Which DVD player

Honestly speaking the 2 channel of Denon & Marantz is quite disappointing. I compare them together recently.

I think you ought to give the Rotel & Arcam an audition before deciding. The Arcam should by far the best sounding 2channel followed by Rotel, Denon then Marantz. This is according to my listening preference for 2 channel. For video performance, I don't really care since all of the players mentioned are very good in that aspect.

God luck.

The Onkyo SP1000 has significantly better build quality, sound, and UI/interface than the Marantz universal. Only thing it's missing is 480i over HDMI, but it sounds like you don't need that anyway if you're planning on upconverting at the player level.

I'd go a different route: Toshiba 2d gen HD-DVD player, for superb HD, great (better than Oppo) upconverting, and very good sound [note that this is a projection of 2d gen performance, based on current models]...and then get a Rega Apollo, modded Jolida, or other really good dedicated CD player for two channel music. Total cost c. $2K.

This approach optimizes the performance demands for each device. All-in-ones, unless you're spending significantly more than your apparent budget, tend to suffer in the same way all-season tires do -- they're decent at most things, but not truly excellent at anything.

Just my two cents.

If you're still interested, I just purchased the Rotel RDV-1092, which actually converts to 1080p (as well as 1080i). For superior video output, one might want to consider the Denon 3930. However, when it comes to 2-channel analog playback, the 1092 is, from my perspective, the hands-down the best performer (I did compare it with the Denon and Arcam DV-137 in my own home, but separately - not A/B - side-by-side). The Arcam was also excellent at 2-channel playback, but at nearly $700 less (I got a great deal from my dealer), it was a no-brainer to go with the Rotel. I did do a serious side-by-side A/B comparison with the Rotel and my ARC DAC-II / EAD T-7000 transport (which is older gear by today's standards - but, at $6,000 ten years ago, was among the top of the heap). The Rotel was so good; I could not really distinguish any noticeable differences in performance. I went with the 1092 because of the audio performance, not because of the video. However, the video is outstanding. My plasma does not do 1080p, but at 720p the video is incredible (much better than the 1080i- I believe progressive is better than interlaced). Hope this is helpful.
Note: the Rotel does an outstanding job with red book CD playback. Also note, I believe Arcam did away with the SACD playback option for the DV-137 (the Rotel does not play SACD either). I am very satisfied with the Rotel.

Ben

Congrats 2chnlben, enjoy the rotel. BTW, how much did you pay? I am pretty set on the Rotel for source.