[BorisVS]

In October 2002 I purchased a Denon DVD3800 for £1000. This beautiful machine was state of the art and hugely over engineered weighing 10kg and backed up by Denon's reputation. Or so I thought....

After about 3 years, the player started to randomly refuse to load DVD's - it happened occasionally and with no discernable pattern. However in the late Summer of 2006 it got a lot worse and I took it back to the dealer. Denon refused to look at it unless I coughed up a non-refundable fee. The dealer to their credit got an independant to look at it for free and I was quoted £200 for a new laser assembly. Clearly as technology had moved on this was not cost effective and I took the player home. Since that time it has got progressively worse and for the last few months has been unplayable and is now consigned to the loft as I can't bare to look at the cursed machine.

Whilst the Denon was away in October 2006 I purchased a Toshiba player for £80 from Richer Sounds. This has worked flawlessly, and in all honesty I would have trouble in a "blind" test to pick one player against the other. £ for £, even if the Toshiba fails today, it has been a revelation in regard to the subjective picture quality that can be achieved for a modest price tag. And if I now want to change to a Blu Ray (max £200!) player I won't feel bad about he cost of the Toshiba.

For 15 years I have followed the high end dream, but this experience has taught me a valuable lesson - spending more does not guarantee better quality - neither build or reliability - and I am starting to wonder whether we are all subject to the "Emperors New Clothes" syndrone of believing that this new product with xyz must be better than the old one etc.

Needless to say, that Denon themselves have been useless, never once responding to my comments. Denon can be assured that I will never ever buy one of their products again and are also responsible for ensuring that this AV enthusiast is moving away from the highly profitable high end market for ever.

On a brighter note, my trusted Yamaha DSPA1 amp dating from 1999 together M&K THX150 speaker system and REL storm subwoofer (1996) continue to sound fantastic, work reliably and I have no plans to line the AV industries pockets for their latest new fangled product anytime soon. Perhaps that's why Denon build shoddy equipment that fails quickly!!

[squashed pea]

I had some issues with my Denon 1940 dvd player and sent off a query through their (denons) site. That was about a month ago, still waiting for a reply. You live and learn. never again. cest la vie etc etc

[Smurfin]

Things have moved on significantly since the days of the Denon 3800, and to be honest, I do think there's lots of cases of emperors clothes. I was in a sevenoaks branch a couple of weeks ago, and the guy there swore his first generation samsung BD player gave a better picture than the PS3.

I think there's one thing that is becoming apparent...certainly in my home, so called "high end" electronics (thinking AV processors/dvd/BR players) are becoming less and less attractive.

Is anyone honestly going to be able to tell the difference between a Panasonic BD-30 BluRay player and a Denon one costing over a grand? Doubt it.....

[Benrudd1]

I take it for granted now that any laser based source, dvd,cd,blueray etc will probably pack up after about 3 years max

I have had it happen to several different makes and would be unlikely to spend big money on a high end player.

Although I do still own the first dvd player I ever purchased (in a box in the attic)

[TommyVecetti]

Originally Posted by Smurfin

Is anyone honestly going to be able to tell the difference between a Panasonic BD-30 BluRay player and a Denon one costing over a grand? Doubt it.....

Well you're comparing two good brands against each other. Try comparing both to a Bush or Alba BD player and yes, there'd be a difference.

[henryv]

Wise words indeed.
I have fallen into the trap of thinking the more expensive product has to be the best -BUT!!
That is the great thing about this forum. You can read other members actual experiences and this will reflect on the manufacturers like Denon if they ignore their customers.
Some are very responsive until you have spent the money!!
The middle road seems best.

My conclusion is that 99% is the DISC quality.
You get a great transfer disc and it will look great on almost anything!! The player cannot do much with most discs where quality is average!!
I have just had "Ghost Whisperer" Series 2 for my birthday
and both picture and sound are excellent. (As was Series 1)
I have three different players and it looks superb on them all.
Better than a lot of my Blu-Ray discs for picture quality.

Henry.

[DarrenH]

These are very interesting comments and ones I value. My thoughts definately depend on what you are watching the films on, and what you audio equipment you are listening to the films through... but particularly the video side (for me).

I have had many DVD players over the years:

Yamaha DVD-795
Phillips Q50
Arcam DV27
Phillips
Denon 1910
Toshiba cheapie
Toshiba HD DVD recorder
Panasonic DMR-77
and now a Yamaha DVD-S2700

I don't like wasting money and I have paid very little for my new Yamaha compared to its RRP of £1000! But what I have found over the years is that you can definately see a difference in the quality of image on most DVD players... Yes, a lot will depend on the film transfer, but also the cables you use.

The biggest difference can be seen when using projectors, that is until you reach the limit of their 'quality'. If you use an affordable projector, then an affordable DVD player and a high end DVD player will most likely look the same. Take those two to a better projector, and it is likely to show up the differences for your money.

I guess I always try to match up qualities of system or expect the weakest link in the system to define the quality of image I am going to see.

That said, I can never resist a bargain and so I had to buy the new Yamaha!

[Smurfin]

Originally Posted by TommyVecetti

Well you're comparing two good brands against each other. Try comparing both to a Bush or Alba BD player and yes, there'd be a difference.

£350 vs £1000, regardless of the brand name I can't quite see the correlation between those costs....

[evans]

Originally Posted by DarrenH

These are very interesting comments and ones I value. My thoughts definately depend on what you are watching the films on, and what you audio equipment you are listening to the films through... but particularly the video side (for me).

I have had many DVD players over the years:

Yamaha DVD-795
Phillips Q50
Arcam DV27
Phillips
Denon 1910
Toshiba cheapie
Toshiba HD DVD recorder
Panasonic DMR-77
and now a Yamaha DVD-S2700

I don't like wasting money and I have paid very little for my new Yamaha compared to its RRP of £1000! But what I have found over the years is that you can definately see a difference in the quality of image on most DVD players... Yes, a lot will depend on the film transfer, but also the cables you use.

The biggest difference can be seen when using projectors, that is until you reach the limit of their 'quality'. If you use an affordable projector, then an affordable DVD player and a high end DVD player will most likely look the same. Take those two to a better projector, and it is likely to show up the differences for your money.

I guess I always try to match up qualities of system or expect the weakest link in the system to define the quality of image I am going to see.

That said, I can never resist a bargain and so I had to buy the new Yamaha!

Darren i had the philips Q50 as well, very good picture quality and cost me alot in 2002, but the lazer assembly only lasted 3 years. Since then i bought a cheap denon 1730 at 1/3 of the cost and it is nearly as good as the q50. So i agree with BorisVS comments. Now i have bought a toshiba xe1 for the sd playback and i hope this one lasts more than 3 years!

[shuzzbutt]

Can I ask what size screen you use? Only because playing devils advocate I would EXPECT that the Denon would do a better job at dvd playback on a 100" projector rather than a 37/42 tv than the tosh

[DarrenH]

Originally Posted by shuzzbutt

Can I ask what size screen you use? Only because playing devils advocate I would EXPECT that the Denon would do a better job at dvd playback on a 100" projector rather than a 37/42 tv than the tosh

That was one of the points I was trying to make... The larger image will show the 'cheaper' DVD player's limitations. My Arcam DV27 mashed all of the other players I have had to date on image quality and 3D depth. I bought it second hand for £450, and sold it for the same... I wish I had kept it, but I needed the money at the time.

[DarrenH]

Originally Posted by evans

Darren i had the philips Q50 as well, very good picture quality and cost me alot in 2002, but the lazer assembly only lasted 3 years. Since then i bought a cheap denon 1730 at 1/3 of the cost and it is nearly as good as the q50. So i agree with BorisVS comments. Now i have bought a toshiba xe1 for the sd playback and i hope this one lasts more than 3 years!

I understand what you are saying... I paid £450 for my first Yamaha, plus £50 to get it multiregioned! The new Yamaha DVD-S2700 will absolutely trounce the old one and I am only paying (effectively) £250 as part of a package for this one. I do not tend to keep players long enough to see them fail (Emporer's new cloths etc...!), although my in-laws have the Q50 still and it works great!

But I feel that we are also mixing up statements about new and old technology. My first Yamaha S795 costing around £500 would not compete with a model costing £200 today. There comes a point where you have to decide if you want to be a technology leader and pay the price! Me... well I guess I am a mix of both - but definately like my bargains!

[gblades]

I am all for paying a reasonable amount for analogue equipment such as speakers and amplifiers. This used to be the case for DVD players but now with most people using optiical out and HDMI outputs it is all digital and the only benefit paying more can give you is a quieter machine and a better upscaler.

Personally I spend the money on the TV, Amp and speakers and everything else I get is towards the budget range.

[evans]

Im glad i got the xe1 even for 400 pounds allthough at my screen size 32 inches the denon is not 4 times less in PQ. Probably an overkill on my part just the denon had micro blocking on dark scenes which i hated.

[graham.myers]

I've just sold my 3800 (on these very forums) and I was sorry to see it go, it was a fantastic piece of kit and defo better than its predecessors (sony 200 disk autochanger and a tosh region 1 import). I'm using a 7ft screen so could see the difference in quality. It was fed through a denon AVC-A1D amp to a sony 720p projector.

Now I have an onkyo 905 amp, a jvc HD1 pj and I'm using a pioneer DV600 which cost less than £100 and it does look good. Not sure its quite as good as the denon but I needed the space and this covered dvd/sacd and dvd-audio.

[Shockabuku]

Imho DVD players were/are a great example of diminishing returns. The output from cheap (sub £100) players is generally of such high quality these days that the benefit of spending five or ten times that amount is pretty marginal, particularly if used in a non-projection system. I reckon this has been the case for some years now, and frankly anyone spending huge amounts on a dvd player should be doing some serious blind testing first imho! When the likes of the Pioneer DV575 came out a few years back, I think the whole high end DVD player market became irrelevant for all but a tiny percentage of buyers. That thing cost £130 on release & could give anything a run for it's money in DVD, SACD and DVD-Audio playback.

[Naqv]

Originally Posted by Shockabuku

Imho DVD players were/are a great example of diminishing returns. The output from cheap (sub £100) players is generally of such high quality these days that the benefit of spending five or ten times that amount is pretty marginal, particularly if used in a non-projection system. I reckon this has been the case for some years now, and frankly anyone spending huge amounts on a dvd player should be doing some serious blind testing first imho! When the likes of the Pioneer DV575 came out a few years back, I think the whole high end DVD player market became irrelevant for all but a tiny percentage of buyers. That thing cost £130 on release & could give anything a run for it's money in DVD, SACD and DVD-Audio playback.

Exactly. It's mind boggling that someone would spend £1000+ on a "upscaling" DVD player and think that they are truly seeing a picture 10 times better than a SD DVD. Absolutely mind boggling.

[Barzo]

Originally Posted by Shockabuku

Imho DVD players were/are a great example of diminishing returns. The output from cheap (sub £100) players is generally of such high quality these days that the benefit of spending five or ten times that amount is pretty marginal, particularly if used in a non-projection system. I reckon this has been the case for some years now, and frankly anyone spending huge amounts on a dvd player should be doing some serious blind testing first imho! When the likes of the Pioneer DV575 came out a few years back, I think the whole high end DVD player market became irrelevant for all but a tiny percentage of buyers. That thing cost £130 on release & could give anything a run for it's money in DVD, SACD and DVD-Audio playback.

Don't agree, but perhaps that's because I'm part of the 'tiny percentage'. Now own a Denon 3930, having owned a terrifying number of players at different price points over the years. Denon 3930 shows an amazing leap in picture and sound quality over the Pio 575 (which I now use as second DVD player for bedroom system). In fact, while not perfect, Denon 3930 shows a quality jump over everything I have currently owned - list includes (some only owned for a few days, as returned for other players): Pioneer 450, Tosh DVD players (older models), Pioneer 575, Marantz 6200, Panasonics S79 and S97, Samsung 940, Oppo 981, Marantz 7600, Marantz 7001. Denon shows every one of them a clean pair of heels.

I do agree, though, that the law of diminishing returns kicks in the higher you go. This is fairly standard. In fact, usually the feature count goes down the higher up the pile you go, and this is not unique to DVD players. Given that I own in excess of 1,200 DVDs (from all regions), having the best quality DVD playback is important to me. Yes, the 3930 cost a good bit, but only a fraction of the software playing on it. Hopefully, it is built to last. We shall see. Of course, quality is not 10x better (whatever that might be), but it is better. The player was demoed against quite a few others (admittedly through a projector, which is what I'd like to upgrade to in the near future), and it pleased me most overall of all the players I viewed. I was looking for a replacement for the Marantz 7001, which I was incidentally v.happy with, except that it kept cutting out over HDMI with R1 discs. That player cost about £500. I was not looking to replace it with something twice as much!

I think the key point here is that DVD has become so much a consumer commodity that excellent performance can now really be had for v.little. This, in a very real sense, explains the race for HD content - companies can still make money on Blu-ray players. I doubt anyone is making any real profits on low end DVD players any more.

[David Mackenzie]

I miss my big Pioneer tank of a player from 2004, but speaking only as regards to video (I'm not as into audio), it was a lot worse than most of the cheap Oppo players I've used since.

The high end DVD thing has usually given me the "emperor's new clothes" impression to be honest, people should be rallying the studios and authoring houses to produce better discs which take advantage of the DVD resolution, not spending four-figure sums on pricey players which will just make the OK-ish product we're used to look still OK.

Know the things that can go wrong with cheaper players, then find one that doesn't have the faults (or has acceptable faults) is my advice...

[BorisVS]

Many interesting contributions, thanks, I'm clearly not alone in my feelings. Picking up and clarifying a few points.

I should have mentioned that I use a Pioneer PDP436XDE display. When I moved to the cheap Toshiba I really expected to see a serious drop in PQ, but as said in my original post, in all honesty in a "blind" test I wouldn't like to guess which was which (I can't now as the Denon is dead!!) That's not to say that perhaps the Denon isn't better, but certainly not 12x better, and under normal viewing conditions, we both are quite happy with the Toshiba's performance.

As one person noted - the quality of disc encoding is a big factor, and I would agree that I would rather watch a sublime disc on a cheap player rather than a lazy encoding on a top end player.

When I took the Denon in, the dealer wasn't surprised - words to the effect that "it tends to happen" - although later they were a little more defensive in the face of my anger and claimed they had never seen a high end player fail so quickly! Ironically, my original player was the 1998 Yamaha (£600!) which was displaced to my mum's house when I upgraded to the Denon. Whilst technically inferior (and not a patch on modern day players costing a fraction) the Yamaha continues to provide sterling service to my mum who is more than happy with the PQ. They don't build them like that any more....

I tend to agree that CD/DVD drives do seem prone to earlier failure - various CD players have gone the same way of the last 20 years, with the best service provided by a Teac P500 transport that lasted a decade.

I really think there is sharp law of diminishing returns at play with DVD players now, but I totally respect peoples freedom to choose their price point. The point of this post was simply to stimulate debate about the pro's and con's of how to spend your hard earned and to perhaps be wary of the marketing men who are constantly trying to get us to buy that new and improved product.

[Jules]

When it comes to Amps and Speakers, a bigger investment yeilds better quality....not always in direct proportion to the cost differential but in many cases worth while.

Digital sources are a different matter altogther, and especially with digital video sources.

I once owned a £2500 Denon DVD-A1. A beautiful machine, built like a tank, but
125 times better than a Supermarket model at £20? yeah right! A bit better certainly, but once you get to modern £200 DVD players, I think it's pretty pointless spending any more.

That's why I'm unlikely to buy a Blu-Ray player to improve on the picture of that from my PS3. I just can't see it yeilding any quantifiable improvement in performance.

[DarrenH]

Well, my expensive Yamaha DVD-S2700 turned up today and it is gorgeous.... haven't switched it on yet!!! but lovely! And a bargain!

[N1ck]

My equipment is getting on a bit now.
Lexicon DC2, Linn 5channel power amp, Pioneer 939 DVD. with MK THX surround set up. This pioneer is by no means shabby but I never felt that I got what I paid for, again like so many others I thought Id fallen of the emporers clothes.

Went in to Sevenoaks and demoed it with the Arcam dv27...WOW the sound hit me and my jaw dropped. Yes the picture was hardly different to warrant the extra cost but the sound was a huge improvement. Doubly good as a 900pound? player probably not. Worth it? Yes.

[Smurfin]

Originally Posted by All torque

Went in to Sevenoaks and demoed it with the Arcam dv27...WOW the sound hit me and my jaw dropped. Yes the picture was hardly different to warrant the extra cost but the sound was a huge improvement. Doubly good as a 900pound? player probably not. Worth it? Yes.

Did you try it in your own system though? Obviously there are a ton of factors which influence sound quality....

[N1ck]

Yeah tried it at the shop an at home.
Even tried many different cables as well.

Originally Posted by evans

Im glad i got the xe1 even for 400 pounds allthough at my screen size 32 inches the denon is not 4 times less in PQ. Probably an overkill on my part just the denon had micro blocking on dark scenes which i hated.

What model Denon DVD player did you have?

[evans]

Originally Posted by Barzo

Don't agree, but perhaps that's because I'm part of the 'tiny percentage'. Now own a Denon 3930, having owned a terrifying number of players at different price points over the years. Denon 3930 shows an amazing leap in picture and sound quality over the Pio 575 (which I now use as second DVD player for bedroom system). In fact, while not perfect, Denon 3930 shows a quality jump over everything I have currently owned - list includes (some only owned for a few days, as returned for other players): Pioneer 450, Tosh DVD players (older models), Pioneer 575, Marantz 6200, Panasonics S79 and S97, Samsung 940, Oppo 981, Marantz 7600, Marantz 7001. Denon shows every one of them a clean pair of heels.

I do agree, though, that the law of diminishing returns kicks in the higher you go. This is fairly standard. In fact, usually the feature count goes down the higher up the pile you go, and this is not unique to DVD players. Given that I own in excess of 1,200 DVDs (from all regions), having the best quality DVD playback is important to me. Yes, the 3930 cost a good bit, but only a fraction of the software playing on it. Hopefully, it is built to last. We shall see. Of course, quality is not 10x better (whatever that might be), but it is better. The player was demoed against quite a few others (admittedly through a projector, which is what I'd like to upgrade to in the near future), and it pleased me most overall of all the players I viewed. I was looking for a replacement for the Marantz 7001, which I was incidentally v.happy with, except that it kept cutting out over HDMI with R1 discs. That player cost about £500. I was not looking to replace it with something twice as much!

I think the key point here is that DVD has become so much a consumer commodity that excellent performance can now really be had for v.little. This, in a very real sense, explains the race for HD content - companies can still make money on Blu-ray players. I doubt anyone is making any real profits on low end DVD players any more.

Boy do you have alot of dvd's! Ive only got around 120 !

I was trying to find on the net durability times about lazer assembly of dvd players and most articles said anything on average between 5 to 10 years. In my case the philips went 3 years, and the repair guy said its not worth fixing. So high end stuff is a bit riskey as if you buy a decent player for 130 pounds and it goes after 3 years your not too worried than if you paid over 1000.

[Barzo]

Originally Posted by evans

Boy do you have alot of dvd's! Ive only got around 120 !

I was trying to find on the net durability times about lazer assembly of dvd players and most articles said anything on average between 5 to 10 years. In my case the philips went 3 years, and the repair guy said its not worth fixing. So high end stuff is a bit riskey as if you buy a decent player for 130 pounds and it goes after 3 years your not too worried than if you paid over 1000.

Hope it lasts longer than that! Pioneer 575 is nearing 4 years. Also, hope a new assembly would be worth it.

[Pat Marcus]

As the owner of what many might call ludicrously High-end DVD and a complete waste of money (Meridian G98 at about £3500) and a Sony RDRHXD970 DVD Recorder at just about one tenth of the price, here's my two penneth.....

For picture quality on a 50" screen, the meridian is very slightly better -by which I mean there is very slightly less picture noise, the panning is slightly smoother and the black detail is slightly clearer. The performance diference might be worth a couple of hundred pounds.......and not the price of a small used car.
Both are digitally connected into a meridian digital processor for sound - the G98 by a propietary multichannel link called smartlink which upsamples the sound on all channels and the Sony, by a good quality standard electrical coaxial. For movie sound there is almost no difference.
In fact, for its cataclysmic price difference, the Meridain only really wins on three counts:
1. Its built to a far higher standard than the Sony and stunning to look at at
2. Its two channel sound quality flattens the Sony. Its a brilliant CD player and the Sony really isnt.
3. The back-up that meridian provide is amazing and software updates get published online to allow you to constantly improve its performance. Even so, its had to go back once.

In the final analysis, although I love it, it wont play quite a few discs (particularly backups) and Id be better-off on both performance and "pocket" with a DVDR like my Sony, that will (plus, I wont feel bad about upgrading from it to Blue Ray, later) and a dedicated CD player like a meridian G08 or Leema Antilla.
........It just looks so nice in the rack................

[Bolander]

Rather confirms my suspicion that firms that produce great audio products don't necessarily have the expertise to create video products to the same exceptional standard. Last year when my old B & O receiver expired after twenty years I was happy to replace it with a Meridian G51, but paired with a G7 CD player, in the expectation that these would not only give great sound, but would continue to do so for many years.
I can confirm from my own experience the excellent Meridian service - when the G51 developed a fault, not only did they replace the main board with an upgraded version that has DAB radio instead of the previous long and median wave, but they did so free of charge, despite the fact that it was an ex demo example.
For DVD playback however I went for an Oppo 981 on the assumption that I will eventually upgrade to a Blu Ray player, so there is no point in spending a lot of money on a product that I'll replace in a few years. Meanwhile I am enjoying high quality results from my DVD collection (though I may yield to temptation to buy the 983, if it turns out to be as good as people say it is).