Oh I will!
If you can get a deal on a used v.2, and I imagine some will turn up on eBay, go for it. The v.3 has an optical input, along with the analogs; if you have use for that connection, it's a bit more expensive, but would be worth it.
There you go!
Sorry. I would love to get a SM, but I don’t have a receiver with analog inputs. Or maybe i dont understand what I need.
You would need the analog inputs. What kind of system are you running?
It's REALLY good with many, many discs.
The only recordings it didn't enhance were mono!
I use a combination of vintage, home built and professional equipment. I'm not the best person to advise you on the purchase of a new receiver. it's sad that analogue inputs are becoming scarce on new components. There are/were a number of models from Marantz that had analogue inputs, others here would be more up on that than I am. Personally I believe in using all separate components (but I know that's not an option for everyone).
I am a sham, been trading on my good looks and charm for years. Dave The ***** has his moments.
Indeed it cannot. As far as I am aware no upmixer can (someone correct me if I'm wrong on that!).
Actually the SM even has a slight edge over many other decoders when playing mono. Many of the decoders when playing 2 ch mono will steer it to a hard center front in 5.1 mode. Very pin point center front but sort of lacking. The SM in 5.1 will produce at full level in the center front speaker & duplicate at -6dB in the front left/right speakers. So it is not a hard (what I call) karaoke effect. This way the sound is center front mainly but has a L/R spread that seems more spacious, even for mono.
I think it does, yes.
We can tell your good looks from your profile picture.
