Here is a suggestion to all of you, who buy $7000 CD player combos.Buy this instead. I've seen the specs on the transports and D/A
converters. I've heard the sound played back on so called audiophile
set-ups. One unit that stands out as having the ability both in
specs and in sound quality is the DVL-700. Not the Elite, but
the Elite is just something Pioneer makes to steal rich people's
money. The DVL-700 is not gold or silver looking, and is not
made of metal. It's not particularly preety looking. But it
gets the job done as good as any CD player, and will keep up with
the dynamics of the best CD combos in the world (103db dynamic range).
Is as quiet as the best CD combos in the world (115db S/N). Will
sound as clean on a high-end pre-amp as any CD combo in the world as
a result of the high S/N. I can attest to the sound quality as
smooth and rich with high detail in all frequency ranges with
excellent linearity. Also is quite a bit cheaper than other so-
called 'high-end' players. Sure this unit doesn't have heavy
metal glued to the inside to make it 50 pounds, but no player
needs to be that heavy anyway. It certainly doesn't have an elegant
appeal, but I don't care, it stands with the best sonically.
Best of all, lets see your combo CD players play DVDs and LDs, as
well as CDs. For $7000 dollars, I can buy a whole system, why
would I spend any more than I need to for a CD player that is
easily equalled by many cheaper models. The only differnce is
that the cheaper ones look ugly and the expensive ones look like
art, but they sound the equally as good no matter how you 'look'
at it. I might get flamed, but only by rich people who will
defend the purchase of their fine art. I, on the other hand care
only for good sound, spending only what I have to, accepting no
gimmicks, just the best sound, for the best price.
Pioneer's DVL-700 does it all, without audiophile rhetoric, but with
great specs, and the convienience of an all in one design. For those
of you who believe in separates: The sheilding inside most multi-
purpose units is already below human hearing at loud volumes
(unless your ear is next to the speaker). Separates don't sound
any cleaner, because they don't spec out any better. Specs are
misleading sometimes, but not in this case. Pioneer is known to
exaggerate wattage, but not Signal to Noise Ratios. Most major
manufacturers are quite honest. In fact they are so honest, that
sometimes they don't include certain performance specs, because
they didn't do well. Digital filters are no different than DSPs
on a signal processor. Everybody uses them in their CD players
to elevate the medium resolution of 16-bit wording through
equalization and ambient enhancement. So, when you hear the phrase
'digital filter' or 'alpha processing' or 'Pro-bit' or any of these
'creative' euphemisms, you can just call it DSP, or equalization,
or ambient enhancement through digital manipulation. That is why
I laugh when so many of these 'audiophiles' slam the use of
equalizers and then turn around and say one D/A converter or CD
player is better than another. They were fooled by crafty
wording, and veiled manipulation of electronics. Think back and
ask yourself why CD players sounded 'off' compared to vinyl until
Technics invented the MASH noise shaper (or digital filter). After
that, every high-end electronics manufacturer scrambled to immitate
the cheaper 1-bit D/A converter that Technics invented and came up
with their own versions of MASH, which today is being called a
digital filter. So many of you are being manipulated by the press,
and the hype, and the price tag, and the gimmicks, that don't
improve performance one BIT.(used up joke, sorry) I give some
examples of the advertising and technical lingo that fools so many
audio buffs. "Solid steel face plate to reduce resonance" (does
nothing to improve performance, but is worth an extra $1,000) or
"Two power transformers built in, one for the IC-board and one
for the motor" (also, insignificant noise reduction, you simply
will not audibly hear the difference even in headphones) or "Gold
plated jacks for better conductivity" (while gold is better at
conducting electrical current, nickel plating is very near gold's
conductivity, and the change in metal will not improve the
sound audibly). None of these advertisers told you those FACTS,
did they. Their is a way to use a better design in the circuits
used, but almost no one will deviate from the basic fundementals
of circuit design. Currently, solid state electronics are designed
with similar laws of physics and subsequently very few designers
ever come up with a 'superior' solid state circuit design when
compared to their competetion. Onkyo being an exception to this
statement. This post will be debated by those who will defend
why they spent more than they had to. I don't blame them. If
I paid $7,000 for a gimmick based product, I'd probably be so
embarrased that I'd find any way to argue with the truth. Some
people are stubborn, and still believe that small, struggling
audio companies with 'angelic' names are superior in sound quality
when compared to large audio companies with 'mass market' names
when in fact most of these small companies are YEARS behing the
big boys in technological inovation. Small companies usually
copy the inovations of larger corporations and market their
new line of electronics with new names for the same thing
thats been out. Small companies are also big on gimmicks, but
small on sonic results when you reason out why the gimmick is not
improving anything sonically. Some people make their company
an exception, like Bob Carver, who is dedicated to electronic
inovation for sound improvement. But Carver is still over
charging for his products, that end up only a small slice above
'mass market' equipment when it comes to actual sonic improvement.
Some of what I'm saying will 're-educate' some people who have
been brainwashed by audio magazines that use dubious lingo to
compare products that are barely indistinguishable. I don't
care if someone paid $5,000 more per component for a minimal
increase in fidelity. Thats his problem to deal with, not
mine. I reccomend Denon receivers. They use high-end manufacturing
techniques both for the 'looks' and the circuit designs. No
gimmicks (AVR5600 exception) just quality merchandise at a
resonable price for 'high-end' sound. If you want more amplification
go with Adcom. They are as good as anyone, and the power will
have you begging for mercy. Adcom is cheaper and offers similar
results that no one really surpasses when compared to the
gimmicky offenders. I'm done, if you want to discuss this furthur,
don't use the board, simply e-mail me. Board room is precious, and
I've taken up enough.
Any more money than the Pioneer DVL-700, and your just wasting
your money on 'looks' and hype.

;>)~
Timothy

Own one about 2 years. No problem at all. Easy to operate and flexible. Not DTS compatible, but is there any DTS-DVD? Not DIVX compatible, no need to worry, DIVX is already dead by the way-Thanks GOD, we can save the earth from plasticand privacy pollution, becareful with DIVX.

Great to be able to play both DVDs and LDs through one receiver input.

First generation DVD player.

I have owned this player for over two years and it continues to perform very reliably. It is a real plus to play DVDs and LDs through one input on my Yamaha receiver. With my outboard laser dolby digital demodulator, I can play DD DVDs or LDs through the same input (once I figured how to wire it properly.) It is a very good LD player, and an okay first generation DVD player. Like many first generation DVD players, it does not handle disk flaws very well. I had a scratched disk that would not play on this player, but played nicely on a 2nd generation PC DVD player. Overall, it is a very nice player and I really like the remote.

Similar Products Used:

Other Pioneer combo players.

Plays DVDs, CDs, LDs.

No Component Video output, very slow start up, won't play VCDs or DTS DVDs. No TV functions on Remote. Hiccups on layerbreaks.

I originally bought this unit when it was first released in 1997. At the time it was the first machine that would play both LDs and DVDs. The room that I was putting this particular DVD player in had a serious size limitation, so I bought the DVL700 to consolidate the LD and DVD players together.

By the time I got the Pioneer player in May of 97 I had already used the DVPS7000 for about a month or so. I guess the Sony had spoiled me because boot up time on the Sony was just so much quicker. The picture also had a tendency to pixilize much more, the Sony hardly ever pixilized. Even simple things like hitting the menu on a DVD seemed to take much longer than the Sony.


The LD part of the player was also a dissapointment, I was replacing the CLDD703 Pioneer LD only player, I noticed that whenever the machine would play side B, small streaks would show up on the picture every once in a while. Also side flipping was very noisy, much noisier than the CLDD703. The good thing about the DVL700s LD player was that it would play Dolby Digital and DTS LDs without any problems.

After about 2 years with this machine I finally got rid of it, since I still had the size limitation I switched over to the DVD919, another Pioneer DVD/LD player, this Pioneer player had the ability to play DTS DVDs that I needed.

Overall I suppose since this was a first generation unit, bugs are to be expected, I just didn't like to have this many. In my other system that I have in the house I have a Pioneer LD player and Toshiba DVD player seperated, because given the opportunity I would never buy a combo unit again.

Similar Products Used:

Sony DVPS7000, Panasonic DVDLV75, Toshiba SD-5109, Proscan PS8610P, Pioneer DVL919.

Plays dolby surround and AC-3 in spectacular fashion when connected to my Pioneer VSX-V555 receiver that had a built-in RF demodulator.

One of my CDs became jammed because it had a slightly rough edge on the inner lip. The unit had to be brought back to the seller to unjam the CD. I haven't played that CD again on the unit, even though it plays on all my other CD units.

Other than the above mentioned cd that became jammed, the unit behaves well. It plays dolby surround on some lasers without having to connect the unit to the RF-in on my Pioneer receiver, while other lasers need to be hooked up to the RF-in. I haven't used any other laser units, but have never had any picture anomalies since buying the unit. Combined with my Pioneer The unit reproduces dolby surround of amazing quality, with deep basses and crystal clear separation.

Similar Products Used:

First time use of combo ld/dvd/cd.

I've had my DVL-700 for almost 2 years and, between CDs, DVDs and LaserDiscs my unit gets plenty of use. After all that time I can say that I have absolutely no complaints with this unit - it performs exceptionally well and it's easy to operate from its well designed remote control.I'm a fairly picky person when it comes to quality, price/performance and reliability with all my audio/video equipment - and I don't have mega-bucks to spend on so-called 'high end' systems. And I'm no audiophile but I know good sound and good performance when I hear and see it - if it's quality, trouble-free operation you want you can't do much better than the DVL-700 - bravo Pioneer !!