New HD audio formats

[rhinopilot]

Can someone please help me understand this relationship:

In regards to Dolby True HD and DTS-HD Master Audio, if a Blue-ray player has build in decoders for these does a receiver or Pre-pro have to be able to decode them as well? Is HDMI the only connection to use to ensure the format is being heard as intended?

I am currently using a Denon receiver with the built in decoders as does my Blue-ray player. I'm looking to upgrade my receiver to a pre-pro but buying a new one with these formats is really expensive right now. Can I look at an older model and save money if I have a Blue-Ray player that can decode these formats?

Thanks in advance for any responses,
Mike

[Kal Rubinson]

In regards to Dolby True HD and DTS-HD Master Audio, if a Blue-ray player has build in decoders for these does a receiver or Pre-pro have to be able to decode them as well?

Nope.

Is HDMI the only connection to use to ensure the format is being heard as intended?

HDMI or analog.

[aarsoe]

I would add that there are two different schools when it comes to HD-Audio.

Some say that decoding should be done at the processor end (preamp/receiver) and others at player end.

You can argue for both, however since an entire setup is required each place where the decoding is taking place I would argue that you typically have better setup options in even the cheapest receivers/processors compared to what you have even in high end blue-ray/DVD players.
So you could use 5.1 or 7.1 analogue connections from your player to your processor, but you would need to setup everything (speaker size, distance, etc) + post processing is not without issues doing it like this.
So in my humble opinion I would argue get a processor who can do what you want - and then at end of life you can extend it somewhat with external decoding, but it will always be an extension as the options are nearly never as good as in the pre/pro.

[wettou]

Stay digital until the last moment your DAC in your pre/pro are probably better than in your blu ray player

I would bit-stream via HDMi and let the av/pre pro do the decoding.

[soundemon]

you can buy a less expensive pre-pro, as long as it has 7.1 analogue in, and you player has 7.1 analogue out. this is a much less expensive option right now than getting a pre-pro with HDMI 1.3a.

[littlesaint]

There's some incorrect (or at least incomplete) information here.

You do not have to use analog (as Kal hinted) to use HD codecs decoded in the player. If the player decodes the codecs, they can be sent via HDMI as multichannel LPCM to any receiver that can accept multichannel LPCM over HDMI, which is just about anything made in the last couple of years. This requires zero setup in the player. All the player does is decode the track. Your AVR receives the LPCM, and all of the bass management, delay, levels, and any other sound field processing is done there. Since these codecs are lossless, there's no advantage to decoding them in the AVR except to see the nice "TRUEHD" light up on the display.

I've been enjoying HD codecs from HD-DVD and Blu-ray for about 2 years now using a very cheap Yamaha v661.

[aarsoe]

Correct - however do not expect a cheap blue-ray player to be able to do a really good decoding. Like everything else it is a matter of where the money was spent in terms of components.
I will however again state that I have never seen/heard decoding in any blue-ray players being up to par with what you can achieve in real high-end processors. Most likely due to the fact that people don't want to pay twice for the same functionality.
The only one swimming against the stream is Denon who skips the processing entirely and have pure transports with no decoding at all.

[littlesaint]

Correct - however do not expect a cheap blue-ray player to be able to do a really good decoding. Like everything else it is a matter of where the money was spent in terms of components.
I will however again state that I have never seen/heard decoding in any blue-ray players being up to par with what you can achieve in real high-end processors. Most likely due to the fact that people don't want to pay twice for the same functionality.
The only one swimming against the stream is Denon who skips the processing entirely and have pure transports with no decoding at all.

There is no good or bad decoding. It's a lossless operation. The decoded track has to be the same as the original before it was encoded. Just like unzipping a text file. Plus, when you consider what is needed to decompress the video, audio decoding is an afterthought.

[aarsoe]

OK - I should have chosen my words more carefully. Although the decoding should theoretically be the same, I can be pretty sure the signal to noise ratio is not - unless similar chip is used.
Also after the decoding there are analogue signal path/amplification etc. that can be a big influence as well.

[littlesaint]

OK - I should have chosen my words more carefully. Although the decoding should theoretically be the same, I can be pretty sure the signal to noise ratio is not - unless similar chip is used.
Also after the decoding there are analogue signal path/amplification etc. that can be a big influence as well.

LPCM is still a digital bitstream going to the AVR, just uncompressed. No SNR, no analog path involved. It's the same signal path as the undecoded bitstream, just decoded first.