DVD 2900 worthy upgrade from 1600?

Discussion in 'Playback Devices' started by Travis, Jun 6, 2004.

  1. Travis

    Travis Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    258
    Likes Received:
    0
    I currently have the DVD1600, which I lucked out and happened to pick up the last one at my local B&M, and while I love it I am looking to upgrade mainly because of SACD. My 1600 plays DVDA but no SACD and they have some titles that aren't available on DVDA. Is this a worthy upgrade worth the extra cost? Is the DVD picture quality much better? I have a tough time justifying spending more money for a DVD player (5900, hence the reason for sticking with 2900) than I did for my receiver (3805). Any input is appreciated.
     
  2. Brian L

    Brian L Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 1998
    Messages:
    2,904
    Likes Received:
    10
    I hope this link works, as it gives the Secrets scores and reviews for all Denon machines:

    http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/cgi-b...deInt=0&mpeg=0

    The 1600 scores exactly 1 point higher than the 2900, but there are key differences that the review will show you.

    One thing that you probably already know is that the 1600, while a killer machine in terms of PQ, is somewhat lacking in its layer change. The 2900 is essentially prefect on that score. That can be a real fork in the eye, and is the only really shortcoming I have issues with on my 1600.

    And obviously, you would be gaining SACD capability.

    BGL
     
  3. Travis

    Travis Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    258
    Likes Received:
    0
    According to the secrets review the 1600 has better pq than the 2900. My TV is a Hitachi 57s500. They say that is fails the chroma and 3-2 alt. Is this going to be very evident. I would hate to sell my 1600 and get something for more money with less pq.
     
  4. Brian L

    Brian L Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 1998
    Messages:
    2,904
    Likes Received:
    10
    I think one of the big things that lets the 2900 down is it has a flavor of the Chorma Bug, but it is only apparent with certain content.

    The scores are weighted such that doing poorly on certain things will hurt more than on others.

    I do wish my 1600 had the layer change of the 2900.

    BGL
     
  5. Mark Broyles

    Mark Broyles Auditioning

    Joined:
    May 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    I recently upgraded my 1600 to the 2900 along with the 3805 receiver. The three visual improvements I noticed were: no layer change whatsoever, better transparency on foggy or dusty scenes and less blurring on flesh tones in motion. I received a good deal on a demo unit so for me the decision was easier. Also the LED panel shows more information which I like but some may find distracting. To me it solved some nagging issues on the video end. Not night and day, but I'm happy with the decision.[​IMG]
     
  6. JeremySt

    JeremySt Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    14
    Real Name:
    Jeremy


    No. The 2900 has all around better PQ, it only recieved a lower score b/c of the chroma bug issue, which is only a problem a select few discs. On any properly authored film based DVDs, the 2900 is clearly superior. The 1600 has no chroma bug isssues, but on every other aspect of PQ, the 2900 wins. On 98% of the DVDs you watch, the 2900 is better than the 1600.

    The 1600 is no slouch, and has great PQ. It does have shortcomings, just like the 2900, but the shortcomings of the 2900 hurt its overall score a little more.
     
  7. Don_Berg

    Don_Berg Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    May 30, 2003
    Messages:
    931
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Secrets experts state that the Silicon Image de-interlacer (used in the DVD-2900) is a little better with film-based material than the Faroudja (used in the DVD-1600) while video-based material is better with the Faroudja. Both are excellent models.
     

Share This Page