Denon 2900.....I sure love it (1 Viewer)

[Bruce Abar]

It's kind of neat when a component is good enough to prompt one to try to ellicit its best (that's what tantalized me into the mod route to begin with). There's no question that the modded DVD-2900 fits that description.

This was the exact reason I decided to Mod My 2900. I never listen to sacd, or even dvd audio before the 2900, but my first cd of this nature just got me hooked. Now with a modd 2900 the performance is just as outstanding with new life to the highs and lows. With such revealing speakers as my psb goldi's, I could not ask for more. I will wait til I have 8-10 days of continual playing before I do any critical listening, but so far....wow!

 

[Mark All]

After being forced to forego setting up my DVD-2900 for a week, I finally had a chance to pull out the three components I'd been using and replace them with this one. Here's what I found in comparison to the following three components I'd been using:

Panasonic CP-72 for DVD--picture sharpness about the same but color depth much better in the 2900. Panasonic too darn clunky sounding mechanically but otherwise reliable.

Sony NC650V for SACD--wow!! no comparison at all. On some of my SACDs played on the NC650V, my thoughts were maybe SACD was overhyped. Not any more.

Toshiba SD-9200 for DVD-Audio--not much if any change in sound quality. However, effective distance compensation settings in the 2900 do make it easier to put into a system than the Toshiba.

I'll be continuing to use the Toshiba as a CD transport, but the Panasonic and Sony are going elsewhere.

 

[Lewis Besze]

Trevor,
would you list the rest of the system you did the evaluation with.Was there any change in it other then the mod on the 2900?
Reagrding the hum,is this happened after the mod? It wasn't there before at all?
Thanks.

 

[TrevorS]

Hi, Mark

That's neat to learn the DVD-2900 knocked the Sony off the SACD pedestal. I 've only tried a DTS DVD_A so far.

I just calibrated my TV to my modded DVD-2900 and am just now spinning my first movie, Jurassic Park. WOW!!! I'm afraid it leaves my old Pioneer DV-414 way behind. I think Bruce's commment regarding the picture on his modded unit must be right on the money. The 2900 is capable of a truly remarkable picture, even with interlaced output.

Congrats on your new Denon -- Trevor

 

[TrevorS]

Hi, Louis

Sorry about the delay getting back to you. I only just now noticed your questions about my system.

There was absolutely no difference on the two channel portion of the system between my earlier listening to the Denon and the evaluation of it modded Friday night. The only changes elsewhere were a couple cables in the surround portion, however surround signals were not generated during the evaluation -- only the main stereo pair received signal. As always when I listen two channel, all power amplifiers were powered in order to minimize cone bounce, though again, only the stereo pair receive signal.

Regarding the hum. I had just had to go hum tracking after installing my freshly returned surround processor Thursday. It turned out it was sensitive to an S-Video feed to the back of the room, apparently creating a ground loop. After floating some video equipment in the rear, the hum was gone until the Denon was installed following burn-in. I didn't immediately notice since it was fairly low level, but one time when I was near the speakers without music playing, I picked it up. So yes, that hum was definitely not there before installing the Denon and was definitely there afterwards. Inverting its plug polarity corrected it.

I'll list just the parts in the specific audio chain if that's OK with you. If you want the whole shmear, it get's a little long.

One source is the modded Denon DVD-2900, both for its own analog, and for its digital out as transport for the DAC. The digital output is reclocked, interpolated to 20bits, and delivered to the other source, a Sonic Frontiers Processor 3. Those two outputs feed a Gryphon Line Stage preamp, that feeds a pair of Gryphon Reference One power amps, which drive a pair of Wilson System 6 speakers. The digital interconnects are a mixture of XLO, Kimber, Illuminati, and Transparent. The analog interconnects are Transparent, the speaker cables are MIT, and the power conditioning is Transparent and Monster.

If you need to know more, just ask.

Cheers -- Trevor

P.S. I just realized I incorrectly answered your hum question. I can't be certain there was or was not a low level hum before the mod -- I didn't specifically check. I wouldn't expect a hum to be introduced during modding unless the wiring and/or grounding of the transformer were changed. Now, in my case, a couple of Bybee devices were installed between the AC socket and the transformer primaries, but given I know the guy who did the work is a seasoned pro (used to be the head design engineer at SF), I think it unlikely he switched the primary polarity. Since it's not so very unusual for audio products to have inverted polarity, I wouldn't presume it to be the modder's fault -- still, it's possible.

 

[TrevorS]

Hey, Bruce

I never played video on my DVD-2900 while stock, but I'm super impressed with what I'm seeing from it right now. I'm used to getting a respectable resolution reasonably 3D front projected image with my old player, but the resolution, and picture depth I'm seeing with this modded DVD-2900 is really wonderful to behold. I can't make a before and after mods comment, but I can honestly say it produces an AWFULLY good picture. This machine is definitely a keeper.

Cheers -- Trevor

 

[Vladimir]

This info is for some who are still interested in objective opinions based on science and not on faith and it concerns several issues discussed here such as mods, burn in time for cables and electronics, cables, etc. I just found this info myself and I thought it was quite impressive and informative. These articles are written by electrical engineers and they challenge many widespread myths about hi-end audio equipment. In particular, one article debates the importance of opamps and power supplies which are a cornerstone of most mods. To make a long story short, these articles claim that majority of the claims by hi-end audio manufactures are false and what we see and hear is very often a clear placebo effect. In most instances, claims made by manufacturers of hi-end audio (mostly cables and it seems mods would fall in that category too) have no scientific merit and can’t be proven using scientific methods. But, read the articles and judge for yourself. At least they are based on science, not faith.

First link is at www
Audioholics dot com

Specifically see the articles:

“eCoustics Interview of Audioholics.com about Audio Cables”

“Audio Cable “Break In” Science or Psychological?”

“Audioquest Response to Top Ten Signs a Cable Vendor is Selling You Snake Oil”

These are just a few available on the website and they also have links to many others.

Another website is:
sound.westhost.com/cables.htm (no www).

This article also discusses opamps and power supplies and of course speaker cables and interconnects.

I am not sure these scientific arguments would affect “true believers” as nothing would change their faith, but those who are looking for real answers would get at least some of them.

 

[TrevorS]

Sure Vlad

As I said before, whatever you say -- twice if you like.

I used to work as an electrical engineer myself, but I've had ears for far longer.

-- Trevor

P.S. On the other hand -- I'm very much impressed you went to so much effort for the purpose of trying to discredit me. I understand, we all really know that the 5900 remains the best player out there -- no problem.

 

[Vladimir]

Whatever you say Trev,

I am sure you were an outstanding engineer and you have many degrees and awards in that field. I am also sure that you know by far more that engineers presenting those comparisons on the audioholics website. Oh and I almost forgot to mention all your degrees in Psychology when you claim that you can remember the details of the sound for many days when comparing two players. Amazing thing, I tell you. You must be the only person known to science to do that and all physical and biological principles cease to exist when it concerns your ears. I know my PhD in biology is definitely nothing compared to your extensive knowledge defying all science known to men.

I am also so impressed that you think so highly of yourself as to think that I would do my reasearch just to discredit you. You are right, that is all that occupies my life now, I don’t know how I could not have figured it out for myself. And why listen to all these specialists in physics and audio engineering, they simply fool themselves with all these silly numbers. I think they should all ask you when they have a question instead of fooling around with all expensive equipment designed to test differences in sound.

Oh, and I almost forgot, when I posted my message, I mentioned that it is not for blind faithful (yes you appear to be in this category Trevor) but for somebody who is interested in finding the truth. As far as I know, science is the only answer. But then again, read the posted articles and judge for yourself. Or ask Trevor and he gives you the most precise estimates of all parameters he measured in his modded player that prove he’s always right.

Vladimir

 

[TrevorS]

Sorry, Vlad

I have read and heard of that stuff plenty of times -- it's very popular within a certain group of individuals, and they can be found everywhere.

That's fine with me. Feel free to diefy measurements all you like. I will continue to trust my ears on what makes a distinctly noticable difference and what does not on my systems.

Frankly, I've little doubt that you do exactly the same, in which case, wherein lies the difference?

Cheers -- Trevor

 

[Bruce Abar]

Hi Everyone! In the beginning I started this thread with the Phrase.."I love my Denon 2900!" As the story goes,I was so impressed I thought, Well if the 2900 is that good, the 5900 must be out of this world! After debating the question of up grading like many did with the 2900 I started to really think why: The 2900 gave me the best picture I seen yet. The 2900 gave me the best sacd sound, the best dvd audio sound yet, not to mention the best two channel music.
With some research, I found out that the 5900 would give me better video, providing I had the equipment to take full advantage of the 5900 possibilities. The 5900 may or may not improve the audio, most thought yes. The cost for me to upgrade to the 5900 would be almost $1000. Like any business man, I tried to think of the best way to invest $1000 in my system for the best return.........Then came the modd 2900 idea, just put the grand in what I have, that would mean take out some stock parts and replace with higher performance parts, something I did all the time to my cars when I was a kid! So thats what I did!
Here Iam now, 4 days with my new modd 2900, spinning away on repeat when Im not listening to the high performance sound or taking in a movie. There are a few things I would like say about my $1000 upgrade so far, as with many electronics, they seen to sound better after continual use, but with only 4 days in, I can tell you this:
1-the unit looked different on the outside, new feet, heavy duty looking rca plugs. I personally like the looks of the old silver feet, but the new EAR Sorbothane feet are to reduce vibration and thats okay. I never opened the unit up, as I have full faith underwood did what they said they were.
2-I could not hold off on the 200 hours that is recommend for break-in, I just have to many movies to watch.....so the first night I plug "tears of the sun" in. Same reaction as my stock 2900, a little slow to start playing, I have been told with these combo units, this is normal......give it a break, there is alot of decsition making to be done when you insert a disc! Tears of the sun is a dark movie to begin with, so I was not sure what to expect.I previously watch at least 15 movies with my stock 2900, so I new the previous player had an excellent picture, but some would say it has a washed looked and did not have the depth most wanted......this was why many traded to the 5900. With me, the picture was great, and something I could live with very easy.(I ordered a new 2900 from underwood,so the modd 2900 is new, and the previous player was returned)To my surprize the first movie I played in my modd 2900 gave me a real indication that I had an bonus return on my $1000......the video was improved to a point of no wash look, I now had vivid colors and depth I never seen before on my 50in screen.
This was a real surprize, I did not expect the video to be improved.
3-Now the sound! Would $1000 in improvements mean better sound? Like usually, I could not wait like I was told, 200 hours, man thats over 8 days.........so in went a disc, eric clapton to be exact. A disc I played many times in my stock 2900. The sound was amazing, just like before, the highs were there, I had the lows....gee did I not just put a $1000 in this thing? So I went to work and let it play on repeat for a few days, thinking well, walter warned me not to judge to early. On day 4 I let clapton ripe again....now I was hearing a difference......Eric was in my room! The sound opened up, soft highs, deep lows were surrounding me. I could hear every instrument playing to its fullest. Now I could be reassured my $1000 was giving me a return, now in three areas. The 2900 had bass issues with some. With a sound meter I could get my sub the way I wanted it by turning down the main and rear channels and leaving my bass at "0", this of course would mean you may have to increase your main a/v volume to compensate. I also did this with my stock unit before returning it. I can say now, $1000 well spent!
4-Then of course there is a thing called "happy". The feeling that you now have a DVD player with superior parts, not just assembly line product. A Dvd player you could use just for audio in just about any high end system. You can also sit out of the market for year or so, at witch time then the less expensive players will all have dvi, something that will make even a cheap player have as good picture as the 5900 does today. This of course would be your choice, and I choose to go with one of the highest end sounding dvd players on the market at this price range.........the underwood modd denon 2900! With all systems this may or not make as much of difference as it did for me, for some they are at the point where the old diminishing returns kick in, and this reinforces my $1000, I was at that stage, and $1000 worked. To go any further I would have to upgrade a/v's, speakers etc, now that would by 25 times my $1000, something I could not afford!

 

[TrevorS]

Congrats, Bruce!

That's really great!!! I'll bet it gets even better over the next few days. I've been listening to mine a lot yesterday and today and just like with CD, I'm clearly hearing big differences between different hi-rez discs (I've a very small selection unfortunately). And what's really neat is that when a disc is really recorded well, the high resolution part of hi-rez really comes through. I feel that anytime a player is able to clearly show you the differences between recordings, it's doing a VERY good job.

I guess there pretty much have to be better sounding universal players out there (maybe a modded DVD-5900 would be one of them), but I agree the modded DVD-2900 has absolutely nothing to apologize for. I bet it could very comfortably slide into most high-end audio systems (and many home-theaters), leaving a lot of dollars in the owner's pocket in the process.

Cheers -- Trevor

 

[Vladimir]

Trevor,

Yes, there are indeed two distinct groups of people – those who understand the scientific method and the principles behind the audio equipment and those who “think” they can hear the difference no matter what. Over and over again, it has been PROVEN scientifically that people easily “fool” themselves into believing in what they want to believe. Our brain plays many tricks with us and memory is one of the areas in which we can fool ourselves easily by re-writing actual information with what we think “happened”. Memory for sound details is especially prone to these tricks and it is a well-known fact. There are many studies on this subject and if you are interested, I can provide you with many references from scientific journals.

Here is a piece from one of the websites I pointed:
“It has been universally recognised for many years in experimental psychology, particularly in experiments about perception, that people tend to perceive what they want to perceive. This is often called the 'experimenter expectancy' effect; it is more subtle and insidious than it sounds, and the history of science is littered with the wrecked careers of those who failed to guard against it. Such self-deception has most often occurred in fields like biology, where although the raw data may be numerical, there is no real mathematical theory to check it against.”

Here is another piece from the website:
“When you change to new cables, there may appear to be an audible difference. If this seems to be for the better, well and good - you'll keep the cables. If the cables seem marginally worse than the old ones, the 'break in improvement' claim will encourage you to persevere with them for a while. Over this time your auditory system will habituate to the new sound balance, resulting in a perceived improvement. If you then swap back to the old cables for a 'fair' comparison, they will probably sound worse, as you are now adjusted to the new ones.”

So, for example there is absolutely no scientific explanation for the purported burn-in changes in cables or in cd/dvd players. But psychology can explain why we think that we “hear” a difference. As a scientist, I am inclined to believe that rather then to believe your very subjective judgment.

We buy audio gear for our pleasure and there is nothing wrong with spending much money on something we believe makes our listening experience more pleasant. But the question is that oftentimes we can achieve the same results at much less costs, because we simply make up the differences in our brain.
So the difference between you and me is that you seem to faithfully believe that you hear the difference and thus there MUST be the difference while I continue to question my judgment and try to investigate each component from scientific prospective and to find whether there is a scientific explanation for the expected results. But in the end, we both may be equally satisfied with our decisions irrespective of how much money we spent.

Vladimir

 

[TrevorS]

That's great, Vlad!

I'm glad you sorted it all out to your satisfaction. No doubt this constitutes "proof" that I don't really have any idea what I'm actually hearing and that since my judgements only ever consist of "better" or "not better" or "worse", then clearly I'm hopelessly deluded. On the other hand, if my evaluations are ever more specific as in what ways better, or the same, or worse, that merely goes to prove that I'm not only hopelessly deluded, but I've a hyper-active imagination as well. That's fine, more power to you.

Now, is there any possibility of you actually getting on topic in this thread? (Or are you done?)

Cheers -- Trevor

 

[Bruce Abar]

But the question is that oftentimes we can achieve the same results at much less costs, because we simply make up the differences in our brain.

I guess If I would of kept my $499.00 pioneer hometheater in a box, I would be much better off financially....but I could not trick my brain into making up the difference......darn anyway:frowning:

 

[Doug_B]

Trevor and Bruce,

Glad you are liking your modded players. Fortunately for both of you, you fooled yourselves into believing you now have much better sounding players . Hopefully, I'll fool myself in about a month when my Pioneer mod comes back.

Trevor,

And what's really neat is that when a disc is really recorded well, the high resolution part of hi-rez really comes through.

I really don't understand what you're saying here - high resolution part of hi-rez. Can you please elaborate (no biggie, just curious).

Thanks.

Doug

 

[TrevorS]

Yes indeed, Bruce

Frankly, I think the most cost effective solution would be to xerox the covers and playlists of our preferred recordings and then simply delude ourselves into thinking we are listening to them. We could even do really convenient on-the-fly playlist re-sequencing in our minds.

On a more serious note. I understand many professional level symphonic musicians actually own very low key stereo setups (unless times have changed). The idea being that they already know VERY well what it actually sounds (and feels) like and so anything reproduced is not going to be able to compete with what they are hearing in their minds. The recording ends up serving more as a stimulus, whereas for most of us, it serves as a substitute. Perhaps there are some musician types out there that care to comment.

Yo, Doug

Sorry, it was a semi-joke, and I guess not a very successful one. The thinking was that the term Hi-Rez refers as much (if not more) to the physical formats as to truly high-resolution sonics. It's kind of a reference back to the reality of CD where although we supposedly had "perfect sound forever", most of the time, the sonic quality was anything but. I'm new to listening to the Hi-Rez media, but my current impression is that once again, the sonics will be all over the map. After all, great sound requires a lot more than a format able to convey it. I'm sure you know what I mean. Still, I imagine the average Hi-Rez quality will easily exceed the average CD sonics.

Regarding the player -- Yes! I do believe the darned thing is growing on me. I started off looking for faults and identified a couple things that I was inclined to blame on the player, but after going back and forth with the DAC and also listening to a number of other recordings, including CD, I realized I was tending to blame the player for recording and cabling issues. The poor thing was simply being honest.

The presentation is definitely different from the DAC in that the player provides a more airy flavor. Whether or not that interpretation is "correct", I don't know. The DAC has a more full bodied flavor, and I tend to favor that, but the player characteristics will likely shift some with the upcoming cable change (or if preferred -- flight of fantasy). The one thing that is pretty clear is the player sounds awfully good, and considerably ahead of the starting point.

As my dubious luck continues, my processor 5.1 input upgrade has scaled itself back to a 4 input version, the center and subwoofer pass through's having chosen to take a vacation sometime Saturday morning. (It would be nice if THAT were a delusion!) So, whereas I was expecting to be able to get into some serious multi-channel music, I'm having to settle for a version with a broken wing. Still, the sonics I'm getting from my mains and rear surrounds are highly pleasing with the right material. Lots of air, lots of delicacy, spacious stage (I could almost swear the damn thing is still coming in -- I could turn into an addict at this rate). I'm right now listening to Mary Chapin Carpenter "time*sex*love*" and it sounds absolutely beautiful, even though the vocalist is missing from the front center (the defunct channel). Fortunately, I still hear a lower level of her voice divided between the fronts and rear center -- still sounds lovely. Wonder what it would be like if I had a bass channel?

In any case, Doug. I think you will be very pleased with your player when you finally get to that point (delusions and all). No doubt the tube outputs will contribute a nice touch of their own. I look forward to hearing about it.

Best to both -- Trevor

 

[Vladimir]

Trevor,

I thought discussing mods WAS a part of this thread. And also, when I was talking about delusions I was only talking about cables, burn-in times and possibly mods. I was not talking about different stock players as they can clearly be differentiated on the basis of physically measured parameters such as distortion, signal-to-noise ratio, etc.

So, can anyone give a scientific explanation of how all parts of the mods actually improve the sound? Would you think that if they actually and physically improve the properties of sound, the manufacturers of mods would provide physical measurements proving that mods do change the physical characteristics of the sound produced by a modded player? I am not saying they don’t, I just have not seen any scientific evidence supporting their claim and I have seen some scientific arguments against at least one part of the mods – opamps.
Do you think that it is possible that you hear what you think is a specific change in sound but no equipment in the world can measure such changes? If your answer is yes, then you are indeed fooling yourself.

I guess if nobody is interested in that, that’s fine too. I just thought that it would be interesting to know what exactly these mods do and what physical properties of sound they affect (besides psychological effects).

Vladimir

 

[TrevorS]

Hi, Vladimir

I would suggest starting a thread specifically dealing with that subject and seeing what interest you can muster. Any time you have a specific topic that is actually unique from the existing threads, it is appropriate to begin a new one. You'll also have to decide which group it best belongs under. I doubt Audio/Video Sources is the right place.

Best -- Trevor

P.S. The problem is twofold. One is simply that others that have an interest in your topic are less likely to spot the discussion and get involved. The other is that repeated insertion of a differing topic in a given thread demonstrates a lack of respect for both the thread and those interested in it. That situation costs the thread potential contributors (they tend to say 'good grief' and turn away) and it also costs the inserter the respect of both existing and said potential participants. Much better to start a unique thread.

P.P.S. In the general sense, a next level player in a product line-up could be considered a collection of 'mods' over a given level player. Your arguments can just as easily be applied to that distinction as well. So it's really not just about 'mods' per se'. If you want to delve into the psychology of audio, it really is a completely different topic from what this thread was directed towards. (Same for materials science.)

 

[Vladimir]

Hi Trevor,

I think you’re right. I did not realize that this was a cult-like spiritual discussion of mystical sounds with you as a holy Cult leader (and your modo must be “Ignorance is a bliss!”). I thought that Audio/Video Sources actually deal with Audio/Video signals but I was wrong. This thread is actually dedicated to only what you personally think is important. I understand that you don’t want to get into things you have no clue about and that is why you sticking to this thread where a few people actually take your non-stop BS very seriously.

May FORCE be with you.

Bye bye.

P.S. You should consider running for a President or a Governor as you always speak for other people so well – you must be a naturally born leader.