Listen up, Nightflier: A true universal player

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So again, you're full of opinions in the dugout but when someone calls you to the plate, you're hiding in the locker room. Figures. And this isn't just for me - from what I've read, there's plenty of others who are wondering what jitter really sounds like.

Are you a lazy mofo. If you, and others are so curious, get off your collective butts and find it. You are the laziest person I have ever seen. You want others to do everything for you while you sit around eating bon's bon's and watching Oprah. I am not your slave...let me repeat this... I am not your slaves, and I am not subject to your rants or demands.

Why don't you find it for those plenty others? You talk so much smack, and enjoy puffing out your little bird chest so much, why don't you be the big man and savior for those who have never heard jitter.

I AM NOT YOUR SLAVE, get that through your thick skull!

So why not put your pedantic know-it-all hat on and show us what jitter sounds like.

Not my job, its yours.

After all, you have the gear, right?

Yep, but I am still not going to do it. I dispise lazy people, do it yourself.

You certainly believe you have the knowledge, right?

I have the knowledge, you don't. Go to school and learn.

You know how to upload files, right?

Yep, but still not going to so it. You know how to search the internet? Do you know how to download a file? Go do it your own dang self.

It's not like you don't have the time, because you've spent enough time trolling around behind my posts of late.

How I spend my time is none of your business. And if you didn't make so many stupid uninformed statements, I wouldn't have to correct them.

So what's the hold-up?

What is YOUR hold up? When you went to school, wasn't it your responsibility to learn?

Is it maybe that you won't be able to prove that jitter is audible?

I have never been asked to prove anything. This is just your assinine way to try and get me to do your work. It failed, move on. I know jitter is audible, I have heard it. I was responsible for my own lesson. No it your turn lazy fool, get busy!

See that's what I'm thinking. So yes, you are trying to weasel out of it because you can't actually do it.

It not that I can't, I won't. I am not your slave, and therefor not subject to do your work. You are a lazy a$$ bum trying to get somebody to do something that you should be doing yourself. Please, do try and challenge your way out of your own lesson.

If you want to know what jitter sounds like, find it. No matter how many times you respond, I am not going to do this for you. No matter how many times you attempt to discredit me, I am not going to do this for you. No matter how many times you badger, challenge, whine, or pee yourself up, I am not going to do this for you. Move on, get busy, you have work to do.

I AM NOT GOING TO DO THIS FOR YOU, get that through your fat head.

[nightflier]

Are you a lazy mofo.

Mother ****er? Yeah, real professional language there, lil't.

You talk so much smack, and enjoy puffing out your little bird chest so much

Judging from the way you are carrying on in your last post, this describes you to a t, lil't.

I AM NOT YOUR SLAVE

I never called you a slave. I only asked you to put some of that fancy gear vaulted "experience" in this industry to some good. It's all fine to brag about this all over the place (you're very good at that), but why don't you actually put it to good use. Naw, I'd say you're the lazy one here.

Not my job, its yours.

Well, you're the one who's always bragging about your gear, your knowledge, and your connections. Id' say that makes it your job.

I dispise lazy people, do it yourself.

So you despise yourself? That explains a lot.

I have the knowledge, you don't.

If that isn't the very definition of arrogance....

Yep, but still not going to so it.

Yep, definitely lazy.

How I spend my time is none of your business.

When you start stalking me, you make it my business, creep.

I have never been asked to prove anything.

Well I know how you're a stickler for specifics. Shall I recount the many times people have asked you to prove something you claimed? Let's start with that whole business about how you are such an independent outsider when you also happen to work in the business. That was a real cute explanation that somehow still isn't very clear.

This is just your assinine way to try and get me to do your work.

No this is my way of asking you to back what you claim.

I know jitter is audible, I have heard it.

Prove it.

No matter how many times you badger, challenge, whine, or pee yourself up.

Judging from the ranting, it seems to me that you're the one who's badgering, challenging, whining, and (I guess) peeing all over himself. As always you started with the insults (badgering), you asked people to prove that jitter exists on HDMI (challenging), and you started complaining about how I would not know what to listen for (whining). What a hypocritical cretin you are.

get that through your fat head.

Well, far be it for me to say, but aren't you the one with the fat head? I mean you're the one with the weight problem, right? And I'm not even going to talk about how your self-aggrandizing napoleon complex adds to the effect. Let's see, I think I remember seeing a picture of you online that your girlfriend was showing off on her facebook page:



(I'm guessing that was before the hair-loss)

Hey, it's not like you didn't ask for it by calling me a mother-****er, bub.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Mother ****er? Yeah, real professional language there, lil't.


Judging from the way you are carrying on in your last post, this describes you to a t, lil't.



I never called you a slave. I only asked you to put some of that fancy gear vaulted "experience" in this industry to some good. It's all fine to brag about this all over the place (you're very good at that), but why don't you actually put it to good use. Naw, I'd say you're the lazy one here.



Well, you're the one who's always bragging about your gear, your knowledge, and your connections. Id' say that makes it your job.



So you despise yourself? That explains a lot.



If that isn't the very definition of arrogance....



Yep, definitely lazy.



When you start stalking me, you make it my business, creep.



Well I know how you're a stickler for specifics. Shall I recount the many times people have asked you to prove something you claimed? Let's start with that whole business about how you are such an independent outsider when you also happen to work in the business. That was a real cute explanation that somehow still isn't very clear.



No this is my way of asking you to back what you claim.



Prove it.



Judging from the ranting, it seems to me that you're the one who's badgering, challenging, whining, and (I guess) peeing all over himself. As always you started with the insults (badgering), you asked people to prove that jitter exists on HDMI (challenging), and you started complaining about how I would not know what to listen for (whining). What a hypocritical cretin you are.



Well, far be it for me to say, but aren't you the one with the fat head? I mean you're the one with the weight problem, right? And I'm not even going to talk about how your self-aggrandizing napoleon complex adds to the effect. Let's see, I think I remember seeing a picture of you online that your girlfriend was showing off on her facebook page:



(I'm guessing that was before the hair-loss)

Hey, it's not like you didn't ask for it by calling me a mother-****er, bub.

Your wasting your time stupid lazy a$$.

[nightflier]

And you're just trying to weasel out of backing what you claim.

[bobsticks]

....ahh, harkens back to the good ol' times...

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

And you're just trying to weasel out of backing what you claim.

Your wasting your time. Seek and ye shall find, that what the good book tells you. It does not say tell somebody else to get it for me. If you doubt what I say, prove me wrong. But it is up to you to get the proof. In what court can you make a claim, and then tell the other guy to find the evidence for you?

Find it yourself, and prove me wrong. Or move on.

[nightflier]

Seek and ye shall find, that what the good book tells you.

Am I speaking to God? Yeah, that's rich. Hmmm, and isn't it written somewhere that to presume the likeness of god is the ultimate sin? Oh, I think this is going to spin your head right off, lil't.

In what court can you make a claim, and then tell the other guy to find the evidence for you?

Court? Am I on trial? What's the punishment, hell? This is a forum, lil't, not final judgement.

... and prove me wrong.

Delisions of grandeur. Ever heard of the term? Of course you have! It's what the townsfolk whisper under their breath when they see your pompous retinue blunder through the streets. This emperor has no clothes, folks. I threw down the gauntlet, and our highness chickened out and scampered off.

The fact is, you've been caught with your pants around your ankles in full daylight and in your terror you stumbled and fell in your own mess. It sure is starting to stink around here....

Look, I'll re-double my challenge to you, lil't: Jitter is not audible on even the most basic gear. You actually have to tweak your system or listen to the most low-end wallmart-made-in-China portable stuff to hear it. The reason you can't respond to my challenge, lil't, is because you know this. Jitter is marketing hype - yes it's measurable, but it's not audible. That's why there isn't anything but scientific explanations about it online and nary a single sound file.

C'mon lil't, you can't walk away from that can you? Prove me wrong, aren't those the words you used? Interesting how you are full of challenges, but when someone actually asks you to step up and prove something in a tangible way, you're MIA. Yeah, I think it's high time your moniker is changed back to what it should have been all along: "lil't".

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Am I speaking to God? Yeah, that's rich. Hmmm, and isn't it written somewhere that to presume the likeness of god is the ultimate sin? Oh, I think this is going to spin your head right off, lil't.



Court? Am I on trial? What's the punishment, hell? This is a forum, lil't, not final judgement.



Delisions of grandeur. Ever heard of the term? Of course you have! It's what the townsfolk whisper under their breath when they see your pompous retinue blunder through the streets. This emperor has no clothes, folks. I threw down the gauntlet, and our highness chickened out and scampered off.

The fact is, you've been caught with your pants around your ankles in full daylight and in your terror you stumbled and fell in your own mess. It sure is starting to stink around here....

Look, I'll re-double my challenge to you, lil't: Jitter is not audible on even the most basic gear. You actually have to tweak your system or listen to the most low-end wallmart-made-in-China portable stuff to hear it. The reason you can't respond to my challenge, lil't, is because you know this. Jitter is marketing hype - yes it's measurable, but it's not audible. That's why there isn't anything but scientific explanations about it online and nary a single sound file.

C'mon lil't, you can't walk away from that can you? Prove me wrong, aren't those the words you used? Interesting how you are full of challenges, but when someone actually asks you to step up and prove something in a tangible way, you're MIA. Yeah, I think it's high time your moniker is changed back to what it should have been all along: "lil't".

Your wasting your time nightliar. How can you say it is marketing hype when you don't know anything about it? How can you make claims to anything PCM related when you don't know anything about it.

You are a frustrated little peon who couldn't find anything actual examples of jitter, so now you are trying to badger somebody who can upload a jittery file any day of the week, and won't do it, into advancing your audio education for you. Nope liar, not gonna do it. Screw your little challenges, and any other tactic you may pull out of your cowardly book of kids tricks.

You didn't ask me to do anything, you ordered me to do it, and now you are badgering and challenging me to do it. Forget about it. This is your trip, enjoy it. LOL

By the way, I didn't challenge any one on anything on this thread. Were you got that from I don't know, and I don't care.

Good luck on your search dayliar, nightliar or whatever they call you.

[Mr Peabody]

For any one still interested in jitter, for your reading entertainment: http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1290jitter/

This article is old but the writer breaks things down pretty well: http://www.regonaudio.com/Jitter.html

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/K...fectJitter.htm

One could research the internet for years on this subject but I've seen enough to be convinced jitter can be audible but as one wise person said in an article I read tonight, a certain jitter spec doesn't mean a player will necessarily sound better than another based solely on that measurement, just as any other related spec to the player. Paraphrased, of course. If anyone takes the time to read these articles you will see a common thread.

[Feanor]

For any one still interested in jitter, for your reading entertainment: http://www.stereophile.com/reference/1290jitter/

This article is old but the writer breaks things down pretty well: http://www.regonaudio.com/Jitter.html

http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/K...fectJitter.htm

...

Thanks, Mr Peabody, for the references.

Personally I see no reason to doubt the jitter exists and can and does affect sound quality as some level, (as does harmonic distortion by way of analogy).

Something I find interesting is jitter has become the current bugaboo among possibly imaginative, (and certainly anal), audiophiles who offer it as the explanation for sound difference they hear (or imagine) in those circumstances where bit-perfection isn't in question.

[nightflier]

Find it yourself, and prove me wrong.

lil't, these are your words aren't they? If I did find evidence that jitter was audible, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Kind of funny, actually, I challenge you to find evidence that jitter is audible, and you manage to turn it around and challenge me to disprove my own claim that it isn't. Typical of someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on, kind of like the Black Knight who wouldn't let King Arthur pass:

Black Knight: All right, we'll call it a draw.
King Arthur: [Preparing to leave] Come, Patsy.
[King Arthur and Patsy ride off]
Black Knight: [calling after King Arthur] Oh, oh, I see! Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you! I'll bite your legs off!

At least the Black Knight was willing to fight. lil't, our yellow-bellied impish little green mousquetier or batton twirler, whatever; on the other hand, won't even show up. That's right, you're all bark and no bite. Let's remember that next time you get all hooty with the next guy.

____________________________

Mr.P, Feanor, thanks for bringing this thread back on track. I agree that jitter is a bit hard to pin down. As a matter of fact, I have no way of knowing that the distortion I think I heard was the result of jitter or something else. That's really why I want to know what it sounds like. If you read Stereophile and many other magazines, they can't get enough of saying such and such player has an nth amount of jitter and that this nixes it as a possible recommended player. But if no one really knows what these "experts" are talking about, then how useful is that rating anyhow? Also, if it is audible, is it really that unpleasant or just slightly different? How does jitter differ from brightness? Perhaps jitter is masked by other more audible issues like room reflections, vibrations or cabling choices? Or maybe it['s just marketing hype - measureable but not audible? The list of questions is quite long...

Bringing this back around to the Oppo BDP-83, I'm kind of curious how well it plays CDs and SACDs. I've read the reviews, but I want to hear what people here have to say, particularly how it compares to say the Marantz, Cambridge, and Sony dedicated players out there.

I'm on the verge of buying it (mostly because there's really nothing else out there in it's price-range), but if I'm better off getting a Panasonic BR player and keeping my current SACD player, then that would be the less expensive route, right now, at least.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

lil't, these are your words aren't they? If I did find evidence that jitter was audible, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Even if you did find a file with jitter, you wouldn't know what to listen for. That file would be useless to you.

Kind of funny, actually, I challenge you to find evidence that jitter is audible, and you manage to turn it around and challenge me to disprove my own claim that it isn't. Typical of someone who doesn't have a leg to stand on, kind of like the Black Knight who wouldn't let King Arthur pass:

Black Knight: All right, we'll call it a draw.
King Arthur: [Preparing to leave] Come, Patsy.
[King Arthur and Patsy ride off]
Black Knight: [calling after King Arthur] Oh, oh, I see! Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you! I'll bite your legs off!

I would not have responded to your challenge anyway. You don't know anything about PCM audio or bitstreams, so what would be the point? I would be wasting my time, and on you, not going to happen. Jitter is not tough to pin down if you know what you are listening for. It's tough for the ignorant trying to look smart in a discussion they know nothing about.

At least the Black Knight was willing to fight. lil't, our yellow-bellied impish little green mousquetier or batton twirler, whatever; on the other hand, won't even show up. That's right, you're all bark and no bite. Let's remember that next time you get all hooty with the next guy.

Big words from a person with a Nepoleon complex. I am not going to find the file for you, and you can stuff your silly little challenge in your kester. I am not interested in satisfying your wims.

____________________________

[Mr Peabody]

NF, it's funny you say jitter can be measured but not heard where others say no difference can be heard in this or that because you can't measure it. Like differences in cables. Some of the writers describe what they heard when comparing two files, one with jitter introduced to one without. Actually the writing on jitter is one of the more consistent topics I've read up on in audio.

Feanor always plays devil's advocate but you both have to admit there is differences in at least audio gear or why do you have what you have. Bottomline is what it sounds like to us any way and who cares if we can't say why it's different. It's our goal to enjoy the music and leave building the gear to the engineers.

I happened upon a couple articles that talked about USB jitter and the multiple places it is introduced in a computer but I thought I had better leave well enough alone. Especially, one article saying a hard drive cannot compare in sound quality to a stand alone player because of the way a computer is built and the interference the digital signal would be subject to. Another confirmed the theory but did mention that some manufacturers of outboard higher end USB DAC's are addressing these issues. Now a skeptic might say all of this computer controversy is being raised to sell these higher end and most likely higher price USB DAC's with the magic to battle the evil jitter. Oh, what a tangled hobby to unweave

[nightflier]

lil't, I think we've already established you're the one with the Napoleon complex and the troll demeanor. I know your head is spinning pretty fast right about now, so let's keep it together, OK?

_________________________

Mr.P, did you audition other players before settling on the Marantz? Not that you would need to, but how does it play RBCDs?

[Mr Peabody]

I just have the 7003 connected to the 8003 via HDMI. I don't listen to a lot of RB through that system but what I have listened to has been pretty good. It doesn't compare to my T+A, as it shouldn't with the T+A at around $3k, nor is it as nice as the Audio Note DAC. The comparison isn't apples to apples either as the units go through diferent gear but just in general. You have a nice preamp you shouldn't sell yourself short by not emphasizing proper importance on the source. If you have a dealer who will allow auditions you should borrow a high end CD player so you can get a reference point. Right now a true high end universal player don't seem to be available. Remind which SACD you use.

In my opinion brands like Denon, Sony, Marantz although they make expensive players the sound just don't reach the level of fidelity as brands like Arcam, Krell, T+A and the like. It seems like no matter the expense the mass brands can't achieve sounding like music. This is based on what I've heard and it hasn't been everything there is to offer by the mass merchants. It's hard to explain in words but I've yet to hear a mass player no matter the expense that still didn't sound like a CD player where the latter brands seem to offer a more refined playback sound more approaching music and more palateable. I've heard some of the more expensive Marantz older models but not the 8001/8003, I'd love to compare either to a sub $1k Arcam.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

lil't, I think we've already established you're the one with the Napoleon complex and the troll demeanor. I know your head is spinning pretty fast right about now, so let's keep it together, OK?

How are you doing with your jitter search?

Since you cannot see me, how do you know my head is spinning? I guess you used the same crystal ball that said that HD-DVD would win because it was cheaper. Or how about that prediction that Blu-ray players price could suddenly increase if a shipment of them fell into Davey's locker. You might need to dump that crystal ball, it is not serving you well.

Perhaps a computer forum is more appropriate for you. You are clearly lost in a audio and video forum.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

NF, it's funny you say jitter can be measured but not heard where others say no difference can be heard in this or that because you can't measure it. Like differences in cables. Some of the writers describe what they heard when comparing two files, one with jitter introduced to one without. Actually the writing on jitter is one of the more consistent topics I've read up on in audio.

Actually Mr.P jitter can be measured, and can be visually shown on a scope. There is more than one kind of jitter. There is clock jitter, jitter introduced by interference, and data and cable jitter that occurs over long cable runs with no re-clocking done.

Feanor always plays devil's advocate but you both have to admit there is differences in at least audio gear or why do you have what you have. Bottomline is what it sounds like to us any way and who cares if we can't say why it's different. It's our goal to enjoy the music and leave building the gear to the engineers.

Most folks have a hard time distinguishing jitter from other forms of distortion. This is why it is useless to provide jitter files to those who have no knowledge of PCM audio. What they describe as jitter could just well be a poor recording, they just do not have the information, equipment and knowledge to tell the difference.

I happened upon a couple articles that talked about USB jitter and the multiple places it is introduced in a computer but I thought I had better leave well enough alone. Especially, one article saying a hard drive cannot compare in sound quality to a stand alone player because of the way a computer is built and the interference the digital signal would be subject to. Another confirmed the theory but did mention that some manufacturers of outboard higher end USB DAC's are addressing these issues. Now a skeptic might say all of this computer controversy is being raised to sell these higher end and most likely higher price USB DAC's with the magic to battle the evil jitter. Oh, what a tangled hobby to unweave

Another reason why I refuse to upload a jitter file. I could measure it with a certain measured time value, and the computer could wreck that value by introducing more jitter. The listener would not be able to distinguish whether the computer was introducing the jitter, or the file. There is no such thing as a "perfect" computer when audio is coming from it. Computers would have to be built completely different for that to take place.

The best sound card for combating jitter I have seen (in terms of jitter measurements) introduced spurious modulation sidebands which reduced dynamic range significantly. A computer is no place to listen for jitter, which is why providing a file for it is a complete waste of time.

[nightflier]

lil't, still beating those dead horses, aren't you?

Oops, now, that just doesn't sound right at all... but then where' talking about lil't. Our little repressed pre-pubescent imp who has so many issues, a whole team of psychologists would be needed to categorize them all, the violent aversion to ordinary tattoos not withstanding. Let's hope they're not Freudians, LOL.

lil't, you're still trying to weasel out of it. How many excuses will you come up with? I thought you had state-of-the-art gear? I guess it's not up to snuff, then? Or maybe you couldn't tell jitter from any other form of distortion either? Or are you in cahoots with the snake-oil salesmen? You're always bragging about how you are "in the industry" so it figures you wouldn't want to let it be known that jitter is actually inaudible.

And this whole trite discussion about different types of jitter and not being able to differentiate between them, is just an exercise in trying to aggrandize something that is barely there an still not audible, right? Kind of like you do with so many other personal descriptors? Every time you write a post, the story gets more ridiculous. Look, just upload the file already, let the computer add all the jitter you're fancy-schmancy system and skill can't manage to keep out. We just want to hear what jitter sounds like, and we don't particularly care what type it is or where it comes from.

Bottom line: we just want to hear it. And why don't you let the rest of us determine if it's different from other audible distortion? So stop insulting people, OK? I know you're thinking you're just insulting me by incorrectly suggesting that I don't have the wherewithal or the equipment to hear jitter, but you're really insulting everyone here who reads your posts. Because let's be frank, lil't, you do believe you're better than the rest of us, right? If not, then why not post the file for the rest of the readers here?

I know this is going to sound insurmountably oxymoronic, but just try to be the bigger man, here. Or at least the big boy... Every time you post, you have a new excuse. It's all you have really. I've called you out, and you're trying every trick you can muster to weasel out of it. Why? Because jitter is not audible on 99% of the systems out there. You know it and I know it. It's snake oil to sell more gear. You can't post a file with jitter because it won't be audible.

Why don't you back your own claim?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

lil't, still beating those dead horses, aren't you?

Oops, now, that just doesn't sound right at all... but then where' talking about lil't. Our little repressed pre-pubescent imp who has so many issues, a whole team of psychologists would be needed to categorize them all, the violent aversion to ordinary tattoos not withstanding. Let's hope they're not Freudians, LOL.

lil't, you're still trying to weasel out of it. How many excuses will you come up with? I thought you had state-of-the-art gear? I guess it's not up to snuff, then? Or maybe you couldn't tell jitter from any other form of distortion either? Or are you in cahoots with the snake-oil salesmen? You're always bragging about how you are "in the industry" so it figures you wouldn't want to let it be known that jitter is actually inaudible.

And this whole trite discussion about different types of jitter and not being able to differentiate between them, is just an exercise in trying to aggrandize something that is barely there an still not audible, right? Kind of like you do with so many other personal descriptors? Every time you write a post, the story gets more ridiculous. Look, just upload the file already, let the computer add all the jitter you're fancy-schmancy system and skill can't manage to keep out. We just want to hear what jitter sounds like, and we don't particularly care what type it is or where it comes from.

Bottom line: we just want to hear it. And why don't you let the rest of us determine if it's different from other audible distortion? So stop insulting people, OK? I know you're thinking you're just insulting me by incorrectly suggesting that I don't have the wherewithal or the equipment to hear jitter, but you're really insulting everyone here who reads your posts. Because let's be frank, lil't, you do believe you're better than the rest of us, right? If not, then why not post the file for the rest of the readers here?

I know this is going to sound insurmountably oxymoronic, but just try to be the bigger man, here. Or at least the big boy... Every time you post, you have a new excuse. It's all you have really. I've called you out, and you're trying every trick you can muster to weasel out of it. Why? Because jitter is not audible on 99% of the systems out there. You know it and I know it. It's snake oil to sell more gear. You can't post a file with jitter because it won't be audible.

Why don't you back your own claim?

Yawn, same old stuff. I'm bored. Good luck in your search ole bean. I guess when you find it, you will be able to tell source borne jitter from the jitter and distortion coming from your computer.

Good Luck dude!

[nightflier]

Mr. P, thanks for the info on the Marantz. That was very informative.

I know I can't expect T+A caliber fidelity from a $500 universal player, and probably not from any universal player that I can afford, but that does put me, and I imagine a lot of other folks< in a quandary. Surround music (from SACD, DVD-A & eventually BR) for most of us out there, is going to come from our HT setups, but to get the kind of fidelity we have come to expect after owning fine 2-channel players, we would need universal players and the associated gear at a price point that is an order of magnitude higher.

What you've experienced is that the Marantz, Denon, and Sony players (I'll refer to them as MDS for short), even at the higher price-points are still not going to provide that fidelity. Essentially, if one is going to spend upwards of $3K on a universal player, one would be better off increasing the budget slightly and going for an offering from the bigger names out there. Unfortunately, none of them make universal players.

From my perspective, there are several major issues with a $3K+ player from MDS:

1. A significant investment like this should have longevity, but technology changes too fast to make this a worthy investment. Just look at the used prices for yesterday's Faroudja players that don't have HDMI.

2. The McIntosh/Krell/Classe (& T+A) level manufacturers, while slightly higher priced than the top of the line from MDS, will keep their value much better and longer.

3. How can Oppo offer 95% of the performance for $500? After the cost of parts & engineering is figured in, how much of the higher price of the MDS models is just fluf?

4. Several reviews now rate the sound of the Oppo comparable to dedicated SACD and RBCD players at twice the price.

5. How can Oppo offer more features, considerably more in many cases, than the mid-priced MDS BR-only players for $500?

That last point is significant. For example: always late to the game is Onkyo (another MDS-type player. Their BR player is still lower-speced and more expensive than most BR players out there. Why bother? Aside from those who absolutely want an all Onkyo setup, they won't be selling many of these, I don't think.

Ironically, even people who don't listen to SACD and DVD-A are buying Oppo's BR player. They are buying it because it's such a popualr BR player and has just about every other feature they want. That says something about Oppo's brand recognition. Even Sony, the inventor of SACD and BR (well mostly) can't build a stand-alone player or universal player that is as highly regarded. Sure they'll sell more volume because of the Sony name, but as a representation of the whole product line, Oppo is selling far more units.

Even if the sound on the Oppo wasn't stellar, it would still sell like hotcakes, but the fact is, the sound is pretty friggin' good too. There simply isn't a product out there that can offer more value, period. I'm going to try and get some of the other Universal players in-house to compare, but for now, the Oppo will be my benchmark for DVD, BR, and SACD.

For RBCD, I think I can probably find something else, but there's no reason to believe the Oppo won't tie me over until I find a good player. And if RBCD is really not that good (and I don't think it will be), then I'll add a good DAC to the mix to clean that up.

... maybe even to fix some of that jitter, LOL.

[nightflier]

Yawn, same old stuff. I'm bored. Good luck in your search ole bean. I guess when you find it, you will be able to tell source borne jitter from the jitter and distortion coming from your computer. Good Luck dude!

Just as I figured. You're weaseling and chickening out. Can't stand by your claims. Same old stuff all right.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Just as I figured. You're weaseling and chickening out. Can't stand by your claims. Same old stuff all right.

Surely your sorry a$$ has a better game than this.....or maybe not.

Perhaps you need a hanky, all this cryin you are doing is wetting up the floor.

[Mr Peabody]

NF, did you pull the trigger on the Oppo?

[nightflier]

Waiting for some money to come my way. Probably within the next couple of weeks. I just got the MC1s and paid for the McCormack, so that set me back a bit.