or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › AVS Owner's thread for the pioneer elite bdp-62fd..
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AVS Owner's thread for the pioneer elite bdp-62fd.. - Page 2

post #31 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

And I use an AudioQuest Diamond DBS (dielectric bias system, uses a battery to create a 72v DC field that constantly "bathes" the insulation and conductors in a steady-state electrical field.)...But music playback (without video)... that's the only place I can find ANY differences between HDMI cables and the AQ Diamond is the "best sounding" HDMI cable I've ever found.

This Audioquest HDMI with 'dielectric field bathing the insulation' for better audio has no solid scientific basis as far as I'm aware.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1271402/do-audioquest-hdmi-cables-provide-higher-quality-audio

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1427050/regarding-audio-any-difference-in-using-expensive-hdmi-cables
Quote:
...Mr. Miller continued and said, the audio wires that run the length of the Diamond cable are 100% silver and that is where the major leap is, in audio not video....

EDIT 1. Found the 3rd thread:
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=204197

EDIT 2: Gene DellaSala's article is pretty damning:
http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/top-ten-signs-an-audio-cable-vendor-is-selling-you-snake-oil
Edited by Kilian.ca - 10/23/12 at 1:54am

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #32 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kilian.ca View Post

This Audioquest HDMI with 'dielectric field bathing the insulation' for better audio has no solid scientific basis as far as I'm aware.
>>...Mr. Miller continued and said, the audio wires that run the length of the Diamond cable are 100% silver and that is where the major leap is, in audio not video....<<

There certainly is solid scientific basis for the battery bias system to be effective. You may not know about the research, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Interaction between the dielectric and electrical signal (when discussing AUDIO signals specifically) is very real. And Miller's presumption is incorrect because AudioQuest makes two HDMI cables that are identical aside from the fact that one has the DBS system and the other does not... specifically the Vodka and Coffee models... both have individually insulated copper conductors with the same (10%) silver plating on each conductor. If the DBS system did nothing, there would be no audible difference between these cables, but there is an audible difference, and the DBS Coffee cable sounds obviously better than the Vodka cable when playing music (not movie sound). I'm not advocating that people have to have a DBS cable or even an expensive HDMI cable. There's certainly no reason to do so if you are using the cable for video and movie sound only. But if the cable carries music and you have an interest in and are striving to maximize sound quality in your system, the DBS cables do provide an incremental improvement in sound quality that only each person can decide whether the improvement is worth the cost.

The Diamond cable employs solid silver conductors and is another increment better-sounding than the Coffee cable, even when I did blind tests.
post #33 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

There certainly is solid scientific basis for the battery bias system to be effective. You may not know about the research, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Interaction between the dielectric and electrical signal (when discussing AUDIO signals specifically) is very real. And Miller's presumption is incorrect because AudioQuest makes two HDMI cables that are identical aside from the fact that one has the DBS system and the other does not... specifically the Vodka and Coffee models... both have individually insulated copper conductors with the same (10%) silver plating on each conductor. If the DBS system did nothing, there would be no audible difference between these cables, but there is an audible difference, and the DBS Coffee cable sounds obviously better than the Vodka cable when playing music (not movie sound). I'm not advocating that people have to have a DBS cable or even an expensive HDMI cable. There's certainly no reason to do so if you are using the cable for video and movie sound only. But if the cable carries music and you have an interest in and are striving to maximize sound quality in your system, the DBS cables do provide an incremental improvement in sound quality that only each person can decide whether the improvement is worth the cost.

The Diamond cable employs solid silver conductors and is another increment better-sounding than the Coffee cable, even when I did blind tests.

If you claim this is true and has a solid scientific basis and there is an audible difference then tell us more in the thread I linked to about what Miller said, since it is OT in this thread. Quote us the peer-reviewed scientific papers outlining the research, the DB trial where it is shown there is an audible difference. Explain why audio but not video is affected since both are carried in the same cable in digital form. In what way does it affect audio exactly? Is Miller not from Audioquest?
Edited by Kilian.ca - 10/21/12 at 7:21pm
post #34 of 825
It sounds to me like you are misinterpreting the context of the quote... I've heard statements like that from other AQ employees when referring to the difference between the top of the line model with solid-silver conductors compared to less expensive models with silver plated or solid copper conductors. I've NEVER heard ANYBODY from AQ say the DBS system itself isn't efficacious. There are a number of opportunities in the AQ product line to compare solid copper to silver plated copper and to solid silver conductors. And also to compare each of those with and without DBS.

The difference is clear, even in blind testing. I have a number of different AQ analog and digital cables with and without DBS and DBS sounds better every time. Bill Low AQ's founder developed the DBS system based on the science behind dielectric effects. If you are interested enough in the science, you can find the information. But ONLY information/research pertaining SPECIFICALLY to audio signals intended for extreme high-accuracy reproduction of MUSIC signals (not any other kind of analog signal) will apply in this case. There's also some emerging research showing that even cables that are inactive or used for non-audio signals can affect analog signal fidelity... indicating that even a cable not actively passing an audio signal can affect the perceived (and measured) quality of the audio signal.
post #35 of 825
Soooooo, after a very long off topic discussion, this player is no dofferent than the BDP-53, right?
post #36 of 825
I just received my 62FD yesterday. I hooked it up to my Pioneer Elite SC-35 receiver and Panasonic 65VT50 and set it up via the onscreen UI.

Home System:
Receiver:SC-35
TV:65VT50
Speakers: Martin Login Source


Initial Impressions:

Build
Yes, the front panel is aluminum and the chassis is all metal, so it has a fairly high quality look to it. Compared to my Sony BX59, the build quality on this Pioneer is significantly better, being the Sony's case is all plastic.

Setup and Control UI
The way the control interface appears is sort low-end compared to my Sony BX59 that I got from Costco for $120 a few weeks ago. The level of polish of the control interface is not up to Sony's and does not feel as quick, even though the BX59 is not the top Sony Blu-ray player.

Video
I played a few movies Blu-ray movies, such as Star Wars, Madagascar 3D and they appeared to load up fairly quickly and the picture looked just as good as my BX59

Audio
I played a Norah Jones SACD and it sounded very good, nothing to complain about here.

Third party streaming
There is really only Netflix, Pandora and You Tube. The BX59 on the other hand has a dizzying array of 3rd party streaming services that is much more complete compared to the 62FD

I'll post more as I spend more time with it.
post #37 of 825
I just received my 62FD yesterday. I hooked it up to my Pioneer Elite SC-35 receiver and Panasonic 65VT50 and set it up via the onscreen UI.

Home System:
Receiver:SC-35
TV:65VT50
Speakers: Martin Login Source


Initial Impressions:

Build
Yes, the front panel is aluminum and the chassis is all metal, so it has a fairly high quality look to it. Compared to my Sony BX59, the build quality on this Pioneer is significantly better, being the Sony's case is all plastic.

Setup and Control UI
The way the control interface appears is sort low-end compared to my Sony BX59 that I got from Costco for $120 a few weeks ago. The level of polish of the control interface is not up to Sony's and does not feel as quick, even though the BX59 is not the top Sony Blu-ray player.

Video
I played a few movies Blu-ray movies, such as Star Wars, Madagascar 3D and they appeared to load up fairly quickly and the picture looked just as good as my BX59

Audio
I played a Norah Jones SACD and it sounded very good, nothing to complain about here.

Third party streaming
There is really only Netflix, Pandora and You Tube. The BX59 on the other hand has a dizzying array of 3rd party streaming services that is much more complete compared to the 62FD

I'll post more as I spend more time with it.
post #38 of 825
Would you mind testing SACD further please when time permits:

1. When set to output PCM, does it output PCM at 88.2kHz?
2. Does the front display show the track number?
3. If you have an optical cable, can you verify it can send 2CH PCM from the DSD (SACD) layer?
post #39 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Soooooo, after a very long off topic discussion, this player is no dofferent than the BDP-53, right?

No, the 53FD has composite video and analog audio outputs (stereo). The 62FS has none of those and is totally digital output only, so there probably isn't a DAC in there at all.
post #40 of 825
So essentially it's a downgrade then, right?
post #41 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

So essentially it's a downgrade then, right?

The 62 is faster, and has more accurate RGB output than the 52 does. Beyond that I'm still testing to see.
post #42 of 825
Thanks for the info, Smackrabbit! I'm going to put my order in.

By the way, can the 62 play .mkv movies from an NTFS HDD?
post #43 of 825
Has the remote control sensor improved on the 62 vs 52/53?
post #44 of 825
If i was using a pioneer elite AVR sc-65 that has the same qdeo processor as the oppo103 and pioneer bdp-62fd would there be a benefit to using one of these higher end blu-ray disc players with the AVR since they have the same processor, or would a lower end blu-ray disc player work the same since its being processed through the AVR any how?
post #45 of 825
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by euphoria619 View Post

If i was using a pioneer elite AVR sc-65 that has the same qdeo processor as the oppo103 and pioneer bdp-62fd would there be a benefit to using one of these higher end blu-ray disc players with the AVR since they have the same processor, or would a lower end blu-ray disc player work the same since its being processed through the AVR any how?
...the AVR does a very good job....of Upscaling all ur inputs....
post #46 of 825
When the receiver detects 1080p signal, the scaler will just pass through the signal.
post #47 of 825
What about image quality like noise reduction, not upscaling for a higher resolution? say if i was using a lower end blu-ray disc player like a panasonic dbt-320 with the elite sc-65 AVR will the processor in the AVR reprocess the image once its recieved enhancing it further or just pass it on since its detecting a 1080p signal?
post #48 of 825
Just passing it on. No further processing
post #49 of 825
I believe it depends on the settings in the Pioneer, as the SC-68 will let you still apply noise reduction and more to 1080p content if you choose to. That said, unless you absolutely need DVD-A capability I'm finding it harder to recommend the 62FD over the Sony S790. The Pioneer is slightly faster, but that's about it. Also, the processing in the Blu-ray player compared to the receiver will be different, as the Blu-ray player can process the Blu-ray content at its native 4:2:0 format, and it will be converted to something else before it gets to the receiver. Just because they have the same chip doesn't mean the implementation is the same at all.
post #50 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Susilo View Post

Thanks for the info, Smackrabbit! I'm going to put my order in.
By the way, can the 62 play .mkv movies from an NTFS HDD?

It worked fine for me with the hard disk connected to the USB port and using DLNA connectivity... though the DLNA option is kind of slow and clunky compared to the response you get with a USB hard disk connected to a USB port. DLNA gets really clunky if the library you want to work with is very large... I have over 3000 albums by more than 900 artists and navigating that list via the network/DLNA interface in the disc player was painfully slow. It was much easier to run JRiver Media Center on the PC and put the disc player into network mode and Push content from the PC running JRiver Media Center to the disc player rather than using the disc player to request content from the PC (aka "pulling" content).
post #51 of 825
Thank you for the info. I'll be using only the USB port (both ports actually) but will not use DLNA.
post #52 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug Blackburn View Post

It worked fine for me with the hard disk connected to the USB port and using DLNA connectivity... though the DLNA option is kind of slow and clunky compared to the response you get with a USB hard disk connected to a USB port. DLNA gets really clunky if the library you want to work with is very large... I have over 3000 albums by more than 900 artists and navigating that list via the network/DLNA interface in the disc player was painfully slow. It was much easier to run JRiver Media Center on the PC and put the disc player into network mode and Push content from the PC running JRiver Media Center to the disc player rather than using the disc player to request content from the PC (aka "pulling" content).

@Doug Blackburn - in your tests, did you successfully stream FLAC audio via DLNA (either by pulling from the player or pushing to the player using an external controller)? I know the manual states that the BDP-62FD cannot stream FLAC over the network, but you don't list the file types you are listening to in your rather large collection.

Thanks in advance...
post #53 of 825
I just received mine today and although it is slightly faster than the BDP-53, it's not worth purchasing the 62.

I find that 50% of the time, the .mkv movies I tested only shows as PCM 2-ch instead of DTS or DD. I need to unplug the USB cable, re-plug it in in order to get it play in DTS/DD. eek.gif

It annoys me so much I went back to my WDTV live to play my .mkv files albeit the PQ from WDTv Live is far inferior than the same file played by the BDP62.
post #54 of 825
I just purchased this and paired it to an sc-55, and all i can say is i am returning the oppo 103 I was trying out, without even watching a blu ray. That is how good the auido sounded to me after listening to the On air DTS cd by Alan Parsons. YEs the oppo seems better built, and has way more functionality, but paying $200 more for inferior sound doesnt make sense to me. I did not pair the oppo with the sc-55, it paired with an onkyo 905 and a yamaha 2010, and I cannot begin to explain how much better this combo sounds to me. HAving had the famous 51fd blu ray player, i am sure the quality of blu ray hasn't gone down, so i am not to worried about movie quality.
post #55 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrobo View Post

I just purchased this and paired it to an sc-55, and all i can say is i am returning the oppo 103 I was trying out, without even watching a blu ray. That is how good the auido sounded to me after listening to the On air DTS cd by Alan Parsons. YEs the oppo seems better built, and has way more functionality, but paying $200 more for inferior sound doesnt make sense to me. I did not pair the oppo with the sc-55, it paired with an onkyo 905 and a yamaha 2010, and I cannot begin to explain how much better this combo sounds to me. HAving had the famous 51fd blu ray player, i am sure the quality of blu ray hasn't gone down, so i am not to worried about movie quality.

Since the Pioneer has no analog outs, you had to be using HDMI for this test, and if that is the case, any sound differences you are hearing are from the receiver and not from the player. They both send the exact same bitstream packets and will sound identical on identical hardware. I also tested the BDP-62FD with PQLS enabled and disabled using an SC-68 receiver and the THD+N and IMD numbers were identical with or without it enabled, those are happening below the level I can measure (0,0001%) and would almost certainly be inaudible.

I'm also waiting for an answer from Pioneer on why the 62 doesn't pass the full chroma resolution off discs. That makes it one of only two players so far to fail this test, so it might convert from 4:2:0 to other colorspaces correctly, but currently it's rolling off fine color detail that it shouldn't.
post #56 of 825
PQLS, to my ears, only seem to make a difference with regular audio CD. Staging seems to be wider when PQLS is activated. With compressed audio, multi-ch PCM, as much as I try my best to hear the difference, I can't hear any difference whatsoever.
post #57 of 825
You are probably right about the PQLS not being the "cause" of my perceived better sounding setup. For all I know, it is the setup feature of the receiver.... That being said, when comparing the oppo with the 2010 bl and the 62bdp paired with the sc-55, the pioneer sounds better to me. Naturally, there is not going to be scientific evidence of that, nor was I implying that the pioneer stuff is better than the other brands... I could pair the oppo with the sc-55 and give it a go, but my point was not to, so I could save about $200 and have the same level of entertainment for me. BTW, I am using klipsch rc-25 speakers, which I have always favored pioneer receivers with, I just haven't been able to get one that I wanted (for the last 4 years) for the price I wanted until the other day. When I stared my most recent upgrade madness, my plan was to use the oppp for video conversion, but I couldn't get past lipsync issues from dish network. Even though my wife is an IT admin and very tech savy, she just wants everything to "work" as easily as possible in home theater, so I keep looking for solutions to make that happen.
post #58 of 825
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrobo View Post

You are probably right about the PQLS not being the "cause" of my perceived better sounding setup. For all I know, it is the setup feature of the receiver.... That being said, when comparing the oppo with the 2010 bl and the 62bdp paired with the sc-55, the pioneer sounds better to me. Naturally, there is not going to be scientific evidence of that, nor was I implying that the pioneer stuff is better than the other brands... I could pair the oppo with the sc-55 and give it a go, but my point was not to, so I could save about $200 and have the same level of entertainment for me. BTW, I am using klipsch rc-25 speakers, which I have always favored pioneer receivers with, I just haven't been able to get one that I wanted (for the last 4 years) for the price I wanted until the other day. When I stared my most recent upgrade madness, my plan was to use the oppp for video conversion, but I couldn't get past lipsync issues from dish network. Even though my wife is an IT admin and very tech savy, she just wants everything to "work" as easily as possible in home theater, so I keep looking for solutions to make that happen.

Why not pair them up together? If they sound the same, then you can still return the Oppo and save $200.biggrin.gif And I do agree with you. Currently, the Oppo 103 has few bugs more for a third generation player.
post #59 of 825
Just for some extra data, here's a couple of audio bench tests with both PQLS on and off, using the 62FD and SC-68, measured from the multichannel pre-outs. There are slight differences in the numbers, but both of those are below the specifications of the LynxTwo card used to measure, and would be around -100 dB and totally inaudible.

60-7000 Hz IMD PQLS Off


60-7000 Hz IMD PQLS On


1 kHz THD+N PQLS Off


1 kHz THD+N PQLS On


Using 16/44.1, 24/96, or 24/192 tracks gave me the same results. I don't have an SACD test tone disc so I didn't try that, and the SC-68 went back before I could try a DTS or TrueHD test signal. I really expected to see a measurable difference with PQLS enabled given the criticism that HDMI takes for a music transport, but it just didn't show up in the numbers. Switching it on and off didn't really give me a difference I could hear either. I'd like to do the same tests with other vendors systems, but it's hard to get both a receiver and Blu-ray player on hand from the same company at the same time.
post #60 of 825
I am not technically adept but I have a comment about the PQLS function and how it has been working for me since I purchased the 62FD. I have the player going through my Pioneer VSX-1019AH and have enabled the PQLS function on my receiver (which can only be set to AUTO with Kuro function on). I noticed that the function only works (blue lights for the PQLS function emit on receiver and blu-ray player) when I play an older CD. It doesn't seem to be working on any other source besides that. In fact, I was playing one CD where the PQLS function came on only during a couple of songs and then turned off on the others. Reading this thread it seems like the function should be working for all the playable media types for this player. Am I missing something or is my PQLS function broken?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Blu-ray Players

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Blu-ray & HD DVD › Blu-ray Players › AVS Owner's thread for the pioneer elite bdp-62fd..