Very few BDs have PCM tracks. Really it was only the first batch before the lossless codecs were finalized. You could probably count on one hand the discs that had PCM and a lossless track. Once the dust settled and the HD codecs were well supported everyone stopped including the PCM tracks because they took up so much space.
If you're saying that you're hearing a difference between sending the HD bitstream to your receiver vs. sending the decoded PCM, you're wrong. (That's why double blinds studies are so important.) That's like saying the program ran better because someone sent it to you in a Zip file, rather than them unzipping it and sending you the raw executable.
It doesn't matter if the player decodes the audio to PCM or sends the bitstream, and the receiver decodes that to PCM. It all ends up being the same bits in the end. Just you don't get the HD light on the receiver as it can't tell the original format.
I'm wholly against bitstreaming. It serves no purpose, and actually slows the adoption of new audio formats (everyone waits for receiver to gain support rather than just letting the players with support for the new format do the work). It's a hack left over from laserdisc days, that lived on too long through DVD. It should have died when BDs came on the scene. Players don't bitstream the video to the display. They decode the compressed video into full frames and send them. Why should there be any difference with audio?
Think if the receiver had to support every audio codec known to man. That would be silly. No, if you have a computer hooked up to your receiver it decodes the Vorbis, AAC, MP3, FLAC, Monkey, Shorten, WMA, etc. and then sends the audio as PCM. That always works.
And that's my rant for the week.
