

Oh hey! Forgot about the SPDIF output. Great idea!
Perhaps splurge and go a little above $10?

This is just a really frugal way to grab enough outputs for an Atmos system and with pro studio quality gear.

If you were the kind of listener that went for separate components back in the day and then fell in with using a computer to host all things audio around 20 years ago, this is a more natural progression than returning to the stand alone players or all in one boxes.