Oppo BDP-95 as a pure two channel audio source?

I'm using an OPPO BDP-85SE version with DynAudio C4 Signature II's and it's darn good sounding for a grand. I'd say it is the single best "deal" I've bought as far as sound and price. I use it for music 90% of the time. I would be happy to buy another one when it wears out based on what this unit provides.

But I agree 100%, to tell the difference you'd need to do it in the same system with the same source material (put one on AUX input and one on CD input and RIP the same CD and listen, switching back and fourth between the two synced together). Switch the two sources to remove that possible sound bias and see what you hear.

The "SE" unit is pretty well received by those that have indeed used "audio" only units with botique names. I'd still be interested in an A to B shoot-out before I drew a conclusion. I'll surely do that before I upgrade, or it might be a downgrade.

Just because something is sold in HUGE QTY, and can leverage a lower price, does it all of a sudden get you less quality of sound and for that reason. Audio has the opposite problem, to few units sold at high prices isn't making stuff sound better. You can spend much more than on the OPPO BDP-83SE and be worse off real easily.

...As long as you are not needing SACD...
]
Hum, standard CD format is pretty poor compared to SACD high-speed serial (which is roughly equivalent to 24bit/196K high-res files). The only source of digital that is even close to a LP record is SACD and hi-res 24 bit digital.

To me, using standard red book or 16-bit audio as some sort of digital hi-fi reference is pretty lame to my ears. If a unit can't play SACD, I'd skip right over it. There isn't enough in a 16 bit CD to be worth the effort to capture. CD digital is all about what is WRONG with "Hi-Fi" to day...source material is too limited in quality.

Until the music industry settles on a standard for h-res digital, were stuck with 16-bit garbage. I wish SONY didn't shoot itself in the foot AGAIN (beta verses VHS) and limit SACD to almost obsolescence.

I have records and a PHONO unit that are 40 years old and still work! Chew on that for a second.

Now chew on this, are you going to capture that "elusive" (it sure is!) sound when the digital format keeps changing it's spots? It isn't even the same animal year to year. Punch cards to tape to 5.25 floppy, to 3.5" floppy, to optical dics (CD, SACD, super DVD and blure ray), ETC. This is but the physical media, the format media is even worse (serial, parallel, USB (several flavors), fire wire, ETC. Nothing is as fleeting as digital, or data as "lost" in the format cycle. Oh I know, YOU have it licked "this" time it's different! Did you put ALL your records on CD an throw them away (I didn't)? Well, when the optical format goes, so does your music.

I want to relax with my stereo. Plop in a (something) and LISTEN. I don't want to run an IT department to load music. And yes, I'm an engineer. I build my PC's as they go obsolete and wonder why my 40 year old records sound so good.

I would love to be able to use a blue-ray recorder and hi-res files for music. I've heard Blue-ray as a format is already on the way out since we all use MP3's!. A nice little disc with two hours of music won't tax my old body one bit getting up off the couch. And, it is easily moved about. Fidelity is as near what even the best systems to manage (better dynamic range than ANY system can manage!). Shoot the engineer and format an AUDIO digital standard.

A record is a great example of doing it right. It maxed out the media quickly, and stopped. Sure, there was wax drums, 78 and such but the fidelity was measurably poor. When LP's were developed, the fidelity was exception even to measuement. A record made today is no different than it was in 1970. Well, they can use digital DACs and screw it up! 24/196 can be that standard. Over 50 years and counting.

I'd say USB stick except that this "standard" can't be kept still long enough to make it "legacy" to anything except temporary data storage. My music media needs to be more than temporary, and so does the standard.

The problem is, digital standards get ripped (pun intended)out from under you again and again at alarming frequency. So much work for so much money for so little actual compatibility.

I'd love to see 124-bit 96K hi-def be the "standard" until superior listenable performance is achieved. Speakers and amplifiers just can't come close to what 124/96 can offer so WHY do we migrate from that standard? Yes, it can be on CD's, USB's or your hard drive. But, the digital file is the SAME. Ones and zeroes can be the same and move to new technology for storage but to keep molesting the format itself?
So my beef is very simple. We move away from a good possible standard and to a fragmented mess of temporary confusion that leads to my permanent insanity with respect to digital.