In Reply to: Are you guys pro, or anti Universal player? posted by Michi on April 8, 2003 at 12:54:02:
The short answer:
I'm happy with my universal player
- One box
- one set of cables
- one set of controls and adjustmentsThe Long answer
Overall, I'd say a universal player is an easy way to test the waters of either and both formats, without having any issue related to an investment made in one or the other.
When I bought my Marantz, in fact I was looking for a replacement for my DVD player. I was more curious about DVD-A, and SACD was a nice "extra" which I picked up thinking "I'll try that some day". It turned out I really liked a lot of the software on SACD, and the sound quality as well. I also realized that my player said "DVD-RW compatible", and that got me started in the idea to try to burn music on DVD.
Anyway, I can see now the points made by other inmates: to get the best of each format, it is probably wiser to invest in separate players, and optimise each choice separately. Also, I think you get better value for the same budget (the Marantz was 2000¤).
However, pushing this logic a little further, I think you would end up with different receivers, amps and speakers as well. Since I have a small setup, that is not an option for me :)I have one caveat about universal players, which is to check whether they are fully compatible with DVD-Audio specs, and allow to read more than 30-34 tracks in Group 1 (Pioneer models). If you don't, you may have to buy other DVD-A players to play your discs, like me...
Best
Eric
PS: I have not used my Marantz as a DVD player more than once or twice, because it got me more interested in music, and I stopped watching movies.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Pro - Eric LeRouge 14:31:00 04/08/03 (2)
- OK, so my 47Ai won't do >30-34 tracks in Group 1? - Michi 00:59:30 04/09/03 (1)
- Only if those are PCM files - Eric LeRouge 02:16:28 04/09/03 (0)