^I bought the similar Oppo 93 a couple of years ago (instead of their slightly better spec'd, state-of-the-art 95), because the measured specs show its performance should already exceed what a human should need, even using a state-of-art listening system under laboratory conditions [a dead silent environment and with an optimal room and speaker placement, if not headphones]. Plus it has no cooling fan, and my experience is those often make an audible noise I CAN detect, at least in a quiet enough room sitting at a close distance. [The new 105 has no fan though, and the 95's fan was said to only run infrequently and quietly] Assuming the 103 to 105 difference is comparable, [admittedly I haven't read detailed third party measurements of the two like I have the 93 vs 95], I would suggest getting the 103 [and use HDMI with Audyssey].
Although I strongly suspect that within minutes I could easily find you numerous forum posts and "professional" magazine reviews which would claim the 95 [or 105] has , *ahem*, "audibly" superior sound over the lesser Oppos, what not a single forum thread reader here can find you is such a comparison where the reviewer took precautions to preclude any possible expectation bias ["placebo effect"], by for instance conducting a blind test of the two with a third party test conductor, say a roommate, plus the output voltage of the top Oppo is an unusually high
4.4 volts , so they don't play at the same analog output volume as other typical devices, and that difference in level alone can
easily fool a human into thinking they are hearing "better" sound. Scientifically valid audio comparisons
must be done at the same matching volume levels. No exceptions.
The people who claim they are "immune" to expectation bias and/or are immune to perceptually misinterpreting small level differences as instead
quality differences, so they need not guard against them in their testing, are simply
full of it. I recommend you ignore them and their "findings", as I do.