My Search for a DVD player

[thxpaul]

I'm currently looking to upgrade my DVD player from a 5 disc Panasonic to something with a little more quality.

The panasonic player freezes up - from time to time I get choppy video - sometimes it respondes to the remote (yes with fresh batteries) sometimes it doesn't - sometimes it reads my discs, sometimes it doesn't.

In otherwords it has been nothing but problems.

I own a Yammy AV/R so I was thinking about going the route of a Yammy DVD player to match - but only if it's performance is up to par.

What are your opinions on Yamaha DVD players? And for that matter - what are some other DVD players I should be looking at? I have about $400 to play with on this one.

Thanks for your help everyone! Ciao.

[Slosh]

Yamaha DVD players are based on Panasonic transports (as are Denons).

I have found Pioneer (Elite) DVD players to be reliable. I have two Pioneers that each have outlasted my two Panasonics combined, with no problems whatsoever. I'd stay away from a changer though.

[shokhead]

Yamaha C750 multi-disc that plays just about any type of disc. Around 300 bucks

[LEAFS264]

The Integra DPC-8.5 will play anything as well. 6 disc changer to boot!! You can get one for around 500.00 if you beg and pleed at your local dealer. I was strongly considering that unit before I picked up my Elite DV-59AVI.

Jay

[shokhead]

Do you think the DPC has 200 bucks more of something over the C750? :p

[N. Abstentia]

The Integra has better sound and build quality by a long margin. Is that worth $200? Depends on the user.

[anamorphic96]

Plus a 3 year warranty with the Integra. :)

[Duds]

I will be needing a universal player soon as well, and was looking at the Integra 6.5. Anyone have any experience with this model? is the onyl difference between the 6.5 and the 8.5 is the fact that the 8.5 is a changer?

Also, how important is HDMI?

[shokhead]

The Integra has better sound and build quality by a long margin. Is that worth $200? Depends on the user.
Well if your using the dig connection,how does it sound better?

[LEAFS264]

HDMI is really important if you have an LCD or DLP because they have a native resolution of 720p,so if you use an HDMI cable your going to get the best picture possible. That's what i'm told.
But I used component and HDMI and switched between the two of them and....not very different.
I thought the HDMI was better.......but maybe I just WANTED to see a better picture.


Jay

[LEAFS264]

Well if your using the dig connection,how does it sound better?


Are you trying to be funny....... :D

[shokhead]

You said better sound. Better explain.. I'm not trying to be funny. I would like to know why its better for 200 bucks?

[LEAFS264]

WOLFSON DAC'S MY BOY, WOLFSON DAC'S.


Jay

[shokhead]

Not to redo an old but that wont matter when using the dig connection for DVD and DC's.

[LEAFS264]

WHAT!!! When a cd or dvd player reads the info off the disc.....it must go from the digital info and change the signal through the anolog outputs on the back. Hence the the Digital to Anolog converter. When you use the Digital only connection you are bypassing the dac's.
And the wolfson dac's are far superior to anything in the Yammy player.
They are also better than my Elite DV-59AVI, I bought that mostly for picture.


Jay

[paul_pci]

WHAT!!! When a cd or dvd player reads the info off the disc.....it must go from the digital info and change the signal through the anolog outputs on the back. Hence the the Digital to Anolog converter. When you use the Digital only connection you are bypassing the dac's.
And the wolfson dac's are far superior to anything in the Yammy player.
They are also better than my Elite DV-59AVI, I bought that mostly for picture.


Jay

Maybe for CD playback but the original poster's request had to do with DVD movie playback, necessitating a digital out for 5.1.

[LEAFS264]

Maybe for CD playback but the original poster's request had to do with DVD movie playback, necessitating a digital out for 5.1.



No, it was for a higher quality dvd player. The Integra DPC-8.5 is a higher quallity player than the Yamaha C750 which was what the last couple of posts are about. And the reason why I was talking about the dac's


Jay

[shokhead]

WHAT!!! When a cd or dvd player reads the info off the disc.....it must go from the digital info and change the signal through the anolog outputs on the back. Hence the the Digital to Anolog converter. When you use the Digital only connection you are bypassing the dac's.
And the wolfson dac's are far superior to anything in the Yammy player.
They are also better than my Elite DV-59AVI, I bought that mostly for picture.


Jay

Right,so the players have nothing to do with better sound when using the dig connection so my question is,why does it sound better for 200 bucks? I must be missing something.

[LEAFS264]

Why are we using the Digital connection again?? The anolog sounds soooooo much better. Why waste it by using the Digital. I think I must be missing somthing.

[paul_pci]

Why are we using the Digital connection again?? The anolog sounds soooooo much better. Why waste it by using the Digital. I think I must be missing somthing.

For 5.1 digital movie soundtracks, that's why. Do you listen to movies though analog connections?

[LEAFS264]

yes i do. I let my player to the decoding......better separation


Jay

[paul_pci]

yes i do. I let my player to the decoding......better separation


Jay

Interesting. Very interesting.

[Eric Z]

I demoed a couple Yamaha DVD players. I know for sure one of them was the 660 or something like that- I can't remember the other one (around $250 price range). I found they were both very sluggish when switching between discs and it just seemed very slow opening and closing. Also, it was a pain to fast forward or rewind with the controller- kept on skipping chapters instead of fast forwarding- pain in the butt! I decided to stick with my single disc player- however, I'm in the market of a multi-disc player now. Also, the Yamaha didn't seem to do too well with the random play with CDs. I put 5 discs in and set it to random play while I did stuff around the house- it played 3 songs in a row on one CD and then switched to another CD and played 2 straight on that one- not very random to me. At first I thought it was just a coincidence, but it did it again later in the day- even played the same song twice in 5 songs.

[hershon]

Get the Harmon Kardon 31 DVD player.




I demoed a couple Yamaha DVD players. I know for sure one of them was the 660 or something like that- I can't remember the other one (around $250 price range). I found they were both very sluggish when switching between discs and it just seemed very slow opening and closing. Also, it was a pain to fast forward or rewind with the controller- kept on skipping chapters instead of fast forwarding- pain in the butt! I decided to stick with my single disc player- however, I'm in the market of a multi-disc player now. Also, the Yamaha didn't seem to do too well with the random play with CDs. I put 5 discs in and set it to random play while I did stuff around the house- it played 3 songs in a row on one CD and then switched to another CD and played 2 straight on that one- not very random to me. At first I thought it was just a coincidence, but it did it again later in the day- even played the same song twice in 5 songs.

[shokhead]

yes i do. I let my player to the decoding......better separation


Jay

I had a comment but i'll keep it to myself. :D

[Woochifer]

The Integra has better sound and build quality by a long margin. Is that worth $200? Depends on the user.

Question about that Integra -- does its bass management also do the crossing over for CD audio as well?

I've looked at the Yamaha and Denon universal players (I even went to an audio store with my SPL meter and test tones to double check this) and neither of them activate the bass management with CDs -- only with DVDs, DVD-As, and SACDs.

I ask this because if I go with a universal player, I want the output to go exclusively through the six-channel analog output and and not use the digital output. My LFE output is right now patched through a parametric equalizer, and I would prefer all of the digital source outputs to go directly through the EQ so that I don't have to manually switch the EQ every time I move between CDs and DVDs.

[LEAFS264]

I had a comment but i'll keep it to myself. :D



And what would that be???

[LEAFS264]

I ask this because if I go with a universal player, I want the output to go exclusively through the six-channel analog output and and not use the digital output. My LFE output is right now patched through a parametric equalizer, and I would prefer all of the digital source outputs to go directly through the EQ so that I don't have to manually switch the EQ every time I move between CDs and DVDs.[/QUOTE]




Thank you!!!!!! I'm not the only one that likes the 6-channel analog better.

[shokhead]

I'm just learning as i get older so instead of saying something ugly{or stupid},i'm finally thinking before i say or write instead of after. Its only taken 40 yearsLOL :p
Where i grew up,we were all the same, a smart a$$. We took it and gave it but outside my friends,it doesnt work very well sometimes. I grew up on a block that had 15 guys and girls all within 2 grades of each other. That was from 3rd grade on.

[LEAFS264]

yes, but what were you going to say. It's ok, I don't get offended that easy!!

[shokhead]

How is your DVD player hooked up and why?

[Woochifer]

IThank you!!!!!! I'm not the only one that likes the 6-channel analog better.

Has nothing to do with liking six-channel analog better, it has to do with the fact that DVD-A and SACD REQUIRE a six-channel analog audio connection. I want to use a universal player whose bass management controls all of the digital formats for simplicity's sake, so that I don't have to manually toggle between EQ profiles on my parametric EQ every time I switch between CDs and DVDs.

[paul_pci]

I had a comment but i'll keep it to myself. :D

You can at least share it with me!

[kexodusc]

Has nothing to do with liking six-channel analog better, it has to do with the fact that DVD-A and SACD REQUIRE a six-channel analog audio connection. I want to use a universal player whose bass management controls all of the digital formats for simplicity's sake, so that I don't have to manually toggle between EQ profiles on my parametric EQ every time I switch between CDs and DVDs.

Maybe I'm waaaaay off here Wooch, I haven't finished the sub or even opened up the BFD yet, but what's stopping you from running 2 more audio cables or using a digital output to the receiver and connecting the bfd in line with sub from the receiver output?? Then you'd only have to turn the multi-channel input selector off and on at the receiver according to the disc you play...no?
I'm just curious, because I'm gonna be up against this in a week or so.

[N. Abstentia]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you use speaker level inputs on your sub for the fronts, wouldn't you then lose the advantage of having discrete channels?

[Woochifer]

Maybe I'm waaaaay off here Wooch, I haven't finished the sub or even opened up the BFD yet, but what's stopping you from running 2 more audio cables or using a digital output to the receiver and connecting the bfd in line with sub from the receiver output?? Then you'd only have to turn the multi-channel input selector off and on at the receiver according to the disc you play...no?
I'm just curious, because I'm gonna be up against this in a week or so.

I already use my BFD in line with the subwoofer output from the receiver, because my receiver handles the bass management for all formats. Right now, it's a pretty simple layout. Adding a universal player would complicate things because my receiver's crossover point is 90 Hz, while typical universal players use 80 Hz for DVD, DVD-A, and SACD (mostly -- I've seen others that use a crossover point of 100 Hz for SACD). Because of the different crossover points, switching sources would require toggling the EQ profile on my parametric EQ everytime I switch between DVD and CD.

My current parametric EQ profile has a -14 db filter at 88 Hz, which means that I cannot use that profile with anything crossed over at 80 Hz. It's simple enough to create a separate EQ profile for the universal player, but I want to standardize as much of my listening as possible around one player as possible. I could leave the digital connection in place for CD playback, but that would then bypass the better DACs that I would find in a lot of the universal players. And it would require me to switch the EQ profile every time I switch between DVDs and CDs -- more a convenience than a necessity, but if I can set up my system such that I can control it all through the universal player, then I would rather have the convenience. That's why it was disappointing when I tried out the Yamaha and Denon universal players and found that the bass management on those players does not apply to CDs.

If that Integra universal player indeed can crossover the bass with CDs, and its DACs are comparable in quality to the Burr-Brown units found in the Yamaha and Denon players, then that would instantly make it a prime candidate when I make the upgrade.

[Woochifer]

Why not just connect your sub with the speaker level inputs? I found bass levels to be all over the map with SACD vs. DVD-A vs. DD vs. DTS vs. CD vs. LP, etc. Using the speaker level inputs let me find a happy medium so I never have to touch the sub, now. It could also avoid an additional A/D-D/A conversion depending on your pre or receiver.

Unfortunately, if I use the speaker level inputs, then I can no longer use my parametric EQ to correct the room effects.

In response to N.Absentia's question, my receiver does allow for the LFE to get redirected through main channels, so the speaker level inputs are a viable option. But, as mentioned, that would leave me back at square one with the room induced issues. I'm looking for a universal player with more comprehensive bass management that includes all sources (including CDs) at the same crossover point so that I can tie together as many sources as possible into a single subwoofer output that would get patched through the EQ.

[kexodusc]

Thanks for clearing that up Wooch, I can see I'm in for a tedious few hours...

[nick250]

Well if your using the dig connection,how does it sound better?

The unanswered question. I wonder the same thing.

[LEAFS264]

The unanswered question. I wonder the same thing.

It won't sound better.....we all KNOW this is a fact.
But I'm not talking about it sounding better through the Digital output.

ANALOG ONLY!!!!!

[shokhead]

I've played my cd's using the 6 analogs and it doesnt do it for me. Probably because of the better bass management the reciever has over the player,at least thats one reason. Oh Leafs264,DON'T YELL! :D :D

[paul_pci]

I've played my cd's using the 6 analogs and it doesnt do it for me. Probably because of the better bass management the reciever has over the player,at least thats one reason. Oh Leafs264,DON'T YELL! :D :D

Had the same conclusion on my setup, albeit I have a cheap JVC DVD player, so my conclusion doesn't extend to other players mentioned. But to rehash my audition of hershon's Cambridge Audio CD player, the soundstage was leaner and seemed more reserved than with my digital connection via my Sony. Of course, another thing is that I have a cheap, boomy subwoofer, so I actually liked the more natural bass from my speakers when I had the Cambridge hooked up. But that's more a matter of needing a quality subwoofer and less a matter of the player.

[paul_pci]

We really should rename this the Terry Schiavo thread.

[hershon]

Has it been a 100% proven that CD's sound better played through analogue cables than an optic cable as alot of people seem to be presenting this as fact, based on what I don't know.
I'm not dismissing the possibility, but what is all this based on. It all sounds like Monster Cable hype too me.

[LEAFS264]

Has it been a 100% proven that CD's sound better played through analogue cables than an optic cable as alot of people seem to be presenting this as fact, based on what I don't know.
I'm not dismissing the possibility, but what is all this based on. It all sounds like Monster Cable hype too me.


Well....how about this Hershon. You take all these people that have nice high end systems. Like a arcam cd player and a krell amp and a nice expensive pre-amp. And you ask any one of them how it is hooked up!!. Is it done with high quallity interconnects or is it done with Digital cable.
Now you have your answer.

[hershon]

Not saying you're or they are wrong, all I know is that alot of people, and I'll include myself, self rationalize alot of things, to justify their purchases. IE, my favorite, people who'll spend $10,000 on an FM tuner.

[LEAFS264]

Not saying you're or they are wrong, all I know is that alot of people, and I'll include myself, self rationalize alot of things, to justify their purchases. IE, my favorite, people who'll spend $10,000 on an FM tuner.

No, I understand what you are saying,and I was saying the same thing not 4 or 5 years ago.

IMO.......there must be a method to the madness :D

[N. Abstentia]

Has it been a 100% proven that CD's sound better played through analogue cables than an optic cable as alot of people seem to be presenting this as fact, based on what I don't know.
I'm not dismissing the possibility, but what is all this based on. It all sounds like Monster Cable hype too me.

It has nothing at all to do with analog cables vs. optical cables. It's what DAC sounds better..the one in the player or the one in the receiver. If you have a nice receiver in the $1000 range with a $99 CD player, odds are it will sound better with the optical cable because that will bypass the DAC's in the in the player.

However, replace that $99 CD player with a $1000 CD player and it will probably sound better with the analog cables because the player will have better output stages.

Now on the other end, if you have a $299 receiver you should try it both ways. Even a cheap player might just have a better sounding DAC. Use the one that sounds better to you.

There is no cut & dry formula, it's not that simple. You have to experiment and use the method you like the best.

[shokhead]

This is better then day time sex. You should try it both ways. You have to experiment and use the method you like the best. Wow! :D :D
LOL