[OrangeHifi]

That's what i meant the over sharpening.

[OrangeHifi]

Tried some more DVD's and BD's which had problems on the 100 f.e. Disney Tarzan 2 and they all play without problems. I think after a lot of testing, for stability people can buy the 300 with peace of mind.

With the very good picture and sound, load times, user interface i am very satisfied. Think Arcam got some credits back for me. Also this unit comes again with 5 years FMJ warranty....

[Edi]

Anyone nows
Is there also an upgrade from 100 to 300 in Germany avalable?

[Sab]

I talked to Arcam again last week. It looks likely that the NAS streaming update may never happen.

[Nabs]

Then off to oppo then...

[Nuri58]

Originally Posted by Nabs

Then off to oppo then...

If silver is not available then one is more free to chose and oppo seems an equal good option if not better.

[killer10971]

still no professional reviews of this yet then ? i thought they would be all over this.

mines still behaving and has been perfect , one worrying observation the wife was dusting and commented on how light it was compared to the others we have had (dv139/bdp100) apparently weight =cost but would be tempting to take the lid off.

[Nuri58]

We ned that photo

[Damian1978]

Originally Posted by Nuri58

We ned that photo

What he said

[Nuri58]

Originally Posted by Damian1978

What he said

We need that photo - what's inside

[Damian1978]

I'm very curious. I can't see it beating the DV139 but as all is well, dare I say, in Arcam land for me one nice player for all would be handy. Don't see it happening though.

Please Arcam. One uber Universal player please. I've been good all year...well nearly!

[dazmb]

Well the weight of the BDP300 is doubtless because it's pretty similar to the 100 - and so looks like this:

Where as a properly engineered Arcam FMJ like the 139 looks like this:

(Using Crustyloafers image from 2006).

Arcam appear to have taken quite a lot of 'stuff' out of their new players. Not quite like for like of course as the BDP's frustratingly to many of us are not universal players, but whether or not the electronics removed were needed to maintain performance quality is the debating point. General consensus after the dust settled was that the BDP100 was not the equal of the DV139 sonically, so therefore it looks like the gubbins they have not included in the BDP's is in fact doing something other than just increasing the weight!

[killer10971]

is that a bdp300 ?? or an old pic from a bdp100

if so i will put my screwdriver away

[Damian1978]

Thats the BDP100.

[Nuri58]

Get hold on the screwdriver so we can see what's inside - I am sure the community will give you lots of credit for that. Not sure Arcam will though

[killer10971]

the lid fell off and i just happened to have my camera ready

[Damian1978]

Those pesky lids are a death trap.

Looks like a better drive (i.e. not Liteon) and a bit neater than the 100 but its no Oppo or DV139.

[DOBLY]

I guess that the power supply is so much smaller on the BDP models than the DV139 as they are more digital, less analogue? and there is more computer, less electronic device about the whole design?

The DV139 has whole boards dedicated to analogue out, which the BDP just doesn't have.

[lazarus]

maybe its just me not being familiar with modern electronics..but im amazed at how much free space there is inside those units.

[dazmb]

Still looks pretty lean inside compared to the 2 Channel only DV135 which also has no dedicated video upscale hardware just like the BDP's ...

[Nuri58]

One thing for sure is that as more distance between individual boards as less the interference (much like the idea behind seperates and the reason that pro types sounds better than the final product - again that the individual components are put in a bigger area). If the performance of boards in particular the PSU is up to par I cannot say. The BDP100 certainly does not have an issue IMO, but maybe that's the difference between that and the DV135???

[PenguinHiFi]

Hi,

Do you think it will sell ?
If I look at the user manual and if I read the reports on this forum this player has :

- no analog outputs ;
- no streaming abilities ;
- no support of DVD-A ;
- no support of SACD ;
- no support of .flac audio files ;
- no support of DivX video files ;
- no support for audio on USB higher than 48khz...

That's a long list for a 1K£ Blu-ray player, especially when you can have an Oppo BDP-95 for the price, that will do all the listed above, probably offer at least the same image quality and will probably be on par with the ARCAM for audio playback.

Anyways, I will pass on this but as I still like ARCAM, will wish them good luck with this one.

Only thing is : I am afraid that the guys at ARCAM have disconnected from the consumers need when I look at their latest products (Blu-Ray players, DAC, rCube...). [PERSONAL OPINION]

Regards.

PenguinHiFi

[Sab]

What the BDP300 does, it does very well. Very good audio and picture. There is a possibility of a software update that will bring streaming abilities.

This is a case of performance vs features.

I know that the BDP300 might not have much under the hood but I prefer it to the Cambridge Audio 651BD which I had for 3 weeks.

The Oppo and the CA offer a lot of features but the Arcam's performance is better in what it does.

This is just my opinion. And no, I do not work for Arcam.

[Nabs]

Originally Posted by Sab

What the BDP300 does, it does very well. Very good audio and picture. There is a possibility of a software update that will bring streaming abilities.

This is a case of performance vs features.

I know that the BDP300 might not have much under the hood but I prefer it to the Cambridge Audio 651BD which I had for 3 weeks.
.

Wouldn't a better comparison be the CA 751bd?

[Avi]

Originally Posted by killer10971

the lid fell off and i just happened to have my camera ready

It would be useful to know what SoC is lurking under the heatsink as this may provide more of a clue about the primary board which is essentially the the Blu-ray player. Anyone know ?

Avi

[dazmb]

Originally Posted by Nabs

Wouldn't a better comparison be the CA 751bd?

I hope for the Arcam's sake it's better than the CA751 audio wise. Sorry, but 2 channel analogue compared to DV139 was not pretty. Which is odd considering it has same DAC's in it (although less of them). Maybe the switching psu, maybe the upsampling or the (pointless) filters but my ears were not enjoying the aural experience the 751 provided during my 1 week home trial. Thank god the unit arrived damaged and I could return it.....

Couldn't fault the QDEO video though. It wasn't a more pleasant picture overall on DVD than the DV139's very balanced colour / detailed combination from it's Zoran/ABT hardware, but it was cleaner/sharper image (almost too much so).

[PenguinHiFi]

Hi Sab,

Currently, my BRP is an Oppo BDP-93 NuForce Edition.

I compared it to my DV139 which was at it's time considered as a killer machine.
Of course, no comparison on BRD as the DV139 doesn't support those.
On DVD image, the DV139 is better (I think) but on sound, both are on par.
On DVD-Audio : on par.
On SACD : Oppo A LOT better... but of course, SACD has never been a format Arcam liked (what they show again here)
On CD : Oppo a little better than the DV139.

So when I read reports about the BDP-300 sounding worse than the DV139 on CD, I really ask myself what the arguments for the BDP-300 at 1K£ are...
Killer picture ? Considering what, i.e. the Oppo does, if it is better it can only marginally be better, at least on a 42' display.
Sound ? But it does NOTHING on sound, except passing it to the pre/pro/receiver ! So you can't tell it does a great job there : your receiver does the job.

I am not a real feature loaded machines freak. And I really would love to get an Arcam BRP. But so far, I see nothing here that would make me think to change my BDP-93 MRZ for a BDP-300.
I might reconsider if they come out with a player that has analogue outputs AND streaming abilities from the beginning... How much promises had ARCAM made that did never come true ?

Regards.

PenguinHiFi

[thezaks]

Originally Posted by PenguinHiFi

Hi,

Do you think it will sell ?
If I look at the user manual and if I read the reports on this forum this player has :

- no analog outputs ;
- no streaming abilities ;
- no support of DVD-A ;
- no support of SACD ;
- no support of .flac audio files ;
- no support of DivX video files ;
- no support for audio on USB higher than 48khz...

That's a long list for a 1K£ Blu-ray player, especially when you can have an Oppo BDP-95 for the price, that will do all the listed above, probably offer at least the same image quality and will probably be on par with the ARCAM for audio playback.

Anyways, I will pass on this but as I still like ARCAM, will wish them good luck with this one.

Only thing is : I am afraid that the guys at ARCAM have disconnected from the consumers need when I look at their latest products (Blu-Ray players, DAC, rCube...). [PERSONAL OPINION]

Regards.

PenguinHiFi

I believe it does have analog outputs...

Dave

[Avi]

Originally Posted by thezaks

I believe it does have analog outputs...

Dave

I think the OP was referring to multi-channel analogue output that may be important for legacy AV processor users that need the player to decode and perform DAC to take advantage of Blu-ray lossless HD audio formats.

The BDP300 has stereo analogue output only. One stereo pair is provided on the Arcam daughter circuit card and the other is provided on the primary Blu-ray player board that is likely to be a bought in design.

[thezaks]

Originally Posted by PenguinHiFi

Hi,

Do you think it will sell ?
If I look at the user manual and if I read the reports on this forum this player has :

- no analog outputs ;
- no streaming abilities ;
- no support of DVD-A ;
- no support of SACD ;
- no support of .flac audio files ;
- no support of DivX video files ;
- no support for audio on USB higher than 48khz...

That's a long list for a 1K£ Blu-ray player, especially when you can have an Oppo BDP-95 for the price, that will do all the listed above, probably offer at least the same image quality and will probably be on par with the ARCAM for audio playback.

Anyways, I will pass on this but as I still like ARCAM, will wish them good luck with this one.

Only thing is : I am afraid that the guys at ARCAM have disconnected from the consumers need when I look at their latest products (Blu-Ray players, DAC, rCube...). [PERSONAL OPINION]

Regards.

PenguinHiFi

I'd sacrifice all of the items you listed, in order to get better hdmi and stereo audio performance and better video performance. And, although the receiver or processor does a lot of the work, because the digital is passed from the source via hdmi, the source still makes a difference in my experience. In fact, to me, it can be significant.

Dave