View Full Version : Dvd Player With Prog Scan 30 Quid
bigjonnyauk
07-05-2004, 23:26
HI ALL
hope this is a bargain but was in my local kwik save today and they had about 10-15 of these dvd players
they were akura i think but it said
dvd
mp3
cda
kodakpicture
cdr
cdrw
plus other stuff
also had dd dts all via coaxial out and it also said it has progresive scan
al this for 29.99 not bad even for the kids
http://www.kwiksave.co.uk/deals.asp?category_id=7& it dosent say on there progresive scan but i can confirm 110percent it says it on the box
pic here = http://www.akura.com/adv14s.html
also im sure these are very easily able to be hacked to multi region
FyreWall
08-05-2004, 08:22
Here's the Multi-Region hack.....
Switch on the player without a disk inserted
On the remote, press Setup, vol + , vol - , vol + , vol –
Your display should now read region 2 on the top left of the screen
Press the Blue Right right key until the desired region is chosen (1-6 or 255 for all regions)
On the remote, press Return, Menu
and that's all there is to it :D
Tyler Durden
08-05-2004, 11:10
I've just got one of these for my father in law, I've read that the hack was to press the 'system' button on the remote 3 times, I'm gonna give it a go later today.
GASWATKINS
08-05-2004, 18:13
Woolies Clevedon
had £30 DVD player in last week
but not this one but may be worth a look for some one
bright shiney thing in Mirror finish , midi size
Mazim name on it ithink
coolsurfer
08-05-2004, 19:01
LOL to the people who paid £500 for their DVD playaz!
LOL to the people who pay £30 for their players, then have to replace them every year.
my sammy 709 is still going strong after 4 years.
does this £30 player convert NTSC to PAL50, and remove macrovision?
if the akura is the same as mine, from somerfield then yes it does NTSC to PAL50. It is also MR from the box, I don't know about macrovison as I can't test for it.
I've got a few dvd players, the original budget 709 being one of them and it is still going strong. But, it can't compete picture wise or feature wise to new stuff. This akura is pretty damned good full stop. For the price it is amazing.
IamGeoff
08-05-2004, 22:07
Originally posted by coolsurfer
LOL to the people who paid £500 for their DVD playaz!
I paid £800 for my Sony 7700 the day it was released. At the time there was only 1 other decent player you could get which was out of stock everywhere.
I still use it today through a Panny AE200 projector.
ryonhilluk
09-05-2004, 10:25
Originally posted by coolsurfer
LOL to the people who paid £500 for their DVD playaz!
I paid £250 for mine 3 years ago and its still going strong. Rather that than buy a cheap one that breaks a year later.
"I paid £250 for mine 3 years ago and its still going strong. Rather that than buy a cheap one that breaks a year later."
You could buy 8 cheap £30 ones for £250, so thats 8 years :)
Assuming they break in a year, which they won't
I have a wharfedale and a lite-on cheapy players which haven't broken, but my next one will be an expensive one as there are niggling quality issues with both of them.
In the end it's your money, your choice :)
I havent seen an under 50 quid player output a decent picture anyway.. I'd rather spend more on a brand to be honest.
Personally I love a nice bit of build quality.. Its very high on my list of things my hardware should have.
bigjonnyauk
09-05-2004, 12:01
look i didnt put this thread up so we can have a mine is better than yours competition
mos normal folk dont have hundreds of pounds to spend on a dvd player
im sure you are really going to buy a 300 quid dvd player for your 11 year old kids bedroom cuz im sure he wont notice the differece in picture quality
ur_the_lame
09-05-2004, 12:06
Hi,
i like my DVD players like my cars... CHEAP :)
I also have a wharefedale dvd750 and a dansai dv1000 or whatever its called.
both still work fine...
brand name = chinese box badged (examples see: Sony, Philips etc. )
Now my Pioneer DV-350s, thats been a right royal pain in the butt on any DVD with more than a micron of dust on it.
Perhaps it needs some Monster (tm) cables :lol: to improve its read capability.
I paid £250 for mine 3 years ago and its still going strong. Rather that than buy a cheap one that breaks a year later.
Does it play mp3's, VCD/SVCD, mpegs on iso disc tho? :cry:
buy cheap, replace when you feel.. at least then you will be riding the latest technology improvements..
as for Pionir tho, threateneing to buy expensive stuff next aint foolin' nobody..
We know your a devotee of the liteon brand :notworthy
Bill
ur_the_lame
09-05-2004, 12:10
look i didnt put this thread up so we can have a mine is better than yours competition
this it maybe..but....its most certain to be cheaper :norty:
Now wheres the nearest Kwik Save, i fancy a player for the downstairs toilet. :p
Bill
ryonhilluk
09-05-2004, 13:34
Originally posted by ur_the_lame
Does it play mp3's, VCD/SVCD, mpegs on iso disc tho? :cry:
Yes. And will 8 players give a better picture quality? No.
CyberSurfer
09-05-2004, 13:39
The KS ones also pay DVD-RW and DVD+RW
There are two models the 144 and the 147
the only difference between them that I can see is that one has a display on it
RGB o/p via scart
3-step zoom
Yes. And will 8 players give a better picture quality? No.
Your original objection was reliability :)
Anyway cheapy players are acceptable quality for most people.
The wharfedale was great for when it came out, but the 180 squid it cost hardly consitutues a bargain these day, and it makes some quite hilarious attempts at rendering reds.
The lite-on I have does all the formats under the sun, and prog-scan & component out, but seems to grain alot (although that could be just because it's more visible with component leads). I got it to replace my Wharfedale mainly for the 3:2 pulldown & prog scan, and divx ability.
£200 change can buy alot of compromise on quality.
Alastair
09-05-2004, 16:13
always wondered what 'progressive scan' on dvd players means
Can anyone enlighten me?
http://www.avdeals.com/classroom/Proscanexplained.htm
Cheap players are great, but people need to stop the 30 quid is better than 500 quid rubbish, because thats what it is.
ur_the_lame
09-05-2004, 16:31
Hi,
Progressive scan means the image is produced as a single frame, not two interlaced fields.
google says for "interlaced progressive scan" >
http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_electronics/dvd_players/progscan.asp
there is an explanation by panasonic for you :)
Bill
bigjonnyauk
09-05-2004, 16:42
well has anyone gone and bought one or are you just all harping in here saying mine does this mine does that
me myself have 4 dvd players 1 cheapy one for the kids and 3 the same which i got nice and cheap from richer sounds
all have been great with no problems at all
i got the 3 toshibas sd220 from richer sounds at 140 quid for all 3 cuz 2 didnt have boxes and one was a demo which had had the keypad lost
got these a year ago and still going great
if anyone is remotley interested in the kwik save ones the beaumont leys one in leicester has around 15
AND THEY INCLUDE A SCART CABLE bonus !!!!!!!
Kez my sammy 709 died just after a year, my sammy DVD drive for the pc same thing just after a year packed in. I wouldn't touch another sammy anything without a three year warranty - as I'm typing looking at my sammy 172w LCD with three year warranty!!!!
thescrounger
09-05-2004, 16:53
Originally posted by coolsurfer
LOL to the people who paid £500 for their DVD playaz!
£30 players are rubbish. Fine for a bedroom machine. No good for the serious enthusiast.:nono:
There's a difference.
threadkiller
09-05-2004, 16:56
Originally posted by thescrounger
£30 players are rubbish. Fine for a bedroom machine. No good for the serious enthusiast.:nono:
There's a difference. in your mind, I run a £30 compacks from Safeway through my PJ, and the picture is better than the £250 pioneer 525 I bought years ago.
Alastair
09-05-2004, 17:54
Originally posted by ur_the_lame
Hi,
Progressive scan means the image is produced as a single frame, not two interlaced fields.
google says for "interlaced progressive scan" >
http://www.panasonic.com/consumer_electronics/dvd_players/progscan.asp
there is an explanation by panasonic for you :)
Bill
thanks :)
thescrounger
09-05-2004, 19:44
Originally posted by threadkiller
in your mind, I run a £30 compacks from Safeway through my PJ, and the picture is better than the £250 pioneer 525 I bought years ago.
There may be exceptions, but my point stands.
Originally posted by threadkiller
in your mind, I run a £30 compacks from Safeway through my PJ, and the picture is better than the £250 pioneer 525 I bought years ago.
thats because 2yrs have passed, the compacks ive seen have chroma bug.
£30 players are rubbish. Fine for a bedroom machine. No good for the serious enthusiast.
There may be exceptions, but my point stands. :lol:
absolute rubbish, do you have any evidence for this or are you just pontificating? Please pray tell your comparisons as a "serious enthusiast"
Originally posted by devil
absolute rubbish, do you have any evidence for this or are you just pontificating?
Of course not, but he's got to justify his purchase of a £500 DVD player somehow. I think I'd be in denial too if I'd wasted that much money. ;)
Luckily however I didn't, and the player I got for £60 a couple of years back holds up against anything I've seen, including my mate's DVD player which cost him something like £300. :lol:
People just assume that because something's more expensive, it's automatically better.
Originally posted by Aretak
Of course not, but he's got to justify his purchase of a £500 DVD player somehow. I think I'd be in denial too if I'd wasted that much money. ;)
Luckily however I didn't, and the player I got for £60 a couple of years back holds up against anything I've seen, including my mate's DVD player which cost him something like £300. :lol:
People just assume that because something's more expensive, it's automatically better.
Youre just trying to justify that youre cheap. ;)
As stated, cheap players are great, but they arent top end performers. Better imaging chipsets, better decoder chipsets, better dacs etc etc. Its like comparing a rover to a merc, both do the same job but the merc isnt the same.
nwgarratt
10-05-2004, 00:41
Cheap players have their place (youngsters, bedroom etc).
I bought a £37.99 player from Lidl's. At first I thought it was amazing (the progressive scan is though). It doesn't play many discs and I get no disc error. Other small things like the forward and backward scan is not very good. It is the fault of the Sanyo drive.
However it is still fine for a second player. I am glad to have my Sony NS900.
Even if the £30 players only last a year, they don't owe you anything at that money. Although, my Uncle has had three Ukuras in six months due to the drive failing.
thescrounger
10-05-2004, 01:09
Originally posted by bob_bob
Youre just trying to justify that youre cheap. ;)
As stated, cheap players are great, but they arent top end performers. Better imaging chipsets, better decoder chipsets, better dacs etc etc. Its like comparing a rover to a merc, both do the same job but the merc isnt the same.
Couldn't have said it better myself. The better dacs play an important part IMO. The difference between a 10 bit and 12 bit Dac is like night and Day with image quality.
Still, DVD is for the masses, and there are still people that can't tell the difference between VHS and DVD quality. :cuckoo: Enter your supermarket buyers.
Until someone gets a load of players together from all price ranges and does some double-blind tests on them it's a bit pointless arguing about which is best. The cheapo player fans will keep to their "it's cheap and image quality is good!" guns and the expensive player fans will stick with "It's expensive, it must be better!".
If you're happy with the money you've spent and the image you have, that's all that matters really.
Taq (still with his Pioneer DV444 but thinking of getting a Sony 730).
umm, magazines such as what hifi and home cinema choice review all kinds on a regular basis. There is no argument.
thescrounger
10-05-2004, 10:58
Originally posted by Taq
Until someone gets a load of players together from all price ranges and does some double-blind tests on them it's a bit pointless arguing about which is best. The cheapo player fans will keep to their "it's cheap and image quality is good!" guns and the expensive player fans will stick with "It's expensive, it must be better!".
That's because by and large they are better, as I gave an example in my previous post.
Magazines rarely compare players directly from different price brackets (well at least they never used to - haven't bought one in ages) and when they do they always factor in 'value for money' and other things anyway.
I've never seen a 'supertest' done double blind either ; in which case you are still at the mercy of the reviewer's bias.
That's because by and large they are better, as I gave an example in my previous post.
No you didn't. You just said 12bit dacs were better than 10bit ones.
Post a few review links and screenshots before making huge generalisations and expecting people to just believe them.
As I said before, as long as you're happy with what you've bought it doesn't really matter how much you've spent.
Taq
ur_the_lame
10-05-2004, 13:20
umm, magazines such as what hifi and home cinema choice review all kinds on a regular basis. There is no argument.
hah, they also review monster cables and "mains cleaners".. its in their interest to promote the advertisers who ultimately pay for their existence.
if you fall for mag reviews then you deserve super expensive kit with lots of snake oil cables and gizmos :cuckoo:
The difference between 10 bits and 12 bits for a DAC is irrelevant if the TV it feeds only has 6-8 bits per colour (like many '100 Hz' TV framestores).
Of course the real resolution of the tube is so poor that all the mega resolution claimed by expensive DVD players is completely lost at show time too.
Most good (not expensive or cheap) TV's you would be lucky to resolve 300 lines , many somewhat less :). A projector is the only place where the extra res may be useful but then these have relatively low pixel count imagers for the size of image produce and....
They sample what comes in and store it just like the 100 Hz TVs and i bet they don't use 12 bit ADC's to do it either :) .
The majority of broadcast material produced over the years only uses 6 bits per primary colour and 6 for luminance and i don't see that many complaints :).
Most audio equipment uses a 1 Bit DAC :doh: so counting bits is fairly pointless anyway (read up on oversampling and sigma delta).
So in summary expensive DVD players have fancier specs (like the Merc) and may look nicer (like the Merc) but the cheap ones, like the Rover get people from A to B exactly the same :D
/me points at his £30 rover 820 :clap:
as long as you're happy with what you've bought it doesn't really matter how much you've spent.
Exactly Taq, makes you wonder why they join in on bargain threads with "expensive is better" rants when somebody declares "cheap is good"... perhaps they aren't so happy after all :norty:
Bill
i prefer buying expensive stuff cheaply ;)
whats your point? of course it depends on the final link in the chain, but thats not the point, you cant just say 'haha to all those who paid 500 quid for their dvd player' because as ive said before, thats rubbish. If you want the best, then its up to you whether or not you want to squeeze the best image/sound reproduction possible. Audio bandwidth is not the same as video.
Pointless, suggest we start a thread in the hardware forum as this is for the bargain, and as i have stated before, 30 quid players are.
ur_the_lame
10-05-2004, 14:09
and as i have stated before, 30 quid players are. .....a bargain :)
pld
gg
bye
Bill
Progressive scan is useless unless you have a very pricey tv that is compatible.
AndyWilson
10-05-2004, 21:17
..or a cheap plasma :D
btw... my acura is on it's way back to Somerfield tomorrow - locks up on every DVD I play. :( Very good prog scan picture though!
Grandmaster
10-05-2004, 21:40
I have several DVD players and have worked through several cheapies.
The biggest problem I have found with the cheapo players is that the electricals are really badly shielded and the "leaky" signal filters through to the video. A lot of the cheapo players have integrated power leads and that's the kiss of death.
On my plasma screen the difference between my cheapies and my Pioneer 444 is pretty obvious to see. That said, my main DVD player is a Chinese job (albeit one with a DVI output!) and it's absolutely brilliant.
I think the best compromise is probably one of those £70-£80 Toshiba or Pioneer players... still fairly "disposable" but far superior shielding and build quality.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.