difference between ratings on blu ray players?

[keloul]

Hello,

looking to upgrade my blu ray player and seeking some advice, checked the what hifi reviews but not sure i understand the ratings in the sense that a under £300 blu ray player can receive 5 stars and a over £300 player can receive 5 stars as well. I understand that this is releavant to price but then how much better is it? Also another thing that is confusing is that the Awards list includes the Denon blu ray player which recieves 5 star but then more expensive BR receive 5 star as well? Surely if the Denon which is cheaper is the best of the lot how does a more expensive unit receive the same grading?

I know i really need to go into store and compare both like for like on screen I agree, the trouble is the stores I go to do not have both models I am intrested in on display.

So it comes down to the Cambridge Azur 751 BD or the Denon DBP-2012UD, really looking for a player that can give the cleanist crisp picture possible, (also have a huge DVD collection).

Any thougts welcome

K

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Best Buys suggest to me that value for money is taken in to account, as well as quality, but I do agree that the star system could be clearer. The super test in the magazine have a clearer star system, could this not be used for all reviews?

 

[Son_of_SJ]

I don't know about the Cambridge Azur 751BD, but I do know that the Denon DBP-2012UD is becoming rarer quite steeply, especially the silver version, so if you want one you'll have to move fast. You might also consider the Marantz UD7006, which is virtually the same machine as the Denon. I have no personal experience of any of these, but I'm pretty sure that they will all be fine. The cheaper version of the Cambridge (the 651BD), and the Denon and Marantz, were all in a group test in What Hi-Fi in April 2012.

 

[professorhat]

Stars are meant to act as a guide as to what the WHF reviewing team rate something, given its price point at the time of the review. So if something costs £300 and gets 5 stars, it means it's an excellent product at that price point, whereas a device that gets 5 stars at £600 means it's also an excellent product at that price point compared to other products that are available. It doesn't mean they are the same or that they should be directly compared - clearly one is double the price of the other and you would therefore expect better performance / build / features / all of the above for the extra money.

As BB says, Best Buys / Award winners take price per performance into account (as well as other things like build and features) - this is because not everyone has £10,000 to spend on a CD player. In fact, I'd go as far to say as very few people have £10,000 to spend on a CD player. So giving a £10,000 CD player a Best Buy award because it got 5 stars at that price point isn't useful for the majority of readers. Again, they're just a way of helping you to make shortlists and comparisons - a Best Buy could be your reference point at that price point for judging other auditions and it's very possible the Best Buy won't be the one you decide to purchase.

At the end of the day, the key thing to remember is stars are a guide and they're also an opinion (albeit an opinion of a team of knowledgable experts) - but they are still an opinion and they're not the be all and end all. Many people may well prefer a 4 star rated product over a 5 star. This doesn't mean WHF is wrong, it just means different people have different tastes and different priorities.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Is something wrong with your Blu-ray player then? Because you already have a brilliant £700 Blu-ray player, that does Blu-ray and DVD seriously well, I personally think you will just be getting no better than what you have, but you will be getting 3D if that is what you want.

 

[keloul]

Thank you all for your answers, I understand that a 5 star rating at 300£ and 5 star rating at 700£ would take into consideration the price and agree that not everyone has 10K to put into a cd player. But I also keep in mind that quality isn t necessarily guaranteed with a higher price tag and this is where my question comes in. Would i get an as good picture from a cheaper machine and just paying for additional tech that i would rarely use (Sacd, hard drive, ...) and again how do you compare a 5 star rated 300£ machine to a 3 star rated 700£ machine?

As to the why I am upgrading, the Pioneer is a good machine but extremely slow to get started and a pain to update, and must admit I used to have a Sony BD which I have given away that made the picture feel more "atmospheric" so I feel a little let down by the pioneer

 

[simonlewis]

It's all about how much pocket money you can afford, people with not much money will find £300 a bit steep, but people with deeper pockets will probably want to spend £700 on a blu-ray player.

 

[John Duncan]

I can't speak for either the Denon or your Pioneer, but I can say that the 751bd has a particularly good upscaler, is a very fast loader and is a great audio player into the bargain. Not sure that I'd pay the cost to exchange just to get faster loading though...

 

[professorhat]

But I also keep in mind that quality isn t necessarily guaranteed with a higher price tag and this is where my question comes in. Would i get an as good picture from a cheaper machine and just paying for additional tech that i would rarely use (Sacd, hard drive, ...) and again how do you compare a 5 star rated 300£ machine to a 3 star rated 700£ machine?

It depends - a number of people have compared Blu-ray players and cannot perceive any difference in picture quality. On the other hand, I demoed a few and did see (and hear) a difference - most notably the difference was with the sound and also in the player's ability to display fast motion. This is why personal auditioning is important and you can't rely solely on someone else's opinion.

In order to audition players in different shops, I took my existing Blu-ray player with me. That allowed me to demo the new player directly with my existing player at each shop. In this way, I was able to track the improvement the new player had over my existing player and had a benchmark to compare them. I went back a couple of times to a couple of shops to also directly compare a couple of players they had in store and after a few trips I was able to come to my decision.

 

[GSB]

So what bdp did you decide on then proff?

 

[professorhat]

Marantz BD7004 - demoed it against the Marantz BD5004, the Cambridge Audio 650BD, and whatever the Sony and Panasonic models of the time were (think there have been at least 3 or 4 upgrades from them since then!).

Demos were actually arranged by WHF for their Savvy Shopper article in local Kingston dealers.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

Thank you all for your answers, I understand that a 5 star rating at 300£ and 5 star rating at 700£ would take into consideration the price and agree that not everyone has 10K to put into a cd player. But I also keep in mind that quality isn t necessarily guaranteed with a higher price tag and this is where my question comes in. Would i get an as good picture from a cheaper machine and just paying for additional tech that i would rarely use (Sacd, hard drive, ...) and again how do you compare a 5 star rated 300£ machine to a 3 star rated 700£ machine?

As to the why I am upgrading, the Pioneer is a good machine but extremely slow to get started and a pain to update, and must admit I used to have a Sony BD which I have given away that made the picture feel more "atmospheric" so I feel a little let down by the pioneer

I personally would go for the Cambridge one if you are set on purchasing one. I see it more like doubling up on quality wise though. Both your Pioneer and the Cambridge have great sound and picture. If I was to buy another Blu-ray player I would go for the Cambridge one. I saw it in Richer Sounds and thought it was really good, roughly the same weight as your Pioneer too.

Just so you know What HiFi readers get a discount on the Cambridge one in Richer Sounds.