Do all blu ray player produce same quality? - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 12:02 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

TiVo and a VCR is like measuring on/off and simultaneous ratios (arm and leg). Measuring two simultaneous ratios would be closer to left and right arms.

I strongly disagree. How you can think that two things that would measure for example 400:1 and 10:1 with a single display are as close as left and right arms is beyond me. More like your left arm and your right index finger. You could say your left arm and your right ear are both appendages and the two CRs are both simultaneous CRs so therefore referring to your right ear as an arm would make sense, but I wouldn't agree.

Left and right arm would be more like one ANSI CR checkerboard and the inverse checkerboard or like a 4x4 ANSI checkerboard and an 8x2 checkerboard (240 pixels by 540 pixels), not like going from something 400+ pixels wide for resolution and something under 10 pixels wide for resolution.

And are you going to answer this question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Between that Samsung A800B with just over 100:1 ANSI CR and a Sony VW85 with about 400:1 ANSI CR which one do you think would have more CR for a single pixel checkerboard of white and black? Would it be more likely to be the one with more ANSI CR in this case (knowing the technologies) or the one with less ANSI CR?

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 12:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

I strongly disagree. How you can think that two things that would measure for example 400:1 and 10:1 with a single display are as close as left and right arms is beyond me.

The result is irrelevant... both are measuring a simultaneous ratio of two images. The vast differences between the two are clearly understood and as such do not separate them.
Charles R is offline  
post #93 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 12:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
darinp2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 21,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

The result is irrelevant... both are measuring a simultaneous ratio of two images. The vast differences between the two are clearly understood and as such do not separate them.

Of course they are both simultaneous CRs. You said they were ANSI CRs. There are billions of simultaneous CRs and ANSI CR is just an one of these. You might as well call everybody Nancy because you met somebody named Nancy. I don't think anybody would have argued with you if you had said something was a simultaneous CR, but now you seem to think that because ANSI CR is a specific example of a simultaneous CR (although with the official spec calling for 2 different images to be measured it gets a little more complicated) that means it makes complete sense to call every simultaneous CR ANSI CR. As I said, your left arm and your right ear are both appendages. Does that mean you should refer to your right ear as an arm and then continue defending it as if it were other people who were wrong?

And are you really claiming that the vast differences between an image that measures 400:1 and one that measures 10:1 are well understood and so referring to the 2nd one as the 1st is not a problem?

I understand the difference between an ear and an arm and wouldn't refer to an ear as an arm, nor would I refer to a measurement that measures 10:1 as ANSI CR on a projector with 400:1 ANSI CR. You obviously would and would keep claiming that this was a valid thing to do. Are you going to answer my question:
Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

Between that Samsung A800B with just over 100:1 ANSI CR and a Sony VW85 with about 400:1 ANSI CR which one do you think would have more CR for a single pixel checkerboard of white and black? Would it be more likely to be the one with more ANSI CR in this case (knowing the technologies) or the one with less ANSI CR?

Does the one with less ANSI CR have more ANSI CR in your view?

--Darin

This is the AV Science Forum. Please don't be gullible and please do remember the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
darinp2 is offline  
post #94 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 12:29 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

Because I look at ANSI CR as the process and results of measuring the 4x4 blocks. Not the pattern itself. Such that the static contrast ratio measured is important not what is being measured.

It doesn't matter what you look at as being.

You could look at a potato and go: look a frog!

ANSI CR is a specifically defined specification, using specific measurements across a specific test pattern on a display, which are then averaged together. It defines ONLY that one specific thing.

A different method of measuring off the same pattern, or a similar method of measurement off a different pattern is NOT ANSI CR. It may be similar and related (such as Greg Roger's "modified 'ANSI CR'") or it may be altogether different.

The ANSI CR is one particular defined method, as defined by the American National Standards Institute, of quantifying a contrast ratio of one particular scene in one particular way.

You cannot quantify ANSI CR in any way other than this specific way. You can define other type of contrast ratios, some very similar to and related to the ANSI CR and some that are completely dissimilar, but ANSI CR is one very specific and defined thing. And that is all it is. It can only be measured in one way, on one specific image. Everything different than that one specific way may be a CR, but it is not the ANSI CR.
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #95 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 12:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

It doesn't matter what you look at as being.

You could look at a potato and go: look a frog!

ANSI CR is a specifically defined specification, using specific measurements across a specific test pattern on a display, which are then averaged together.

This was agreed upon pages ago.
Charles R is offline  
post #96 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

You cannot quantify ANSI CR in any way other than this specific way. You can define other type of contrast ratios, some very similar to and related to the ANSI CR and some that are completely dissimilar, but ANSI CR is one very specific and defined thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by darinp2 View Post

No. Only ANSI checkerboards have ANSI CR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

I completely agree with you on a definition basis. It is what it is. However I see the process and results being important not the pattern itself. As such I see the watch having an equivalent ANSI CR... meaning it's measurement is based on the same (general) principle. The one principle is related close enough to largely explain the other.

If one doesn't feel the concept is close enough to called one thing or another I certainly can't say their opinion is wrong.
Charles R is offline  
post #97 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WhatHappend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern MN
Posts: 1,791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

If one doesn't feel the concept is close enough to called one thing or another I certainly can't say their opinion is wrong.

Of coarse you couldn't, because it would be impossible, since they are right.

But on the other hand if one thinks they are the same, they are wrong as has been proved over and over.

ANSI CR is not a concept, but a specific standard.
WhatHappend is offline  
post #98 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 01:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhatHappend View Post

ANSI CR is not a concept, but a specific standard.

Missed it yet again. I never suggested it was.
Charles R is offline  
post #99 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 02:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WhatHappend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern MN
Posts: 1,791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

Missed it yet again. I never suggested it was.

hum..... I thought you said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

If one doesn't feel the concept is close enough to called one thing or another I certainly can't say their opinion is wrong.

WhatHappend is offline  
post #100 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 02:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhatHappend View Post

hum..... I thought you said:

I did... where does it say ANSI CR is a concept?
Charles R is offline  
post #101 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
WhatHappend's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern MN
Posts: 1,791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

I did... where does it say ANSI CR is a concept?

Which concept are you referring to then? The art of confusion while posting on a message board?


All three posts you quoted all were referring to ANSI CR explicitly.
WhatHappend is offline  
post #102 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 02:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhatHappend View Post

Which concept are you referring to then?

Concept: an abstract idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

The one principle is related close enough to largely explain the other.

Charles R is offline  
post #103 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 03:17 PM
 
ChrisWiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 20,730
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

This was agreed upon pages ago.

Then why are still arguing when we all agree that you're wrong?
ChrisWiggles is offline  
post #104 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 04:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

Then why are still arguing when we all agree that you're wrong?

Because they never understood the original concept and would like to define it under their own terms. Sort of normal for AVSers. How closely one simultaneous ratio method is related to or explains another unfortunately isn't black and white.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisWiggles View Post

You can define other type of contrast ratios, some very similar to and related to the ANSI CR and some that are completely dissimilar, but ANSI CR is one very specific and defined thing.

I thought the differences were more than obvious and the similarities similar. Others rather play semantics and bypass the concept and when they did I instantly agreed by definition.
Charles R is offline  
post #105 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 04:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
b curry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: on the way to Hell, Michigan USA
Posts: 2,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post

...I thought the differences were more than obvious and the similarities similar. Others rather play semantics and bypass the concept and when they did I instantly agreed by definition.

Charles, do you by any chance work for the US government?
b curry is offline  
post #106 of 162 Old 10-15-2009, 04:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 9,807
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by b curry View Post

Charles, do you by any chance work for the US government?

Luckily for them (and you) I don't.
Charles R is offline  
post #107 of 162 Old 10-20-2009, 08:25 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
kouasupra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
What does everybody think about the Pioneer BDP-320? It's cheaper than the OPPO and produce almost the same PQ as the OPPO.
kouasupra is offline  
post #108 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 08:15 AM
Member
 
mainly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
assuming your only concerned with image quality, which i am, and not features, will there be any percievable difference amongst blu ray players?

this is, when playing a blu ray disc.

i assumed no, since its digital in, digital out, no conversion?? but im not sure.

for example right now i have a cheapo player(150 dollars), although the other parts of my system are pretty nice. would i see a difference if i bought say a 1000 or 2000 dollar blu ray palyer? do they even make them that expensive?


what about audio? i guess the da converters would play a part there? its for this reason that i may get a better player, as i come out of my blu ray player, analog, and into my amp.
mainly is offline  
post #109 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 08:53 AM
Advanced Member
 
hifi59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mainly View Post

assuming your only concerned with image quality, which i am, and not features, will there be any percievable difference amongst blu ray players?

this is, when playing a blu ray disc.

i assumed no, since its digital in, digital out, no conversion?? but im not sure.

for example right now i have a cheapo player(150 dollars), although the other parts of my system are pretty nice. would i see a difference if i bought say a 1000 or 2000 dollar blu ray palyer? do they even make them that expensive?

what about audio? i guess the da converters would play a part there? its for this reason that i may get a better player, as i come out of my blu ray player, analog, and into my amp.

Yes,without doubt. Many will say no diff. The differences are not huge,but noticeable. If one takes the time to live with each player for at least a few hours and with a variety of programs,these difference will make themselves known.Variables range from noise level differences to over sharpening of image to overly contrasty images. My experience shows the last year pioneers to be best for BR image and amongst the best from video and DVD up conversion. I have not seen the Oppo 83 yet, but I'm sure it's a great BR and DVD player.

If you're talkin, you ain't learnin.
hifi59 is offline  
post #110 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,528
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mainly View Post

assuming your only concerned with image quality, which i am, and not features, will there be any percievable difference amongst blu ray players?

this is, when playing a blu ray disc.

i assumed no, since its digital in, digital out, no conversion?? but im not sure.

for example right now i have a cheapo player(150 dollars), although the other parts of my system are pretty nice. would i see a difference if i bought say a 1000 or 2000 dollar blu ray palyer? do they even make them that expensive?


what about audio? i guess the da converters would play a part there? its for this reason that i may get a better player, as i come out of my blu ray player, analog, and into my amp.

The main difference you will see with an all digital system on Blu-ray Discs is in the 1080i deinterlacing capabilities of various Blu-ray players. Most HDTVs do a poor job of deinterlacing 1080i as it is not a priority feature for people, and the same goes for Blu-ray players.

Now, while 85-90% of Blu-ray Discs are 1080p24, the remaining 10-15% are 1080i - this includes everything from films (i.e. Time Bandits, Short Circuit, Beer League) to concerts (i.e. Foo Fighters, Nine Inch Nails) to documentaries (i.e. Nature's Journey, Galapagos). Anything that is 30fps will be 1080i, and there are some 24fps movies like the ones mentioned above that are stored as 1080i due to having 1080i masters.

If a player is not good at 1080i, you will definitely see a marked difference compared to a player that is good with 1080i sources - especially in fine detail.

Now just because a player is expensive does not mean it is good at 1080i. For instance, the DENON 3800 and SONY 5000ES both retailed well over $1000 and fail to pass all the 1080i BD tests.

The players I would recommend at this point for pure BD all-HDMI quality would be the following:

Oppo BDP-83
Panasonic DMP-BD85
Panasonic DMP-BDT300 (also does 3D BD)
Panasonic DMP-BDT350 (also does 3D BD)
Pioneer BDP-09FD

The upcoming Denon DBP2011 also looks very promising.


The player that is the worst at 1080i is also the most common one - the PS3 - as it fails to deinterlace 1080i at all, leaving it to the HDTV which usually botches the job.
moska likes this.

Vote with your wallet. Don't buy Cinavia-infected Blu-ray Discs! Why pay a premium for pseudo-lossless audio damaged by an intrusive watermark in the audible spectrum?
Ruined is offline  
post #111 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 10:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
hifi59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post


The main difference you will see with an all digital system on Blu-ray Discs is in the 1080i deinterlacing capabilities of various Blu-ray players. Most HDTVs do a poor job of deinterlacing 1080i as it is not a priority feature for people, and the same goes for Blu-ray players.

Now, while 85-90% of Blu-ray Discs are 1080p24, the remaining 10-15% are 1080i - this includes everything from films (i.e. Time Bandits, Short Circuit, Beer League) to concerts (i.e. Foo Fighters, Nine Inch Nails) to documentaries (i.e. Nature's Journey, Galapagos). Anything that is 30fps will be 1080i, and there are some 24fps movies like the ones mentioned above that are stored as 1080i due to having 1080i masters.

If a player is not good at 1080i, you will definitely see a marked difference compared to a player that is good with 1080i sources - especially in fine detail.

Now just because a player is expensive does not mean it is good at 1080i. For instance, the DENON 3800 and SONY 5000ES both retailed well over $1000 and fail to pass all the 1080i BD tests.

The players I would recommend at this point for pure BD all-HDMI quality would be the following:

Oppo BDP-83
Panasonic DMP-BD85
Panasonic DMP-BDT300 (also does 3D BD)
Panasonic DMP-BDT350 (also does 3D BD)
Pioneer BDP-09FD

The upcoming Denon DBP2011 also looks very promising.

The player that is the worst at 1080i is also the most common one - the PS3 - as it fails to deinterlace 1080i at all, leaving it to the HDTV which usually botches the job.

I just recently put the pannys up against my Pioneer 23fd . Their image quality for BR was Pioneers equal except for a slighty noisier image easily seen in brighter sunlit scenes. Nothing crazy here,but noticeable. Other than that and their physical ugliness (subjectively) they are great players.

If you're talkin, you ain't learnin.
hifi59 is offline  
post #112 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 10:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Ruined's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 3,528
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

I just recently put the pannys up against my Pioneer 23fd . Their image quality for BR was Pioneers equal except for a slighty noisier image easily seen in brighter sunlit scenes. Nothing crazy here,but noticeable. Other than that and their physical ugliness (subjectively) they are great players.

I actually found the DMP-BDT350 to perform ahead of my Pioneer 51FD both subjectively (real life material) and objectively (HQV & Snell/Wilcox BD) on 1080i BD & DVD material, saw no difference in 1080p24 BD once all of the features/video modes of both were disabled. But, the 51FD and 23FD - which are very similar in video output aside from the 23FD's superior deep color upconversion - are both out of production and hard to find so they are kind of a moot point.

The Denon DBP2011 looks super attractive, though it won't be here til January 2011... Will probably see how the Oppo replacement fares against the 2011, buy whichever is better to replace the BDT350 (which is awesome, but on DVD is not as good as the ABT-based players).

Vote with your wallet. Don't buy Cinavia-infected Blu-ray Discs! Why pay a premium for pseudo-lossless audio damaged by an intrusive watermark in the audible spectrum?
Ruined is offline  
post #113 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 12:48 PM
Member
 
jedovaty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: orange county, CA
Posts: 119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruined View Post

The player that is the worst at 1080i is also the most common one - the PS3 - as it fails to deinterlace 1080i at all, leaving it to the HDTV which usually botches the job.

If your TV doesn't botch the job, is it good?
jedovaty is offline  
post #114 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 01:24 PM
Member
 
mainly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
thanks guys, i think ive got my answer as far as the difference in video quality, subjective this , subjective that, a little noise here... yada yada yada...

but as far as the audio, maybe that should be more aof a concern,

that would be more dependent on which level player i went with...?

any suggestions on a player with good audio da converters?
mainly is offline  
post #115 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 01:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
thebland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Detroit, Michigan USA
Posts: 23,618
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 88
Search a number of polls I did on this.

Short answer (for 1080P24): No.

There are more than a handful of [op amps] that sound so good that most designers want to be using them as opposed to discreet transistors. Dave Reich, Theta 2009
thebland is online now  
post #116 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 02:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
hifi59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebland View Post

Search a number of polls I did on this.

Short answer (for 1080P24): No.

If your tv is large enough,calibrated and resolute enough then ignore them polls. I know that you seek the best and have a good eye, but There are difference at 1080/24. Compare an Lg 590 to the Pioneer 23 to a Sony 770. Three somewhat different pictures with the Pioneer being the most correct (not overly sharpened or hot contrasty image ,with all else being equal). While viewed on their own,one would not likely conclude that this one is oversharpened or that one has a hot image unless you have a really good eye.

If you're talkin, you ain't learnin.
hifi59 is offline  
post #117 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 03:43 PM
Member
 
mainly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by hifi59 View Post

If your tv is large enough,calibrated and resolute enough then ignore them polls. I know that you seek the best and have a good eye, but There are difference at 1080/24. Compare an Lg 590 to the Pioneer 23 to a Sony 770. Three somewhat different pictures with the Pioneer being the most correct (not overly sharpened or hot contrasty image ,with all else being equal). While viewed on their own,one would not likely conclude that this one is oversharpened or that one has a hot image unless you have a really good eye.

well, my "TV" is pretty large. (JVC-RS15, 144" screen, 2.35:1)
mainly is offline  
post #118 of 162 Old 09-04-2010, 05:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
hifi59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Florida
Posts: 679
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by mainly View Post


well, my "TV" is pretty large. (JVC-RS15, 144" screen, 2.35:1)

Hoo wee doggy , that's one big o' tv. Yea,ok you have a pro-jo and that should make it ez to see these subtle,yet noticeable differences between players.

If you're talkin, you ain't learnin.
hifi59 is offline  
post #119 of 162 Old 09-06-2010, 10:17 AM
Member
 
RhoXS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Since the prices for many Blu-Ray players seem to now be between $150 and $200, I stopped at Best Buy to see what specifically is available. Since I am not that familiar with the various features available with Blu-Ray players, I asked the salesman about the differences between the under $200 players and the ones in the $300 to $400 range. I was expecting to hear him tell me about features the more expensive ones have. Instead, he simply said the more expensive Blu-Ray players will provide a better quality picture. The ensuing dialog led me to believe that there will be a noticeable difference.

I am skeptical that the playback quality will be consequentially different between any Blu-Ray player but I do not know for sure. What is really the truth?

If the under $200 class of players provides less than a great viewing experience (on my 52" Sony W series), the prices have not yet fallen to the point where I am willing to buy one. However, if there is no noticeable difference, I will probably buy one this week.
RhoXS is offline  
post #120 of 162 Old 09-06-2010, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
eddy_winds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,747
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:


What is really the truth?

It's the features..

Netflix, apps, etc

My mom works for Sony, and she brought home a copy of "Starhawk BETA"
I quickly slipped it into my trusty PS3, and started playing.


GOOZEX Game/Movie Exchange
eddy_winds is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Players

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off