Norton

As a poor Brit I’ve been looking at setting up a mch/immersive system on a budget. What seems to be lacking is a 10 + channel processor/dac/pre that can handle native DSD mch and decode ATMOS, with accent on SQ over features and a sub £2k price tag. Power amps to be added to taste, although there is still limited budget audiophile choice there too.

Been enjoying repeated listening to this since it came out on Qobuz last week. While the Bruch is very well known, I’m ashamed to say that, despite 30 years of Classical listening, I’ve not heard the Schumann concerto before - terrific stuff with a barnstorming 1st movement.

The “USB in” referenced above is the rear usb DAC input. The OP is comparing SACD optical disc with the front usb media input

The file types handled by Optical disc and usb media input on the Oppo are similar (compared to usb DAC input which is somewhat different ) suggesting they have broadly the same signal path. With my 205 I’d agree with your findings, ripped dsd usb media playback is a bit lacklustre compared to playing the SACD itself. Could be 2 things: 1. SACD rips are not in fact identical to the source SACD or 2. usb media input on the Oppo is just not that good, perhaps through introduction of noise from connected drive etc re 1 - I have seen a few reports in the past from users who maintain that SACD rips have poorer soundstage than original disc. I don’t think I agree with the specifics, but I do generally prefer to listen to the original disc. I find that usb media playback is my least preferred way to use the Oppo, regardless of format, so my hunch is that 2 is the answer.

Thanks anyway Kal, good at least to hear from a forum member who has used the Oppo this way.

Thanks. Any thoughts about how carefully power amp and speakers need to be matched in such a set up? I don’t want to end up reducing the Oppo’s volume so much as to cause audible impact on resolution. I know some power amps have adjustable gain, but I haven’t seen with Hypex.

I’m considering building a budget MCH system around my Oppo 205 direct into a 5 or 7 channel power amp, principally to realise the potential of my SACD collection. Would be good to hear experiences of others who have done this. On assumption that Oppo’s volume control is in digital domain, I guess there may be an issue in matching amp power to speakers, so that I’m not attenuating so much as to compromise resolution? I’m most likely to go with a Hypex MP MCH amp from Nord, but while I’d be tempted by the 350 w variety, maybe the 150w or even 75 w would be better? Speakers likely to be Kef Q350/650c/150 in a fairly small room. Grateful for any input, thanks.

You are welcome, happy to help out a fellow 205 owner if I can. Enjoy playing your SACDs.

Assuming that whatever you’ve connected the Oppo to via RCA (a pre amp, a receiver?) has its own volume control, turn this right down, then go into Oppo’s Audio processing menu (page#65) and select fixed volume, then turn up the pre amp’s volume to taste. If at all unsure, leave Oppo volume on variable output and just use the volume buttons on Oppo remote. Re loss of hdmi video, not really my topic but you could just try turning hdmi audio in Oppo’s audio output menu from “off” back to “auto”, but just as likely to do with input setting of whatever device you’re connecting Oppo to via hdmi. If say you are connecting the Oppo to an av recover simultaneously by both HDMI and rca that could lead to unexpected outcomes. Best to connect it by one method at a time only and check both HDMI video and RCA audio work, before assuming your Oppo is broken

Assuming you are playing physical SACD via RCA or XLR output try this:, go to audio output menu (page #59 in manual) : secondary audio off HDMI output off SACD priority 2ch SACD output DSD In playback menu (page #49 in manual) set auto play to on

Sell it to someone who will: add streaming services (properly integrated into the user’s libraries etc) develop the already excellent JRemote (to include Player and DSP studio options etc) improve SQ, and DSP options highlight and further develop JRMC’s function and potential as a standalone DLNA server, with the user’s choice of end/control points keep to the one off purchase model, but maybe increase to $99 for initial purchase and sub $50 for subsequent (optional) new versions. That would return JRMC to being an attractive and distinctive product in today’s market. Whether it’s economically viable and technically possible would be another matter though. Always wondered, for example, if the somewhat unconvincing reasons given for avoiding streaming were underpinned by some real technical challenges in integrating such services, particularly with the (pre streaming era) JRMC libraries.

Just a wonderful performance and recording

Thanks, I checked email header and seems genuine from Roon.com. Really odd though that I got no reply whatsoever in the last 7 days from my 2 emails to [email protected], nor from a enquiry via the Roon webform, nor from posting on the forum. I guess they don’t want new customers? I think I’ll stick with JPlay for iOS.

I’m experiencing a bewildering situation with Roon, I wondered if anyone else has had the same? On Monday, after ending a free trial, Roon invited me to buy with a discount “..To claim your discount, reply "proceed" to this email.”. Email looked genuine ([email protected]) so I replied. After 24 hrs I heard nothing, so I sent a reminder to same address , 24 hrs later nothing still so sent an enquiry on their web form. Another day passed and still no reply or access to Roon, so posted a query on the Roon forum, which was declined and apparently sent as a note to accounts within a few minutes. 24 hrs on from that, still no Roon access nor a response to any of my queries. Could this original email be a scam, or is this just a taste of Roon customer service post takeover?

But is that a hard definition, and if so , whose? And indeed what do we mean by a Master recording and the implied provenance, if there can be multiple masters? For example, if a 70s analogue recording is transferred by the record company to 24/96 and then distributed as RBCD as a “remaster” and I then make a bit perfect rip of that CD, can I be said to have a lossless copy of the original analogue master? I’d suggest not and that, far from a hard definition, lossless is just a meaningless marketing term

The question is only meaningful if you can define what “lossless” means. Bearing in mind that it will not be possible to reconstruct exactly the original recording from the vast majority of consumer distributions of music in any format , lossless is a meaningless marketing term. In practice , it just means that it is possible to take a consumer distribution and reconstruct the file that immediately preceded it in the distribution chain.

Anyone paired one of the current crop of ECD DACs with the UPL96ETL? I’m still enjoying mine with the DA96 of same vintage and put a significant part of the SQ down to the UPL. Wondered how it sounded with latest gen DACs.

I don’t think the 105 can accept DSD over USB DAC input, see https://www.oppodigital.com/KnowledgeBase.aspx?KBID=135&ProdID=BDP-93 You can play DSD from network shares or USB storage attached to the 105. I can’t remember if it applies, but probably best to ensure SACD Priority is set to DSD. It may well also work via DLNA, using something like JRiver/JRemote, MConnect or JPLAY but you will need to enable either DoP or not DoP ( can’t remember) in the relevant software settings.

I understand your point and while the subjective threshold of “good enough” itself undermines claims to objectivity, on this occasion I disagree with you. The reason why the Pass examples are such a damning indictment of the “objectivist” approach is precisely because the conclusions lack the nuance you mention. Using the same model, same test equipment and with similar data, one reviewer deems the amp to be so bad as to be a waste of design and manufacturing effort, while the other praises its superb measured performance and underlying engineering. It is thus difficult to conceive of more different conclusions, hence my finding that an “objective” approach is in fact just as subjective as any other.

Yes, in practice it seems sensible to consider a range of points of information in forming an initial opinion and I am sure there are many of us who might be labelled subjective who would likewise similarly reject such products. However, products that irrefutably lack any possible scientific basis to performance claims form only a small subset of those drawn into the objectivist subjectivist debate. And even then, there is a big difference between a category of product that cannot possibly work, and an otherwise good product, rooted in sound engineering, marred by an overenthusiastic marketing dept.

The Objectivist: Subjectivist divide is largely a fiction, for the simple reason that Objectivism itself is a theoretical construct to fuel internet argument, rather than a practical approach. I suspect that very few who claim to be Objectivist actually choose their audio equipment based on data gained from their own electronic measurements or correctly constructed double blind listening tests. Instead they put their belief in secondary sources they see as objective, just as others put their belief in other sources according to various perceived credentials. Not science but rather scientism. Moreover, “Objective” test data itself is filtered through the subjective approach of the author, before reaching the reader. For example, 2 well known objective testers evaluating the same amp with the same test equipment, and from what I can see, similar test results, yet one concludes “..I can't recommend the Pass Labs HAP-1. They need to get away from telling stories and wasting design and manufacturing skills this way” while the other determines: “Pass Labs' HPA-1 offers superb measured performance that reflects equally superb audio engineering”. so there are in fact competing “objectivities” and while the defence goes up that “objective” tests can be replicated, in practice most readers are not going to do so themselves, so in the end, we are all subjectivists. We just differ in terms of where we choose to invest our faith.

One might also say that if someone is confident in their knowledge and position, they don’t need to resort to offensive comments to make their point.

Funny how someone who misses the “old guard” posts the most offensive thing that’s been on this site for the last few years…if that’s an example of being “fun” and “interesting” I think we can do well without.

As our late Queen said “recollections may vary”. My memory is that they didn’t actually make much in the way of a positive contribution. At best, if someone asked “how do I do this” they might respond with a “you don’t want to do that” along with a large side order of put down and showboating. I can’t remember any of them actually helping another member out, starting a positive thread, or revealing much about their own system choices or enthusiasm for music. That’s why I thought of them as the “object to it ists”, here to criticise others and above all get a reaction, but not to contribute positively.