List of 7.1 Analog-out BD Players?

[jostenmeat]

after reading your posts, Zumbo, you've pretty much pushed me to look at pre/pros that can do the decoding themselves. The only one I was looking at that couldn't was a Mcintosh, and the more I look at it, the less I want to go that route. I think I may look at either going with an AIO receiver, or using a pre/pro with decoding and a separate amp.

IMO, a more immediate and profound impact that can be had with an inexpensive receiver acting as pre is room correction in the time domain.

Something I doubt Mac would have, no matter the cost. Of course I don't know any better. Please feel free to surprise me.

And by going with the cheaper BDP that doesn't have m-ch outs, means that you can basically think of the pre/pro cost as being maybe $100 less.

 

[zumbo]

I have studied current receivers and pre-pros, and once I climb the ladder to features needed, I have just about as many BS features I don't need.

BR is all new to me, but I have decided on the new Rotel pre-pro.

Key features for me include:
None of the networking/computer, blue-tooth,i-pod,XM,Sirius BS that I just don't need.

Separate x-over settings for all speakers.

Separate x-over setting for sub.

All the latest and greatest audio/video processing and DAC's.

Price is comparable to current receivers/pre-pros with my specific needs.

http://www.rotel.com/NA/Products/ProductDetails.htm?Id=474&Tab=1&Pic=1

 

[ErinH]

I have studied current receivers and pre-pros, and once I climb the ladder to features needed, I have just about as many BS features I don't need.

BR is all new to me, but I have decided on the new Rotel pre-pro.

Key features for me include:
None of the networking/computer, blue-tooth,i-pod,XM,Sirius BS that I just don't need.

Separate x-over settings for all speakers.

Separate x-over setting for sub.

All the latest and greatest audio/video processing and DAC's.

Price is comparable to current receivers/pre-pros with my specific needs.

http://www.rotel.com/NA/Products/ProductDetails.htm?Id=474&Tab=1&Pic=1

i'm in the same boat. I could care less for ipod, networking, etc. I just want excellent EQ (auto, or manual, but would prefer both), and the video processing.

Separately adjustable x-overs is a very big plus.
Thanks for the link.

Any others that fit this bill, that you've looked into? I'm really looking for simplicity, but also some good A/V options.

 

[zumbo]

i'm in the same boat. I could care less for ipod, networking, etc. I just want excellent EQ (auto, or manual, but would prefer both), and the video processing.

Separately adjustable x-overs is a very big plus.
Thanks for the link.

Any others that fit this bill, that you've looked into? I'm really looking for simplicity, but also some good A/V options.

I like the Marantz 8002 receiver. But, I have an external amp already. For just a little more, I can have the Rotel pre-pro. The Marantz does have Audyssey, and the Rotel doesn't.

The Marantz 8002 receiver doesn't up-convert to 1080p. This is another feature I don't need. It's all about what you need.
http://us.marantz.com/Products/2204.asp

There is also the Marantz 8003 pre-amp. It's more than the Rotel, and I don't need the extra features.
http://us.marantz.com/Products/2317.asp

Marantz 5002 receiver accepts LPCM via HDMI, and could save me big bucks. But, I don't know.
http://www.6ave.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=MARSR5002

 

[Nomo]

I missed this thread but this chart is, to me, pretty telling, although a bit over simplified, maybe.

http://www.blu-ray.com/players/compare.php

 

[zumbo]

I missed this thread but this chart is, to me, pretty telling, although a bit over simplified, maybe.

http://www.blu-ray.com/players/compare.php

What I am trying to do, is find the best way to get the most out of my Marantz BD8002 for the least amount of money.

It seems that others are trying to get the most out of decoding players as well.

What is the point of having these decoding players if there is no benefit?

I have already concluded that the 5.1/7.1 analog connection is a bunch of BS. For me, that is an undisputed fact.

 

[jostenmeat]

A couple of little things I read. I'll just jot such things down here when I see them. Kinda like a post-pad.

Pioneer players have been reported by at least one person to have a very high universal xover point, with no settings for delay, and has "edginess" to 24p as a result of Pio tweaking.

Panny BD-55 cannot output 480i over HDMI. An issue if you want to play DVDs and use outboard video processing.

^Just things I read, and for you guys to confirm. I don't care myself about things, as with analog outs, because I don't watch DVD anyways, and I prefer less VP for now (outside of the desire to correct color).

 

[bandphan]

IMO, a more immediate and profound impact that can be had with an inexpensive receiver acting as pre is room correction in the time domain.

Something I doubt Mac would have, no matter the cost.

This is very true, and we should start to see some affordable correction gear come to market within a couple of years. Even using some of the pro units seems to be an inexpensive solution to bass managment.

 

[jostenmeat]

This is very true, and we should start to see some affordable correction gear come to market within a couple of years.

bandphan, how do you know of this? As in stand-alones?

I was recently and briefly researching how to implement Audyssey into my 2-channel. It appears for now that getting an affordable HT receiver acting as pre/pro, to feed my Cambridge integrated (or to be replaced by 2-ch amp) was the only WTG. The alternative, for me, seemed to be the very expensive SEQ, which is too much money, and perhaps overkill for one L.P. in a compromised living room.

Thanks though, you've given me hope.

 

[bandphan]

bandphan, how do you know of this? As in stand-alones?


Thanks though, you've given me hope.

Stand alones I mentioned the audesessy unit back in another thread and cost was the prohibiting factor, since then at least 1 major player in the subwoofer market (although they do have some pretty high end speakers also) has a proto floating around with real time correction(and processing/dsp). The unit we heard was for an active 5.2 setup, and while lacking finality it showed promise as a complete solution with a target msrp around 1k.. hopefully with 2years, so dont tighten the wallet yet

 

[billy p]

I now understand the lack of control you have via analog is considered less than favorable in recent posts. But I finally watched my first BR movie on my s550 and I was very impressed, even the SD upconversion was better than I had hoped(having owned the oppo dv971) I'd call it comparable. However the PQ and SQ of I, Robot in DTS HDMA was un-freaking-believable. Although I'm not sure how you can improve on the SQ of a lossless format even via analog, I felt the setting in the player when tweeking things where in vain IMO. Heh.. I now see why having a HDMI receiver has its benefits and may have moved up on my priority list. LOL

 

[croseiv]

I now understand the lack of control you have via analog is considered less than favorable in recent posts. But I finally watched my first BR movie on my s550 and I was very impressed, even the SD upconversion was better than I had hoped(having owned the oppo dv971) I'd call it comparable. However the PQ and SQ of I, Robot in DTS HDMA was un-freaking-believable. Although I'm not sure how you can improve on the SQ of a lossless format even via analog, I felt the setting in the player when tweeking things where in vain IMO. Heh.. I now see why having a HDMI receiver has its benefits and may have moved up on my priority list. LOL

I agree with you. The analog out scenario is only to hold me over until I can get a HD receiver sometime next year. The S550 is a good player. Kung Fu Panda sounded fantastic (BD-True HD). Your observations about PQ and SD up conversion confirm mine.

 

[Alex2507]

New Low Price

I went grocery shopping again. I read an article in Sound&Vision about this player and looked it up.
It's a lot less than the $699 listed in post #2 or #3.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMP-BD55K-1080p-Blu-Ray-Player/dp/B001GAOYCI/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1226761767&sr=8-2

 

[billy p]

I went grocery shopping again. I read an article in Sound&Vision about this player and looked it up.
It's a lot less than the $699 listed in post #2 or #3.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-DMP-BD55K-1080p-Blu-Ray-Player/dp/B001GAOYCI/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1226761767&sr=8-2

I''m picking up my Panny(ordered it before I bought the Sony) BD55 today. FWIW after installing my s550 I can't see how the 55 would better it. I'll hook it up today and decide which one to return but for the record the Sony cost 30.00 dollars less and the $30.00 isn't burning a hole in my pocket.
Regards, Bill

 

[allargon]

I''m picking up my Panny(ordered it before I bought the Sony) BD55 today. FWIW after installing my s550 I can't see how the 55 would better it. I'll hook it up today and decide which one to return but for the record the Sony cost 30.00 dollars less and the $30.00 isn't burning a hole in my pocket.
Regards, Bill

I don't know about the 550, but I know the 350 has a disturbingly bad omission where it won't recode DD+ and DolbyTrueHD to legacy DD or DTS over spdif for people with legacy receivers.

 

[croseiv]

I''m picking up my Panny(ordered it before I bought the Sony) BD55 today. FWIW after installing my s550 I can't see how the 55 would better it. I'll hook it up today and decide which one to return but for the record the Sony cost 30.00 dollars less and the $30.00 isn't burning a hole in my pocket.
Regards, Bill

Have you had a chance to try out the Panny?

 

[EddieG]

My Marantz BD8002 has both,

Just curious...what can the Marantz do that a player (like the bd55) can't do for so much less $$?

 

[allargon]

Just curious...what can the Marantz do that a player (like the bd55) can't do for so much less $$?

Besides weighing more to imply better build quality and saying Marantz ('ooooooh') rather than Panasonic , it has a Realta processor for better SD DVD upscaling (and possibly better Blu playback as well). It's DAC's may be better, too, for people that want to use the analog audio outputs.

 

[zumbo]

Just switched from a Yamaha RX-V1400 to a Z7.

There was a huge difference in the audio quality when switching from m/c input(5.1 analog) to digital coax on the 1400.(Marantz BR player source)

There is no audible difference when switching from m/c input(5.1 analog) to HDMI on the Z7. (Marantz BR player source)

I would say that when utilizing a BR players 5.1/7.1 analog outputs, the audio quality solely depends on the player.

I can't say the Marantz is better than the Panny, but I can say it's DAC's are better than the 1400's, and it's audio quality is more inline with my new Z7.

 

[Thunder18]

I don't know about the 550, but I know the 350 has a disturbingly bad omission where it won't recode DD+ and DolbyTrueHD to legacy DD or DTS over spdif for people with legacy receivers.

That killed the 550 for me and is the reason I ended up replacing my Panny BD10 with the BD55. Having to go into the menu everytime you watch an SD dvd and set it to ouput legacy dolby digital/dts over spdif rather than the analog multi-channels outputs was ridiculous. The Panasonics allow you to send legacy DD/DTS bitstream/PCM via spdif while sending out lossless codes via analog multi-channel at the same time. I can confirm it by merely switching between multi-channel analog and digital inputs and immediately getting a DD/DTS message on my receiver. My old Panny did this and I couldn't go back. Too much of an inconvenience. Oh, and the Sony's won't frame by frame advance from a paused stated. Not a big deal, but some seem to be very up in arms about it.