Linn Unidisc 1.1 vs Current Denon 5910 - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 64 Old 02-04-2007, 10:46 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
Alimentall's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Home by the sea
Posts: 14,584
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Originally Posted by Morbius View Post

This doesn't make any sense.

Maybe because you can't wrap your gigantic ego around the possibility that someone else might understand something you don't. You'd look like far less of a gigantic ass if you actually asked questions in a civil manner rather than attacking people you don't like.

So an interlaced signal has the scan lines ordered: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9......2, 4, 6, 8, 10, ....
A progressive signal has the scan lines ordered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10......
These two orderings are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE!!!

What you don't understand is that there's a big difference between a progressive signal and progressive content. There is a difference between reformatting and de-interlacing. Do you want to figure it out on your own or do you want me to explain it to you? I'll give you a hint. When a standard def is carried on a high-definition signal, is it standard definition or high-definition?

Why don't you find out what technical terms MEAN before you use them.

Maybe you should learn how to *apply* those terms before assuming that other people are "WRONG!!!"

For those that actually are following along, it appears to me that "progressive" output on the Linn reformats rather than de-interlaces. We had this issue with early DLP projectors. They output a progressive image, but did not de-interlace, so it looked like a conventional TV without an add-on de-interlacer. I also didn't think the Linn, on second look, had a very good MPEG decoder compared to the NAD and Meridians.

My point with regard to the Linn in general is not that it needs to do good video to do good audio *but* that, if they can take that kind of short cut on the video section when good decoders and de-interlacers are *dirt cheap* and common, what other short cuts are they taking? Having looked in a few Linn pieces for curiousity, there's almost nothing of *any* expense inside. No proprietary, expensive circuitry or chips that I could see. If Linn were really serious, I'd have told them to drop all the video and digital output circuitry completely and make it only for audio and that *almost* could make me understand the player as it is.

IOW, if you like the sound, go for it, but don't buy it to play DVDs for sure and don't count out the possibility that there is a universal player for WAY less money that is just as good or better. The marketing on this machine is basically "Linn makes good turntables, so their disc players are very 'analog' and 'musical' because they understand vinyl". That's like saying Greg is great with words because he is a math whiz and well.......

Alimentall is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #62 of 64 Old 02-05-2007, 07:41 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
KeithR's Avatar
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,446
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Originally Posted by Alimentall View Post

"smoked"? Here's the thing. I've never heard *any* well engineered CD player "smoke" another well-engineered CD player. I heard a Denon CD player that outperformed a $5000 Proceed CD/DAC combo though, mainly because it had *much* lower noise. My point about the Linn is that it's way more expensive than the sum of the parts. If *you* like it better *subjectively*, that's fine, but that doesn't mean it's a "better" machine unless you can really show that it actually measures better or something. It certainly wouldn't be more expensive to build except for the case which is just a waste of money.

What I find amusing is how people throw around the term "better" because they like a product more. I'd bet money I could line up a Denon, a Linn, an NAD in a double blind test and you wouldn't be able to pick the Linn out as the better machine. The real reason the Linn is the darling? A) it's expensive and B) it comes from a company known for turntables and since audiophiles love vinyl, a CD player from a vinyl company must be "better". :rolleyes.

In the end, sure, if you like it and want to spend the money, but that doesn't mean someone else should do the same, unless they're convinced themselves it will sound better in advance.

i'm a cynical audiophile John (and i have sold lots of gear that didn't make a big difference)---the difference here wasn't subtle. and i had it for a week audition before i purchased. i did many a/b comparisons with myself and others---even single blind at times. it truly was remarkable. probably the single piece of gear i regret selling the most. and i was a huge Wadia fan, running it basically as a preamp direct to my avantgardes at the time.

i purchased it for audio, however my videophile friend (a well respected forum member) said it was pretty darn good. this was back in 2004 i think btw. the player was later deemed Stereophile product of the year and was raved about in TAS too. the measurements were impeccable as i recall. the 2.1 did not have the magic of the 1.1 in audio, so i'm not surprised you weren't impressed. different beasts.

and as far as a comparsion to Meridian---apples and oranges john. my 2 channel system is a waste for all that digital technology and against my audio philosophy. and to add, i've never heard an all Meridian system that was worth its GIGANTIC pricetag. In particular the 8000s are some of the worst speakers over 40k that i've ever heard. i have always been fond of the 508 and 588 cdps back in the day---although it should be noted that they use a $50 cd/dvd rom drive in them and always felt cheap to me. but that smoky glass top was expensive

to each his own, but go out and audition a 1.1 before you poo-poo it on an internet forum.
KeithR is offline  
post #63 of 64 Old 02-05-2007, 07:55 PM
oneobgyn's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Danville, California
Posts: 8,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
well said Keith
oneobgyn is offline  
post #64 of 64 Old 04-24-2008, 04:33 PM
xj bandit's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Westmisnter
Posts: 48
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think what you will find is that the Linn will definitely sound better for 2ch audio. I have heard this unit and it is the smoothest sounding cd player I have ever heard. It makes you want to sit there and listen to the entire cd. However, for video, especially if you are upconverting SD DVD, I think the Denon will edge it out, so it really comes down to what you will be using the unit for primarily. Personally, I went for the denon as I use it more for movies than 2 channel audio.
xj bandit is offline  
Sponsored Links
Reply Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off