Home / TVs & Audio / Blu-ray Player / Samsung BD-C6900 / 3D Testing and Verdict

Samsung BD-C6900 - 3D Testing and Verdict

By Danny Phillips



  • Recommended by TR
Samsung BD-C6900


Our Score:


For 3D testing, we viewed Monsters Vs Aliens on Samsung’s UE46C8000 LED TV. In terms of quality, it’s hard to say where this deck stands in the grand scheme of things as it’s the first 3D Blu-ray deck we’ve tested. But on face value it certainly appears to do a decent job, making the image look deep and layered without compromising on detail clarity or colour vibrancy, even through the tint of the lenses.

After your eyes have grown accustomed to the effect, you start marvelling at the way characters seem to stand forward from backgrounds, and the exaggerated sense of perspective and distance that you don’t get from 2D pictures.

But as we discovered with the HT-C6930W, 3D playback isn’t always the breathtaking spectacle it’s cracked up to be. This is due largely to ghosting, where the faint outline of an object is visible next to it (most commonly thin dark lines set against light backgrounds), which muddles up the overall 3D effect.

The clearest example of this is the movie’s Golden Gate bridge sequence, where the bridge’s posts and suspension cables look blurred. As a result, you can’t get ‘lost’ in the image as much as the 3D hype-mongers would have you believe. We don’t know how much of this is down to the TV, but either way it’s something that will need sorting if 3D is ever going to take off.

Sonically, we can’t fault the Samsung – soundtracks fed to our test receiver through the HDMI output or the 7.1-channel outputs are clear, expansive and bursting with detail.


Even without its 3D capabilities, the BD-C6900 would be one of the best Blu-ray players on the market. It boasts a phenomenal range of features, the most impressive of which are comprehensive multimedia support and wireless networking, while its 2D picture quality, fast disc loading and slick operating system are also to be applauded. The only issue is the ghosting on 3D playback, but this is sure to be ironed out over time and the extra depth and visual dynamism still inspire enough wonder to make it worth the investment.

Overall Score


Scores In Detail

  • Performance 8
  • Value 9
  • Features 9
  • Design 9


June 11, 2010, 5:41 pm

one of the bes players on the market? It's £300 it can be no where near a more expensive player. If you said it was one of the best players below £500 or something i might lend the reveiw more credence.

And PS it's a seriously ugly player

meeto 0

June 11, 2010, 8:56 pm

@Brian, whilst aesthetics is a personal decision I have to side with the reviewer and say its a beautiful player. And why does a player have to cost £1000 for it to be considered one of the best players on the market. Above a certain price point is there any credible difference in picture quality when sampling Blu Rays from the main manufactures.


June 11, 2010, 10:59 pm

@Brian - what a daft thing to say. Just because it's under £500 does not mean it's not the best


June 12, 2010, 3:10 am

Not sure about the best in class statement, but I agree that it's one of the best looking pieces of kit I've ever seen (bearing in mind that beauty's in the eye of the beholder). I hope this kind of design filters down into Samsung's cheaper, non-3D, Blu-ray players.


June 12, 2010, 4:15 pm

Hope they get this ghosting sorted as it sounds like a potentially

great machine.


June 12, 2010, 7:34 pm

The thing is you can get a £1000 Blu Ray player and because you have your tv settings slightly out means it is in fact a worse picture than with the £300 player.

comments powered by Disqus