lokyc
Minor Hero
Posts: 71
|
Post by lokyc on Jul 30, 2020 20:39:16 GMT -5
Finally picked up my Sony UBP-X800M2 player and spun up 1917.
10 minutes in, totally impressed. Sound quality from the XMC-2 was so good. Amazing audio imaging. My crude PEQ filters seem to work well even before Dirac.
Thought I would compare with a ripped 4k UHD version via Plex player on my Nvidia Shield.
For sure the Dolby Vision on the physical disc looks sharper and better defined. But suprised me was the sound quality. The UHD player is noticeably better!
The XMC-2 reports TrueHD on both sources (I use 5.1). The UHD player is quieter, the bass is sharper with good slam and better imaging. I can't explain it! Anyone has any ideas?
The only possibility I can think of is jitter between the 2 players. I am ripping a remux version instead of Bluray raw to see if that makes a difference. Any thoughts welcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by SteveH on Jul 30, 2020 21:02:01 GMT -5
I agree with you. I have found the physical 4k UHD disc is always better than any 4k that I stream, especially when it comes to the audio.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Jul 30, 2020 21:25:31 GMT -5
Same here, I have never found a single streamed movie or TV show that comes remotely close to the same on disc, that's video or audio. It's one of those rare night and day comparisons.
Cheers
Gary
|
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Jul 30, 2020 21:31:11 GMT -5
I agree with you. I have found the physical 4k UHD disc is always better than any 4k that I stream, especially when it comes to the audio. To be fair a lot of the audio being streamed is on a DD+ base and the UHD disc is a TrueHD base. But I do buy my “keeper” movies on UHD disc. They just look better, and it is noticeable on the projector upstairs. |
|
lokyc
Minor Hero
Posts: 71
|
Post by lokyc on Jul 31, 2020 3:07:36 GMT -5
Guys, just to be clear, I am not streaming from Netflix or Amazon Prime, but a UHD raw rip, no compression, from my NAS, to play on Plex from my Nvidia Shield TV. Passthrough video and audio. Can't understand why it sounds different?
As for streaming services, yea, no comparison to lossless playback. Visually, even upscaled FHD/SDR look better. Objects look more solid, and 3D. DD+ was touted to be indistinguishable from lossless. From a soundbar maybe! Just sounds anaemic in comparison to a disc. I stream The Expanse as the Bluray/UHD discs aren't out yet. But the previous seasons, wow, just so much more body to the soundtrack. I'm in space for goodness sake. I need to hear fusion engines rumble! (Yes, I know. In space, no one can hear you scream....)
|
|
|
|
Post by thezone on Jul 31, 2020 3:20:30 GMT -5
I have a dedicated HTPC which I built, running a NVidia GTX 1060 graphics card and when I play my "Backed up" UHD discs from Jriver Media centre with madvr renderer the PQ is way better than my Panasonic UHD player. Sound quality shouldn't be any different if you are bitsreaming to the XMC-2.
Running the Jriver app on my Nvidia shield and streaming from my HTPC I dont get anywhere near the same level of PQ. I put this down to the madvr renderer being far superior to what is configurable on the shield.
|
|
lokyc
Minor Hero
Posts: 71
|
Post by lokyc on Jul 31, 2020 3:54:37 GMT -5
I have a dedicated HTPC which I built, running a NVidia GTX 1060 graphics card and when I play my "Backed up" UHD discs from Jriver Media centre with madvr renderer the PQ is way better than my Panasonic UHD player. Sound quality shouldn't be any different if you are bitsreaming to the XMC-2. Running the Jriver app on my Nvidia shield and streaming from my HTPC I dont get anywhere near the same level of PQ. I put this down to the madvr renderer being far superior to what is configurable on the shield. Hmm, interesting thought. Despite the specs, I actually prefer the Shield's AI upscaling to MadVR. Do you change any of the default setttings? I use a GTX1080. I will test the ripped content (remuxed version) again tonight on Plex/Shield, HTPC and the UHD player to see if there's any difference. PQ I understand. Sound, I don't. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 31, 2020 4:03:10 GMT -5
So much for "bits is bits." And yes, I also find (and have for a while) that playback from disc DOES sound sharper than the rip and stream option.
|
|
lokyc
Minor Hero
Posts: 71
|
Post by lokyc on Jul 31, 2020 4:08:03 GMT -5
So much for "bits is bits." And yes, I also find (and have for a while) that playback from disc DOES sound sharper than the rip and stream option. Great! So I am not going mad! I always like to back them up as I get a bit queasy about the longevity of physical discs. Also far more convenient to select on media player than changing discs. For seres' its a real pain looking for the right episode. Also waiting for the mandatory splash screens! But when my last player broke, I just ripped and didn't bother. I thought it was all in my head. With the advent of UHD and Dolby Vision, I have gone back to disc players and difference is so striking! But what's the explanation? Even more confusing is reading reviews of UHD players, apparantly there are sound quality differences! It was never clear in those reviews if they were using audio passthrough or transcoding to PCM. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 31, 2020 4:27:35 GMT -5
So much for "bits is bits..." Great! So I am not going mad! Let's not be premature... The orthodoxy says that if you have a bit perfect copy, it is identical to the source, and there ARE NO DIFFERENCES. This tenet is defended with fervor by "the measurers" who contend that everything you really hear with your ears is invalid due to "expectation bias" or some similar twaddle. ...But what's the explanation? Even more confusing is reading reviews of UHD players, apparantly there are sound quality differences!... Now THAT's the 10-million-dollar question! But folks who deny the difference in the first place aren't in any big rush to look for causes. This attitude is summed up by the quote "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's made up!" The huge divide in audio this 21st century is whether "we already know everything about audio, and it can all be measured" and "what we're measuring doesn't describe what we're hearing." I, obviously, am in the latter camp and suffer continuous abuse for it. But that's neither here nor there - your question cuts to the heart of the issue. "Measurers," what's your response? |
|
|
|
Post by steelman1991 on Jul 31, 2020 4:28:02 GMT -5
So much for "bits is bits." And yes, I also find (and have for a while) that playback from disc DOES sound sharper than the rip and stream option. Great! So I am not going mad! I always like to back them up as I get a bit queasy about the longevity of physical discs. Also far more convenient to select on media player than changing discs. For seres' its a real pain looking for the right episode. Also waiting for the mandatory splash screens! But when my last player broke, I just ripped and didn't bother. I thought it was all in my head. With the advent of UHD and Dolby Vision, I have gone back to disc players and difference is so striking! But what's the explanation? Even more confusing is reading reviews of UHD players, apparantly there are sound quality differences! It was never clear in those reviews if they were using audio passthrough or transcoding to PCM.
Nope - your not. I have the same experience with my Kaleidescape and ripped media played from a Zidoo Z9S. Fidelity is definitely superior via Kaleidescape. No idea why.
|
|
|
|
Post by thezone on Jul 31, 2020 4:30:00 GMT -5
I was so underwhelmed by my UHD player that I sold it and now I just rip all my discs to the HTPC. I have tweaked madvr somewhat, I created some rules in madvr and depending on what the source material is it will invoke a different set of scaling algorithms. But for playing 4K directly to the 4K player I haven't touched is hugely. Are you using Jriver MC?
I really wish that the Shield was better than the HTPC so I could stick the HTPC in another room as a server and free up some space in my lounge.
|
|
|
|
Post by thezone on Jul 31, 2020 4:39:48 GMT -5
Oh and another weird thing. Since routing the 4K picture through the XMC-2 I notice that it makes the picture look a little softer on my OLED as opposed to having a direct HDMI signal straight form the HTPC to the TV. Its as though the XMC-2 makes my TV look like the glass is thicker. I actually really like this feel. I'm sure I'm not imagining it.
|
|
|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Jul 31, 2020 6:22:26 GMT -5
Great! So I am not going mad! Let's not be premature... The orthodoxy says that if you have a bit perfect copy, it is identical to the source, and there ARE NO DIFFERENCES. This tenet is defended with fervor by "the measurers" who contend that everything you really hear with your ears is invalid due to "expectation bias" or some similar twaddle. ...But what's the explanation? Even more confusing is reading reviews of UHD players, apparantly there are sound quality differences!... Now THAT's the 10-million-dollar question! But folks who deny the difference in the first place aren't in any big rush to look for causes. This attitude is summed up by the quote "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind's made up!" The huge divide in audio this 21st century is whether "we already know everything about audio, and it can all be measured" and "what we're measuring doesn't describe what we're hearing." I, obviously, am in the latter camp and suffer continuous abuse for it. But that's neither here nor there - your question cuts to the heart of the issue. "Measurers," what's your response? I'll throw you a bone Boom. I firmly do not believe we know everything about hearing. In my head expectation bias is very real, ergo I find it necessary to TRY to validate objectively.😊 |
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jul 31, 2020 7:16:50 GMT -5
I have a dedicated HTPC which I built, running a NVidia GTX 1060 graphics card and when I play my "Backed up" UHD discs from Jriver Media centre with madvr renderer the PQ is way better than my Panasonic UHD player. Sound quality shouldn't be any different if you are bitsreaming to the XMC-2. Running the Jriver app on my Nvidia shield and streaming from my HTPC I dont get anywhere near the same level of PQ. I put this down to the madvr renderer being far superior to what is configurable on the shield. it is. Some here think otherwise, but MadVR is fantastic. I won't use a player that doesn't use MadVR unless I'm forced to play a physical disk live. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on Jul 31, 2020 8:13:27 GMT -5
I'll throw you a bone Boom. I firmly do not believe we know everything about hearing. In my head expectation bias is very real, ergo I find it necessary to TRY to validate objectively.😊 Hi foggy1956 - I'll take what I can get, thank you very much. I firmly believe in measurements for the DESIGN of audio equipment, but for the most part, I believe that consumers should rely mostly on their own ears and less on specifications. I disdain specifications for numerous reasons, as a consumer tool: 1. Manufacturers tend not to offer specifications that make their products look less than competitive 2. Manufacturers tend to bend specifications to make their products look better - for example, using excessive smoothing on frequency response curves to make the speakers' response look better or else using undefined specs such as claiming a frequency response of 20-20KHz. without specifying the + / - range of the data. 3. Manufacturers tend to exaggerate specs such as claiming a wattage output at 1KHz. (one channel driven) rather than a more common spec of 20-20KHz. with all channels driven. 4. Manufacturers tend to claim "magical" benefits of their products without any proof at all, such as "jitter reduction circuitry" that gives no information about how the magic circuit works or how to verify its function. And I could go on... But since there is so much flim-flam in specs, the wise consumer is best served by either being HIGHLY skeptical of specs, or else by ignoring specs completely. And I'd further warn that buying from a large and established company is no guarantee of freedom from the above. I just looked at some Yamaha NS-5000 speakers for which Yamaha claims a bass response of 26 Hz. But looking into the fine print, it turns out that rather than being a + / - 3dB. anechoic measurement like most companies use, that 26Hz. figure is a -10dB measurement! You'd think that a company as old and large as Yamaha would have been more honest. You'd be wrong. Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by drtrey3 on Jul 31, 2020 8:48:36 GMT -5
I have a very similar setup, minus the 4k player, and I suspect Plex. I use and enjoy Plex, but it is only a background or road music player for me as it does not sound near as good as my Squeezebox set up. Plex is a great program, but they do not have audiophile values.
Trey
|
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Aug 1, 2020 1:31:11 GMT -5
I have a very similar setup, minus the 4k player, and I suspect Plex. I use and enjoy Plex, but it is only a background or road music player for me as it does not sound near as good as my Squeezebox set up. Plex is a great program, but they do not have audiophile values. Trey +1 .Thats the general difference between something designed for a specific purpose ; a dedicated uhd player that has been listened too and components judged on a test rack like using a smps or a low noise toroid or an oem off the rack put together do it all component like a HTPC where listening tests are not a factor . Does the emi and rf in a chassis if bad enough effect the bitstream for say jitter [and the timing of all those bits]? Why does a component ce like say Pioneer put so much effort into a stable non vibration disc drive ? Do they listen to see ? That was rhetorical btw  Measurements like Boom said are a good indication of competency of design ; why its good people like Amir at ASR do such a service to identify those competent designs . Needless to say he doesnt do HTPC'S . Madvr is the best btw ;its easier to judge video than audio ; good thing the Envy is coming for those who can afford or dont have a lumagen  |
|
|
|
Post by markc on Aug 1, 2020 3:01:37 GMT -5
Fact: an identical digital audio stream sent via HDMI to the Surround Sound Processor is identical, no matter what device is bitstreaming.
Any difference heard is either due to the stream not being identical or to settings differences between the HTPC input and the Blu-ray input on your XMC-2 (Different speaker presets, trims, surround modes, filters, DRC etc)
The most likely is the stream is not identical - usually not the audio data itself but the flags within it that are set to instruct the decoder how to decode it.
A possible reason for the stream not being identical is that when you ripped the disc you removed the Dialnorm setting from the Dolby track (Even DTS has a similar flag, but it is infrequently used). The Audio track is the same as before but your XMC-2 is decoding it differently.
In mkvmerge software, the 'remove dialog normalization gain' checkbox is the setting that can be changed when manipulating mkv files but other AV processing/ripping software doesn't always do this transparently and may be doing something in the background without giving you the option.
Then, there can even be different Dialnorm flags in the Dolby core and the TrueHD extension, so one or both flags could be preserved or removed by the ripping software.
|
|
|
|
Post by markc on Aug 1, 2020 3:33:30 GMT -5
Fact: an identical digital audio stream sent via HDMI to the Surround Sound Processor is identical, no matter what device is bitstreaming. Any difference heard is either due to the stream not being identical or to settings differences between the HTPC input and the Blu-ray input on your XMC-2 (Different speaker presets, trims, surround modes, filters, DRC etc) The most likely is the stream is not identical - usually not the audio data itself but the flags within it that are set to instruct the decoder how to decode it. A possible reason for the stream not being identical is that when you ripped the disc you removed the Dialnorm setting from the Dolby track (Even DTS has a similar flag, but it is infrequently used). The Audio track is the same as before but your XMC-2 is decoding it differently. In mkvmerge software, the 'remove dialog normalization gain' checkbox is the setting that can be changed when manipulating mkv files but other AV processing/ripping software doesn't always do this transparently and may be doing something in the background without giving you the option. Then, there can even be different Dialnorm flags in the Dolby core and the TrueHD extension, so one or both flags could be preserved or removed by the ripping software. I'd like to think that all of these ripping pitfalls are deliberately introduced by the industry to make it more tricky for perfect disc copies to be made so that buying the discs and supporting the industry is more desirable, but that's an aside. As video quality was also mentioned in the posts above, it's important to note that audio, including DTS:X and Atmos is a relatively small part of the datastream on a UHD movie and can easily be preserved bit-perfect in a copy on a hard drive. Video is not preserved in a bit perfect way, even on the discs themselves, and your "backups"/rips are further compressing this data using lossy techniques. No-one "backs up" their discs to a 50-100GB mkv! UHD discs contain up to 100GB of data and even then the video data has had lossy compression applied by the studio to fit it onto the disc. (Raw 4K movie data is in excess of 112GB per hour!) Fact: The best version of the video file, with the least artefact or colour or motion or image defects, is the one on the disc (or a raw direct copy rip of course (50-100GB for UHD!)) but it is still not perfect as the studio has compressed it once already. Any subsequent remuxing or file compression using Handbrake or ffmpeg etc is selectively removing further detail using a second layer of lossy compression over the original lossy compression applied by the studio. How this is done affects the video quality at the end of it and different software and hardware will also affect the quality of the playback as this signal is decoded and output as sequential still frame images. MadVR cannot resurrect detail lost from a compressed rip to make it look better than a well decoded video file from the disc. It certainly could feasibly decode a raw rip better than the hardware decoder in your blu-ray player, but then who is storing 50-100GB mkv on their hard drive? If you have a Blu-ray player with poor hardware decoding ability, then a 50% compressed rip done well by Handbrake with MadVR decoding could easily produce an image better than the poor hardware, despite the twice-done lossy compression that MadVR has to work on. Back to the original post however - with audio, this is not the case. Lossless is lossless and as long as the decoder in the XMC-2 is receiving all of the audio stream, including flags etc, intact, the audio is identical in every way. |
|
