Vangor
I don't know about HDMI sounding better than analog. It would really depend on the DAC's used.
If you had a $500 receiver, then it's a safe bet that HDMI is probably the better way to go vs analog, as the analog inputs aren't likely to be that great.
If you have a higher end receiver or a controller then there is a chance the analog inputs could sound "better" than HDMI. It would depend on what you think sounds better to your ears and again, the quality of the DAC's in the 83 in comparison to your receiver's.
The 83 has very good DAC's in it and the 83SE are spec'ed even better.
Your question will be easier to address when there are decent reviews of the SE available.

It's all speculation for now.

I think you've got it a bit flip-flopped, audionirvana, but I agree with your intent. HDMI is going to put the analog workload on the receiver (staying in the digital domain upstream of it), and a $500 receiver is likely to have a lower quality analog section than the stock BDP-83 - as a result, the analog input to the receiver from the BDP-83 is likely to sound better because it bypasses the DAC's and goes straight to the amplification with minimal influence from the receiver's internal analog section. A higher-end unit will have a better analog section with better D/A conversion performance, thus making HDMI a more appealing option.

I am running my Oppo BDP-83 to my Onkyo 805 receiver (using it as a pre/pro) using the supplied HDMI cable. My Onkyo has Burr Brown DAC's. I don't know which is better between Cirrus Logic and Burr Brown. If running the audio out through the analog section of the Oppo 83 SE to high end equipment is the purpose of the Special Edition model, then what's the purpose of paying high dollar for the high end processor your connecting too if the Oppo is doing all the video work and digital to analog converting?

Thanks for your input Gonk.I can attest that the 7.1 Direct sounds good in my system but it is no where near as good sounding as the optical sound. It has to do with the 5.1 downmix to the 990 in that it tries to use the center channel for all of the voice signal and my center cannot match the LR for richness of sound. It would have been nice to have the BDP-83 have a menu for downmix with 2.1 upsample as an option.

Any opinions out there as to what my first Blu-Ray should be. I have a lot of good DVDs which I won't likely upgrade so everyones suggestions are welcome.

It's not just a question of the DAC's - it is how the DAC's are implemented. Burr Brown is a widely recognized name, but there are equally good or better DAC's available. The stock DAC's in the BDP-83 are the top-of-the-line from Cirrus. My 885 (based on the Onkyo 905 receiver) also uses Burr Brown DAC's, and the BDP-83's Cirrus DAC's matched up very well - as I said, my wife preferred the 83's 7.1 analog output for CD listening.
There is a common perception that we must have HDMI. The reality is that HDMI has been a debacle from the word go. The connector is poorly designed. The feature set has been a moving target (we're on our fifth version in less than seven years). The encryption standard that was chosen (HDCP) is a poorly-enforced headache. Even the decision to build it around an existing computer digital video standard (DVI) is questionable, since DVI was meant for desktop PC's located very close to their monitors and thus came with a 15-meter length limitation that is a real problem for projector-based systems or systems with remote equipment racks. HDMI can be really handy when it works, but it also has a lot of really unfortunate baggage - not the least of which is that it is only a few years old.

That brings us to one of the reasons for OPPO to put some real care into the design of the BDP-83's analog section. Surround processors didn't spring into existence after HDMI arrived. If we limit ourselves to "high end" surround processors released in the last ten years, there are a lot of really good units that appeared without HDMI. Anthem had the AVM-20 and AVM-30. Lexicon had the MC-12, including several hardware and software upgrades. Companies like Proceed, Theta, and many others had some very, very good products during that time. Companies like Rotel, Adcom, and Outlaw have had a number of very good products as well that deserve mention, even if some may place them a step down from the elites of the industry. I've got a co-worker with a Rotel 1068 and another with an Outlaw 990. Both are great pieces of gear. Neither guy wants to invest a thousand dollars or more in a new, more complex processor just to get access to an HDMI port that will offer them a better audio alternative for exactly one component. Yet if they want a player with an analog section that at least equals their processor, they won't find that in a Sony or Panasonic player. They could go to a Pioneer Elite, Denon, Marantz, or Lexicon player, but it will cost them a lot. Or they could go with the BDP-83, which lets them protect their investment in surround processor. That is the purpose of the Special Edition - and, to a lesser degree, the purpose of the stock BDP-83.

There is a market for an OPPO player with the BDP-83's capabilities that omits the really potent analog section. Folks with those new high dollar, high end HDMI-equipped processors could get such a player for less than the BDP-83 costs. I think we'll see such a player eventually. At the moment, though, the BDP-83 offers a lot of player for the money even for people in that position. The $500 that OPPO sells the 83 for is a bargain when you consider what's under the hood - even if you don't use the analog output. That's why so many people with receivers like your 805 have been singing the player's praises this year. They could have priced it at $600 or $700 and it would have been worth the money. The good analog is icing on the cake and an acknowledgement that there are people out there who don't want to throw out perfectly good non-HDMI gear just because the industry wants them to.

Well said Gonk! It's funny. You can call manufacturers direct and they can't give you an answer to your question as clear as Gonk can.

In OPPO's defense, their statement to you:
is in some ways just a less long-winded version of my own answer, without my editorial comments on the glory of HDMI...

With a BDP-83SE and the 990, I would like to avoid using the 990's DAC if possible. I have a 5.0 system with full range fronts and the center and rears being pretty good down to near 40 Hz.

Using the 7.1 analog direct inputs, I understand that all speakers must be set to large to avoid A/D/A conversion. I assume "all" means "all" so in a 5.0 system, I would still have to set the SW and Rear Surrounds in the 990 to large to avoid the conversion.

I could then have the player do the speaker adjustments.

But then I also have to consider my other sources--mainly my cable TV. In particular, with all the speakers set to large, would there be missing bass in the center and rears.

Am I thinking about this correctly? Any thoughts?

I think the best advise would be to set all speakers to large on the Oppo and sett them to small on the 990 thus letting the 990 do bass management. Using the 7.1 inputs, about all the 990 does is apply bass management and volume settings.That way yuor speaker settings ar applied for all sources, and the Oppo is doing youd digital-to-analog conversions.
I'm sure that Gonk will chime in on this, he's the Oppo expert.

Thanks, that is basically what I am doing now. The Oppo is all set to Large and on the 990 I have the 2 full-range fronts set to large and my center and surrounds set to small. I was just wondering if it is worth trying to get a little more performance out of the Oppo by avoiding the 990 DAC. The drawback is no bass management for my cable box but I wonder if there is much audio being directed to the center and rears below 45 HZ anyhow. Maybe it isn't worth messing with but I thought maybe I'd play with it and see what seems to be the best overall.