Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems Worthwhile trading-in 808.2 for 808.3?

I see I will have to be very careful with the precise wording of my posts!
My understanding is that the work done in the 808 is better than available in the speakers. This is what I had always been told by M, (and experienced for myself)
This is why 808.3 is going to be better again than 808.2 even better FIFO buffering from faster clocks etc. If the FIFO and apodising in the speakers was as good as the CD players then I agree, there should be no improvement in going via an 808, but as Bill confirms there is, so it must be!
Its not the fact that the Control is connected via SPDIF or speakerlink, its the fact that its connected via the 808 at all.
Obviously with the advent of the ID40 in the 808.3 the SPDIF vs Speakerlink (even if it were available on 808.2) connection from Control:10 disappears anyway.
Rick

What a great return to this thread after I was away (from home and computer) for some days.

Rick, your posts have been outstanding with their frequency, detail, and your specific response to questions. Therefore huge thanks to you and also to Meridian.

Hopefully there will be much more of this type of assistance on this forum.

Not at all Rick. I happen to agree 100% with what you are saying and it's something that I've been something I've been saying for a good number of years

Some people here have been saying that Apodizing is Apodizing (or in the old days Upsampling (old version) was Upsampling). i.e. it didn't matter where or which product was doing it. Likewise with Resolution Enhancement

My own opinions (based on Meridian's statements but also what I've heard personally) have been

a) It matters WHICH Meridian Product is doing the Apodizing, as Meridian have different implementations in different Products as well as spending more time fine-tuning certain implementations (e.g. 808.2i)

b) It matter WHERE IN THE CHAIN that Apodizing takes place, with earlier almost always being better

Which leads nicely on to the next question.

Making the Assumption (which I think is a fair one) that the Apodizing implementation in the 861v6 is superior to that in the much simpler and cheaper HD621, will Meridian change the MConfig Program to allow the Apodizing / Upsampling in the HD621 to be switched off???

Despite the HD621 being marginally earlier in the Processing Chain than the 861v6, I assume one would still want the 861v6 to perform the Apodizing on all the 6-8 Channels from a Bluray disc, rather than allow the HD621 to do it???

Your comments welcome

You can turn upsampling on/off in the HD621, but the option needed is probably source/original so that it doesn't downsample.

Yes. Unfortunately this is a global rather than a per-source (physical or phantom) setting, so we will need a pass-through option.

Crion / Joel
Apologies for my "Upsampling On/Off" Wording (late night writing.)

What I meant was what you're saying, i.e. don't downsample High Res material

However, just to avoid confusion, my question to Rick and Meridian remains the same

When playing a Bluray Disc thru an HD621 / 861v6 combination, is it correct to assume that one would want the 861v6 to do the Apodizing, even though it is actually slightly later in the chain. I'm assuming of course that the Apodizing in the 861v6 is more Optimized / Fine-Tuned than that in the HD621............

Your late night post was completely clear to me Mine probably wasn't!

I was throwing into the mix the alternate functionality which isn't a pass-through, but would allow one to control HD621 up/down-sampling on a per-source basis.

Ronnie,

Apodizing is best done earlier in the chain, the HD621 is the best place for it.
This allows the signal which the 861 receives to already be upsampled and have much less jitter.
The 861 therefore has less work to do, and can get on much better with its processing jobs, rather than tie itself up apodising and upsampling.
If thats not anthropomorphosising it too much!

Rick

Technically, it is upsampling that is best done earlier for jitter reasons. Assuming the filters are the same, apodizing can (technically) be performed anywhere in the chain with identical *bit* results.

This may be moot for jitter reasons, but Meridian is making bold and highly visible claims for the 861v6 that it is virtually immune from input jitter.

So there is a battle between upsampling earlier in the chain with a potentially/possibly/probably inferior apodizing filter, and upsampling later with a potentially/possibly/probably superior apodizing filter.

Do we really know the answer or is this an assumption based on the (historic) Meridian rule-of-thumb?

But upsampling and apodizing are part of the 861's bread and butter. Are you suggesting those MIPS are used to do something else?

Just trying to separate the wheat from the chaff! I'd rather the issue doesn't get confused by guessing.

I'm not guessing, this has been discussed with Meridian.

Maybe bringing even more 861 style processing to the HD621 would improve it still further, but for now they inform me that even if they allowed the HD621 to simply pass through the data it has stripped out of the HDMI and get the 861 to upsample/apodise it would sound worse than it does in current configuration. I suppose this is why they haven't put the option into its set-up.
I see where you are coming from, but am assured that this upsampling battle has been fought and the HD621 won!
Cheers,
Rick

Anthropomorphosising will be available in the 861 v7

ROFL