Connecting audio out from blu-ray player to Rotel RSX-965

[cpmorganesq]

I have a 12-year old Rotel RSX-965. I'd like to add a blu-ray player to my system. If I buy a Panasonic DMP-BD85K blu-ray player, can I configure its audio output so I can connect its digital output to the Rotel AC3 input and get Dolby 5.1? (I realize I'd be giving up Dolby True digital and DTS if I did this).

Since the Panasonic has analog outputs, I could also use a DB25-to-RCA cable to connect to the Rotel, and get better sound, but there don't seem to be many of these cables available any more. I think Dolby 5.1 would be sufficient for my system. Any thoughts?

Thanks,

- Chris M.

[Kevin P]

Yes you can. I have my Sony BDP-S570 hooked up to my Sherwood P965 using digital coax, works great.

[spoiledone]

Just use RCA cables (6 of them) to connect the multi analogue outs to the Rotel receiver. That way you can process the True HD formats. I have the 1056 and the same panasonic player - works great!

[cpmorganesq]

Thanks. The Rotel doesn't have RCA inputs for the individual channels, so I'd have to use the DB-25 connector to connect them.

[spoiledone]

Thanks. The Rotel doesn't have RCA inputs for the individual channels, so I'd have to use the DB-25 connector to connect them.

Sorry - my bad, I thought it did!

[Nuthed]

Just use the digital coax or optical connection. You'll get what is known as high bitrate, lossy sound from BluRay. Even though it is regular DD and DTS, it is of much higher quality than the sound from DVD. Darn near imperceptible from lossless.

Here is some reading for you.

[madmac]

'Even though it is regular DD and DTS, it is of much higher quality than the sound from DVD. Darn near imperceptible from lossless'.

madmac says......"really" ?? Sound off on this peeps !

[Kal Rubinson]

Thanks. The Rotel doesn't have RCA inputs for the individual channels, so I'd have to use the DB-25 connector to connect them.

There are DB-25-to-RCA cables or, at least, used to be.

[srb]

Just use the digital coax or optical connection. You'll get what is known as high bitrate, lossy sound from BluRay. Even though it is regular DD and DTS, it is of much higher quality than the sound from DVD. Darn near imperceptible from lossless.

The Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack on DVD has a maximum bitrate of 448Kb/s. The mandatory Dolby Digital 5.1 compatibility soundtrack on Blu-ray does have a higher maximum bitrate of 640Kb/s, but (1) doesn't guarantee that the available soundtrack is encoded at this higher bitrate and (2) even if it were encoded at the higher bitrate, the difference is small.

The uncompressed Dolby TrueHD soundtrack on Blu-ray has a maximum bitrate of 18Mb/s, which is a giant leap from either Dolby Digitial 5.1 compressed soundtrack on Blu-ray or DVD.

Steve

[madmac]

@ srb.....the final question will come down to this......how many bits and bytes will be needed to create the 'perfect' sound ?. How much can we really process with our ears and their limitations?. When does MORE information NOT make a difference because we cannot HEAR the difference?. Fascinating !!!

[srb]

@ srb.....the final question will come down to this......how many bits and bytes will be needed to create the 'perfect' sound ?. How much can we really process with our ears and their limitations?. When does MORE information NOT make a difference because we cannot HEAR the difference?. Fascinating !!!

Sure, outside of numbers it comes down to "does it really sound any better"?

With audio, I can usually hear the difference between compressed and uncompressed files. In general, when I compare rips from CDs, I can tell the difference between a high bitrate MP3 (320Kb/s) and an uncompressed WAV or AIFF file (1411Kb/s). But it also depends on the musical content. I have a few iTunes 128Kb/s AAC files of Alison Krauss and Union Station. Because they are very sparse string and vocal recordings, I am always amazed at how good they sound. But other more complex music at 128Kb/s sounds like crap.

I have listened to Dolby 5.1 tracks on DVD and Blu-ray and cannot tell any difference. The corresponding Blu-ray Dolby TrueHD soundtrack sounds a lot better to my ears, much like the MP3 and WAV/AIFF comparison. This would be more evident on mid to high-range AV Receivers with better DACs, and may not reveal as much or any differences on a low-end $300 Big Box receiver or when processed by a low-end Blu-ray player.

Steve

[madmac]

@srb.......Agreed!. In terms of Comparing CD to MP3, there is simply no comparison. That format is simply put, for portable devices with limited memory. When you get into the higher end stuff, SACD. DVD-A and Dolby and DTS HD , as much as they are better from a tech point of view, I have some CD's that simply blow me away. I also have some SACD's and DVD audio discs that while they sound nice, don't blow me away sonically. I still contend that the effort and quality that went into the original recording itself will have a bigger impact on the end sound than the format it's played back in (Mp3 excluded from this of course!!).

[srb]

I still contend that the effort and quality that went into the original recording itself will have a bigger impact on the end sound than the format it's played back in (Mp3 excluded from this of course!!).

I agree. A well recorded and mastered CD, particularly with minimal dynamic compression, sounds better than higher resolution formats that were not recorded as well. But when you run into a recording that is both well recorded and in a higher resolution format, holy cow!

As far as the video disc formats, because the standard Dolby 5.1 soundtrack is highly compressed, the higher resolution uncompressed format (derived from the same recording) is still usually discernibly better. Here also, the more complex the recording, the more the difference is detectable.

Steve

[madmac]

@srb.......Amen and Agreed!!. I have yet to hear DTS and Dolby Digital HD so I cannot talk about the sonic differences of those formats vs. the legacy ones. But, I HAVE heard 24 bit sound, HDCD, SACD and DVD-A etc. and it can be good but[U] it still has to have been well recorded at the onset to be worth getting it and hearing a substantial difference!.

[Nuthed]

'Even though it is regular DD and DTS, it is of much higher quality than the sound from DVD. Darn near imperceptible from lossless'.

madmac says......"really" ?? Sound off on this peeps !

I posted a link, did you read it?

[Nuthed]

The Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtrack on DVD has a maximum bitrate of 448Kb/s. The mandatory Dolby Digital 5.1 compatibility soundtrack on Blu-ray does have a higher maximum bitrate of 640Kb/s, but (1) doesn't guarantee that the available soundtrack is encoded at this higher bitrate and (2) even if it were encoded at the higher bitrate, the difference is small.

The uncompressed Dolby TrueHD soundtrack on Blu-ray has a maximum bitrate of 18Mb/s, which is a giant leap from either Dolby Digitial 5.1 compressed soundtrack on Blu-ray or DVD.

Steve

You need to go read the white papers for Dobly TrueHD and DTS MA. The difference between hbr DD and DTS soundtracks on BluRay and those on DVD is a much more audibel change than from hbr lossy to lossless.

I agree, that the lossless tracks are better on paper. But can we as humans neccesarily hear that difference? The answer is no.

The fact remains that the leagcy codecs on BluRay are nearly imperceptible from their lossless counterparts and much better than they would be on DVD.

Read the link I posted.

[madmac]

@nuthed.......I agree with the standard dolby digital / DTS thing in regards to Blu ray because I notice a definite improvement sound wise when playing Blu rays in standard DD and DTS VS DVD.

I cannot comment on the lossless versions because I've never heard them. But, 18mb/ sec is a helluva' lot of data so I would imagine that it is better sound wise for sure!. How MUCH better is debatable however. Certainly for concert videos there would be a dramatic improvement I would imagine!!. 80% of a movie is dialog so the advantage would be less.