Is Oppo 93/95 worth an upgrade?

[HitsOfMisses]

Hi,

I'm working on upgrading my 10 yrs old HT system. The key components of my setup is Kenwood VR-4090 Receiver, Nakamichi RX-505 Tape deck, Tyler Acoustic Linbrook System II Front & Center speakers, JBL S312 for rear, etc.

Right now, I do not have any SACD or DVD-A audio & I'm not sure if I'll be buying it in the future. I mainly watch video on netflix or DVD & listen to music on cassettes & CD/DVDs. I don't care for 3D but if HDMI 1.4a improves the audio, then I'm a game for it.

Initially, I'm thinking of getting a good Blu-Ray player. I was considering Panasonic DMP-BDT 105P ($130), Sony BDP-BX-57 ($140) or Samsung BD-C6800 ($170) all available at Costco until I read about Oppo.

My next upgrade would be a used/ refurbished amp & pre-amp combo. Is Oppo BDP-93 worth that extra $350 or should I spend additional $850 & get BDP-95 to enhance the audio as well? Will the AQ & PQ be better than amp/ pre-amp combo?

I would appreciate a response from anyone who's experience with such a setup. Thanks for your time & comments.

[Hyfi]

Hello HOM,

I reviewed my OPPO 93 here if you search back a month or so.

If you truly want a single player solution and can afford it, I would say go with the 95. The 93 doesn't hold a candle to the CD and HDCD playback to a $600 Rotel 1072 CDP. The 93 does however sound pretty good via Analog outs which is a mixed down output to the FR/FL where the 95 has the dedicated outputs with better processing.

As far as DVD, Blu, and streaming goes, the 93 is awesome. PQ/SQ from Video is great. There is some beef about the quality of Netflix but it is mixed and possibly your Internet provider dependent.

I have been streaming all kinds of files over my wireless network with no issues. The player upsamples everything you throw at it and has played every disk that would not play right in any of my other players.

Bottom line is....If your current CD playback is not excellent already, the 93 may be good enough to satisfy. It does sound good, just on the bright side and lacking any slam or bass detail.

See these two threads for the whole scoop.
93
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1291855&page=1

95
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1311806&page=1

[pixelthis]

I POSTED a reply on your other thread.
Why do you need two?:1:

[Woochifer]

If you go with the Oppo, you're getting the best performing video player on the market. All indication are that it retains Oppo's class-leading DVD playback, while also delivering the best Blu-ray playback. That's where most of that added cost goes.

The audio features will let your older receiver get the full performance from DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD soundtracks using the multichannel analog audio outputs. However, the bass management with all BD/DVD players is more limited than if you connected the audio digitally.

The SACD and DVD-A playback is important to me because I have a modest collection of essential albums in those formats. But, if you don't already have anything in those formats, you probably shouldn't use that as a consideration, because DVD-A is basically dead and SACD limited to a trickle of jazz and classical titles.

[pixelthis]

If you go with the Oppo, you're getting the best performing video player on the market. All indication are that it retains Oppo's class-leading DVD playback, while also delivering the best Blu-ray playback. That's where most of that added cost goes.

The audio features will let your older receiver get the full performance from DTS-HD and Dolby TrueHD soundtracks using the multichannel analog audio outputs. However, the bass management with all BD/DVD players is more limited than if you connected the audio digitally.

The SACD and DVD-A playback is important to me because I have a modest collection of essential albums in those formats. But, if you don't already have anything in those formats, you probably shouldn't use that as a consideration, because DVD-A is basically dead and SACD limited to a trickle of jazz and classical titles.

as I replied on the other tread, its ridiculous to buy a state of the art universal player
when your receiver is ten years old, and the only new ability will be to play two formats, one dead and the other dying .
One important thing about this hobby, plan your upgrades carefully, so you don't wind up with a Ferrari on a dirt track.
THAT NEW sub or disc player might be tempting, but its only going to frustrate you
if more important things are unattended to.
Like a decent control center, either a pre-pro or receiver.:1:

[Hyfi]

as I replied on the other tread, its ridiculous to buy a state of the art universal player
when your receiver is ten years old, and the only new ability will be to play two formats, one dead and the other dying .
One important thing about this hobby, plan your upgrades carefully, so you don't wind up with a Ferrari on a dirt track.
THAT NEW sub or disc player might be tempting, but its only going to frustrate you
if more important things are unattended to.
Like a decent control center, either a pre-pro or receiver.:1:

Hey I just updated my review thread. I had some settings way off in the player.

Oh by the way, all my current gear in my 2CH gear is from the 90s and as a CD, HDCD player, it's now pretty impressive. My HK635 doesn't have HDMI and still works great.

[pixelthis]

Hey I just updated my review thread. I had some settings way off in the player.

Oh by the way, all my current gear in my 2CH gear is from the 90s and as a CD, HDCD player, it's now pretty impressive. My HK635 doesn't have HDMI and still works great.

You are talking about two channel gear. Good for you.
But anything non HDMI used for video is a waste of time. So much better than
any other connector it just isn't funny.
If your receiver has line in and outs, then you can hook up a decoding BLU player
with multichannel out, and all you will miss is video switching, and you can do that at the TV.
I DID IT THAT WAY FOR several years. Didn't know what my player was getting its LPCM from, the high degree of automation and macros kept breaking down, needing a Manuel adjustment.
A TEN YEAR old receiver might be "fine", especially if you have no choice.
BUT to take money from the upgrade budget for what is basically a toy is faulty
reasoning, IMHO.
My last receiver was only four years old, I loved it. And my speakers are getting a bit
long in the tooth. WILL need replacing soon.. My old receiver just had too many obsolete systems. EVERY DAY I am reminded of my decision, and I don't regret it a bit.
Even a four year old receiver is hopelessly out of date. Just because you are used to a ten year old receiver doesnt mean its "fine", it means you are used to it. MY CAR IS 13 YEARS OLD, and I am used to it, but its anything but "fine".
DEPENDS on what you settle for. I know a lot of folks whose stereo has a record changer sticking outta the top.:1:

[HitsOfMisses]

Thank you all for your comments. Based on these & feedbacks on other threads it appears that:
>>> As long as using HDMI (which I don't have) for Video & Audio, 93 should be fine.
>>> Otherwise, if using the current setup, 95 is better.

And I agree with the comments that it's better to upgrade to a newer, better pre-pro type setup then waste money on dying older system.

1.) Considering above comments and ensuring that the new setup is future ready (A/V streaming, NAS, DLNA, etc.), which pre-pro setup would you recommend?
2.) Can I upgrade it slowly, one component at a time?
For e.g. buy either only pre or just pro first & then buy the next over a period of say 8-12 months, spreading the cost. Meanwhile, if possible continue to make the most out of existing setup.

I'm thinking of spending around $2k for pre & pro +/-$500. And I don't mind if they're used or refurbed.

Please specify the exact make & model & where to get it if you know.

Thank you!

[pixelthis]

Thank you all for your comments. Based on these & feedbacks on other threads it appears that:
>>> As long as using HDMI (which I don't have) for Video & Audio, 93 should be fine.
>>> Otherwise, if using the current setup, 95 is better.

And I agree with the comments that it's better to upgrade to a newer, better pre-pro type setup then waste money on dying older system.

1.) Considering above comments and ensuring that the new setup is future ready (A/V streaming, NAS, DLNA, etc.), which pre-pro setup would you recommend?
2.) Can I upgrade it slowly, one component at a time?
For e.g. buy either only pre or just pro first & then buy the next over a period of say 8-12 months, spreading the cost. Meanwhile, if possible continue to make the most out of existing setup.

I'm thinking of spending around $2k for pre & pro +/-$500. And I don't mind if they're used or refurbed.

Please specify the exact make & model & where to get it if you know.

Thank you!

IF YOU ARE not status conscious, you can buy a receiver
with preamp outs
The receiver amps work fine for the surround channels, and a
decent two channel amp on the front left/right will deliver
audiophile grade sound.
ANY higher end Integra has what a pre-amp needs (12 volt triggers,preamp outs) and some nice touches not on some higher
end gear, like a phono stage.
I tend to rant about Integra, which is basically a gussied up
Onkyo, but I HONESTLY think they are the best bargain in audio.
No crosstalk, amps get a little warm, but this thing is on while I AM in the house.
I bought an Integra 6.9 on closeout for 850 bucks, hooked it up to an Emotiva on sale for 250 bucks, do the math, although INTEGRA has upscaled their lineup and are more expensive now,
they are still a bargain
And while the phono stage is hardly high end, it is a phono stage,
more than you get most places these days.:1:

[Woochifer]

Thank you all for your comments. Based on these & feedbacks on other threads it appears that:
>>> As long as using HDMI (which I don't have) for Video & Audio, 93 should be fine.
>>> Otherwise, if using the current setup, 95 is better.

And I agree with the comments that it's better to upgrade to a newer, better pre-pro type setup then waste money on dying older system.

1.) Considering above comments and ensuring that the new setup is future ready (A/V streaming, NAS, DLNA, etc.), which pre-pro setup would you recommend?
2.) Can I upgrade it slowly, one component at a time?
For e.g. buy either only pre or just pro first & then buy the next over a period of say 8-12 months, spreading the cost. Meanwhile, if possible continue to make the most out of existing setup.

I'm thinking of spending around $2k for pre & pro +/-$500. And I don't mind if they're used or refurbed.

Please specify the exact make & model & where to get it if you know.

Thank you!

The thing to consider with networking features is that the pre pro combos are not updated as often, so a current model that originally came out more than a year ago might not have a good grasp on DLNA or NAS integration.

In general, you might want to use a set top box, Blu-ray player, gaming console, or other media player to handle streaming media. You will likely keep a receiver or pre/pro components longer than a Blu-ray player or set-top box.

Right now, home theater networking features are still in the early stages and evolving quickly. A receiver is a much bigger investment than a Blu-ray player, yet the BD player might have the same DLNA capability as the receiver. And as more networking features get added to Blu-ray players and other set-top boxes, it costs a lot less to swap those components out.

Everything in home theater can be done incrementally. And I would recommend that approach if you have a set budget, and the performance you're looking for exceeds what you can currently afford. Receivers can double as pre-amps, and you could always add amps incrementally (e.g., add a two or three-channel amp for the front speakers first, then add more amplification to handle the surrounds).

At your budget you might want to consider something like an Anthem receiver. Or just start with one of the midlevel models from the more well known brands like Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer, or Yamaha, and build around that.