SACD player Or Media Player + Processor Combo

Hi Guys, I am thinking of stepping into multi-channel audio ( 5.1 only), instead of getting an SACD player, do you guys think it is wiser to get a AV processor instead since I already have a media player? By acquiring an AV processor also enable me to combine my audio with video. BTW, I already got the amps and speakers, only looking for the source.

Thanks in advance.

Personally it makes sense to me. You should try your best to get a very good AV processor.

My problem is I am not really familiar with the AV processor scene and the quality of sound I get from the AV processor + media player combo. Any body has any experience before?

I can tell you that if you buy a Denon / Yamaha / Harman Kardon AVR the sound quality will be horrible. My Yamaha AVR claims to do "70W x 5" but it can't even drive the front speakers properly. In reality, the power rating is bogus - it is rated for 70W into one channel. If you want it to drive 5 channels, each channel will get much less. Probably closer to 15W.

If you live in a small apartment and don't mind the shrill, tinny sound then an AVR is OK. All my AVR does at the moment is drive the center channel speaker and provide preamp level outs for "real" power amps for the other speakers. In any case, multi-channel sound in my place is an afterthought.

If you want quality, you will have to pay. The 5.1 processors and power amps from Cary and Anthem are meant to be very good.

shbehmal wrote:Hi Guys, I am thinking of stepping into multi-channel audio ( 5.1 only), instead of getting an SACD player, do you guys think it is wiser to get a AV processor instead since I already have a media player? By acquiring an AV processor also enable me to combine my audio with video. BTW, I already got the amps and speakers, only looking for the source.

Thanks in advance.

shbehmal,

sorry I may get this wrong. Are you looking for a multichannel source (eg SACD) or multichannel processor?

Multichannel processor will be useless if the source in your media player is in 2.0 stereo channel only. The processor will still try to 'break it' into 5.1 channel and distirbute the sound to the 5 speakers and sub but the sound will be awful. Unless your media in the media player is a multichannel source, then you will not enjoy the proper SQ that a multichannel audio was meant to be heard.

Of course, unless my understanding of your requirement is wrong.

I should also point out that TRUE multi-channel SACD players are a very rare and expensive breed. A "true" multi-channel SACD player means that it uses a 1-bit 2.8GHz DSD DAC. For 5.1, you will need six DSD DAC's for six channels, or twelve DSD DAC's for six balanced channels. Not to mention another 6 or 12 PCM DAC's. As far as I am aware, there are only three SACD players in current production capable of multi-channel SACD output: EMM Labs CDSD/DCC2 transport/DAC (the cheaper CDSA does NOT do multi-channel output), the Playback Designs MPS5/MPD5 combo, and the top of the line DCS stack. We are talking USD$25k and up for the cheapest. Or you can look for some secondhand Sony SACD players ... I think the XA9000ES is relatively inexpensive, it was USD$5k when new.

ALL other multi-channel SACD is not true DSD. Blu-Ray players, universal players, and Sony PS3 (early model only) convert the DSD stream to PCM for use in a PCM DAC. Yes you do get the multi-channel aspect but you lose the hi-res quality.

And yes, I have heard multi-channel DVD-A and SACD in a showroom. It was using a Blu-Ray player, converting the DSD into PCM and using a Lexicon processor and amplifiers running into the speakers. My feeling was that it was really gimmicky - in a real concert, the drums and guitars do NOT come from behind your head unless you are the lead singer.

I haven't even started on the paucity of titles available in 5.1 sound. You can probably find a handful of albums, but is it worth making all these expensive changes to your system to hear so few discs? I wouldn't think so.

Thanks guys, I really gain a lot of knowledge here.
Actually, I make a mistake mentioning I was looking for a SACD player, but in actual fact the player that I am looking forward to upgrade is Holfi's multi player, I do not know whether it has six DSD DAC or not, have to check it out, I like its sound quality while playing CD as my present CD source is a holfi xandra ( old model about 10 years ).
Lack of title is a real problem, but I think the more fundamental question I should ask is does multi-channel audio provides better sound quality in terms of sound stage, imaging, transparency, finer detail or better base compare to stereo? Is it worth spending extra to get into multi-channel?

The other advantage of getting into multi-channel is I can intergrade it with HD video, nowadays you can get lots of blue ray HD 1080P movies from the internet. More importantly I can get the type of music that I like from the net that I cannot get from shops here ( in loss less flac format of course ).

My bottom line is I do not want to make the mistake of spending 20K on a multi player but at the end of the day I can instead get a high end AV processor with that money and get the same result plus I can intergrade HD video into the package.

I have tried direct inputting the analog signal from the media player into the pre am, the sound is just horrible. I am thinking of hooking the optical out of the media player into the av processor, then from av processor into the pre am. Now my main question is whether there is such high quality AV processor on the market?
Now we are talking about play back from a hard disk drive, how is the sound quality compare to one play back from a cd player or transport? Any one has experience on this?

Thanks in advance.

Does multi channel audio provide superior imaging: it has the potential to provide superior imaging, and certainly with some discs the multi-channel experience can be more immersive. However, many discs have been engineered to sound gimmicky which actually detracts from the experience IMO.

High quality A/V processors: yes, there are plenty. Many of the high end processors seperate the "preamp" from the "power amp" function, so you buy a seperate processor and seperate power amps. For a 5.1, you will need five channels of power amplification. Reputable companies for processors: Cary, Anthem, Lexicon.

Optical out: don't do it! This is the worst possible digital interface. If you want quality, use the AES/EBU output with an appropriate digital interconnect.

HDD playback vs. CDP/transport: this is controversial. A buffered and reclocked data stream from a HDD should in theory be superior to a CDP, which has to read the 1's and 0's in real time. Certainly, people who have hard the Nova Physics Memory Player seem to rave about it. However I have little experience with this so I can't comment.

Sum-up: if you want 5.1 for video, I would advise you to go ahead and do it. It is sensible, because there are plenty of movies which can take advantage of it. If you want 5.1 for audio, then the case is very weak.

The best compromise is to integrate your 2 channel system into your HT, which is what I have done. My AVR runs the center channel and rear speakers, and provides low level signal to the subwoofer and to my 2 channel preamp. The 2 channel preamp has a "HT Bypass" function, which sends the signal to my power amp and to my 2 front speakers.

Thanks a lot. I get it now.