Denon DVD-2910 Player Review!

[WmAx]

Haha, good luck finding a consumer product with potentiometers with greater precision than 0.5dB not to mention channel to channel tracking of that level of accuracy.

I suppose this is dependant on the particular product(s) in question. But I have examples (non specialized) ALPS 9K series and Panasonic EV-J series potentiometers(popular in professional and mid end consumer equipment) that meet those requirements through out most of their operating ranges. It is not a problem to use such devices as voltage dividers(one on each channel discretely) between a source and ampllifier input to bring the signals within a 0.1dB range for use in product comparisons if the gain control on the amplifier/reciever lacks such resolution.

Also, make sure you don't move your head more than a centimeter, blink, or sneeze when flipping between sources or you will be off far more than 1/10th of a dB

The test to which I referred was performed using a room and a speaker. No mention of clamping subject heads down to keep head movement under a 1 centimeter range was made in the report.

-Chris

 

[MarieonCape]

Upgrade from DVD-2200 to DVD-2910?

My question is the opposite of the 3910/2910 question. Is it worth it to upgrade to the 2910 from a 2200 or do I need to look to higher models (higher price tag) to make a real difference? For example, my 3805 has Denon Link but the 2910 does not. The $1500 3910 does.

I have a DVD-2200, which I admit I bought because of the price point for a universal player. It seemed to be great value compared to the more expensive Denon players at the time . It is in a system with an AVR-3805 (first one out of my store and one of the very first to own on in this forum).

It seems that the 2910 is dimensionally, and layout-wise, very similiar to the 2200, but has a mix of components from the 5900/5910, 3910, 2900, & 2200 -at a lower price than the old 2900. The 2200 and 2900 also used the Silicon Image Sil504 PureProgressive circuit while the 2910 uses the Faroudja DCDCi FLi2310 circuit as did the 5900. Matter of fact the 2200/2900 seems to be the only players, both more and less expensive, that didn't use a Faroudja design.

Thanks for any thoughts...

Noted tid bits:

The spec sheet for the 2910 has exactly the same dimensions and weight as those shown on the 2200 spec sheet - cut & past error?

The weight for the 2910 is shown as 4.7 kg / 10.36 lbs. on the its spec sheet, as 12.1 lbs in the Denon product comparison chart, and it is listed as 5.5 Kg /18 lbs, 12 oz. in the owner's manual. That last .5 Kg difference between the 2200 and 2910 must be really heavy to account for over an 8 lb. difference between the two!

The 2910 is listed at $679 on the Denon comparative spec chart and $739 on the Denon products page. Was there a price increase (value of dollar) or just a mismatch.

 

[surveyor]

I own the 2910 and it weighs 10.36lbs.
I could not speak to the upgrade question, as I've not been fortunate to have owned the 2200?

My question is the opposite of the 3910/2910 question. Is it worth it to upgrade to the 2910 from a 2200 or do I need to look to higher models (higher price tag) to make a real difference? For example, my 3805 has Denon Link but the 2910 does not. The $1500 3910 does.

I have a DVD-2200, which I admit I bought because of the price point for a universal player. It seemed to be great value compared to the more expensive Denon players at the time . It is in a system with an AVR-3805 (first one out of my store and one of the very first to own on in this forum).

It seems that the 2910 is dimensionally, and layout-wise, very similiar to the 2200, but has a mix of components from the 5900/5910, 3910, 2900, & 2200 -at a lower price than the old 2900. The 2200 and 2900 also used the Silicon Image Sil504 PureProgressive circuit while the 2910 uses the Faroudja DCDCi FLi2310 circuit as did the 5900. Matter of fact the 2200/2900 seems to be the only players, both more and less expensive, that didn't use a Faroudja design.

Thanks for any thoughts...

Noted tid bits:

The spec sheet for the 2910 has exactly the same dimensions and weight as those shown on the 2200 spec sheet - cut & past error?

The weight for the 2910 is shown as 4.7 kg / 10.36 lbs. on the its spec sheet, as 12.1 lbs in the Denon product comparison chart, and it is listed as 5.5 Kg /18 lbs, 12 oz. in the owner's manual. That last .5 Kg difference between the 2200 and 2910 must be really heavy to account for over an 8 lb. difference between the two!

The 2910 is listed at $679 on the Denon comparative spec chart and $739 on the Denon products page. Was there a price increase (value of dollar) or just a mismatch.

 

[selfar]

I have the 3805 and got the 3910 2 weeks ago. For audio, the 3910 sounds great for all available modes and formats, specially, the SACD. I used to have Sony NS905 DVD and SACD player. When i heard the 3910, i said to myself that Sony invented the SACD and Denon made us really enjoyed it. For the DVD audio, this was my first time to try it. It sounds great. Concerning the Dlink, i tried it with every format, it sounded excellant.

Conerning the Video and compared to what i used to have it, it really has an excellant performance. However, in case you go for the 3910, you should know exactly what type of display you have in order to take full advantage of the 3910 capabilities. My understanding of the 3910 is that the 480p/576p,720p,1080i modes are only available using HDMI/DVI interface. The 480i/p and 576i/p are the only options available via component, unfortunately.

 

[Audioholics]

Thanks guys for the weight correction - I'll fix this on Monday. That kind of stuff we usually take from the spec sheet or manual and it didnt click that it was too high until people started mentioning it. We might need to make sure we start personally weighing stuff lest we get caught up in a "weight controversy"!

 

[gene]

For all of you folks trying to level match within 0.1dB, you may first wish to peruse our article on: The Sensitivity of the Human Ear to Amplitude Variation.

 

[WmAx]

For all of you folks trying to level match within 0.1dB, you may first wish to peruse our article on: The Sensitivity of the Human Ear to Amplitude Variation.

Even according to the references in that article, a difference as small as 0.25dB is detectable under certain conditions. For an important controlled perceptual test, I maintane it would be *sloppy* to allow more than a 0.1dB variation. You run the real risk of invalidating such test results if you use a 0.5dB(a figure you seem to imply in this thread is acceptable) tolerance of level matching. If you wish, I will send you a copy of the 2003 AES paper that studies music(against same selection), music(different selections) and white noise to evaluate minimum dB change detection thresholds a several subjects, in a room, with a speaker as the sound source.

-Chris

 

[krabapple]

Haha, good luck finding a consumer product with potentiometers with greater precision than 0.5dB not to mention channel to channel tracking of that level of accuracy. Also, make sure you don't move your head more than a centimeter, blink, or sneeze when flipping between sources or you will be off far more than 1/10th of a dB

Indeed. All the more reason to take casual ('sloppy' might be construed as impolite) comparisons with a big hunk of salt. And of course the fact that the comparison was done 'sighted' pretty much makes the level-matching issue secondary. If the comparisons aren't going to be made more rigorous, maybe the disclaimer should be made stronger? Like "NB: the sonic differences reported in this review could be completely imaginary'?

 

[Audioholics]

That sounds reasonable and practical... if you want us to do about 2-3 reviews per year. As much as we'd like to entertain thoughts of perfectly sterile environments for each review and double blind tests for each listening session, the reality is that it's simply not practical - or realistic.

We've always been about real-world and that's where we intend to stay. People don't listen using double blind tests and they certainly don't listen in quasi-anechoic chambers. In the real world there is no such thing as greater than 0.5dB level matching on most equipment - so clamoring for it doesn't matter.

We love the feedback, but hopefully you can realize that there is a deliberate and practical side to what we do as well as how we do it.

 

[krabapple]

That sounds reasonable and practical... if you want us to do about 2-3 reviews per year. As much as we'd like to entertain thoughts of perfectly sterile environments for each review and double blind tests for each listening session, the reality is that it's simply not practical - or realistic.

We've always been about real-world and that's where we intend to stay. People don't listen using double blind tests and they certainly don't listen in quasi-anechoic chambers. In the real world there is no such thing as greater than 0.5dB level matching on most equipment - so clamoring for it doesn't matter.

We love the feedback, but hopefully you can realize that there is a deliberate and practical side to what we do as well as how we do it.

Speaking of real...the goal is to describe *real* differences, isn't it? In the real world sighted comparison is a *bad* way to substantiate *real* differences -- despite being really common. Good methods only don't 'matter' if accurate results don't matter. And frankly, level matching is secondary without this basic consideration being taken care of first.

It's funny how 'real world' comes to mean 'whatever is practical or convenient '...even if it gives possibly imaginary results. I note that people don't tend to bench-test components either, yet few would argue against bench tests in reviews, on that basis.

If it's too impractical or 'unrealistic' to use methods that are actually *good* for substatiating differences, seems to me that the 'revising the disclaimer' option is the most honest way to go.

[NB: The preceding rant is not aimed only at Audioholics; it describes a failure endemic to audio journalism. ]

 

[Audioholics]

Again, I think practicality is the impeding value here. It would take a team of at least three people for each review. Good ideas are good ideas, but implementation means taking into account the big picture and factiring in all of the other issues.

The other thing is that often, people tend to confuse their goals with ours. This results in a 'good' vs. 'bad' mentality - whereas I think it's simply a difference of opinion or method.

 

[Wyngdh]

Denon - Beware the sting in the tail!

<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2><A href="http://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/DenonDVD-2910Review1.php"><IMG style="WIDTH: 125px; HEIGHT: 94px" alt=[DenonDVD2910] hspace=10 src="http://www.audioholics.com/news/thumbs/DenonDVD2910_th.jpg" align=left border=0></A>Denon surprised many of us hard-core videophiles at this year's CES with their top of the line DVD-5910 DVD player. Its little cousin, the DVD-2910,&nbsp;is the mid-priced product in their Universal DVD line up for 2005 and, at an MSRP of $739 presents a very compelling price point for a well-performing universal DVD-A/V/SACD player. Denon has proven they can consistently design and build high-quality DVD players that meet the performance level demanded by the home theater enthusiast. Will the Denon DVD-2910 prove to be another great player? Read on to find out...</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size=2>[Read the Review]</FONT></P>

I've had this player for 9 weeks and it's back at the distributors. First I noticed the playing of randomly programmed CD tracks is faulty. Then the DVD player reset movies after 20 minutes! The latter problem was fixed at the first round of repairs. I've sent it back because the programming function is still faulty.

 

[Atos]

Much of it depends on the recording, not the player. Most of the titles coming out now are compatible with a 5.1 configuration. Some of the earlier DVD-A discs such as Toy Matinee werent and if you didn't have bass management on the player or in the receiver, the subs were sent full range signal and you could hear instruments and singing coming out. Really weird. In that case, I default to the DTS track which has proper bass management and channel allocation for a 5.1 configuration.

I recently got a Yamaha RX-V2500 and I am thinking in matching it with Denon 2910. In regards to multi-channel sources, can we output the “six channels” via the optical digital output of the 2910? Is it possible or copyright protection prevents this? I’d hate to buy six interconnect cables when I can use only one optical cable.
I do not completely understand the need for a “multi-source” setting in the Yamaha and the analog outputs of the Denon when both have digital capabilities. What are the pros and cons of using one versus the other?

 

[shokhead]

Dig for DVD's and cd's and 6 analogs for multi-channel audio.

 

[krportmann]

I'm curious what firmware the test unit had. Where can I get current firmware for my 2910 running v4? Mine was bought at a non-authorized dealer so not available on Denon's site.

did you get an answer to this problem?\
i need one,please
thanks

 

[ronrags]

Upgrade to 2910

I too am interested in upgrading to the 2910 for the sole purpose to upconvert to 720p or 1080i on my sony 55wf655 projection lcd tv.

Will the 2910 produce better picture quality with DVI than the 2200 with component? I ordered the OPPO DVD player on-line for the same comparison and found the Denon produced a better picture.

Can anyone help?

My question is the opposite of the 3910/2910 question. Is it worth it to upgrade to the 2910 from a 2200 or do I need to look to higher models (higher price tag) to make a real difference? For example, my 3805 has Denon Link but the 2910 does not. The $1500 3910 does.

I have a DVD-2200, which I admit I bought because of the price point for a universal player. It seemed to be great value compared to the more expensive Denon players at the time . It is in a system with an AVR-3805 (first one out of my store and one of the very first to own on in this forum).

It seems that the 2910 is dimensionally, and layout-wise, very similiar to the 2200, but has a mix of components from the 5900/5910, 3910, 2900, & 2200 -at a lower price than the old 2900. The 2200 and 2900 also used the Silicon Image Sil504 PureProgressive circuit while the 2910 uses the Faroudja DCDCi FLi2310 circuit as did the 5900. Matter of fact the 2200/2900 seems to be the only players, both more and less expensive, that didn't use a Faroudja design.

Thanks for any thoughts...

Noted tid bits:

The spec sheet for the 2910 has exactly the same dimensions and weight as those shown on the 2200 spec sheet - cut & past error?

The weight for the 2910 is shown as 4.7 kg / 10.36 lbs. on the its spec sheet, as 12.1 lbs in the Denon product comparison chart, and it is listed as 5.5 Kg /18 lbs, 12 oz. in the owner's manual. That last .5 Kg difference between the 2200 and 2910 must be really heavy to account for over an 8 lb. difference between the two!

The 2910 is listed at $679 on the Denon comparative spec chart and $739 on the Denon products page. Was there a price increase (value of dollar) or just a mismatch.

 

[ssabripo]

Any chance to get an answer to my question?

Thanks

hi...long time viewer, first time poster

anyways, long story short, I owned the 2910 and upgraded to the 3910....Very Big improvement to say the least!!

I would say you gain about a 20% improvement in video, and a 30-40% improvement in audio....is this worth double the price? I dont know, only you can answer that, but to me, it was a resounding yes!

better details in the picture, less noise, much less MB, and overall, just better filtering in the image....

I posted a review a while back on avsforum....do a search under my name..this is the thread I posted when I was not quite satisfied with the 2910:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=477406&highlight=ssabripo

here is what I found when I did a shootout between the 3910 and 59avi when I was shopping for an upgrade:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=4988052#post4988052

finally, here are my thoughts once I upgraded to the 3910 (as compared to the 2910):
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=489947&highlight=ssabripo

 

[Grunt]

Please help this Rookie

I read the posts on the 2910 v. 3910 and am leaning toward buying the 3910 to hook-up to my 45" Sharp Aquos. Do you think that's a good fit?

What else do you recommend?

Do I need a receiver? Which one do you recommend to go along with the 3910?

What about speakers? I'm in a condo and don't have a lot of room. I thought Bose was good until I read some of the other posts. The size of their jewel speakers is perfect. Are there some good ones that size out there? If not, what are the smallest and best speakers you would recommend?

Will I need an amp if I get certain speakers?

Sorry for all the basic questions, but I really am a rookie on all this stuff.

Bottom line, I have this great big tv that I'd like to maximize with great DVDs and great sound. I'd like to keep the total price around $3k to $3,500.

 

[BlueScorpion]

Denon Dv-2910 & Hitachi 42pd7800ta

Hi All,

Just wondering if anyone can offer some advise as to how I can accurately set up my DENON DV-2910 which is linked to a HITACHI 42PD7800TA?

Particularly colour managment...

(I am using HDMI connection)

Is there any software available for this? Or any websites that can offer more info. about this sort of thing?


...Fantastic review of the DV-2910 by the way..thanks Clint DeBoer

Cheers!

 

[brian32672]

You could try this...
http://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/DatacolorSpyderTVreview.php

EDIT:: Also, have you used Avia or DVE?