Social Feed

Actually, I believe the OPPO company is owned by a Chinese company, BBK Electronics in Taiwan. They make the guts for a number of moderate to high end Blu Ray DVD player marketers. The BD-83 from OPPO is identical to the guts in the subject Lexicon blu Ray player. I understand they also make for a few others too. OPPO has two versions of this, BD-83 and the BD-83SE.. The one that is identical to the Lexicon ( BD-83)as well as a higher end unit, the SE, that sports a heftier power supply and a different audio analog section using additional and better DAC's. It sells for about double the BD-83. On top of that, this BD-83SE is upgraded even further by several 3rd party retrofitters in the US for even better performance in the analog audio output section. Here it gets pricey, upwards of $1200-$1400 for this upgraded BD-83SE. But Lexicon has done nothing except put the OPPO build in their box and name tag and modify the logo in the firmware load. That will cost you an additional $3100.

I own the BD-83SE and I am very pleased with it, but have to disagree with Navychop. WE don't have a $3500 Blu Ray player, The fools who spent $3500 have a $400 Blu Ray player!


As for the basic design itself, One has to experience the difference between the OPPO BD-83 and those lower cost $200- $400 other brands. I have and the first thing you wioll notice is those other players have terrible lag times in response. My Oppo is as fast as my PS3 which is considered the benchmark in performance. I like the idea that when I push eject from play it ejaects within a second. When I insert a BluRay disk, it begins to play the first video within 10-15 seconds. MY Samsung would often take 3-5 minutes to perform a play from insert. Finally, the 7.1 performance is breathtaking. If you want this kind of performance in a blu Ray plauer, get the Lexicon for $3500 or the OPPO for $400. Choice is yours. They are the same, except for the box and the name.

Could someone please explain the benefits of using high-priced DACs in a system that ideally outputs digital sound to be handled by what must surely be more sophisticated and more easily configured outboard surround sound processors? Sounds like selling snow to the snow men.

harshness- Everyone will have their own cup of tea when considering a higher end HT installation than a low end HT in a box system.

In the case of DACs and other special considerations, what Diogen said is basic to his opinion. However, he may not understand all reasoning in all installation compromises. I may not be typical but I know I am what I am and I can't do a complete HT system in one shot design. Instead, I am constantly tweaking and when it comes to the high end of the scale with power and sound, I am not ready financially to make a complete system upgrade every time a new format hits the industry. So, I have to make upgrades as I can afford them. To upgrade to 7.1, I wanted a really good analog connection to simple (diogen's term "Dumb" amps) that were high power and capable of loud without falling apart at the high end. In my case, the processing in the OPPO was a way to get that higher end quality for 7.1 but not have to upgrade the AVR equally at the same time. In my case the heftier power supply was what made me go for the SE more than the DACs but having both, I'm sure also made a big difference. I have three BD players, the Samsung 1500, the PS3 and now the OPPO 83SE. There is a big difference between the OPPO and the other two in the sound quality that is only heard on DTS HD Master audio. The sound appears to he greater dynamic range and fullness. But when I use the other players, or VIP 722K play sources, I'm feeding the AVR with Optical audio, then speakers and amps are identical. MY next upgrade will be to swap out my 10 year old AVR to a 9.2 AVR with all the latest bells and whistles. I don't plan to buy price, but save until I can afford a very high end AVR. At that time I will re-examine the best connections for the OPPO, HDMI or analog.
The key to the way I think of systems is what works for me and remaining flexible.

As far as Picture and functionality, there is no difference between the BD-83 and the SE. Both offer the same best in the industry performance, comparable or better than the PS3. You only gain dynamic range and quality of sound in the SE if you are connected analog out to simple amps or AVR is "dumb" pass through mode. If your AVR further processes the sound and you bought the SE, you wasted your money!


Diogen believes the best candidate to house the high end DACs is the AVR. I agree with this, however, considering at this time the only 7.1 DTS Master Audio source is the Blu Ray disk, having those DACs in a higher end DVR would cost me today far more money and I would get no added program source benefit. If I had DTS Master audio in 7.1 from my VIP 722K and my xbox 360 and PS3, then having the DACs in the AVR would make more sense to me.

harshness said:

Could someone please explain the benefits of using high-priced DACs in a system that ideally outputs digital sound...

Click to expand...

First, I believe this is a faith-based discussion about DACs. Second, there is no ideal system.
The question is whether the difference (between what a system does and suppose to do) is audible.

The goal is to reproduce the audio/video stream from the shiny CD/DVD/HD/BD disk without molesting it.
And the deeper you dig into the issue the better you understand this is much easier said than done.

Everybody agrees that digital->analog (DA) as well as AD conversion is hard (and expensive) to do right. Therefore it is a good idea to do it once and by the most competent device (if possible). It is another can of worms alltogether the quality of your wiring, sampling rate and bit depth, speakers and abilities to hear artifacts; I won't go there.

Some 5+ years ago I was part of a group (HTPC users, no audio/video -philes) that tried to set up a comparison between the Denon 3910 DVD player and similarly priced HTPC, i.e. high end. You can't call us an objective group but we tried to do double blind testing as accurately as we could. To skip the details, the result showed there was a slight bias for HTPC doing a better job in video and the same job in audio as the Denon. Nothing statistically drastic. I heard about others getting similar results with the Denon 5910, for much more $$$ than the HTPC.

Keep in mind, this were DVDs that are telecined. And since no DVD mastering is perfect, a simple inverse telecine (IVTC) often wasn't good enough and sophisticated algorithms to do deinterlacing come into play. That's what those Farodja/Reon/etc. chips are for and what drives up the costs.

With Blu-ray playback most of those problems disappear.
The video content (most of it) is stored on the disk in 1080p. Spit it out over HDMI either directly to the TV/projector or AVR in pass-through mode. The TV will do the DA conversion and regardless of how the bits arrived, they will look the same (assuming the TV is capable of 1080p).

If your AVR is capable of decoding the latest lossless audio codecs (some $250 is enough to get one), the audio chain will be just as simple as video chain. Bottom line, the number of variables to control has been reduced (when compared to the old DVD times) dramatically. Only having invested thousands of $$$ in equipment like amps can be a reason to insist on DA conversion done in players.

Diogen.

Don Landis said:

....I own the BD-83SE and I am very pleased with it, but have to disagree with Navychop. WE don't have a $3500 Blu Ray player, The fools who spent $3500 have a $400 Blu Ray player! .....

Click to expand...

I like your choice of words!

You have an interesting choice of players. I have a PS3, 1500 ($80 w/TV I bought) and the plain 83.

My Samsung is now history!