Alex,
Denon uses their famed ALU processing (an arithmetic logarithm) to "interpolate" a word length of 24 bits from a standard 16 bit redbook cd. They've been using this technology for the last 10 years in everything from their recievers to their dvd players to their cd players.
This is a proprietary process that Denon has developed. Other more "hi-fi" companies such as Ayre, Cary, Arcam etc accomplish the same feat through a different process that I'm not technical enough to explain. But the results speak for themselves and I don't think most people reading this post feel that Denon's sound is anywhere close to the performance levels of the companies mentioned above. And to be honest, there are great 1 bit cd players on the market today that sound incredibly good. So I'm not even sure if interpolating data to a larger bit stream is critical to obtaining great sound.
Regarding upsampling (atually there's no such thing and it should be referred to as oversampling)your comment "there's no theoretical or practical advantadge to upsampling the cd" is not true. While Denon may have come to this decision after reviewing the overall design and performance criteria of their units, there are many other companies (including Marantz which is now owned by Denon) that are very high on the concept and use it with regularity. Ayre, Arcam, Cary, Musical Fidelity, Esoteric, etc are but a few of the companies that routinely use oversampling in their cd players and with GREAT RESULTS! All of the above companies are much more highly respected than Denon when it comes to their engineering design and "know how".
I agree that oversampling is not always necessary to achieve good sounding cd playback. But I just want to make it clear to everyone reading your comments that was a decision Denon made and reasons could be varied...anywhere from cost concerns to the design of their unit not being compatible with oversampling. You will note that on Esoterics's UX1 player they decided not provide all of the oversampling options available on the DV 50. One of the primary reasons for this was the design of their transport made it unnecessary to do so.
Regarding the DV-50's transport being the same as the Pioneers, please do not understate the importance/impact of adding the clamping mechanism...which reduces jitter and allows the laser mechanism to track the disc in a more linear and accurate fashion. In my mind this modification alone puts the Esoteric transport on a higher level above the Pioneer. Furthermore, the laser tracking mechansim and the laser wavelengths (which are adjustable) help by determining how far the player is capable of digging in to the "cd pits" and obtaining the recorded information.
As you know, many laser tracking mechanisms travel on a thin wire that in itself is subject to vibration. The better companies such as Esoteric do not use this method..or they use a better version. In my mind the outer housing,laser mechansim, etc are all part of the transport and in this regard the Esoteric does have a better transport than the Denon. You are free to disagree as I'm sure you will.
Regarding comparing the DSP (Digital Surround processing)chips in both units that really doesn't concern me as I'm much more interested in analog audio performance (op amps, DAC's and their associated filtering processes) than I am with digital processing..most of which is associated with video and digital processing speed. Is the Denon the better DVD player? Probably.
Do I care? NO!
Is HDCD a nice feature to have? Maybe to some but not to me since the in my listening tests the use of the three oversampling filters can bring a level of resolution to cd's that's better than HDCD.
Alex, 711 has given me several extended listening auditions of your units and I think they sound incredible..much better than the DV 50 in terms of musicality. And if you are successful in bringing the DV 50 to a level of performance on par with your APL 3910 I will gladly be one of your next customers requesting an upgrade. But I just had to respond to your comments and imho the build quality, transport and overall engineering found in the DV 50 is on a much higher level than the 3910. To be able to use the lesser Denon platform and take it to a level of performance that surpasses the DV 50 is high praise indeed and a testament to your modding skills!
Keep up the good work!
AVGURU
Denon uses their famed ALU processing (an arithmetic logarithm) to "interpolate" a word length of 24 bits from a standard 16 bit redbook cd. They've been using this technology for the last 10 years in everything from their recievers to their dvd players to their cd players.
This is a proprietary process that Denon has developed. Other more "hi-fi" companies such as Ayre, Cary, Arcam etc accomplish the same feat through a different process that I'm not technical enough to explain. But the results speak for themselves and I don't think most people reading this post feel that Denon's sound is anywhere close to the performance levels of the companies mentioned above. And to be honest, there are great 1 bit cd players on the market today that sound incredibly good. So I'm not even sure if interpolating data to a larger bit stream is critical to obtaining great sound.
Regarding upsampling (atually there's no such thing and it should be referred to as oversampling)your comment "there's no theoretical or practical advantadge to upsampling the cd" is not true. While Denon may have come to this decision after reviewing the overall design and performance criteria of their units, there are many other companies (including Marantz which is now owned by Denon) that are very high on the concept and use it with regularity. Ayre, Arcam, Cary, Musical Fidelity, Esoteric, etc are but a few of the companies that routinely use oversampling in their cd players and with GREAT RESULTS! All of the above companies are much more highly respected than Denon when it comes to their engineering design and "know how".
I agree that oversampling is not always necessary to achieve good sounding cd playback. But I just want to make it clear to everyone reading your comments that was a decision Denon made and reasons could be varied...anywhere from cost concerns to the design of their unit not being compatible with oversampling. You will note that on Esoterics's UX1 player they decided not provide all of the oversampling options available on the DV 50. One of the primary reasons for this was the design of their transport made it unnecessary to do so.
Regarding the DV-50's transport being the same as the Pioneers, please do not understate the importance/impact of adding the clamping mechanism...which reduces jitter and allows the laser mechanism to track the disc in a more linear and accurate fashion. In my mind this modification alone puts the Esoteric transport on a higher level above the Pioneer. Furthermore, the laser tracking mechansim and the laser wavelengths (which are adjustable) help by determining how far the player is capable of digging in to the "cd pits" and obtaining the recorded information.
As you know, many laser tracking mechanisms travel on a thin wire that in itself is subject to vibration. The better companies such as Esoteric do not use this method..or they use a better version. In my mind the outer housing,laser mechansim, etc are all part of the transport and in this regard the Esoteric does have a better transport than the Denon. You are free to disagree as I'm sure you will.
Regarding comparing the DSP (Digital Surround processing)chips in both units that really doesn't concern me as I'm much more interested in analog audio performance (op amps, DAC's and their associated filtering processes) than I am with digital processing..most of which is associated with video and digital processing speed. Is the Denon the better DVD player? Probably.
Do I care? NO!
Is HDCD a nice feature to have? Maybe to some but not to me since the in my listening tests the use of the three oversampling filters can bring a level of resolution to cd's that's better than HDCD.
Alex, 711 has given me several extended listening auditions of your units and I think they sound incredible..much better than the DV 50 in terms of musicality. And if you are successful in bringing the DV 50 to a level of performance on par with your APL 3910 I will gladly be one of your next customers requesting an upgrade. But I just had to respond to your comments and imho the build quality, transport and overall engineering found in the DV 50 is on a much higher level than the 3910. To be able to use the lesser Denon platform and take it to a level of performance that surpasses the DV 50 is high praise indeed and a testament to your modding skills!
Keep up the good work!
AVGURU