Anyone compared audio on the Denon DVD-2200 and DVD-2900? (1 Viewer)

I bought a Denon DVD-2200 for my second stereo system this week. While I bought it primarily for stereo DVD-Audio, I am very pleased with its performance with SACDs and CDs (I need to compare it to Sony SCD-C333ES and 'C555ES SACD/CD changers in the same system). Although I am happy with the '2200, I can't help but wonder if I am missing anything by not going with the Denon DVD-2900. The '2200 is very nice all around, but is the '2900 worth $400 more from the standpoint of stereo audio performance (primarily stereo DVD-Audio)? Thanks in advance.

Keith, I have not heard the Denon 2200 so I can't tell you if $400.00 more for the player will make a difference to you. I think many factors come into play, The speakers, If you have one of the better receivers out there and how critical a listener you are. I have the Marantz 8200 and the Denon 2900 has better sound through its analog outputs, the difference is noticable with my paradigm 100v3 speakers but maybe with my older speaker the difference would have been less dramatic.

Many people have said that in picture quality both players are the same but that the 2900 has better sound with all the formats, I thought my Marantz DACs would beat my new Denon's but it was not the case and I am glad I got this unit, now I have a fantastic dvd/SACD/dvd-audio unit and a decent cd player, and I can even watch the family pictures from my Sony Mavica .

Luis, thanks. Certainly one's system plays a role, and while my second stereo system isn't high-end, I can hear differences between players. I would hope that the higher price of the '2900 gets you better audio than the '2200, but I am wondering if it's a significant difference.

Nick, that's interesting. The salesperson I spoke to at Tweeter said the same thing. He said there was really no reason to spend the extra $400 for the '2900 because all you really got was better build quality. I realize that the '2900 has more heft, but I am skeptical about his assertion that build quality is the only difference. On the other hand, he is a salesman who works on commission, and he did tell me to buy the cheaper player. Go figure.

He may have assumed you were not going to buy anything if he favored the more expensive player, but would get a sale on the 2200. OTOH, he may have been telling you what he thought. You need to listen and decide for yourself.

Maybe the salesman was looking out for your best interest (there are a few that do), or maybe the 2900 was sold out...

I haven't done any listening to either one but here is a link I found interesting. They say the 2900 does have better sound and the same video performance, but the 2900 probably isn't worth the upgrade unless you do a lot of critical listening...



From this thread, I'd make the assumption that you'd have to take both players home and give them a try. It looks like the difference you're paying for wouldn't even be distinguishable in the store.

I'm a happy owner of a 2900 and I doubt it would "sound" any better then the 2200.Having said that I bought the 2900 because I wanted a DVD player that looks and "feels" more then the typical "Wal-Mart" special that most DVD players looks like.Now if that's worth any extra cash is up to you,it did for me.However I haven't paid full price for it either.

Nick, CDN$800 is a silly price. I would jump on that if I were you.

I am both a salesman and a propeller head. I have spent quite a bit of time with both the DVD2200 and the DVD2900. I ended up ordering my own DVD2200 last week, because the DVD2000 delivers everything I am looking for, and it's less money.

While I have not personally compared the 2, I do know that the 2900 uses a different audio chip. The 2900 uses the 1790 chip and the 2200 uses the 1791 chip. Also, the 2900 has discrete power supplies for the different internal boards. So there is technically a difference. I don't know if you are going to see a $400 improvment though. I got the 2900 because I got a killer deal on it. I only paid $750US for mine, where it usually runs $1k.

The customized Burr-Brown 1790 in the 2900 is a significantly better audio DAC than the BB1791 found in the 2200 - which is also used in the Pioneer 563. The general consensus seems to be that the 2900 has better audio quality among those who have owned both.

-Reg

Change the subject of this thread!

I liked the Denon DVD-2200, but I couldn't help but wonder if I was missing something by not getting the '2900. It just kept eating away at me, as I felt like I was settling by going with the '2200. I am a nut for build quality, and in researching more and more the differences between the '2200 and '2900, I was lured by the better DACs and isolation of various circuit boards and the transport in the '2900. So, I exchanged the '2200 for the '2900 today. Let me tell you, the '2900 is a player!

Now, I don't have the two players here for a direct comparison, but I listened to a handful of DVD-Audio discs extensively on the '2200 while I had it. In listening to the same discs on the '2900 (e.g., Donald Fagen The Nightfly and Steely Dan Everything Must Go), I was immediately struck by the greater depth and clarity of the '2900. There is greater "air" and better bass. While the '2200 sounded clear in my experience, it did not convey the resolving power of the '2900. The '2900 is simply a better player. Oh, and the build quality of the '2900 is very nice -- comparable to the Denon DVD-3800 in my other system.

Part of me thinks that the '2900 is overkill since it is in my second system and I am not using it for video at this point. However, it is a killer audio component. Well done, Denon!

Could someone explain, using short words, what I witnessed last night? The salesman run the denon through the digital cable, and then he ran it with it doing the processing (am I correct that was a sort of analog mode on the receiver (2803) end, feeding six channels through individual RCA cables? That sounded, at least to me, a lot less "compressed."

Keith,

let me know how the 2900 stacks up to the 3800 on dvd-a and redbook playback. The 2900 is excllent
to me across the board in all areas.

Reggie

Reggie, well, I have the '3800 and '2900 in different rooms. At this point, I don't plan on moving components around. If I do a direct comparison, I'll post the results. At this point, I have no complaints with either component. I've had the '3800 for ten months now, and I've absolutely loved it. The '2900 is performing marvelously too.

What do you mean by "compressed"?
Also you can't conclude which conection is better without examaning how the various features like bass managment was used in each machine.

Keith,

Whenever you have time, I would like to know how you would rate Denon DVD-2900's SACD performance with that of Sony SCD-C222/333/555ES.

Thank you.

Jigesh

Same speakers, same receiver (2803, I think).

It just seemed to sound a little "fuller."

Chuck,

I have a Denon AVR2803 / 2900 combo. On paper, the DACs on the 2900 are better then those of the 2803. When playing CD's via digital coax the 2803 is doing the decoding. When playing CD's via the six channel anaolog (for SACD & DVD-A) connections, the 2900 is doing the decoding before sending the signal to the AVR.

I like redbook CD playback via the six channel analog too. As you said, the sound is just richer and fuller (imaging/soundstage?). I think if I had better L/R speakers the difference would be even greater.

Well, this may be even weirder, but we've got a lot of radio stations in St. Louis... I didn't notice it until I got a decent receiver and speakers, but the local classical station sounds SIGNIFICANTLY better than the other stations... It's almost like the rock and roll stations are just playing really, really stepped on mp3 files...