|
It is currently 13 May 2024, 08:14
|
View unsolved topics | View unanswered posts
|
|
|
|
Author |
Message |
elahrairrah
|
Post subject: LD Player Comparison Article in Video Magazine Posted: 20 Jul 2016, 18:04 |
Young Padawan |
|
|
Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38 Posts: 3425 Location: New Jersey Has thanked: 79 times Been thanked: 152 times
|
Here's another interesting LD related article I came across in an old issue of Video Magazine. In this one they do a direct comparison of video and audio quality between 5 different LD players: Mitsubishi M-V8000, Panasonic LX-1000, Philips CDV600, Pioneer CLD-3090 and Sony MDP-605. Scan 1Scan 2Scan 3Scan 4Scan 5Found it odd that they rated the Sony player the highest. Then again, when I had a Sony LD player (MDP-A3) I thought it looked really good--at first before the picture began to fail. Not surprised about the Panny as I used to have one of those and thought it looked pretty darn good. Though I'm surprised that they felt these players looked better than the mighty LD-S2.
|
|
|
|
|
elahrairrah
|
Post subject: Re: LD Player Comparison Article in Video Magazine Posted: 21 Jul 2016, 13:44 |
Young Padawan |
|
|
Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38 Posts: 3425 Location: New Jersey Has thanked: 79 times Been thanked: 152 times
|
Well, I had a Sony player like I said, and it fell victim to the well-known common problem of the picture going horribly wrong over just a few years. The picture darkens and gets grainy and soft and there's no way to reverse it. When I replaced the Sony with a middle of the road Pioneer DVL-919, the difference was night and day. The Pioneer was heads above the Sony. Plus Duncan (ldservice) when he would post on these boards said that the particular model of player in this review had a habit of leaky capacitors destroying circuit boards in the player. So with my own experience along with all the other horror stories about them, I'll never get another Sony LD player again. That's not to say I'm against Sony as a whole. My display is a Sony WEGA. I own several Sony Betamax VCRs. I've been a longtime supporter of the now dead Minidisc format. It's just that they stumbled horribly with LD. And just so you know, I'm not totally for Pioneer when it comes to LD. I currently have a Runco LJR II in my home theater along with a Pioneer CLD-97 and Panasonic LX-900 as backups.
Last edited by elahrairrah on 21 Jul 2016, 14:40, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
ldfan
|
Post subject: Re: LD Player Comparison Article in Video Magazine Posted: 30 Jul 2020, 07:42 |
Hardcore fan |
|
|
Joined: 28 Jun 2014, 05:59 Posts: 1463 Location: San Francisco, CA USA Has thanked: 427 times Been thanked: 537 times
|
forper wrote: Yeah this article just makes online Pioneer snobbery and bias so much more apparent. ---When we revealed the identities of the players, our panelist were amazed that picture quality performance seemingly had nothing to do with price. Most agreed that all five players performed well. "There are slight differences in color and sharpness." one panelist noted, "but you can adjust the monitor and solve those problems in two seconds"---Really??? Doesn't sound like anyone felt any one particular player out did each other. forper wrote: In my experience with lower end players Sony's always look and sound better and are more reliable than Pioneers. I remember the 900 series Pioneers always being just something one would rather skip and save your money toward a better model. And as for Sony? Well, I did have that crappy MDP-455 that was just garbage but it did look somewhat nice and build quality was great. forper wrote: Actually I have been a loyal Sony fan since the '90s and was only convinced to go Pioneer with LD because of all the internet propaganda here and elsewhere online.
I learned my lesson as I'm now having inexplicable problems with the S9 and will go back to Sony ONLY. I'm a pretty dedicated Sony fan as well when it comes to their DVD players and pretty much most of their ES products. But in respect to LaserDisc, it's pretty well documented that they have had a pretty dismal history when it comes to reliability. Maybe some of the reasons for Sony's bad press might have more to do w/ the fact that they made far fewer players than Pioneer (and that's including all the clones that Pioneer made for other manufacturers) and thus it represents a far smaller sample size that gives the impression of more bad units. However, with far fewer players, that also means fewer spare parts, and fewer spare parts means more junked players that remain unrepairable that just adds to their legendary unreliability issues. And to be fair, I wouldn't say that Pioneer players were extraordinarily reliable because that wouldn't be true either. Their 2nd generation Alpha Turn players were a disaster when it came to fragility so it was not unusual to see 50% of the players sold being defective right out of the box. However, once they were fixed @ a shop, they were otherwise extremely reliable after that until they were sent in the mail once again (e.g.: ebay). And even today, most Pioneer players that appear to be broken are in most cases just experiencing simple issues like the ubiquitous stretched belt or mechanical regreasing which is a simple fix. So in that case, I'll be sticking w/ my 12 working Pioneer units and continue to avoid every Sony that comes my way (unless it's free )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|