Denon DVD-5910CI DVD Player Review

[ned]

Clint, DVD-5910CI is great product indeed but old tech considering the availability of HD. People who have the need for such would be looking for the best PQ as well. An external video processor will be more reasonable.

 

[astrodon]

my two cents

If I can add my two cents since I am a current owner of the DVD-5910, I am truly amazed both with the picture quality and audio quality of this machine. If the CI model is as good as its predecessor, then it's a machine to be considered if one can afford the cost. Since I don't plan to buy an HD-DVD or BluRay player until the "war" is over, I am quite content with what I have. (By the way, I just posted pictures on the "Members System Galary" thread.
http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27138)
I was fortunate since I bought my 5910 on sale at Tweeter for $2400 just before the new CI model came out. Finally, I would like to point out that Stereophile just listed the DVD-5910 as one of the best multichannel digital players in their "Best of" (or whatever they call it) edition of the magazine last month.

 

[Jacksmyname]

Hi all. I've been following this thread with interest.
I have the 2930CI. It's terrific with SD DVD, DVD A, and SACD.
In fact, it's so good with SD DVD it's hard for me to imagine better picture quality than I get now with SD DVD.
I have the Toshiba A2 on order. I've also "stockpiled" about 30 HD DVD titles in anticipation of the new player.
So, any thoughts on just how much improvement I'd see from the 5910CI over the 2930CI? Or, for that matter, the 3930CI over the 2930CI?
BTW, I'm using a Yamaha RX-V2700 receiver.
Also, does anyone know exactly what version of HDMI these players are using, i.e. 1.1 or 1.2a?
Thanks

Jack

 

[perato]

According to Denon's website, the 5910CI, 3930CI, and 2930CI are HDMI v1.1 not v1.2a, which is a shame. They should have at least used HDMI 1.2a and allowed multichannel SACD to be passed through the HDMI cable as DSD. Audioholics should lobby Denon for a firmware update to fix this travesty. A US$3800 player does not have HDMI v1.2a when much cheaper receivers from Yamaha do. But note that although the Yamaha website says HDMI 1.2a, it does not explicitly state SACD over HDMI. I suspect even the new Yamaha receivers won't receive SACD as DSD through HDMI.

 

[Sleestack]

Folks, the DVD-5910CI is also a great product for custom installers (which honestly is what I see as its target market, not budget-conscious consumers)... It gives them a nice markup product but actually has the guts to perform as a flagship player (instead of just looking like one as many esoteric brands do). Some people simply want the best and will pay whatever to get it. For SD DVD, DVD-Audio and SACD - this is probably it.

Anyone who balks at the price of a DVD-5910 isn't the target consumer for it.

Totally agree on the 5910ci. Having had other much more expensive universal players, I ended up staying with the 5910ci for both DVDs and SACD/DVD-A. It delivers transparency on the audio end and makes the video circuits of most high end players look like a joke. As far as audiophile/videophile products go, it is an absoulte bargain.

 

[rosh]

A quote from the 5910 review:
"On the flip side, you could spend nearly three times the asking price of the DVD-5910CI and get a poorly designed esoteric player in a fancy chassis from a so called “high-end” company with significantly lower audio and video performance and features"

Perhaps i must sasert that I do not intend to challenge the honesty of this review or any other in particular. But
over the last few months that I have spent reading scores of reviews of speakers and dvd players and other a/v equipement here and other sites ...I think I am getting an overdose of these kind of phrases/comments. Almost every third or fourth review has reference to unmentioned "much higher priced" products that wont perform anywhere to close to the product under review. But no review i can find that says... "much lower priced products than this will perform better". It would be useful for readers if the names of those over priced products were also mentioned alongside these statements.

But I am getting the feel that perhaps a bluntly honest and derogatory review risks the manufacturer not sending review samples in the future to the reviewing site.. which in turn means less review to publish and that means less visitors to the site ?

 

[MACCA350]

A quote from the 5910 review:
"On the flip side, you could spend nearly three times the asking price of the DVD-5910CI and get a poorly designed esoteric player in a fancy chassis from a so called “high-end” company with significantly lower audio and video performance and features"

Perhaps i must sasert that I do not intend to challenge the honesty of this review or any other in particular. But
over the last few months that I have spent reading scores of reviews of speakers and dvd players and other a/v equipement here and other sites ...I think I am getting an overdose of these kind of phrases/comments. Almost every third or fourth review has reference to unmentioned "much higher priced" products that wont perform anywhere to close to the product under review. But no review i can find that says... "much lower priced products than this will perform better". It would be useful for readers if the names of those over priced products were also mentioned alongside these statements.

But I am getting the feel that perhaps a bluntly honest and derogatory review risks the manufacturer not sending review samples in the future to the reviewing site.. which in turn means less review to publish and that means less visitors to the site ?

The name is right there, Esoteric

cheers

 

[gene]

Perhaps i must sasert that I do not intend to challenge the honesty of this review or any other in particular. But
over the last few months that I have spent reading scores of reviews of speakers and dvd players and other a/v equipement here and other sites ...I think I am getting an overdose of these kind of phrases/comments. Almost every third or fourth review has reference to unmentioned "much higher priced" products that wont perform anywhere to close to the product under review. But no review i can find that says... "much lower priced products than this will perform better". It would be useful for readers if the names of those over priced products were also mentioned alongside these statements.

But I am getting the feel that perhaps a bluntly honest and derogatory review risks the manufacturer not sending review samples in the future to the reviewing site.. which in turn means less review to publish and that means less visitors to the site ?

I thought I was pretty clear about that in this review. By esoteric, I mean DVD players from Linn, Krell, Arcam, etc.

In many of our reviews such as the $4k Thule amp I recently reviewed in the past, it goes without saying there are better value products in their class. In that particular review I even mentioned how the power output in multi channel mode wasn't as impressive as a sub $1k receiver. Spend a little time reading the recommendations and conclusions section and you will see that for yourself.

 

[Sleestack]

The name is right there, Esoteric

cheers

While their products are extremely overpriced, I would not say they offer compromised audio performance. Their audio sources provide more flexibility and connectivity for dedicated audio users. Their internal designs are immaculate. I don't think anyone would fault their audio performance, however justification for their prices are a different story. I would not buy Esoteric for their video offerings and definitely prefer the 5910ci for video.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

I'd really like Audioholics to put the XBox360 and PS3 through the DVD testing wringer, since everyone on the gaming forums is replacing their DVD-specific palyers.

Consider it a public service. More people will buy $500 videogames than $3800 stand-alones.

 

[Tom Andry]

I'd really like Audioholics to put the XBox360 and PS3 through the DVD testing wringer, since everyone on the gaming forums is replacing their DVD-specific palyers.

Consider it a public service. More people will buy $500 videogames than $3800 stand-alones.

Dibs on that review!

 

[RLA]

Dibs on that review

Dude, if you cut in my line the shotgun is coming out both barrales blazing.
besides I need to get it dialed in for possum season.

 

[Tom Andry]

Dude, if you cut in my line the shotgun is coming out both barrales blazing.
besides I need to get it dialed in for possum season.

Possum season?! Dang, boy! When you gonna have me over fer supper? Them's good eat'n!

 

[Riot Nrrrd™]

I can't believe in 4 pages of posts I haven't seen this mentioned.

Denon calling this a "Universal" player makes me laugh. I bet the Japanese laugh when they keep seeing American baseball culminating in the "World" Series. Americans consider the "World" to be pretty small, and Denon's "Universe" seems to be similarly shrunken.

What decade is Denon living in? Last I checked, this is 2006 - a land where multiple video formats reign, and are readily available as content on discs (burned or otherwise) - I'm talking about DivX® 3/4/5/6 and DivX® HD and XviD and WMV9 and WMV HD here, sports fans.

EDIT: I've just discovered that the new Denon series (2930CI/3930CI/5910CI) does, indeed, apparently support DivX® 6 playback. That's a start, but that's only one codec/revision out of the list supplied above.

I don't think I'm going out on a limb in assuming that the numbers of people who have content in these formats far outstrips those who own SACD or DVD-A discs. Yet we have manufacturers like Denon who soldier on, oblivious to this new reality.

Uh oh, I see the *philes among you advancing towards me with your pitchforks and torches ablaze. Back, back I say! If your objection is that these are "plebian" formats, guess again - I have a (so far) 6 part series from BBC HD called "Planet Earth", they are all ~ 2+ GB AVI files that are native 720p with AC3 audio, encoded as DivX® HD. When played back at 720p over DVI to my Sony KV-34XBR910 - which I have to use a frankly cruddy JVC SRDVD-100U to play back with - it looks far better than any SD DVD I own (even played back upconverted to 1080i from my Oppo).

The point I'm trying to make it simple; companies like Denon et al. continue to pour money into high-end chipsets for DVD/Redbook-optimized video scalers/deinterlacers/video decoders/audio decoders while ignoring this whole new market that has now existed for other video content that just doesn't happen to be MPEG-2 encoded. Until they do, the notion of calling these things "Universal" players just strikes me as laughable.

(I do realize that a large part of this problem appears to be that only people like Sigma have chipsets that handle decoding these codecs, ergo they aren't getting included in high-end players that have completely different video chipsets; but I don't understand why that is - why can't Silicon Optix, DVDO et al. extend their range of chips to be able to handle these other formats/codecs as well?)

 

[gene]

Denon calling this a "Universal" player makes me laugh. I bet the Japanese laugh when they keep seeing American baseball culminating in the "World" Series. Americans consider the "World" to be pretty small, and Denon's "Universe" seems to be similarly shrunken.

The term universal came about to describe a DVD player that would handle DVD-A and SACD formats. WE are a # of years (if ever) from seeing a "Universal" player that will handle all existing formats including Blu-ray and HD DVD. To blame the manufacturers for this displays ignorance of the accuser(s) as there is more at play (aside from technical complications) here than simply magically making a super player to handle all formats. Licensing is a big obstacle as a starter, finalizing the new formats is another.

I find the amount of negativity among a handful of readers here towards a review of a SD high end DVD player disturbing. I am surprised nobody criticizes the A/V press while they continue to review high end linear amplifiers since we are in an age of the digital revolution.

 

[RLA]

Possum season?! Dang, boy! When you gonna have me over fer supper? Them's good eat'n!
__________________

Come on over boy we got plenty of viddles,heck we can even wash it down with a couple of gulps of Wild Turkey.

 

[edmcanuck]

What decade is Denon living in? Last I checked, this is 2006 - a land where multiple video formats reign, and are readily available as content on discs (burned or otherwise) - I'm talking about DivX® 3/4/5/6 and DivX® HD and XviD and WMV9 and WMV HD here, sports fans.

EDIT: I've just discovered that the new Denon series (2930CI/3930CI/5910CI) does, indeed, apparently support DivX® 6 playback. That's a start, but that's only one codec/revision out of the list supplied above.

And if you'd studied further, you'd know that the DivX6 codec in the player can play all versions of DivX, XviD, MPG, and MPEG4. Windows Media is meaningless proprietary crap that nobody cares about. So that's pretty much every significant computer video format being used today... sounds pretty universal to me. Maybe you should study before you spew... information is readily available nowadays you know, it is 2006.

 

[Tawnos]

I agree these HD fanboys are starting to get on everyone's nerves. They support a poor first generation player that is based on software and does a poor job at everything. They think that resolution is everything and there is nothing more to displaying a proper image.

 

[Sleestack]

I agree these HD fanboys are starting to get on everyone's nerves. They support a poor first generation player that is based on software and does a poor job at everything. They think that resolution is everything and there is nothing more to displaying a proper image.

I have the 5910ci and Pansonic Blu-ray Player. The Blu-Ray player has so many flaws, I won't even begin. It does, however offer an amazing picture that remains perfectly clear at 5' on my 65" 1080p panel. That being said, at my normal viewing distance of 10', the 5910ci offers a far superior picture compared to the Blu-Ray player when using standard DVD content scaled to 1080p. IMO, the 5910ci is simply the best source for SD DVDs and continues to be a piece that audio/video purists will want in their system for years to come.

 

[MAX661]

While I do think the 5910 is a great player, I also think it is a poor value. The arguement about HD DVD and Bluray not having enough content i moot now in my eye's.

I have great respect for Gene's reviews {he writes the best ones I've read} but having to watch lethal weapon 1 or water world simply isn't the case. In the past few months I have watched MI:3, King Kong, Xmen 3, You, Me and Dupree, Nacho Libre, Kiss Of The Dragon, Unleashed, Talladega Nights, Ice Age 2, Batman Begins, V for Vendetta, The Last Samurai, Troy, FF: Tokyo Drift, and many many others...

While many of these aren't the greatest movies, my point is now All new releases are coming out on either Bluray or HD DVD. And let's face it spending that kind of money just to rewatch an few old favorite flicks you have seen a million times.

Also you do not need 6 analog cables to enjoy the new sound formats, you simply need an HDMI capable receiver and an HDMI cable.

Also the counter arguement is, "It's an excellent SACD player". When infact there are even less SACD's in your average store than there are just HD DVD's and that media has been around long enough to know if it will hit mainstream. Also SACD only has releases in certain kinds of music so if your genre isn't included well then...

There are many cheaper alternatives than the 5910CI and I think the price of it should be cut in half, sort of what Pioneer did with the DV-79AVi. Then it may have some value added. This opinion in no way means the 5910CI isn't a great piece of equipment. But it is priced as if it was cutting edge or something new when really it is simply an over priced dated technology.