Another WHF Review Joke

[abacus]

Joke 1

The latest Panasonic 700 UHD player has the same video processing as the 900, yet WHF in their infinite wisdom say it’s not as good.

Joke 2

The second is the sound, which they say is not as good, however it only has digital out, which means the quality of the sound is determined by what it is connected to, not the player.

What world/planet is WHF in/on, as it’s certainly not this one. (WHF really is a joke these days)

Good job there are plenty of other quality sites/magazines out there, or we would be in a complete doo doo.

Bill

 

[Superaintit]

Agreed.
I dont think malice is intended but it shows what its worth to judge by eye and emotions only. It'll cost you dearly because of poor judgment of added value.
If I were to buy a new home cinema I'd focus on getting a good tv rather than an extra expensive 4k player and 5 star hdmi cables. I fell for it once but realised quick enough its ridiculous.

 

[jjbomber]

Joke 1

The latest Panasonic 700 UHD player has the same video processing as the 900, yet WHF in their infinite wisdom say it’s not as good.

Bill

It can be something as simple as an inproved power supply that will create a better output. The processing is just part of the overall picture.

Leicester City used Vardy as centre forward in the Premier league, while england used him at centre forward in Euro 2016. Very different results.

 

[Superaintit]

"In terms of their performance with 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray discs, we could see absolutely no difference between the UB700 and the UB900 and both offer flawless playback"

 

[bigboss]

This is what Trusted reviews says:

Internally, the DAC and analogue circuitry have been re-jigged. Panasonic tells me this means the UB700’s sound won’t be quite up to the UB900’s standards, but picture quality should be virtually identical.
Read more at http://trustedreviews.com/panasonic-dmp-ub700-review#6kGVc91LpqKhMGI4.99

 

[abacus]

This is what Trusted reviews says:

Internally, the DAC and analogue circuitry have been re-jigged. Panasonic tells me this means the UB700’s sound won’t be quite up to the UB900’s standards, but picture quality should be virtually identical. Read more at http://trustedreviews.com/panasonic-dmp-ub700-review#6kGVc91LpqKhMGI4.99

Interesting comment, however it has no analogue outs, so all decoding is done by the receivers DAC and analogue system, thus making any DAC/analogue system in the player redundant.

Bill

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

Interesting comment, however it has no analogue outs, so all decoding is done by the receivers DAC and analogue system, thus making any DAC/analogue system in the player redundant.

Bill

Or, put another way....

Since all audio decoding is performed by the receiver, the sound quality one gets from the 700 is dependent on the DAC and amplifier circuitry in the receiver. If the user's receiver is not top notch, the user won't get as good a sound as he or she would using the possibly newer / superior internal DAC and analogue pre-amp and outputs built into the 900. For example, if the receiver in question is a few years old and does not have the capabilities to handle Atmos, DTS:X, the latest Dolby-whatever codecs, etc., then the sound field quality may be compromised.

As for me, only the 900 is available in the US right now, at a price of US $699.95 plus 8.25% sales tax, (or about one million Pounds given the post Brexit referendum exchange rate ) so the point is moot. It's on the top of my Chrimbo list.

 

[Benedict_Arnold]

PS the Samsung and Philips units are down to $250 plus tax here now....