Is anyone using one? Any experiences at all? Music playback via analogue outputs is all I'm concerned about at it's said to have about 95% of UDP-205 sound quality. Not so much bothered about operations as would use it with Roon or as a DAC.
I’ve got a Oppo 203 but never tried it for music as I have mine connected by hdmi connection so if I tried it would be going though my Yamaha Rx1070insider9 said:Is anyone using one? Any experiences at all? Music playback via analogue outputs is all I'm concerned about at it's said to have about 95% of UDP-205 sound quality. Not so much bothered about operations as would use it with Roon or as a DAC.
insider9 said:Do you mind if we compare it against your CD player? I've read/seen a lot of good about Oppo's capabilities.
insider9 said:According to a review I've seen it is and 95% of sound of its more expensive sibling. That's at CD quality. Not sure they compared it to 105 but I know they've been know to be good sounding.
For £649 seems an amazing value and could easily be a better purchase than a similarly priced DAC. Having a streamer and transport as a bonus. Not to mention it could be a Roon endpoint.
It was via analogue, levels matched, tracks synced and blind. Even reviewer's wife took part *shok*Al ears said:insider9 said:According to a review I've seen it is and 95% of sound of its more expensive sibling. That's at CD quality. Not sure they compared it to 105 but I know they've been know to be good sounding.
For £649 seems an amazing value and could easily be a better purchase than a similarly priced DAC. Having a streamer and transport as a bonus. Not to mention it could be a Roon endpoint.
Was that sound review done over the analogue outs or via the Hdmi interface I wonder.
davidf said:I found the 105 quite similar to an Audiolab 8200CD. There really should be a bigger difference in audio quality - picture quality is supposed to be the same, so why would anyone buy a 205 if the audio is only a tad better? Something wrong with that review...
davidf said:If the 205 is only about 5% better than a 203, that’s a tad worrying. If the 205 is like the 105, it has a dedicated two channel output section, away from the multi-channel output, and if I recall correctly, it’s pretty much a dual mono type affair. The 105 used Sabre DACs, whereas the 103 used something much cheaper. I found the 105 quite similar to an Audiolab 8200CD. There really should be a bigger difference in audio quality - picture quality is supposed to be the same, so why would anyone buy a 205 if the audio is only a tad better? Something wrong with that review...
If for just CD playback, the Audiolab, as you wouldn’t rally buy something as complex as a 105 to do just one job (unless that was to play Blu-ray Discs, as it was intended). It was a close comparison, but the 8200CD just won out. Someone with SACD and DVD-A discs might sacrifice that extra quality in order to play these other formats.insider9 said:In regards to Audiolab comparison assuming you could only have one which one would you pick, David?
davidf said:If for just CD playback, the Audiolab, as you wouldn’t rally buy something as complex as a 105 to do just one job (unless that was to play Blu-ray Discs, as it was intended). It was a close comparison, but the 8200CD just won out. Someone with SACD and DVD-A discs might sacrifice that extra quality in order to play these other formats.insider9 said:In regards to Audiolab comparison assuming you could only have one which one would you pick, David?
The main thing going for the 105 over the 103 was a headphone socket, it’s dedicated two channel output, and it’s audio quality.