Customer Discussions > Blu-ray forum

Oppo BDP 93


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-47 of 47 posts in this discussion
Posted on Apr 23, 2012 12:13:28 AM PDT
douglasG says:
I have 4 different Blu-ray players and I can see a difference in picture quality between 3 of them.(two are the same brand). With 1.4 HDMI the bounds(limits) are certainly high enough to have differences in picture quality and they are designed to handle upcoming 2160p. The 3D performance from my understanding differs between brands do to different chips and video cards. Also some have different capabilities such as one of my Panasonics has the ability to adjust the debt of the 3D, and has the ability to convert 2D into 3D. My other players you cannot. Some players display the picture darker/brighter. My TV you can't adjust the picture contrast or color in 3D mode only the polarity. Lots of differences between players and their 3D output. oppo I am sure it is a clear picture but how it performs in 3D is what I am wondering.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 5:58:36 AM PDT
Mike says:
Jonathan Like I said human being receives picture and sound thru eyes and ears and those numbers are well beyond seeing differences but brain is more complex For example diamond tweeter works up to 70 khz and anything over 17 khz which about capability of human hearing is overkill right ? wrong ! sound contain harmonics those create color or character of sound and they extend beyond 100khz and if you cut them off you change whole character of sound and your brain knows it Look screen door effect may not be visible from 10 feet but it changes character of your picture and that is what your brain is perceiving ,I don't what is it to not understand.Don't get caught on numbers they represent nothing but formats and those will always change remember DVD had a Dolby digital sound but was it same DD they use in studio No ! Now blu-ray has a Dolby true digital and suppose is bit by bit same to original studio recording We are just getting closer to reality which miles ahead of us and when your screen will look like window than maybe you can say you are there

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 6:17:41 AM PDT
I have a 55" Panasonic 3D Plasma and the Oppo BDP 93. It works great! All who watch are blown away! Need I saw more?

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 6:24:29 AM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Apr 23, 2012 6:27:37 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 12:46:44 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 23, 2012 12:47:20 PM PDT
douglasG says:
The fact it works great is not in question. Oppo has earned it's reputation. My $140 Panasonic has "blown away" people who have watched movies at my place.

"Need I saw more? "
If it is great to you I would say: no, you don't need to see more.

How does the oppo compare in 3D performance to other brands?

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 4:18:15 PM PDT
The purpose of a blu-ray player and HDMI is simply to send frames of video to the display, which decodes them and decide how to show it. For example, with vertical frame-packing, the blu-ray player sends the display 24 - 2205px by 1920px frames per second. The frames are then split by the display into 2 - 1080px by 1920px frames (with a 45px space in between) to show to the left eye and the right eye. The "quality" of 3D depends on what the display then does with these 2 frames. Blu-ray players are bound by specifications to deliver displays 3D in the same formats.

As I understand it, the video processor may correct badly encoded video and some artifacts, therefore the "difference" between players will manifest itself more clearly with worse quality video, like DVDs. With blu-rays, since they are already native resolution, there's very little that can be done... Not to mention that most blu-ray players these days use the same VP chips manufactured by Silicon Optix HQV or Anchor Bay.

I'm not sure what the differences you see are. If it's merely brightness, those can be corrected in the player's menu. There are surely differences in the default settings, if that's what you left them with, but players all calibrated to the bright/contrast settings should look, for the most part, the same, in my opinion.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 4:34:37 PM PDT
Mike, the screen will not look like a window because there are limitations on how to effectively simulate light on a flat screen, but not because of some magical frequency that delivers harmonics so far outside the realm of human seeing and hearing. Diamond tweeters that work up to 70kHz is a gimmick because, outside of some SACD, there are no sources that play that high. All CD's have a low-pass filter on as high as 22.05Hz, the Nyquist frequency. The argument for harmonics could be settled with 24/96, which goes as high as 48kHz. Anything beyond that is overkill and pure marketing.

A screen door that you can't see does not change the appearance because you can't see it, in exactly the same way as the fact that you can't see detail from far away in real life. The fact that there is some burls in the wood grain of some fine furniture is irrelevant to your eyes at 100 feet away.

I guess if you're going to make the 'golden ear audiophile' argument we're just going to have to agree to disagree. 99% of studio engineers can't reliably spot the difference between audio sampled at 12-bit dithered compared to 16-bit in normal listening, not to mention 24-bits.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 4:55:03 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 23, 2012 5:11:06 PM PDT
douglasG says:
I think your opinion is just that. Thanks for answering me but what I have experience and what you are saying is two different things. Plus technology with 3D is not static, it is constantly evolving so what ever you may think you know may only apply to a specific group of players and TVs and not to all that is in the current market place.

"With blu-rays, since they are already native resolution, there's very little that can be done... Not to mention that most blu-ray players these days use the same VP chips manufactured by Silicon Optix HQV or Anchor Bay"

Since when are most companies using the same chips and are bound by the same specifications? Some probably are but it is unlikely they are 'all' using the same. Also what is on blu-rays is a compressed picture, not as compressed as a dvd,but in most case it is not a native(raw) resolution. You will see a native picture on upcoming players/TVs geared at 2160p or higher.

Bottom line if I see a difference in picture quality I see a difference in picture quality.

Thank you for trying to help(at least I think that is what you are doing) but from here on I will find the answers elsewhere by doing research on the web.

The question still hasn't been addressed here as how the oppo 3d compares to other models or what options it may have that compare. We do not all see 3D the same and having the ability to adjust the dept is important. Does the oppo have this option? Does the oppo only offer one type of display or does it offer all the 3D formats including checkerboard?

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 23, 2012 9:04:47 PM PDT
Jonathan, that is not my understanding of the 3D signal. My understanding is that 3D data per frame is about 1.5 times the size of a normal 1080p frame. The data consists basically of a full frame and "delta" information for the opposing eye information. I find it highly unlikely that the BD player would fully decompress two full frames of data to send to the tv.

I believe what you are describing is used for broadcast 3D, where you have to tell the tv (or it senses) that the incoming signal is up/down, or left/right 3D signal. And the up/down broadcast method is what you are describing, but does not happen at a 1080p level. A 1080i signal is basically displayed as left/right 540i.

Admittedly, I am not well versed in 3D tech, but this was my understanding. Where can you check to verify your description? I find it VERY unlikely that a BD player would transmit two full 1080p uncompressed frames for 3D. I would think the tv would do some of the heavy lifting here.

High level description on Wiki seems to support what I think, but that doesn't mean a player could decompress the data and send it in the manner you describe, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray#Blu-ray_3D

Posted on Apr 24, 2012 4:39:42 AM PDT
Looneytuuns says:
Just throwing in my two cents but whether or not you want to pay the difference if a matter of your intended use. I have a Panasonic 55ST30 and have used both an old 80gb PS3 and my BDP93. I honestly cannot tell a difference in 3d picture quality. If you have a lot of older DVDs then the Oppo does a far superior job in upconverting the signal. Also, if you have any high resolution audio (DVD Audio or SACD) then you cannot beat this unit.

For me, if you are only watching blu-ray and using HDMI for video and audio, there is really no reason to spend the extra cash. And this is coming from someone that absolutely loves his Oppo and their legendary customer service (side note, bought an older Oppo on ebay, had a problem and still got amazing customer service on the phone and email even though any warranty had long since expired and I was not the original owner).

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 24, 2012 9:53:30 AM PDT
EdM says:
" 'golden ear audiophile' argument ... 99% of studio engineers can't reliably spot the difference between audio sampled at 12-bit dithered compared to 16-bit in normal listening, not to mention 24-bits."

That fewer than 1 in 10,000 people have perfect or absolute pitch, does not mean that perfect pitch does not exist. This is without regard to whether those statistics are correct, whether the test conditions were correct, or whether studio engineers constitute a proper sample [or category] of hearing people to test the premise of bit depth audibility. If true, this might arguably explain why some audio recordings are notably worse [or better] than others.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb05/absolute.aspx

"Do your friends call you tone-deaf? Chances are, they're wrong. While only one in 10,000 Americans have absolute pitch, most people can remember--and produce--specific pitches in special circumstances, says Daniel J. Levitin, PhD, an associate psychology professor at Canada's McGill University."

Perhaps engineers as a group, as opposed to [some] musicians, are not the best test subjects for whether the bit depth of music is audible or not. Personally, I care most about things I can hear, not what some given group of strangers may or may not hear.

If this argument were in fact true, why have Dolby and DTS gone to the trouble of making standards for lossless audio at 24 bits, in the Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio standards? I very much enjoy the excellent 24 bit lossless audio on some BD recordings, notably more than corresponding music on 16 bit Red Book CDs, which CD standard also is lossless.

This is easily tested out as there exist a few BD audio recordings with corresponding Red Book CDs. Have you ever listened to BD movies, concerts or plain BD audio recordings and found no difference between the excellent lossless audio vs. the normal audio?

This argument is not about some person in their megabucks audio salon room that almost no one can afford, this is about quality audio for ordinary folks with decent audio gear [not TV speakers] playing lossless codecs for audio/music on their normal BD movies and concerts.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 24, 2012 9:53:14 PM PDT
C. Barbus, it appears you are right the Blu-ray 3D uses MVC, not frame packing, but my point still stands -- all blu-ray players are required to use the same decoding mechanism to send 3D to the TV, therefore it would seem odd to me to expect different qualities of 3D from different players, aside from brightness/contrast (and possibly pulldown glitches that players may have in their firmware).

Of course, if you buy a bunch of players and don't calibrate them for the right settings, they are all going to look different because manufacturers use different defaults to make them stand out at the store.

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 25, 2012 4:00:42 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 25, 2012 4:25:05 AM PDT
I don't see what perfect pitch have to do with anything. I specified studio engineers because, if anything, they have greater capabilities to detect bit depth than the general population. That's what they do, and they are trained in how to listen for those differences. This doesn't really have anything to do with bad audio recordings, surely a product of loudness wars, but more so that it is just incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to hear bit depth differences at normal listening volumes. The only way you could really claim to do it is by taking a split-second sample of high dynamic range, and playing it at a volume so loud that the continuous piece would have deafened you. 16-bit audio has a noise floor of 96dB, 24-bit is 144dB, so if you don't listen that loud (which is impossible), you can't hear the full dynamic range anyhow.

What you think you can hear is not due to the reason you think it is.

Take a 24-bit FLAC and downsample it to 16-bit, then compare them using a program to simulate a double blind test. I bet that you cannot hear any difference at all. Comparing compressed music to uncompressed is a different matter altogether.

http://drewdaniels.com/audible.pdf

In reply to an earlier post on Apr 28, 2012 6:13:35 PM PDT
Mathew J says:
Good. You will NOT regret it.

Posted on Apr 29, 2012 8:02:02 AM PDT
Dudeski62 says:
There is only 1 payer better and that is the OPPO 95

Posted on Jun 23, 2012 11:55:33 AM PDT
Elder Dave says:
I'm resurrecting this thread just to let those interested know that I did indeed get the Oppo 93 and an LG 55LM7600 both of which have been giving me almost sinful delight for the last few weeks. My biggest question had been about he Oppo's 3-D capability. In a word or two: it's immaculate. I intend to review the LG on Amazon; the Oppo really needs no further reviews, but here's my experience. I've tested it against a Samsung, an LG and a Panasonic player. To my eyes and ears and those of at least three of my friends, the Oppo gives superior picture and audio through my Onkyo 7.1 home theater and on the LG. I used "Hugo" as my reference blu-ray. I'm not a video and audio technician so I can only give you my experiential opinion. Picture and audio are enhanced over the other players! The 3-D is the best I've seen. I sit entranced watching "Hugo", "Captain America" and many other 3-D blu-rays. I also watch DirecTV's 3net and ESPN channels and numerous other sources and have yet to see crossover, ghosting, flashlighting or anything other than pure crystal clear viewing. For DVD's, Oppo's ability to upconvert is amazing. But everyone knows this. I watched the "Tree of Life" blu-ray which I wish had been made in 3-D and which I had seen on an LG player. The difference was remarkably better: sharper, more detailed picture and more fully defined sound--there's a lot of whispering, but that had much more clarity. Also, the symphonic music seemed richer with more presence.

Just a side note: when ordering my Oppo, the representative told me something of which I was unaware. He said this is the last year manufacturers will be allowed by law to include analog output, so no Oppo going forward will have it. I have use for analog, so I'm glad I bought now. I'm sure you tech whizzes knew all about this, but it was news to me.

Final word: if you were unable to tell, I'm ecstatic about the video and audio experiences I get with the Oppo and the LG, and I have absolutely no buyer's remorse. Thanks for all your encouragement along the way.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 23, 2012 12:30:48 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 23, 2012 12:35:47 PM PDT
Your representative actually got the law wrong. Players can have an analog output, but they cannot play AACS content through the analog connections. And this part of the AGREEMENT that Blu-ray manufacturers sign (not a law) goes into effect after December 31, 2013, so your rep also got the timeline wrong, too.

In the agreement paragraph 2.2.2.2 says: "No Licensed Player that passes Decrypted AACS Content to analog video outputs may be manufactured or sold by Adopter after December 31, 2013." In other words, Blu-ray playback over composite, S-video or component outputs will be disabled.

You got a nice player, but you were misled by your sales rep...imagine that.

The full AACS adopter agreement is here-

http://www.aacsla.com/license/AACS_Adopter_Agrmt_090619.pdf

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 23, 2012 1:41:20 PM PDT
Elder Dave says:
Thanks for the info, C.Barbus. I knew you guys would know. Of course, I'm the FIRST person ever to be misled by a sales rep who passed himself off as a tech, so let this be a warning to others! Thing is, you're right. I got a nice player, and, when you come down to it, I guess after next year people who want to use component cables will no longer be able to get high def from new players they buy. It's HDMI or bust.

Did you know the Oppo comes dressed in a nice tote bag? Pure class. You get to undress it yourself for the first time. It's been a great honeymoon period!

Posted on Aug 5, 2012 10:36:28 AM PDT
AV Junkie says:
I have the Oppo BDP93 and couldn't care less about 3D. I have enough problems with my own glasses without having to look like a George Lucas creation. As far as my experience with blu ray players, no comparason. I had a sharp which I destroyed intentionally because I wouldn't want to pass on the headache to anyone. I have a Sony BD55 and it's fairly reliable but cannot even come close to the sound reproduction and picture performance of the Oppo. To those who say cheaper models are as good, you are just a malcontent who is wanting to stir the pot. Read the reviews and discover why the Oppo is unmatched even by the $2500 Denon. The Oppo is the best...nuff said!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 10, 2013 7:40:24 PM PST
John Burrows says:
An Oppo salesperson strikes again.

Posted on Dec 12, 2013 9:49:07 PM PST
Roy Zander says:
I've owned 5 Panasonics and 2 Oppos - the 93 and the 103. Oppo is by far the superior, even though the Panasonics were very impressive. Truer colors were what really turned my head. The 3D performance is amazing! I'm curious why all the talk is about the 93 when the 103 is the upgraded newer model. I got tired of the flush buttons on the 93. The 103 has buttons you can feel and the drawer button is illuminated, too! Go for the Oppo 103. It does the best 3D on the fly. It's adjustable. It's just more realistic and lifelike. Also, it's reassuring to know you have the best that money can buy. I have no experience with there customer service - just never had a problem.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 14, 2013 9:06:37 AM PST
OPPO customer service is absolute best in class. The 93 is the best piece of home entertainment electronics I have ever owned. There is no comparison. Not an Oppo sales person......
‹ Previous 1 2 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Blu-ray forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Blu-ray forum
Participants:  16
Total posts:  47
Initial post:  Apr 20, 2012
Latest post:  Dec 14, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions