Denon DVD-1600 vs DVD-1910

Brandon Steck · 10-31-2004, 08:35 PM

Hey all. I'm getting my Toshiba 64hm84 in a couple of weeks, and I'm thinking of getting an upconverting DVD player to go along with it. The Denon 1910 immediately jumped at me because I currently have the 1600 and it's awesome. Clearly noticeable PQ difference with the Faroudja chip vs. "Best Buy" type DVD players. I say this because I work at BB, and all the DVD players there are pretty much the same, with a few minor differences. I digress . . . We have a Toshiba 5970 upconversion player minus Faroudja hooked up at BB to a Sony KDP42 something we655. It's the 42" LCD with Cable card and tuner and the Superbit version of Spiderman looks pretty sweet on it, so I'm thinking the Denon w/ Faroudja would look even better. The Denon's gotten some good reviews and a few so-so reviews, as far as being a "slow" player, and pretty basic. Basic doesn't bother me because all I want it for is to play movies, but I don't want to wait forever to scroll between menu options (as on the horrid Samsung upconversion players). Don't need DVD-A or SACD. Anyway . . . hit me with your opinions. Also . . . since the player upconverts to 720p, and the native resolution on the 62hm84 is 720p, would that give it a significant advantage over the 480p dvd-1600? Thanks!

Brandon

Stephen Hopkins · 11-01-2004, 12:59 PM

The 1600 did better in the Secret's shootout but this isn't the be all end all of tests, it simply test atributes that can be quantitatively measured w/out subjectivity. It can measure alot of things like picture noise due to D-A and A-D conversions that occure when using component video. Up-converting players offer less picture quality increases on CRT sets because the signal is still converted to analog somewhere along the the, as opposed to fixed pixel sets where the picture remains digital but must be scaled to the display's native resolution. PQ gains can still be seen in many CRT sets though since 480p signals are often scaled to 540p or 1080i once they reach the set. By scaling to 1080i at the player you are skipping the 480i-480p and 480p-540p/1080i steps and going directly from 480i-1080i. You are also skipping a conversion within the display (most displays have less-than-stellar scalers) as well as skipping deinterlacing completely.

Your best bet is to find the 1910 locally from a retailer with an understanding return policy and compare the two side by side once you get the set.

matt-f · 11-01-2004, 04:56 PM

The Panasonic DVD-RP82 also gotten the same rating at the Denon 1600.

As for looking for the Denon DVD-1910, I would test out with the Panasonic DVD-S97 instead.

Stephen Hopkins · 11-01-2004, 05:03 PM

There are some issues with converting HDMI to DVI (black crush i think, someone else probably knows more than I do about this), so if your set only has a DVI input then the S97 may not be the best choice. There are no issues with going from DVI to HDMI, however. The S97, however, will be a good player too look out for.

Edison Tinker · 11-01-2004, 05:53 PM

I recently purchased a Denon 1910 despite the issues I've heard with it (macroblocking, a greenish tint to blacks)...I will be returning it.

IMO, the marginal increase in picture quality afforded by the upconversion and DVI connection is really overshadowed by those issues mentioned...certain movies (Underworld and Mulan stand out in my mind) really looked awful...damn near unwatchable (and this was after an hour or so of calibration with DVE and the Sond and Vision setup disc).

I was really hoping that this would be the answer to the budget upconverting DVD player question, but sadly it's not. I may just have to awit to find a B&M with the Panasonic S97 or plop down the extra $400 for the Denon 2910 and see how it fares.

**HTF Ads**

Brandon Steck · 11-01-2004, 11:08 PM

Edison, what type of TV are you using?

Edison Tinker · 11-02-2004, 12:02 PM

Display is a 50" Samsung DLP (HL-P5063W).

I tried everything I could to get rid of the macroblocking and green tint but nothing seemed to work (after the initial hour of calibration I adjusted color saturation, played around with brightness and contrast)...finally gave up.

matt-f · 11-02-2004, 01:22 PM

Edison,

The macroblocking has something to do with the Faroudja FLI 23XX series itself. I guess manufactuer's are trying to cope with it.

If you've been keeping up on the AVS thread the macroblocking is accepted on this player. There is a macroblocking survival guide on the first page of the thread too for this unit.

It's also considered better built than the Denon 1910 due do it's study and quit operation even thou it's slim.

Edison Tinker · 11-02-2004, 03:12 PM

Quote:

The macroblocking has something to do with the Faroudja FLI 23XX series itself. I guess manufactuer's are trying to cope with it

Yes, that seems to be the case...I understand that the 1910 uses the FLI 2301 chipset while the Pansonic S97 and the Denon 2910 and 3910 use the FLI 2310 chipset...supposedly the FLI 2310 is better at handling the macroblocking, although reports still point to it's existence with both chipsets. I may have to test the Panasonic S97 or Denon 2910 on my own display to see if the macroblocking will be an issue.

Quote:

If you've been keeping up on the AVS thread the macroblocking is accepted on this player. There is a macroblocking survival guide on the first page of the thread too for this unit.

I have been reading that thread, so I am hopeful that the Panasonic may work for me (it is after all about $300 less that the Denon 2910 and I doubt anyone here wouldn't want to save $300)...now I'm just waiting until a local retailer has it in stock (I really don't want to buy online since I've typically had bad experiences with online returns).

Quote:

It's also considered better built than the Denon 1910 due do it's study and quit operation even thou it's slim.

I did notice that the Denon seemed kind of "cheap feeling" for lack of a better turn of phrase...the build quality persent on thier higher end lines didn't seem to trickle all the way down to the 1910...although I suppose that's to be expected since it is, after all, $350 less than it's closest sibling (the 2910).