Like

CD/DVD-V/DVD-A/SACD player???

 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 25
Registered: 01-2004
... that can handle Audio CDs with quality?

I'm a fan of Denon and Marantz, Denon DVD-1400? Marantz DV6400?

To match a same brand Receiver!
 

Silver Member
Username: Gman

Post Number: 193
Registered: 12-2003
If you like Denon--get the Denon 2200. It is their least expensive universal DVD player and does everything very well.

Of course, if your budget is much higher the Denon 2900 is even better--and built like a tank.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 26
Registered: 01-2004
Sorry, but their least expensive universal DVD player is the DVD1400... Were launched at the same time the 700, 1400 and the 2200.
 

Silver Member
Username: Gman

Post Number: 196
Registered: 12-2003
I stand corrected. I guess I wasn't paying as much attention to the above enquirer too. He mentioned the 1400.

 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 28
Registered: 01-2004
?????

Now I didn't understand...

http://www.web-quality.ch/WQ/main_fs.asp?PublisherID=DenonUK&KundenID=DenonUK&VK undenID=DenonUK&S=2&PM=0&HG=2
 

Silver Member
Username: Gman

Post Number: 198
Registered: 12-2003
I have a Denon 2900 and a Pioneer Elite 59AVi (had a 47AVi). They all play cd's great. I would imagine the Denon 1400 has cut back more on the video side than the audio side. I am confident they play all types of audio discs that are compatible very well. And I am sure the video is good at the price.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 479
Registered: Dec-03
Falp,

Get a DVD-A player. DVD-A blows CD out of the water. Completely. Once you've got DVD-A, you will probably not buy any more CDs, but you can use the player for the CDs you already have. There will be no compromise there on sound quality, which will be limited by the CD format itself.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 16
Registered: Mar-04
A CD/DVD-V/DVD-A/SACD player is DVD-A player...
 

Silver Member
Username: Myrantz

Post Number: 104
Registered: Feb-04
He got you there John A!

After reading many, many reviews and bench tests (not that I believe they are gospel), the Denon DVD-2900 keeps coming up trumps. Can they all be wrong? The Marantz DV-6400 is built to accomodate lower budgets and I believe this will show in the product. As a Marantz fan I was excited at first but the thing weighs next to nothing.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 17
Registered: Mar-04
Often called universal player...
 

Bronze Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 68
Registered: Feb-04
Other sub-grand universal players to consider:

Yamaha S1500 ($399 list coming out soon) and Yamaha S2300 ($999 list available now)

Toshiba SD4960 ($199 list coming out soon)

Pioneer 563/565 ($150 or less street price available now)

I concur with Mr Stern that the Denon 2200 seems to give the biggest bang-for-the-buck even though it lists at $629. The Yamaha S1500 may be a contender. Specs look great, but there are no first hand reviews of this player. Price is no longer an issue for getting a universal player since they are now available for less than $200.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 18
Registered: Mar-04
Sorry but no thanks...

Japanese audio for me only Denon or Marantz...
 

Bronze Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 69
Registered: Feb-04
They're all Japanese. I'm not sure why you're limiting yourself to Denon and Marantz, but hey that's cool, whatever turns you on.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 19
Registered: Mar-04
I'm not fond of mainstream japanese sound.

I like Denon and Marantz and a few products from other japanese sources.

Japanese Speakers no way!

Otherwise would go for Rotel, Nad, etc....
 

Bronze Member
Username: Falp

Post Number: 20
Registered: Mar-04
I used to like Yamaha, but their total commitment to Video Sound and effects in recent years, makes me look other way.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 31
Registered: Dec-03
I would take Marantz if I was concerned with audio, esp SACD. Denon should give you better video and maybe DVD-A.

Pioneer make nice players with great picture, but they don't decode SACD with DSD chips. They convert to PCM. Since I am a bigger SACD fan, I stray from Pioneer. Their entry level model can be had for under $150, so it is a great deal.

As far as DVD-A blowing CD out of the water...the fidelity is an improvement (not life changing), but you will still buy CD's. The DVD-A catalog is pathetic. The SACD catalog is a little better, but not much.

 

Bronze Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 71
Registered: Feb-04
Returning to the original question of this thread, I have yet to hear a DVD player under a grand that sounds as good as my dedicated Cal Audio Lab CD player. (But I have heard fairly inexpensive DVD-A players that play DVD-A that sound better than a CD played on my CAL player.) If CD audio quality is important to you, then it would be better to keep a dedicated CD player in your system, unless you can afford a DVD player with superior redbook CD performance. From what I've heard, you'll need at least a grand to get the best of both worlds in a single player.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 492
Registered: Dec-03
Ben,

"the fidelity is an improvement (not life changing)". Yes, it is an improvement. A big one. What other single format change has make such a difference?

Around the mid-to-late 1980s most people stopped buying LPs and pre-recorded tape cassettes, preferring to buy CDs. The CD is now close to its demise. It has DVD-A (and/or SACD) coming in to displace it for sound quality, and MP3 and AAC coming in from the other end to displace it for convenience.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 33
Registered: Dec-03
John, John, John,

"The CD is now close to its demise" Oh please! Will you tell me where I can get a DVD-A of the new Bob Dylan, Eagles of Death Metal, Modest Mouse, Stereolab, or The Mountain Goats recent releases???? How about the Cure boxed set???? I know I can listen to them on CD or LP. Not too bad for dead formats.


 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 504
Registered: Dec-03
Ben,

Point taken. We've had this sort of discussion before.

SACD or DVD-A - which way will the industry go.

You are correct. CD is certainly not dead. Yet. I didn't say it was! And CD may take a long time a-dying. But it will, eventually. It is already going into decline. In fact the industry seems to be in a blind panic today about falling sales.

I feel quite liberated, not being attached to any one band or recording artist, nor any one record company.

We're going to go on needing players to play our existing CD collections, and those of us with no other sort of player are going to go on buying CDs. But CD is no longer at the cutting edge. My point is, if you are going to buy a player, consider CD is on its way out, and you will soon need a player primarily for something else.

I know a many of us here well remember the demise of LP. From the 1950s to around 1982-85 LPs were everywhere, and it was difficult to imagine that they could go. Everyone had some sort of turntable even if only a "Music centre" or whatever. But almost all production had stopped by about 1990. It took maybe eight years for CD to clean up and take over completely. Go and look at the phono forum here. There are people already who do not know what a stylus or a "phono" input is, have never even seen a turntable. Let alone one that will play at 78 r.p.m.

The present transition seems a bit more complicated, but maybe not, if you consider there was a brief time when pre-recorded audio cassettes were also a major factor - "Audiophile" cassette players were a very big thing in the 1970s and 80s, too, and people such as us were arguing about types of tape and noise reduction formats. Where are pre-recorded cassettes, now?

I'm not a betting man, but I wouldn't be surprised to see most CD production being quietly terminated by, say, 2010. Not "all", "most". "All" will come some time after. There are always niche markets. But CD was a niche market until about 1988. It doesn't take long.

To be honest, I do not know what will replace CD in the mass market. Sony owns a lot of catalogue, makes players, owns formats, and has huge marketing clout. Which is why you can get Dylan, for example, on SACD but not DVD-A. But Sony is certainly not getting everything its own way. JVC and Matsushita took on Sony over video formats, and won.

I am just trying to let folks here know DVD-A is superior to CD. It is. A lot. No argument. If pure sound quality is what you want, then there is no contest.

Bought any good VHS tapes recently?
 

Silver Member
Username: Gman

Mt. Pleasant, SC

Post Number: 379
Registered: Dec-03
As all universal players have cd playback no one needs to fear what will happen to cd's for the forseeable future. As SACD's and DVD's are the same size and have much better theoretical performance than cd's and since both SACD's and DVD-A's are stereo capable, I am sure there will be a day not too long off (2-5 years)that companies will mostly offer SACD's and DVD-A's, since it won't be profitable for them to do otherwise.

As the pricing keeps dropping on universal players and more people buy them, the demand for cd's will dramatically wane. Automobiles are even starting to have DVD-A and even SACD included in their sound systems. Within 2 years I expect this to be very common, as most cars already have some form of surround speaker set-up.

No doubt, cd's have the advantage over LP's in that they can be played back on the same players. Just this fact will allow cd's to be prominent in peoples collections for years to come. But I am sure that people will also upgrade the cd's they love most to DVD-A's (if they feel the sound transfer is better) and most certainly they will buy new releases on SACD's and DVD-A's that were mastered for those formats.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 40
Registered: Dec-03
Some observations. Amongst universal players some share DACs and the good ones have separate circuitry for SACD and DVD-A. Something to consider. My hybrid SACDs sound better on a CD player than CDs do. Obviously a better master was made for the SACDs. With the advent of MP3s music consumers like the idea of picking songs they like and creating their own compilations. This has led to some companies offering to create compilation CDs for consumers that choose their favorite songs from a list. This is also reminiscent of the days of the 45rpm single. Is minidisc a possible comeback potential?
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 31
Registered: Mar-04
John A. wrote: "It is already going into decline. In fact the industry seems to be in a blind panic today about falling sales."

At least some of this blind panic is fueled by the Corporate Radio Mongurs, such as Clear Channel, who insist on playing to the lowest common denominator. I've come to the conclusion that they actually have a formula which lets them know the least amount of music they can play while still able to sell commercial time. Talk to anyone trying to make it in the music business and they'll tell you just how difficult it is to even get their music heard.

A Clear Channels Classic Rock station is a classic example of this. They "play the music of the '60s, 70's, and '80s." Those were some of my prime listening years, and I seem to remember hearing a hell of a lot more than the same 75 songs, (if that), over and over.

A lot of the new music is crap, (ok, so I'm starting to sound like my parents and grandparents here). But the music industry can't seem to stop pushing it onto the masses, and they wonder why sales are falling. There is very little mass produced, mass marketed new music aimed at the baby boomers - duh!!

On the other point, one thing that may slow the demise of the standard cd is that there is no clearly defined next generation as of yet. DVD-A or SACD? The public probably won't fully embrace one until there is only one. Human nature.

Now, are easily copied and traded mp3s helping or hurting the music industry? I'll leave that for another day...
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 34
Registered: Dec-03
John,

DVD-A, SACD, HDCD,...etc are all superior to red book CD. No one is arguing with that. I just don't buy into the "gospel" that DVD-A is the format that will replace CD. If I had my choice, it would be SACD, but it doesn't matter. Most people don't even know that SACD and DVD-A exist. All they want is a progressive scan player for $79.00 (or cheaper) to hook up to their big screen TV.

Remember back when DVD came out. Everybody had players to sell and movies on disc, lots of them. Now go to Circuit City, Best Buy, Wally's World, or Target and count how much DVD-A and SACD you see...it isn't out there in quantity (at least in the US). Lots of Sony, Panasonic, JVC, Pioneer, Samsung,...etc machines without a SACD or DVD-A. Hell the only hi-rez advertising than I remember seeing in mainstream publications has been for SACD. When DVD came out advertising and promotion was everywhere. I find all of this ver dissapointing.

I see the decline of music sales on CD more as a reflection of economics. People are spending their CD allowance (if they still have one...thanks GW!) on the latest DVD release, high speed internet, and digital cable. Sure crap posing as quality music is promoted by the record companies and corporate radio, but that has always happened. Does anybody remember Disco?
 

Bronze Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 81
Registered: Feb-04
There ain't nothing wrong with disco. Sometimes you just need to shake your b00ty.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 32
Registered: Mar-04
Ben, you are right there's always been crap. But in the past there was always enough independant radio stations that delivered enough non-crap to keep us all happy. Now there are a lot less choices in types of stations out there. And a lot less variety being played as well. The same group(s) that own most of the stations also promote most of the concerts and control ticket sales as well. Something wrong with that.

I've turned to live365.com for good music to listen to while working or surfing. They have pretty much everything you'd want. Those that live near a larger city may find niche stations and that helps, but that leaves me out :-(

One good thing about disco is it didn't last that long...rap on the other hand seems to be hanging on like a toothache.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 37
Registered: Dec-03
Now that we are totally off the subject...

The rap thay you hear on most radio is crap, but there is rap that is done with asrtistic integrity. I hold recordings by Run Dmc, Beastie Boys, De La Soul, Public Enemy, A Tribe Called Quest, Jurassic 5, ...etc to be just as significant as those made by any key artist in any category. I do not believe that any of those artists have their catalog on DVD-A or SACD and that is a shame.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 38
Registered: Dec-03
Now that we are totally off the subject...

The rap thay you hear on most radio is crap, but there is rap that is done with asrtistic integrity. I hold recordings by Run Dmc, Beastie Boys, De La Soul, Public Enemy, A Tribe Called Quest, Jurassic 5, ...etc to be just as significant as those made by any key artist in any category. I do not believe that any of those artists have their catalog on DVD-A or SACD and that is a shame.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Two_cents

Post Number: 85
Registered: Feb-04
Picked up Outkast's Stankonia on DVD-A. What a major disappointment! Shoulda picked up the Wyclef Jean DVD-A instead. Like all genres, there's good rap and rap that blows. I would add to Ben's list the Fugees, Handsome Boy Modeling School, Prince Paul, and, yessiree Bob, Eminem.

BTW I emailed Admin the site administrator about adding a software topic to this forum to discuss music and movies. He replied that it's being planned.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 33
Registered: Mar-04
I certainly didn't mean to start a music war, that was never my intention. And you are right Ben, this has gone way off topic, I apologise.

Two Cents, what a good idea. I would love to hear about what others are watching and listening to.

I still don't care for 95% of the rap I've heard though ;-)
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 514
Registered: Dec-03
There was always a case that some music was made for low-fi. I think it's tosh, personally.

Ben, I thank you for "rap that is done with artistic integrity". I've never heard that before!

As I said the last time round on this, who cares where the mass market is now?

The point is, people only buy discs if they have something to play them on, and usually only buy the thing to play them on if they have the discs, or expect to, or have borrowed some. So the mass market is conservative. But when it shifts, it shifts. And fast.

I just want people to know, under the topic of this thread, if pure sound quality is your first priority, get a DVD-Audio player. Now.

If in doubt, and you have a home theatre/cinema system, buy or borrow a DVD-Audio disc. Just one. Any one. It will play on your DVD-Video player. Even dealers don't seem to know this.

Then, just listen.

Make sure to do this before deciding to buy any new CD player!
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 39
Registered: Dec-03
I would say that if I was intereysted in hi-rez audio, skip DVD-A and look into hybrid SACD. They are evrey bit as good as DVD-A, will play on any CD player. The SACD catalog puts DVD-A to shame. In fact, the DVD a catalog is really, really, really bad and they have yet to release hybrid discs. (I think they should ban the distribution of all non-hybrid DVD-A and SACD.)

Or, buy the new Modest Mouse, Wilco, Dead Kennedy's, Beta Band, Morrissey, or other release on CD or LP enjoy them and be comforted that you will still be able to play (and sound great) in ten years. Nobody can say that will happen with pure DVD-A or SACD.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 528
Registered: Dec-03
Ben,

Here, we part company. Most people prefer not to live in caves.

You can't get Dylan on DVD-A because Sony wants to keep you on the hook. You can't get a Sony DVD-A player because they want you to buy from their catalogue. If you like Dylan, stop him being used as bait.

They've got you, friend. And they'd pay you to work out a way to ban non-hybrid discs. That's what they started with, and it flopped.

Pure DVD-A will sound great as long as people have ears.

There will certainly be something even better one day. The over-riding principle then, as now, must be let people choose for themselves.

If we don't, then neither you nor I will live to hear it.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 41
Registered: Dec-03
John, just to be sure.

Are you saying SACD is not quality sound???

You are suggesting that people should buy a DVD-A player and DVD-A's just to have them. It doesn't matter if what you want to hear the new Twilight Singers release, if it isn't on DVD-A, don't buy. Instead go for a DVD-A of a lesser recording and be amazed by how good it sounds (nevermind that the music is subpar). The format is what is most important.

I would think that buying "Blackberry Belle" would be deciding for yourself that the most important thing is having the release that you want.

BTW, I know I can listen to my "Nashville Skyline" SACD on my Arcam CD92T and it trumps the prevoius release (although it sounds better on my Sony SACD player). I waited a long time for them to remaster the Dylan catalog, and bought it on that merit...SACD was just a nice bonus.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 531
Registered: Dec-03
Ben,

Thanks.

No, I am NOT saying SACD is not quality sound.

Neither am I saying "...that people should buy a DVD-A player and DVD-A's just to have them".

In the first place I am saying one thing. I am saying it because I've only just found it out for myself, also because a lot of people, whom I know would be interested, don't seem to know it.

It is this: DVD-Audio is quality sound. And that is a big understatement. Furthermore, DVD-Audio sound is way ahead of CD sound. It leaves it at the starting blocks.

That surprised me, I must admit. But debating with folk like you and Gregory helped me make up my mind to get a DVD-A player. I thank you.

Now, I think I am probably much less wedded than you to any particular recording artist. And the genres I particularly like are all over the place, different groups, different labels. So I am pretty well free to choose. I have some long-standing loyalties, too, but I'm not generally bothered with the latest release. The labels I like seem to be ones willing to take commercial risks, but I'll also buy discs from Sony, Warner, BMG, whatever. There are just a couple of small, independent labels I like that are already commited to SACD, but they are independent, so we'll see. One is Linn, which railed and railed against CD when it first came out, but eventually saw which way the wind was blowing.

In fact, I know some musicians whose genre is not anywhere at all in surround sound, yet, but would be perfect, and I mean to write to them. Chances are they know already. I've also written to a label which went into receivership recently, but is promising to come back with its catalogue. BTW, that label was right at the edge in CD, was first to close LP production, I think in 1984. It was the only independent in UK mastering and pressing CDs for years, while the mass market was still dithering about whether CD would ever catch on. I just admired their courage on that.

So, I can pretty well choose any format I like. And, for now, with the money at my disposal, I choose DVD-A.

As regards the music available, it just isn't true to say the stuff on DVD-A is sub-par. Quite on the contrary. True, if anyone particularly wants some recording artists, it may well be that SACD has it stitched up, for the time being, but that can also be true for DVD-A. That is certainly something to check out before people decide which way, as individuals, to go.

Yes, the Dylan catalogue was a breeze for Sony, but they'd already bought CBS. As I said before, a good indicator for the future is what EMI does with the Beatles and the Stones catalogues. That's a key issue. I believe it is still under discussion. But those discussions will be in board rooms in places like Tokyo, London, and New York, and the suits around the table will probably never have heard of "The Lonesome Death of Hattie Carrol", except they will probably have a mole to tell them Sony's projected return on the Dylan catalogue. That's their kind of language.

You mentioned "artistic integrity". Let's freeze out the bean counters; cut the strings of the corporate puppeteers; those are among the few words they fear.

I'm getting too serious. End of rant. It was great growing up in the 60s. I guess it sticks, and shows!

By the way, I owe you big for telling me about www.sundazed.com

I still haven't bought the Blonde on Blonde LP, but will.

Anyone care to swap it for the SACD?
 

Bronze Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 42
Registered: Dec-03
The Stones catalog has been released on SACD.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 535
Registered: Dec-03
Timn8ter,

Thanks. By EMI? OK. It's war....
 

Bronze Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 43
Registered: Dec-03
Apparently EMI doesn't hold all the Stones material. This was released by ABKCO the company that owns the Rolling Stones'Decca/London-era material. I misspoke using the term "catalog".
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 45
Registered: Dec-03
John A,

Usually when I go to by music, I am targeting a particular release. I don't say, I feel like some new trip-hop or indie rock, lets see what is out there. I have artist loyalties, but usually by based upon listening.

As I have said, the hi-rez formats are great, but the way it is being promoted has been a dismal failure. By no means is it a "slam dunk" investing in SACD/DVD-A hardware and software. I feel it is necessary to inform the uninformed of this. Why??? Because reading some of these threads make it sound like "pack up your CD's because DVD-A is the format of the future".

What I would do to change this:

1. Quit selling DVD-players that do not have a hi-rez decoding capability. Why do Sony, Panasonic, Phillips, JVC, Samsung, Poioneer, etc... do this...esp Sony and Phillips.

2. Make all new CD releases an affordable hybrid format...esp Sony.

3. Actually advertise.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 44
Registered: Dec-03
The popularity of MP3s convinces me that the vast majority of music listeners don't care/know about quality. The notion that compressed music sounds as good as lossless is nonsense. Until the masses display concern over source quality it will continue to be marketed (however subtly) toward those looking for it.
 

Bronze Member
Username: John_s

Columbus, Ohio US

Post Number: 55
Registered: Feb-04
Yeah, what Timn8ter said.

It's very likely that these two hi-rez formats will always be for the fringe audiophile market IMO.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 34
Registered: Mar-04
As mentioned in another post, I picked up the Pioneer 563A recon unit this evening for $99 from http://www.audioclassics.com/ they have one left at that price.
As of right now, I have only 1 DAD-A disc - The Eagles' Hotel California, and one strictly DTS disc Alan Parsons - On Air. I listened to HC twice, once in surround and once in stereo. The sound is quite amazing, very clear. Seems like a really good mix and I'm hearing things I didn't hear on the LP or regular cd.

Anyone who knows me knows what a fan of Alan Parsons I am. He is a renound recording engineer, obviously - Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon, last couple Beatles (and a couple Mccartney solos), Ambrosia, and others. Anyway this album comes alive in DTS surround. He was actually doing some promotional work for the DTS format a couple years ago. This DTS version is amazing. Theme based album based loosely on the history of flight.

Hope they hurry with that music/movie topic here.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 69
Registered: Dec-03
i think some of the people are missing the point
it isn't that big a deal to pick up a universal
player they are fairly inexpensive and you can
enjoy the high rez formats whether they last or not. the media you purchase isn't going to faid
to dust if they quit making it.and there are very
many good titles out there allready.and they play
dvd's as well as cd's so you don't loose out if
you pick one up.you just end up with another unit
to play your media.and most of the new players
should play all of your burnt dvd's as well as
your vcd's , cdr's and cdrw's so it just gives
you another/backup player.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 541
Registered: Dec-03
Ben,

I couldn't agree more with you on the industry's failure to promote hi-res. Give me some credit for trying to do something! Even the hardware manufacturers don't seem to know. Though the Sony consumer audio catalogue plugs SACD relentlessly. It is done in a way which could be calculated to put guys like me off. That could be part of my issue with SACD, I admit.

By far the most significant change in the NAD T733 over the T532 is DVD-Audio, but it is not on the box, not on the front panel, and you have to get to page 20 of the owner's manual before it gets mentioned at all. If I were NAD I would be telling everyone this feature is the bee's knees.

Timn8ter,

Thanks, again. So EMI has not moved, yet? Just for the record, I am probably alone in my age group in never having purchased anything by the Rolling Stones. My concern for their catalogue is not personal interest, you understand! The tribal loyalties of my youth demanded allegiance to either the Beatles or the Stones. Doubtless there is a sociology PhD thesis somewhere on that.

I agree about MP3. I checked out an iPod recently. It's wonderful, really. You can get "CD-quality" out of it if you want, but nobody does. People seem to prefer the compressed files, so they can carry around in their top pockets more badly-reproduced music than you could listen to in several years of relentless playback. It's a pleasure to see my son swapping files with friends. They get a lot out of that. Every time I see or read the industry going "tut, tut" and talking about "piracy", I want to join the revolution.

Sem,

Great! I remember your mentioning Alan Parsons. Which formats does the Pioneer 563A cover? I was knocked out, and went on and on, here, about DTS. I said I couldn't see how DVD-Audio can be better. But it really is!

Kegger,

I agree!

Sorry to bundle replies together. I am on a different time zone from all you guys, obviously.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 37
Registered: Mar-04
Kegger,
Exactly! The decision for me was easy. I could invest in a nicer DVD-A or SACD player which potentially could be obsolete (can you say beta-max?). Or pick up an inexpensive universal player which is what I did yesterday and not be locked into one format. This way I can let the majors battle it out while not be locked out of either format. In the future if only one survives, or even if both coexist, I can still upgrade.

John A.
I believe the 563A supports jpeg/cd/cdr/cdrw/vcd/mp3/sacd/dvd and dvd-a. I didn't have a lot of time last night to fully set it up, I still have to adjust the delay for the surrounds, etc. There seems to be enough SACD's and DVD-A's that I would be interested in to make this purchase worthwhile.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 552
Registered: Dec-03
Congratulations, Sem!

I am pleased for you. You will surely enjoy it. Just tell me I'm wrong about DVD-A!. And if SACD's better, please say so, too. Of course you will.

Please report back!
 

Bronze Member
Username: Black_math

Post Number: 46
Registered: Dec-03
The Pioneer does not decode SACD with a DSD chipset. They convert to PCM and then decode. I have heard the SACD sound is a little "soft" with the Pioneer models due to this. You still should hear some improvement over red book CD.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Kegger

MICHIGAN

Post Number: 74
Registered: Dec-03
i have recently replaced both my dvd players with
the denon 2200 and pioneer 563a.

prior to that i had a jvc non progressive scan
and a toshiba sd-5109 i have sold both and got
$140. then i bought the pioneer from best buy
brand new for $150 and obviously a little more
for denon.

so now i can listen to and watch whatever i want
wherever i want. it's very nice!
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 557
Registered: Dec-03
"The Pioneer does not decode SACD with a DSD chipset. They convert to PCM and then decode. "

....maybe that's how they had to do it, at that price?
 

Bronze Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 46
Registered: Dec-03
Definitely a cost saving doing it that way. I must point out that to ask someone with one of these players to compare DVD-A to SACD isn't a good way to do it. In fact, I would expect DVD-A to sound slightly better in this situation.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 41
Registered: Mar-04
I'm not really sure what all that means but I do know it sounds really good. I guess I'll do some more research to find out what you're talking about. As of now I haven't picked up any SACD's but this player gives me the flexibility to buy both DVD-A's and SACD's.

I put a couple regular cds on this evening. One is Bob Welch His Fleetwood Mac Years and Beyond, and the other is Steely Dan's Everything Must Go. Welch's sounds really good but Steely Dan's cd sounds even better. So far this player appears to be a bargain at $99, which is about the amount of the tax on a Denon 5900. But believe me, I'm not comparing the two, I just used this as a reference to show how little you can spend to get really decent DVD-A playback. I will probably upgrade this someday but certainly not before I see a clearer direction on where this is all going.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 561
Registered: Dec-03
Sem,

If you, or anyone else, are interested, there is a very good explanation of DVD-A and SACD formats, coding methods, and general pros and cons, on this external link:

DVD-Audio Overview

I think you got a real bargain there, and certainly you can decide later what to do without having lost much cash. It's be more than worth it, for what you learn. Believe me, with your system, you have a surprise coming to you with DVD-A! Why not try "Tubular Bells"?!
 

Bronze Member
Username: Sem

Post Number: 42
Registered: Mar-04
John A.
Thanks for the link, I'll take a look at it. The one thing I noticed right away is the lack of bass when playing my one and only DVD-A in 5.1. There was much more bass in stereo though. I'm not sure if there is any adjustments or changes I can make, I really haven't given it the time necessary to learn all its functionalities yet. Also, I don't have a sub yet, that may be part of it.

I may pick up Tubular Bells, I did see the DVD-A at Circuit City the other day. Should be worth it, if nothing else, to hear John Cleese!! Thanks for the recommendation.
 

Silver Member
Username: John_a

Post Number: 569
Registered: Dec-03
Sem,

Yes, if there is a ".1" channel in the recording, a sub is a good idea. For DVD-V it 's not really necessary, provided you have full-range main speakers, and set the receiver "speaker settings" accordingly (mains large; surrounds and center small; no sub).

For DVD-Audio, however, you need to use "bass management" in the player. The receiver is just taking what it is given through the analogue "Ext 5.1" input, and is really working mostly as a five-channel power amp.
 

Silver Member
Username: Lockaudio801

Post Number: 117
Registered: Apr-04
"Although the CD format seems to be walking it's
last MILE..somehow the execution has been postponed"..I made that up.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Facebook

Shop Related Deals

Directory

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us