Home Theaters

[Zint]

The new BDP-103 is more expensive at $719.00

I got mine for $499.00 Canadian.

Shipping was $15

[classicrawker]

The new BDP-103 is more expensive at $719.00

I got mine for $499.00 Canadian.

Shipping was $15

The $719,00 is for a region free modded unit.........the do it yourself mod board is $149.00 by itself so $70.00 for installation is not unreasonable as this is the bench charge to just open up a unit for repair these days.....

[Black Sabbath]

At this point I think I have like maybe 5 alternate Region movies, so for me it isn't practical to spend a couple hundred on a better player. I absolutely know what you're saying, but even then, a little shitty player is fine for the amount of alternate Region movies that I have.

[classicrawker]

At this point I think I have like maybe 5 alternate Region movies, so for me it isn't practical to spend a couple hundred on a better player. I absolutely know what you're saying, but even then, a little shitty player is fine for the amount of alternate Region movies that I have.

I hear you mate...I am not crticizing your choice since if it makes sense to you financially and you don't see yourself buying too many foreign region B/C blurays then that is all that matters......

[Zint]

The new BDP-103 is more expensive at $719.00

I got mine for $499.00 Canadian.

Shipping was $15

The $719,00 is for a region free modded unit.........the do it yourself mod board is $149.00 by itself so $70.00 for installation is not unreasonable as this is the bench charge to just open up a unit for repair these days.....

Ahh my bad.

Good to know it's available for the 103.

I definitely want to do it.

Thanks for the info links, I'll check them out.

I might take a crack at setting up this afternoon.

[Zint]

At this point I think I have like maybe 5 alternate Region movies, so for me it isn't practical to spend a couple hundred on a better player. I absolutely know what you're saying, but even then, a little shitty player is fine for the amount of alternate Region movies that I have.

Sabbath, just reading the manual that comes with this Oppo I'm quite impressed with everything this player has...and does.

The video processor alone is a cut above the average in-store player.

You can shut down a video feed for improved audio signal (concert blu's etc.)

It plays SACD's.

It streams Netflix, youtube and a few others.

It will take a regular dvd (or blu) and upconvert it to a 3D image (and you can control the depth of the 3D).

It has indpenedent analog outputs for each channel up to 7.1(if one is so inclined).

Plays movies from USB drives etc.

And it's 4k ready (should that ever become a factor for the common man...which, eventually it will).

Like CR said, with the impressive set up you have and the investement you've put into it,this deck would be the icing on the cake.

[Black Sabbath]

I'm sure it's fantastic, but again, the only reason I would even get a standalone player is for the few Region locked blus I have. Aside from being 4K ready, I can either do the other stuff or it doesn't apply to me.

Maybe sometime down the line I might get one, but as of now a little shitty player for $50 will be OK for my needs.

[Zint]

I got the Oppo hooked up.

Still tweaking shit, but, fuck me, this deck is amazing!

I've had three blu-ray players, Sony, Samsung and LG...this deck is superior on every level.

The processor is just sublime, everything is so fluid.

It's the most natural I've seen movies look at home (I set it up for the 24fps conversion).

Even the surround is improved, and I need a new receiver!!

Really bloody happy with this deck, it's taken home theatre to a whole new level!

[classicrawker]

I

I got the Oppo hooked up.

Still tweaking shit, but, fuck me, this deck is amazing!

I've had three blu-ray players, Sony, Samsung and LG...this deck is superior on every level.

The processor is just sublime, everything is so fluid.

It's the most natural I've seen movies look at home (I set it up for the 24fps conversion).

Even the surround is improved, and I need a new receiver!!

Really bloody happy with this deck, it's taken home theatre to a whole new level!

OPPO makes amazing machines but it does make you want to upgrade the equipment it is connected to......I am in the same boat as you as now I have to upgrade my receiver.......life is tough......lol....

Edited November 13, 2012 by classicrawker

[Zint]

I am in the same boat as you as now I have to upgrade my receiver.......life is tough......lol....

Every time I think I've found a good deal on a receiver, I do some research and find less than favourable reviews that make me pass on the deal.

Sabbath helped me with some info, anyone else have tips on what I should be looking for?

Future proofing?

What's the new shit on the horizon?

[Black Sabbath]

Did those we talked about not have good reviews? I would be surprised if they didn't, as both are great manufacturers.

Maybe classicrawker can help direct you in the right area.

[Zint]

The one I was leaning toward, I looked up some reviews, and it was page after page of people saying the same thing.

I can't recall what it was now, something about audio drop out maybe?

Just noticed CR mentioned some a few pages back, going to check those out as well as the one you bought.

[KBear]

If I was buying a receiver I'd probably look at NAD first and foremost. Also Rotel, Denon, and Marantz. I'd be surprised if NAD did not outperform though. I would be less interested in features and more with build and sound quality. I figure whatever receiver a person buys it will be outdated pretty quickly, but unless there is a format change on the horizon then one has to ask himself how crucial some of the frills really are. I have not read up on home theaters in a while though, so I'm not sure what you will want to look out for. Can't imagine that any new receiver would have issues with DVDs or Blu-Rays, since those are pretty entrenched and I doubt they are going anywhere anytime soon. Streaming is also built into BR players like the Oppo and many others, so that angle seems taken care of as well.

[Zint]

Any thoughts on this one?

http://www.bestbuy.c...d5744ba64a6en02

[KBear]

Onkyo has a pretty good reputation. Pioneer Elite as well, in addition to the brands I mentioned above. They are likely all very competitive at a given price point. Where I come at it is that NAD (and maybe Rotel) will put more resources into amplification and a more simple design. The others probably pack more features into the box, but everything costs money and it's likely that the amplification is not quite up to the level that NAD's is.

I know future proofing is a concern of your, Zint. Looks like NAD has addressed this with a modular design. Not sure how many other makers have. It might be something to consider: http://nadelectronics.com/products/av-receivers/T-757-A/V-Surround-Sound-Receiver

Edited November 18, 2012 by KBear

[Zint]

I think what I have to keep in mind as well is, my environment.

Currently in a condo, so I can't have it sounding like there's a space shuttle passing through the place.

I think clean precise clarity with strong surround, at moderate levels is the key for me.

No point going gonzo if I can't have the space shuttle going through the living room!

[classicrawker]

I am a big fan of Marantz AV receivers.....built like a Mercedes and fantastic clarity of sound.

I have had a Marantz SR8000 5.1 AV Receiver since 1999 and it still sounds stellar. Unless something comes and blows me away I will be getting the Marantz SR7007 or what ever their next gen is come bonus time at work this June...I will add a second bass module and two surrounds I have waiting in the closet giving me a 7.2 system.

Denon is owned the same company and offers much of the same quality so would not be afraid to go for one of their AV receivers either......but in all honesty just about any brand name high end AV receiver will give you excellent performance so it really comes down to brand preference I think as I doubt any of us could hear much of a difference once you get into the expensive stuff.

Edited November 19, 2012 by classicrawker

[Zint]

Thanks for the tips and info guys.

The more I read up on receivers, the more I have to take things into consideration.

With the death of the cd imminent, should I be looking at receivers that are incorporating streaming into their units?

Some models are offering wireless streaming.

[KBear]

I think the CD will be around for a while yet. But the Oppo can stream Netflix and one or two other movie services, Internet radio, plus connect to your own home network where I'm assuming you can stream music from your PC or tablet. Not sure what receivers will give you outside of this. I would let the Oppo handle this stuff if the decision comes down to it or a receiver.

I think what I have to keep in mind as well is, my environment.

Currently in a condo, so I can't have it sounding like there's a space shuttle passing through the place.

I think clean precise clarity with strong surround, at moderate levels is the key for me.

No point going gonzo if I can't have the space shuttle going through the living room!

That's what the volume knob is for.

The better the amplification and the simpler the signal path, the better the sound (all else being equal).

Edited November 20, 2012 by KBear

[Zint]

I think the CD will be around for a while yet. But the Oppo can stream Netflix and one or two other movie services, Internet radio, plus connect to your own home network where I'm assuming you can stream music from your PC or tablet. Not sure what receivers will give you outside of this. I would let the Oppo handle this stuff if the decision comes down to it or a receiver.

I think what I have to keep in mind as well is, my environment.

Currently in a condo, so I can't have it sounding like there's a space shuttle passing through the place.

I think clean precise clarity with strong surround, at moderate levels is the key for me.

No point going gonzo if I can't have the space shuttle going through the living room!

That's what the volume knob is for.

The better the amplification and the simpler the signal path, the better the sound (all else being equal).

Good points...awesome!

My brain is getting rattled with all the stuff I'm reading from different companies and stuff.

And about the amplification...if the wattage is higher, will I get clearer audio at lower levels?

[KBear]

I think the CD will be around for a while yet. But the Oppo can stream Netflix and one or two other movie services, Internet radio, plus connect to your own home network where I'm assuming you can stream music from your PC or tablet. Not sure what receivers will give you outside of this. I would let the Oppo handle this stuff if the decision comes down to it or a receiver.

I think what I have to keep in mind as well is, my environment.

Currently in a condo, so I can't have it sounding like there's a space shuttle passing through the place.

I think clean precise clarity with strong surround, at moderate levels is the key for me.

No point going gonzo if I can't have the space shuttle going through the living room!

That's what the volume knob is for.

The better the amplification and the simpler the signal path, the better the sound (all else being equal).

Good points...awesome!

My brain is getting rattled with all the stuff I'm reading from different companies and stuff.

And about the amplification...if the wattage is higher, will I get clearer audio at lower levels?

This is more complicated than one might expect.

First of all, the wattage numbers quoted by many receiver manufacturers are grossly exaggerated. The numbers may be accurate on some level, like it might be what the amp can put do during a short burst, but that's hardly indicative of how it will hold up under greater demand. Hi Fi companies like NAD tend to be a little more honest, which is why you'll see NAD's figures a lot lower than others. Current delivery is more important than wattage figures. Speakers present a load to the amplifier and the load varies depending on the frequency playing at the time. Amps need to generate plenty of current to control the speaker driver during those periods where a heavy load exists (often at low frequencies and high volume levels).

Now, some speakers are hard to drive (i.e. are inefficient), others not so much (i.e. are efficient). So less power will be necessary in the case of an easy to drive speaker. It's why some people can drive a pair of Klipsch speakers with an amp that is rated at 10 watts and the loudness level could drive a person from the room. Klipsch speakers are usually very efficient. Even for a speaker with moderate efficiency, at normal listening levels, an amp is likely using only a few watts most of the time. If your speakers are efficient and you don't turn up the volume while watching movies that have plenty of loud noises (or rock concerts) then you likely aren't going to be demanding a lot from your amp. Then again, maybe your speakers aren't very efficient and what you watch/listen to is demanding, so extra power would be required.

Just to show you how meaningless wattage numbers can be, speakers will use different levels of power depending on the frequency played at the time (20Hz - 20kHz). Deep bass to high treble. When you look at wattage ratings, the manufacturer will usually quote wattage into a certain load (8 ohms, 6 ohms, 4 ohms). This is the impedance. The lower this figure the greater the load on the amp. So, a 4 ohms speaker is twice as difficult to drive as one at 8 ohms. Ideally, the amp will double in power when the load doubles, so it would read 100 watts into 8 ohms, 200 watts into 4 ohms. Very few amps actually do this; those that do tend to be very expensive and are not home theater receivers but dedicated amplifiers. Here's the thing...speakers do not have one load level. If you look at the graph below for measurements on a random speaker I chose off of Stereophile's website, the dark solid line is the speaker's impedance. It's measurements are on the left side. The frequency being played is on the bottom. You can see, at 50 Hz (low bass for a speaker like this) the impedance is at 4 ohms. At 100 Hz it is at 8 ohms. At 90 Hz it is at 17 ohms! And so on. But the point is, it is pretty much always changing.

So how useful is it to know a receiver is 100 watts into 8 ohms? It is actually more important to know whether a speaker dips to 6 ohms or even 4 or 2 ohms, which is what could really stress an amp, because the amp will be called on to generate more power. If it cannot then it will clip and possibly damage the speakers.

This is ignoring another spec called sensitivity, which is designed to measure how loud a speaker will get while being fed one watt of power. If high enough, then you do not require many watts, but you might still need an amp that has a sturdy supply of current if the speaker dips below 4 ohms. Like wattage, sensitivity specs are calculated while playing a test tone at only one frequency. So it's not all that useful, but I suppose it and watts are meant as a sort of guideline.

I don't know this stuff near as well as many do, by the way. I have a good idea of the basics, but I know it goes a lot deeper than my understanding. And it takes a while to wrap one's head around it, and of course most people won't really care. I guess I just had to illustrate this somehow as the question you ask isn't that simple.

To answer your question then, at low levels you probably won't be using that many watts, especially if you also use a subwoofer with it's own amp (this takes stress of your receiver, because anything under say 80Hz is handled by the subwoofer's amp. I would say it is more likely that you'd get clear audio at low volumes if you have a receiver that generates as little noise as possible so that the softest sounds can be heard. And that's not just sounds at low volume like when someone whispers, but when there are multiple sounds at one time, you pick up the smaller details. That's kind of what high end audio focuses on, the simplest components with the highest quality parts will help to ensure this outcome. Undistorted power when needed because the amp can generate plenty of current, and with a low noise floor so that you can hear the smallest details in music. Basically, the thinking is that everything you do to the signal will mess it up in some way, so do as little as possible and this will preserve more detail.

I like NAD quite a bit but they did have reliability issues a few years ago. I think those issues were fixed, but it's something to maybe read up on if you want to buy one of their receivers just to be sure. I think looking at NAD, Marantz, Denon, and Onkyo should assure you of getting a good product, especially if your speakers aren't anything too difficult to drive. NAD will just focus on audio quality a little more, and probably shun some features it doesn't feel need to be there.

Edited November 20, 2012 by KBear

[Zint]

Wow KB, thanks for taking the time to post that information.

Greatly appreciated!

I'll warap my head around it moreso later when I have more time.

My speakers aren't great..that will be step 3.

Any good micro-speaker systems (is that what they call them, the tiny cube size things) around?...space is an issue.

Oh and...some amps are THX certified, others not...important or no?

[Black Sabbath]

Curious as to what classicrawker or Kbear have to say about THX, but from what I know and have read, it's really just more of a marketing thing and doesn't really mean anything.

I'll let them direct you when it comes to the speakers, because I never paid much mind to the littler speakers

[KBear]

CR probably knows more about THX certification than I do, since two-channel audio is more my thing. I do plan to build a nice home theater though, hopefully in the not too distant future. But, what you say is pretty much what I've heard about THX certification. It's more for marketing than anything else.

As for speakers, you may want to consider Monitor Audio or Tannoy. They both have lots of options when it comes to small home theater speakers. If I'm not mistaken, Tannoy is the oldest speaker company in the world. You're in London, right Zint? There are two audio stores I know of in London, Target HiFi and London Audio. The great thing about a store like this is that you should be able to hear systems in somewhat realistic settings, so you'll be able to turn the volume up or down as much as you want and listen to whether the system does what you want it to. I have nothing against Best Buy and Future Shop, they sell some good audio/video products but you won't get the chance to listen to a properly set up system. It's always different to what you'll hear at home though...a different room means a different way for sound waves to react. Also, high end audio stores should offer products that are competitive with what Best Buy sells (just not on the very low end). If you plan to drop $1,000 on a receiver though, and perhaps the same on speakers, you should have lots of options.

[Zint]

More gerat info, thanks!