I broadly understand the differences between composite, s-video and component feeds from a DVD player to a TV/Plasma/projector.

However, there is now a massive difference in prices of DVD players - I have a "no-name" player that cost less than 100 pounds and has component output even...

Here is my technical question - in what way and why is a player better that costs 5 times or 20 times more?

Thanks

Jonathan

Better quality.

Go and borrow a "no-name" £100 CD player from someone and compare the playback of CD's on that against your CD2!

I had a quick play with a DVD5 the other week at my local dealer. It is simply the best DVD player I have ever seen.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jonathan:
I broadly understand the differences between composite, s-video and component feeds from a DVD player to a TV/Plasma/projector.

However, there is now a massive difference in prices of DVD players - I have a "no-name" player that cost less than 100 pounds and has component output even...

Here is my technical question - in what way and why is a player better that costs 5 times or 20 times more?

Thanks

Jonathan

---

It is not definitly better......but it can be..
concerning the picture are differences in the processing of picture similar to the d/a converters and outputstage of a cd player.
concerning the sound its similar to an cd transport in its acoustical behaviour.(Imo big differences.)
O.J.

you pretty much gets what you pays for.

To the point where something as good a the DVD5 makes a movie you've just watched (or know well, even) seem like a *whole new movie*. WOuldn't beleive it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio

I've readily been able to hear the difference between cheap CD players and (most) more expensive ones - for example my CD3.5 is vastly better than the Arcam Alpha 1 that was my first hi-fi CD player.

On the DVD front though I've yet to encounter any DVD player which is really markedly better than the £250 or so Pioneer one that I'm using (I've yet to try the Naim one). So while my hi-fi system has naturally ended up as balanced/source first type of thing (LP12/CD3.5/32.5/SNAPS2/140/Credos) my home cinema hasn't, with a £250 DVD player fronting a considerably more expensive amp, speakers and projector/screen setup.

I wondered the same thing myself, so I begged the loan of a friend's player for some testing. My player is a pioneer 656 - jack of all trades, ~250 quid. The loaner was a pioneer 747 - older, but top of their line and ~850 quid when new.

I ran the video essentials (test / calibration DVD) test patterns on both of them to see what would show up.

Most of the patterns showed no discernable difference but some of the resolution charts amazed me - where my cheaper player gave up about 1/2 way along the test pattern, the higher end player resolved fine lines of detail right to the end of the pattern.

Clearly better components, better build quality, better video processing etc all contribute to a better picture. Whether the difference in quality is worth the difference in price is of course down to you!

The other side of the coin is the display device: I was testing against a decent LCD projector - I'm not sure whether the difference would be that apparent on a 32" telly!

Cd Players Perform in a source/amp/speaker- chain (not forgetting the technical design and quality of the interconnects)
Dvd players perform(picturewise)in a source/picture reprocessing/screen chain.
(screen can also be plasma ,lcd ,or conventional tv monitor).
One of the big differences is that while
we can only connect our Cd /amp / speaker chains (good hifi has rarely variable bass treble equalizers),there are a lot of possibilities
to variy individual "the picture performance of our beamers/tvs" (sharpness ,colour ,progressive scan,colour temperature and so on
offer hundred ways to get it right o r wrong.
O.J