[Sa-dono]

Are you referring to their inspection of the DV-78?

No, I'm reffering to their guidelines for picture quality and the results on the DV-79 from my experience.

Reading through your original post, it makes more sense now. Thanks!

Keep in mind that your screen is relatively quite small, so certain problems not visible on a sub 60" screen may still be there.

[Sa-dono]

Here's the Secrets update that includes the DV-78, not the DV-79 being discussed here.  

The DV-78 didn't fair well in the tests, yet still they concluded that

The video frequency response of the player was quite good with only a slight rolloff at higher frequencies, but this didn’t seem to affect detail in playback.

Overall the DV-78 is a solid offering that is improved upon with their flagship DV-27A. The 27A will be featured in our next benchmark report.

The report states that the flagship uses Silicon Image so if the DV-79 is the flagship then I'd expect it to do well.  If it is using the chip used in the DV-78 then I'd expect it to have similar performance, at least in terms of deinterlacing, CUE, etc.  

Keep in mind the FMJ DV27 still faired average at best. I am not sure if this is the DV-27A they are referring to. It must be related, as it also uses the Silicon Image chip. Comments included:

This is another player with the Silicon Image chipset, and quite a bit less expensive than the Camelot, though more expensive than the Denon DVD-2800. Its performance was very similar to both of those players, though with more combing on subtitles, perhaps because of differences in firmware settings.

.......

The Arcam had some moderate video ringing, though not the worst we've seen, and otherwise had a fine picture. It does have the chroma bug, though, again, not the worst we've seen. It would rank somewhere in the middle of the pack as to visibility of the bug.

I am still curious how the new DV-79 would rate. It is a shame it does not do high-def upscaling.


Nathan,
Have you noticed if the DV-79 is still inflicted with the chroma bug?

[8thnerve]

I am still curious how the new DV-79 would rate. It is a shame it does not do high-def upscaling.


Nathan,
Have you noticed if the DV-79 is still inflicted with the chroma bug?

Upscaling is like oversampling, it is not neccessarily better, it depends on the design.  The Samsung HD-931 that upsamples doesn't have half the picture quality or percieved resolution as the DV-79 does.

I don't see any of the artifacts assiciated with it, but as you said, perhaps my screen is too small?

Technical tests don't always tell the whole picture, the same with measuring audio equipment.  That being said, I would be shocked if this player wasn't the best player they have ever tested.  The short of it is, I have never seen a better, more film like picture from any other DVD player.  It has the effect of an easier suspension of disbelief.  Like with Naim audio equipment, you stop paying attention to the system, and get stuck in the content.

[8thnerve]

Here is a link to a PDF review of the DV-79 which is much more technical than the info I have given here.  Review is from AV Tech which is Hi-fi News' AV publication.

http://www.audiophilesystems.com/arcam/AVT_DV79.pdf

[Sa-dono]

This again proves that most audiophiles are not videophiles, and vice versa.

Secrets' DVD Benchmark latest update is now available, including the Arcam DV-79, here.

Sorry Nathan, but this player ranked poorly (average at best), including via the HDMI output. In fact, it tested even worse via the HDMI output. The player does suffer from the chroma bug and layer change delays. Plus, is lacking in its blacks, and ability to properly deal with mixed flags and deinterlace, among other items.

I can't say I am overly surprised. Again, as long as you're happy with your player, Nathan, that's all that counts. I just thought others would be interested in the results - especially the 2 second layer change delay.

[8thnerve]

This again proves that most audiophiles are not videophiles, and vice versa.

Secrets' DVD Benchmark latest update is now available, including the Arcam DV-79, here.

Sorry Nathan, but this player ranked poorly (average at best), including via the HDMI output. In fact, it tested even worse via the HDMI output. The player does suffer from the chroma bug and layer change delays. Plus, is lacking in it ...

It looks like they left the Chroma levels set at 7.5 instead of 0.  It is configured this way from the factory, but really needs to be changed for best picture quality.  As you said, I am certainly an audiophile and not a videophile, but I have seen many of the other DVD players they are reviewing and their performance next to the Arcam is laughable.  Honestly, I am not sure what the significance is of the things they are testing, but it seems quite simple to me; the Arcam's picture and movement are the most representative of the real life I see through my own eyes every day.  That's all there is to it, and not by a small margin.  Every single customer I sell an Arcam DVD player to calls after they have plugged it in and gushes about how unbelievable it looks AND sounds.  The fact that the tests don't agree is entirely unsurprising.  Look at all the high end audio gear that tests well and sounds like crap.  And then there is gear that tests well and sounds great.  And things that test poor and sound good or bad.  All this tells me is that we are testing the wrong things!!

Especially considering the test results for the new Arcam CD33 review in Stereophile that were, "Overall, this is about as good measured performance as you can get from the 16-bit CD medium. - John Atkinson", and my own experience with this DVD player and many others, I will have to view any "DVD Secrets" results with skepticism.

Sorry to be down on DVD Secrets, but it is plainly obvious to me when something looks like a representation of an object and, when something looks exactly like an object.  Every other DVD player I have used or tested has always been a representation.  The Arcam looks like the real thing.  It really lets a good video transfer stand out as reality.

And frankly, that is MY benchmark on what makes a top-notch DVD player.  My 9-year old daughter agrees, who watches tons of movies on all these systems.  "Daddy, this is the best DVD player you've ever had".  I agree.

[8thnerve]

Sorry Nathan, but this player ranked poorly (average at best), including via the HDMI output. In fact, it tested even worse via the HDMI output. The player does suffer from the chroma bug and layer change delays. Plus, is lacking in it ...

Reading through the review again, I'm not sure how it rated poorly.  Most compaints were due to useability, slower menus, longer layer change (I would rather have a pause in the middle of a great looking and sounding movie, than none in an average performing one).  Here are some excerpts:

Arcam DV-79

You mention that it was inflicted with the Chroma bug...  "This MPEG decoder does have the chroma bug in all forms, but it is almost completely eliminated with Zoran’s chroma filters. Unless you are sitting extremely close to the image or have a huge screen, I doubt you would even see it."

"The video frequency response of the player is nearly flat, and there are no signs of Y/C delay at all. White level is perfect at 100 IRE, and the player passes below black via component." The HDMI black level is dependent on setting the level to the Japanese standard, 0 instead of 7.5 where it is by default.  This would explain why they were unable to achieve the blacker than black on HDMI output, but it passed with flying colors on the Component.

"There were no signs of Y/C delay via HDMI, and pixel cropping was perfect with no pixels out of view on any side."

Overall, I'm not sure what their reference DVD Player is, as it seems they are dissatisfied with every player they test.  Their top-rated player on this page, the Zenith - DVB-318 DVI, has comments like this:

"Unfortunately the rest of the testing did not go as well. This player has a lot of issues in its core performance. It has some very severe pixel cropping in all resolutions, with up to 15 pixels being cropped from the right side of the image. There are also various amounts of Y/C delay when using the component outputs. The 1080i resolution did the best in this respect with only about 5ns of Y/C delay, but the other resolutions showed at least a full pixel of delay. White levels for all output resolutions were on the hot side, varying from 102 to 104 IRE."

and

"On the DVI side things are also a bit amiss."

So I guess there is a different listing with DVD players that give them good performance in their tests??

[jgubman]

They do regular shootouts of the new dvd players every month.

Here's a link to their complete listing of every device they've tested:
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/cgi-bin/shootout.cgi?function=search&articles=all&type=&manufacturer=0&maxprice=0&deInt=0&mpeg=0

and here's the interface where you can do more sorting:
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/cgi-bin/shootout.cgi

Their highest ranked dvd player thus far is the Denon 5900 w/ a score of 96.

They only consider video performance in their rankings.

[wshuff]

I would suggest that you read the introduction to the tests to get an understanding of exactly what it is they are testing and what the rankings mean.  I don't think the Secrets Shooutout is meant as a complete review of the player.  Rather, as mentioned, they focus on video performance, and in particular, deinterlacing.  The fact that the Arcam didn't fair well is I think more a reflection on what the Zoran deinterlacer doesn't do well.  I think it is also explained that chroma errors are weighted pretty heavily, so any player that has the CUE is going to have a lower score.  And they readily admit that what they are testing is the extreme performance of those parameters that they test.  The fact that any particular player doesn't pass a particular test doesn't mean that all people will notice or care.  In fact, many people don't.  Still, it doesn't invalidate what the tests show with respect to deinterlacers and MPEG decoders.  Some are just more capable than others, although using a good deinterlacer doesn't automatically result in a great player, and vice versa.  In the end, if you like the Arcam, and what problems it has with deinterlacing don't bother you, or aren't noticed on the majority of material, then that is what matters.