AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
819 Posts
Kain,


perhaps you should ask in the Audio and Hi-fi forum? After all, your question is about audio performance.


My guess would be (haven't heard the players) that Denon and Sony would tie for the first place.


cheers,

Halcy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
do you care for hirez?


the denon is also 2x $$ the sony...


i didn' t think the denon 3800 had chroma bug ...


my gut says get the denon, sony and phillips in that order.... what adout denon 1600?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
819 Posts
Kain,


sorry, I misread your post. I honestly thought you only asked about audio performance. Those questions are usually better answered in the Audio and Hi-fi Forum, in my experience. That's why I suggested it :)


As for video performance, I'd think that Philips has best de-interlacing (remember DCDi), no chroma-bug (with the latest firmware), while Sony has worst de-interlacing (no Faroudja or SIL chipset) and worst chroma bug. Denon falls in between: it still has the chroma bug although alleviated from DVD-2800 model.


cheers,

Halcy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,876 Posts
Kain,


Everything has plusses and minuses depending on what you want to match it up with. I use the interlaced component out into my Marantz pj so the quality of the de-interlacer isn't as critical to me.


I tried a Philips Q50 for less than a day. It locked up three times. Also the component output jacks were different for interlaced and progressive out vs a simple switch for every other players I have seen. When I took it back to CC they said that Philips had pulled this model off the market to fix some bugs. I don't know what they have fixed since then. But the image when it did work was very good.


I seettled on the Sony NS900 after also trying and taking back the Panasonic RP56 (really crappy sound and lots of jitter on progressive feed), Sony NS300 (better sound but still too much jitter on progressive out). The Sony has the best sound of any of the players. Also the SACD capability is convenient to use when I want to listen to SACD without firing up my stereo system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
819 Posts
Kain,


Sony DVP-NS 900V - image quality: 28/35 (Video, Ger, 1/2002)

Philips DVD Q50 - image quality: 27/35 (Video, Ger, 2/02)


A slight edge in this regard to Sony. Points given on the basis of measurements AND visual inspection.


That Marantz model is not out yet. You will have to wait and read the reviews to find out, if you want to be sure how it performs.


We can guess how it will perform compared to others, but it won't be anything more than that: guesswork. No amount of bumping will make our guesses better :)


cheers,

Halcy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,876 Posts
I would say that the Sony and Philips players has similar picture quality. I did not have them at the same time and would not want to bet on one or the other, both were very good. The Philips haad the functional problems that for me disqualified it and I am not sure they have fixed them. It was March when I tried it and having seperate output RCAs for interlaced vs progressive signals is downright dumb.


The only area where the Sony is significantly better is the sound.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,016 Posts
Wait for the Sony DVP-NS999ES supposed to be available in fall.

It's expected to be both PAL and NTSC progressive.

Since you are asking from 6 month what HT stuff to buy, I assume it don't matter you to wait even more...


Currently, over the Sony you may want the Panasonic RP91 which is better video speaking, a bit inferior audio speaking. Some say the Philips is also superior to the Sony in video, but certainly inferior in audio.

Philips reliability is questionable.

Anyway, all players are good and differences are subtle, so maybe the cheapest would win?


Carlos
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top