DVD-1600 versus DVD-5900

Well, I've been monitoring this forum for a while now, and finally decided to join in the fun!


drago1919,


I haven't seen the DVD-1600, but I did own the DVD-3800, and currently own the DVD-5900. FWIW, I thought that the 3800 was awesome when I first got it, but to be honest, once I got the 5900, it was no contest (I'm using it through it's DVI port). The picture was clearer, richer, and dare I say it, more "film like." It really depends if you're planning on using it through DVI, because from what I've read on the other forums, while the picture through it's component outs is superior to the other Denon dvd players, the difference is only marginal and may not justify the jump in price. From what you've posted, you're going to be using it through the DVI, to your plasma, and that's what this baby was made for! DVI apparently shines through digital mediums like plasmas, LCD's, and DLP's (I have a RPTV), so that may be your ticket. But alas, nothing in this world is perfect. There is one caveat. The MACROBLOCKING BUG. It appears that in some dark scenes of some poorly mastered dvd's, there are visible "blocks", that lurk in the picture. It can be minimized with some calibration and tweaking, but it may be a deal killer for you. With that said, there are discussions on the other forums, that involve possible future firmwares. Now cd, dvd-a, and sa-cd, are a whole different story. To me personally, the difference in sonic quality alone justifies the price, with the biggest benefactor being the venerable compact disc IMHO. And if you buy a different power cable to stock one that comes with the unit (controversial, I know), the potential is there, for better performance. Anyway, the 3800's cd sound stage was good, but always sounded a bit muddled. Not so with the 5900. I am hearing details in many of my favs that I had never heard before. Now I am talking music that I have owned for YEARS. Better defined, tighter bass. Clearer, warmer, more detailed highs. And a midrange that I am apparently barely being introduced to, because, I had never heard it before! last but not least, full digital bass management for dvd-a and sa-cd (although the dsd stream must be converted to pcm)! It really depends on what your uses are. Do I regret the jump into hyperspace? NEVER!


Juan

Kris,


With any CRT based display you of course have to convert to analog somewhere to drive video at the CRT cathodes.


This requires a (video) DAC. I believe some or all of the filtering you are referring to (Noise Shaped Video, anti-aliasing, frequency multiplying, etc.) is to eliminate or reduce video DAC noise. If one wishes to clean up the PQ after a video DAC operation, this filtering must be in place - either in a player feeding a CRT RPTV display via component cabling or in the CRT display after it's own video DAC's but before it's CRT cathodes.


The only argument I can see for DVI to ever create a better CRT image than component from the player (all other issues being under control and optimzed) is perhaps that a last minute conversion to analog and it's filtering located close to the cathodes may be a bit "cleaner" than doing this back in the player and then having to transport analog video over some length of video cabling.


I assumed Juan's Tosh 42HDX82 was "CRT based" because he used the term "RPTV". But of course as we speak, they now offer DLP and LCOS "RPTV's". I don't know what display technology is in Juan's Tosh.

Phil and dpippel:


I am confused by the following two posts of yours:


"There's another advantage that using a DVI connection with a CRT RPTV can have. By sending an HDTV-res signal from the 5900 to the display, you can bypass the TV's line doubler. This works with my 5900/Hitachi 57SWX20B combo. I let the Denon do the upconversion to 1080i, feed it to my display via DVI, and take the Hitachi's upconversion processing out of the loop. If the Faroudja does a better job than the display (likely) you will probably notice improvements."


"Much of what I have read says that it's rare that one can see any advantage of DVI over component with an RPTV. I believe that for DVI to produce superior PQ to component on an RPTV, the digital to analog video conversion(s) in the player have to be inferior to the digital to analog video conversions in the RPTV. (As you know, the overall digital to analog video conversions inside the 5900 are superb, so I was curious as to what RPTV you have.)"


Which statement is correct?


Does a better video DAC in the source player output a higher PQ via DVI relative to component for CRT-based HDTV sets, or another way around?


I understand that in the case of hi-res audio, analog output from a source player with better audio DACs can produce higher sound than the digital i-Link. But I am confused about the hi-res video process, especially in the case of CRT-based HDTVs.


Peter