Official 2012 Sony BDP-S790 Thread - Page 40 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1171 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 05:13 PM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
You will not see ANY differences in picture quality based upon the price or build quality of hdmi cables. You will either get a signal, or you won't.

Second I respectfully request that ANYONE reading this thread provide screenshots to back up assertions of better or worse picture quality so we can see for ourselves what you are talking about (detail, color, contrast, artifacts, etc).
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisccheese View Post

Due to joerod's review, tested oppo 95, 93 and sony s790. Apples and oranges, here. As 95 beats 93 easily on sound quality, sounding much more realistic on analog 7.1 outs to legacy equipment, 93 was out for me. 95 easily beats s790 on audio (it has beaten multithousand processors in reviews, so not a shock). s790 only has left, right dolby digital out for legacy equipment; you have to buy hdmi processor or receiver which at nearest BB was $500+. So best value of video and audio is actually the 93. And best audio (for $500 more) is the 95 which also has high end stereo out rated at A+, though for me it did not consistently win over older Sony ES cd player.
So why did I keep the s790? The test dvd - Austin Powers, Raiders. Bluray - CaddyShack, There's Something About Mary, T2, Hugo
Despite famed Qdeo upscaling, Sony much better, with clearer picture on dvds, near bluray sharpness. Did question whether 95 defaults had more pleasing color and better contrast, but pic was bit hazy. Clear win for Sony upscaling. Bluray Caddyshack pool scene a revelation with Sony, very realistic, other grainier scenes due to older picture cleaned up with the Sony. Still good to very good with Oppo though. Both Sony and Oppo downmixing sound to center on There's Something about Mary. Oppo very good pic, but Sony on apartment scenes could see everything in apartment clearly. Actors looked more realistic, too. T2, Sony slightly better with clearer Arnold and Terminator, but have to give 95 win due to much better sound quality. Hugo, Sony little clearer, but Oppo 95 tended to look better throughout, perhaps due matted colorized picture, so with sound a win for 95.
You do need a very good cable to see these differences, just as joerod has a very high end projector. Other factors, Oppo tends to have more hdmi handshake issues, taking 2 - 4 times when Sony takes 1 - 2 times. Sony much faster on pause and play, and on changing settings during movies. Sony does seem to have more judder (motion distortion) and color artifacts than Oppo which gets worse when using the higher settings joerod recommends. Sony does go darker in dark scenes, though Oppo may look better as can see more shadow detail. Sony will still go bright in bright scenes, though, but may have to adjust contrast for better whites.
Still wondering whether I should have kept 95 and Sony for different movies, that's how good the 95 movie sound is.
slimm and bakerwi like this.
johncourt is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1172 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 05:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisccheese View Post

Due to joerod's review, tested oppo 95, 93 and sony s790. Apples and oranges, here. As 95 beats 93 easily on sound quality, sounding much more realistic on analog 7.1 outs to legacy equipment, 93 was out for me. 95 easily beats s790 on audio (it has beaten multithousand processors in reviews, so not a shock). s790 only has left, right dolby digital out for legacy equipment; you have to buy hdmi processor or receiver which at nearest BB was $500+. So best value of video and audio is actually the 93. And best audio (for $500 more) is the 95 which also has high end stereo out rated at A+, though for me it did not consistently win over older Sony ES cd player.
So why did I keep the s790? The test dvd - Austin Powers, Raiders. Bluray - CaddyShack, There's Something About Mary, T2, Hugo
Despite famed Qdeo upscaling, Sony much better, with clearer picture on dvds, near bluray sharpness. Did question whether 95 defaults had more pleasing color and better contrast, but pic was bit hazy. Clear win for Sony upscaling. Bluray Caddyshack pool scene a revelation with Sony, very realistic, other grainier scenes due to older picture cleaned up with the Sony. Still good to very good with Oppo though. Both Sony and Oppo downmixing sound to center on There's Something about Mary. Oppo very good pic, but Sony on apartment scenes could see everything in apartment clearly. Actors looked more realistic, too. T2, Sony slightly better with clearer Arnold and Terminator, but have to give 95 win due to much better sound quality. Hugo, Sony little clearer, but Oppo 95 tended to look better throughout, perhaps due matted colorized picture, so with sound a win for 95.
You do need a very good cable to see these differences, just as joerod has a very high end projector. Other factors, Oppo tends to have more hdmi handshake issues, taking 2 - 4 times when Sony takes 1 - 2 times. Sony much faster on pause and play, and on changing settings during movies. Sony does seem to have more judder (motion distortion) and color artifacts than Oppo which gets worse when using the higher settings joerod recommends. Sony does go darker in dark scenes, though Oppo may look better as can see more shadow detail. Sony will still go bright in bright scenes, though, but may have to adjust contrast for better whites.
Still wondering whether I should have kept 95 and Sony for different movies, that's how good the 95 movie sound is.

Did you have the Super bit mapping engaged? and did you turn on any of the Qdeo enhancement features such as noise reduction, Contrast enhancement or sharpness or did you use the 95's default values?
audiofan1 is online now  
post #1173 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 05:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

You will not see ANY differences in picture quality based upon the price or build quality of hdmi cables. You will either get a signal, or you won't.
Second I respectfully request that ANYONE reading this thread provide screenshots to back up assertions of better or worse picture quality so we can see for ourselves what you are talking about (detail, color, contrast, artifacts, etc).
I take it your not a big fan of aftermarket cables?
audiofan1 is online now  
post #1174 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 06:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bakerwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Peach State
Posts: 2,840
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenD View Post

I know what you mean. To be honest,the Sony BDP S790 has more than enough features. And though it may not have the 7.1 analog inputs, you could get a decent HDMI based AV Receiver for the money saved by not going Oppo.

This is quite true if you don't require analog support.

Pioneer Elite PRO-151FD

Zektor MAS7.1

Classé CA-2200/CA-5200

Oppo BDP-105, Denon DVD-5910CI, Cambridge 752BD, Cambridge 640C V2

Paradigm Signature S8, Paradigm Signature ADP1

Paradigm Signature ADP3, Paradigm Signature C5

REL R-505 Sub (2)

Oppo BDP-93, BDP-103D, Pioneer BDP-320

Sony BDP-S790

bakerwi is offline  
post #1175 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 07:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bakerwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Peach State
Posts: 2,840
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

You will not see ANY differences in picture quality based upon the price or build quality of hdmi cables. You will either get a signal, or you won't.
Second I respectfully request that ANYONE reading this thread provide screenshots to back up assertions of better or worse picture quality so we can see for ourselves what you are talking about (detail, color, contrast, artifacts, etc).

John,

I've stop responding to individuals claims of better picture quality based on their subjective opinions and the adjectives they use to describe what they are seeing.smile.gif Some of these same individuals make these same claims as they move from transport to transport sometimes using the same adjectives to describe what they are seeing.smile.gif I respect ones preference for transport A or transport B, but I would NEVER base a buying decision based on someone else's eyes and then see EXACTLY what they are seeing even though our viewing environment and setup have nothing in common.eek.gif

I personally have red flags that I look for in the various postings.cool.gif

Pioneer Elite PRO-151FD

Zektor MAS7.1

Classé CA-2200/CA-5200

Oppo BDP-105, Denon DVD-5910CI, Cambridge 752BD, Cambridge 640C V2

Paradigm Signature S8, Paradigm Signature ADP1

Paradigm Signature ADP3, Paradigm Signature C5

REL R-505 Sub (2)

Oppo BDP-93, BDP-103D, Pioneer BDP-320

Sony BDP-S790

bakerwi is offline  
post #1176 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 07:33 PM
Member
 
wisccheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Wow, the members sure get nasty here on this site, especially since I was supporting the S790. Sorry, do not have high end camera or time to take pics like joerod. I did have exactly joerod's settings initially. I had SBM engaged at all times. Yes, good question on the Oppo 95; I did try the noise reduction and sharpness. It helped but I started seeing judder problems. I still kept it at level 1 and I ended up backing off on joerod's settings due to negative impact and that was also at level 1 for superresolution. As for cables, I was most of the time using a 10 dollar xtreme hdmi cable and could still see the sony vs oppo difference. I then got a longer and more expensive cable and believe it or not it looked better. Agree since digital it should not, but it did. This was true for both the sony and the oppo. And if people think they can get a 250 dollar sony and a 200 dollar 7.1 hdmi receiver for less than the 500 dollar oppo 93 ok.
wisccheese is offline  
post #1177 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 10:11 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
htwaits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 24,772
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

You will not see ANY differences in picture quality based upon the price or build quality of hdmi cables. You will either get a signal, or you won't.
I take it your not a big fan of aftermarket cables?
I've always used Monoprice "high speed" HDMI 28 AWG cables for lengths up to 15' in order to put as little stress on the connections as possible. I have very short cables (1.5') in my rack connecting our OPPO HDMI switch to our cable box and shiny disk players. A 15' cable goes through the wall to the display. As long as none of these cables turn out to be defective or their connections get sloppy, I expect them to work just as well as any HDMI cable on the market.

BUT, recently someone posted that short cables under four feet could cause trouble. Soon after that I was at Monoprice checking out their HDMI switches. Monoprice now has disclaimers, in red type, for all their HDMI switches, stating that the HDMI cables used with their switches should be at least four feet, and preferably six feet with at least 24 AWG. I don't need another switch right now so I haven't called Monoprice to clarify their warning.

So far all the installations that I've done (four biggrin.gif) are working fine. At the first sign of trouble my first test will be to swap out any suspected short 28AWG cable. The only problems outside the "it works or it doesn't work" principle is that there have been reports that slightly loose or strained HDMI connections can cause repeated handshake transmissions which lead to gaps in audio/video signals. I've never experience this type of problem, but they do seem to happen.

My first HDMI cable was a very heavy Monster cable that caused a lot of trouble because it was so stiff that it couldn't be bent in any reasonable way. I have used it successfully test components spread out on the floor to be tested before I submitted a Monoprice order. wink.gif

As for other types of interconnects, especially involving analog data, the quality of the cable is much more important. I never never get involved in those debates. eek.gif
htwaits is offline  
post #1178 of 3550 Old 06-10-2012, 11:12 PM
Member
 
taurus2007.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakerwi View Post

John,
I've stop responding to individuals claims of better picture quality based on their subjective opinions and the adjectives they use to describe what they are seeing.smile.gif Some of these same individuals make these same claims as they move from transport to transport sometimes using the same adjectives to describe what they are seeing.smile.gif I respect ones preference for transport A or transport B, but I would NEVER base a buying decision based on someone else's eyes and then see EXACTLY what they are seeing even though our viewing environment and setup have nothing in common.eek.gif
I personally have red flags that I look for in the various postings.cool.gif

Bake, this forum is for folks to share their experiences on products and what the naked eye visualizes, if you are basing buying decisions on statistics then so be it but statistics and specifications do not always equal superior performance in output to the human eye. If you look at product reviews
and experiences it appears people base their buying decisions on user reviews.
taurus2007. is offline  
post #1179 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 12:06 AM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by taurus2007. View Post

Bake, this forum is for folks to share their experiences on products and what the naked eye visualizes, if you are basing buying decisions on statistics then so be it but statistics and specifications do not always equal superior performance in output to the human eye. If you look at product reviews
and experiences it appears people base their buying decisions on user reviews.

The eye doesn't perceive, the brain does. And the brain receives emotional as well as sensory input. As in, "I paid $5K for this projector, and/or $1K for this player." When you factor in all of the variables, the sensory data is just one factor among many in our perception of reality.

There are countless individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes by "eyewitnesses," only to have genetic evidence overturn these convictions. They "saw" the perp in the lineup, even when the perp was not in the lineup. Picture quality evaluations are much less serious in nature, but just as haphazard and unreliable. Think of all of the variables that can affect one's perception of THE EXACT SAME IMAGE:

-variations in room lighting
-small or large variations in viewing distances or seating angle
-is your screen dirty?

There are tons of other trivial factors: do you have mucus in your eye? Are you tired from a hard night of partying?

And perhaps the most important is, how do you justify paying $120 for a single cable when you could've bought one with identical spec for $1.50? How do you justify a $1K player with inferior streaming specs compared to a $100 player? These anxieties and concerns also affect your perception as well.

On top of that, many of us prefer an inaccurate but "hot" image, ie very colorful, high contrast picture which wipes out a lot of detail.

The bottom line is, there is no reliable (corroborated) evidence which demonstrates ANY variation in blu ray picture quality from one brand or model to the next, unless there is a clear defect in processing (as smack rabbit discovered with the sonys).
johncourt is offline  
post #1180 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 12:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisccheese View Post

Wow, the members sure get nasty here on this site, especially since I was supporting the S790. Sorry, do not have high end camera or time to take pics like joerod. I did have exactly joerod's settings initially. I had SBM engaged at all times. Yes, good question on the Oppo 95; I did try the noise reduction and sharpness. It helped but I started seeing judder problems. I still kept it at level 1 and I ended up backing off on joerod's settings due to negative impact and that was also at level 1 for superresolution. As for cables, I was most of the time using a 10 dollar xtreme hdmi cable and could still see the sony vs oppo difference. I then got a longer and more expensive cable and believe it or not it looked better. Agree since digital it should not, but it did. This was true for both the sony and the oppo. And if people think they can get a 250 dollar sony and a 200 dollar 7.1 hdmi receiver for less than the 500 dollar oppo 93 ok.

Interesting indeed! After extensive comparisons for color spacing, 24 on or off, deep color on either of the offerings or off , I did notice that some configurations can induce judder but can other wise look great. I do however find with my Mitsubishi 73738 dlp RGB color space with 24p set to on and deep color at 30 bits or off to produce the best image and passes the test patterns via Spears and Munsil. When I keep hearing about the Sony's black level I hope no dynamic range is lost or shadow detail or heaven forbid black crush, can it be made to produce an accurate image? . I plan to try the up scaling on my 95 and play around with a little but this is of little use to me because I'm a sucker for Hi resolution these days, but I will post my findings.
audiofan1 is online now  
post #1181 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 12:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

The eye doesn't perceive, the brain does. And the brain receives emotional as well as sensory input. As in, "I paid $5K for this projector, and/or $1K for this player." When you factor in all of the variables, the sensory data is just one factor among many in our perception of reality.
There are countless individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes by "eyewitnesses," only to have genetic evidence overturn these convictions. They "saw" the perp in the lineup, even when the perp was not in the lineup. Picture quality evaluations are much less serious in nature, but just as haphazard and unreliable. Think of all of the variables that can affect one's perception of THE EXACT SAME IMAGE:
-variations in room lighting
-small or large variations in viewing distances or seating angle
-is your screen dirty?
There are tons of other trivial factors: do you have mucus in your eye? Are you tired from a hard night of partying?
And perhaps the most important is, how do you justify paying $120 for a single cable when you could've bought one with identical spec for $1.50? How do you justify a $1K player with inferior streaming specs compared to a $100 player? These anxieties and concerns also affect your perception as well.
On top of that, many of us prefer an inaccurate but "hot" image, ie very colorful, high contrast picture which wipes out a lot of detail.
The bottom line is, there is no reliable (corroborated) evidence which demonstrates ANY variation in blu ray picture quality from one brand or model to the next, unless there is a clear defect in processing (as smack rabbit discovered with the sonys).

Man if only that were all it was to it, while I agree with some of what your saying. "Cables matter" its really to bad well made ones tend to cost more but after 15yrs of different cables I learned to treat them as components with equal respect as I do my gear . As for the $1000 player if the Oppo 95 cost three grand I would've start saving, in my rig it has more than justified its price! It replaced two units which I sold and put out a 1/3 more in cash to get it. This should really make your head spin my cables just from the 95 alone cost more than two of them and to be honest I'd buy them again:D
audiofan1 is online now  
post #1182 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 12:50 AM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

Man if only that were all it was to it, while I agree with some of what your saying. "Cables matter" its really to bad well made ones tend to cost more but after 15yrs of different cables I learned to treat them as components with equal respect as I do my gear . As for the $1000 player if the Oppo 95 cost three grand I would've start saving, in my rig it has more than justified its price! It replaced two units which I sold and put out a 1/3 more in cash to get it. This should really make your head spin my cables just from the 95 alone cost more than two of them and to be honest I'd buy them again:D

You don't need experience with cables. All you need are test results showing which brands allow for the cable runs you need in your particular setup. You can't 'tweak' your picture by switching hdmi cables. It's not like fine tuning a radio dial. It's on or off. If you see differences, it's imaginary.

According to blue jeans cable, inexpensive hdmi cables are reliable to 50 feet.

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/how-long-can-hdmi-run.htm
johncourt is offline  
post #1183 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 01:02 AM
Member
 
taurus2007.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 24
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

The eye doesn't perceive, the brain does. And the brain receives emotional as well as sensory input. As in, "I paid $5K for this projector, and/or $1K for this player." When you factor in all of the variables, the sensory data is just one factor among many in our perception of reality.
There are countless individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes by "eyewitnesses," only to have genetic evidence overturn these convictions. They "saw" the perp in the lineup, even when the perp was not in the lineup. Picture quality evaluations are much less serious in nature, but just as haphazard and unreliable. Think of all of the variables that can affect one's perception of THE EXACT SAME IMAGE:
-variations in room lighting
-small or large variations in viewing distances or seating angle
-is your screen dirty?
There are tons of other trivial factors: do you have mucus in your eye? Are you tired from a hard night of partying?
And perhaps the most important is, how do you justify paying $120 for a single cable when you could've bought one with identical spec for $1.50? How do you justify a $1K player with inferior streaming specs compared to a $100 player? These anxieties and concerns also affect your perception as well.
On top of that, many of us prefer an inaccurate but "hot" image, ie very colorful, high contrast picture which wipes out a lot of detail.
The bottom line is, there is no reliable (corroborated) evidence which demonstrates ANY variation in blu ray picture quality from one brand or model to the next, unless there is a clear defect in processing (as smack rabbit discovered with the sonys).

John you posts are incomprehensible and inconsistent, it appears now you speak for most people on this forum, huh: "On top of that, many of us prefer an inaccurate but "hot" image"
taurus2007. is offline  
post #1184 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 02:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

You don't need experience with cables. All you need are test results showing which brands allow for the cable runs you need in your particular setup. You can't 'tweak' your picture by switching hdmi cables. It's not like fine tuning a radio dial. It's on or off. If you see differences, it's imaginary.
According to blue jeans cable, inexpensive hdmi cables are reliable to 50 feet.
http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/how-long-can-hdmi-run.htm

No offense to most here that use bluejeans cables as I've heard good things about them and already read the artical when first published .I have a Mono Price 24awg hdmi cable for my Cisco dvr but for the Oppo I use the Pangea hdmi 24awg occc with 4%silver which is modestly priced in the world of aftermarket cables and delivers deeper blacks and better color separation and well worth the investment. Do I need them no but do they take my audio/video experience to the next level, yes!
audiofan1 is online now  
post #1185 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 02:51 AM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

No offense to most here that use bluejeans cables as I've heard good things about them and already read the artical when first published .I have a Mono Price 24awg hdmi cable for my Cisco dvr but for the Oppo I use the Pangea hdmi 24awg occc with 4%silver which is modestly priced in the world of aftermarket cables and delivers deeper blacks and better color separation and well worth the investment. Do I need them no but do they take my audio/video experience to the next level, yes!

Again, I ask you, where is your evidence to back up your claim. There are really only two kinds: screenshots or screencaptures, or test data.

Forgive my skepticism, but in the past you've made the claim that oppo delivered superior picture quality compared to the sony, even though you've never owned or used the sony.
johncourt is offline  
post #1186 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 03:08 AM
Senior Member
 
johncourt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakerwi View Post

John,
I've stop responding to individuals claims of better picture quality based on their subjective opinions and the adjectives they use to describe what they are seeing.smile.gif Some of these same individuals make these same claims as they move from transport to transport sometimes using the same adjectives to describe what they are seeing.smile.gif I respect ones preference for transport A or transport B, but I would NEVER base a buying decision based on someone else's eyes and then see EXACTLY what they are seeing even though our viewing environment and setup have nothing in common.eek.gif
I personally have red flags that I look for in the various postings.cool.gif

People want to feel PROUD of their purchases. Often, their egos are tied up in these commodities. As in "I'm a high status individual because I own a high status and/or expensive brand of electronics." It doesn't make much sense when you type it our or especially when you say it, but this is the underlying belief that drives a lot of the marketplace.

When you attempt to question this false belief, and since there is no rational counter-argument, it leads to a lot of name-calling in order to preserve the belief, and hence one's own ego by extension.

People never want to feel as if they subscribe to incorrect beliefs, and to challenge anyone's belief seems to lead to automatic name-calling and anger.

It's very odd, but it's actually the basis of why wars begin (arguments over religion). People were condemned to death for arguing that the world was round, or that the earth revolved around the sun and not vice versa.

In this sense, arguments about picture quality are similar to arguments about religion, and likewise it can lead to very heated animosities.

Having said all of that, there are still facts that will not go away regardless of condemnation or name calling. The sun does not revolve around the earth, and there are no significant variations in picture quality between brands of blu ray players or hdmi cables.
johncourt is offline  
post #1187 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 03:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian-HD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 2,218
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by htwaits View Post

BUT, recently someone posted that short cables under four feet could cause trouble.

If you are going from BD>>AVR>>Display, both cables have to be over 4 feet?
Brian-HD is offline  
post #1188 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 05:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Wesley Hester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Selma, Alabama, USA
Posts: 1,992
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Shorter cables causing issue is new to me. I do know they are recommended by Monoprice and other makers of HDMI switches/splitters for better performance using those types of products.
Wesley Hester is offline  
post #1189 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 05:19 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
JMCecil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

No offense to most here that use bluejeans cables as I've heard good things about them and already read the artical when first published .I have a Mono Price 24awg hdmi cable for my Cisco dvr but for the Oppo I use the Pangea hdmi 24awg occc with 4%silver which is modestly priced in the world of aftermarket cables and delivers deeper blacks and better color separation and well worth the investment. Do I need them no but do they take my audio/video experience to the next level, yes!
Your brain says yes, physics says no. I'll go with the later.
JMCecil is offline  
post #1190 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 06:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
Smackrabbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Posts: 893
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 30
A couple notes:

- On the cable length thing, the 6' minimum length came up in discussion at the Lumagen forums. I haven't read it in depth enough to talk about it, but you can seek out the details here at AVS, or over at the Lumagen forums. Considering the handshake issues I have with my Marantz sometimes, I might swap in a couple more 6' cables and see if it makes a difference (same brand as what I currently use, to keep it the same)
- A different cable won't offer blacker-blacks or whiter-whites no more than a different Ethernet cable for my PC will offer sharper fonts on the emails I send. With all the encoding that happens to the signal on send and receive those things just don't happen.
- I see no point to offering a screenshot of anything. That's introducing a whole new level of variables with the camera, how the image was processed, and everything else. I'm trying to write something for the QD882 that lets me do a direct frame capture from players, and Stacey Spears has said I can use images from their discs for this if I would like, which can then show the processing effects. While screenshots of projector setups and such look nice sometimes, I don't think they offer any realistic version of what you are seeing with all the variables that come into play.

When someone mentioned that they showed their friends the enhanced and unenhanced versions back-to-back and they went for the enhanced ones, I wasn't surprised. We adapt very quickly to what the eye sees, and so if I change my TV from being calibrated to vivid and then back, the calibrated one will suddenly look dull and washed out. Before vivid was turned on it looked great, and 15 minutes later it'll be great again, but my eye has then adapted to that quick rush of color. It's why calibrators have to use instruments and not go by eye, since we adapt far too easily to visual changes and can't get a neutral grayscale by eye, or colors by eye, past a certain point.

The best ways to show the benefits of an accurate image are choosing material that will show the flaws of lacking one (say Art of Flight, where you will have totally clipped highlights while they snowboard, and you can easily see the mountains go from detailed to just flat white) as with quick images of normal material you might not tell. I think of it this way: If someone drinks their coffee all the time with sugar or Coffee Mate, they're not going to like plain coffee (or just coffee with some cream, but no sugar). If you just give them both right after each other, no matter how good the plain coffee is they won't like it. Now if they spend a few weeks adapting to coffee with less and less sugar and additives to get to drinking plain coffee, now they'll notice all sorts of nuances in the plain coffee (if it's good, of course). They might go back to the coffee mate and find it overly sweet and fake tasting compared to the plain coffee, which before they couldn't stand.

Of course, that isn't for everyone. Some people don't like plain coffee no matter what, just like I don't drink scotch neat no matter how good it is, and I usually prefer an old fashioned to straight bourbon given the choice. But if you take someone that's used to a very bright, over blown, highly contrasty image and give them a totally neutral image, they'll have a similar reaction to the coffee drinker since that's what they've been used to for years. I know it sounds very pompous to say "You don't know what you like, just watch it neutral", but you can say "Just try it for a week and see what you think, then if you still don't like it you can go back", and often after giving their eyes a week to get used to the different image, they'll see the details and such that they didn't see before, and the vivid modes will now seem harsh and blown out. Some people still won't like it and will go back, but if you just see a flash of neutral for 30 seconds at a time, you almost certainly won't like it for the reasons I mention here.

Chris Heinonen
Senior Editor, Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity, www.hometheaterhifi.com
Displays Editor, AnandTech.com
Contributor, HDGuru.com and Wirecutter.com
ISF Level II Certified Calibrator, ReferenceHomeTheater.com
Smackrabbit is offline  
post #1191 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 07:13 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
JMCecil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

A couple notes:
- On the cable length thing, the 6' minimum length came up in discussion at the Lumagen forums. I haven't read it in depth enough to talk about it, but you can seek out the details here at AVS, or over at the Lumagen forums. Considering the handshake issues I have with my Marantz sometimes, I might swap in a couple more 6' cables and see if it makes a difference (same brand as what I currently use, to keep it the same)
This seems very weird to me. Could it be causing an over voltage condition? Doesn't seem likely, as each line is individually controlled. Understanding drops/interference over distance is easy to understand. Going the other way makes no sense. There should be no timing difference between 1' foot, 6' foot, 6 miles, 6 thousand miles(assuming resistance cooperates).

That is one technical explanation I'd be interested in hearing.
JMCecil is offline  
post #1192 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 08:13 AM
Member
 
WarrenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smackrabbit View Post

A couple notes:
- On the cable length thing, the 6' minimum length came up in discussion at the Lumagen forums. I haven't read it in depth enough to talk about it, but you can seek out the details here at AVS, or over at the Lumagen forums. Considering the handshake issues I have with my Marantz sometimes, I might swap in a couple more 6' cables and see if it makes a difference (same brand as what I currently use, to keep it the same)
- A different cable won't offer blacker-blacks or whiter-whites no more than a different Ethernet cable for my PC will offer sharper fonts on the emails I send. With all the encoding that happens to the signal on send and receive those things just don't happen.
- I see no point to offering a screenshot of anything. That's introducing a whole new level of variables with the camera, how the image was processed, and everything else. I'm trying to write something for the QD882 that lets me do a direct frame capture from players, and Stacey Spears has said I can use images from their discs for this if I would like, which can then show the processing effects. While screenshots of projector setups and such look nice sometimes, I don't think they offer any realistic version of what you are seeing with all the variables that come into play.
When someone mentioned that they showed their friends the enhanced and unenhanced versions back-to-back and they went for the enhanced ones, I wasn't surprised. We adapt very quickly to what the eye sees, and so if I change my TV from being calibrated to vivid and then back, the calibrated one will suddenly look dull and washed out. Before vivid was turned on it looked great, and 15 minutes later it'll be great again, but my eye has then adapted to that quick rush of color. It's why calibrators have to use instruments and not go by eye, since we adapt far too easily to visual changes and can't get a neutral grayscale by eye, or colors by eye, past a certain point.
The best ways to show the benefits of an accurate image are choosing material that will show the flaws of lacking one (say Art of Flight, where you will have totally clipped highlights while they snowboard, and you can easily see the mountains go from detailed to just flat white) as with quick images of normal material you might not tell. I think of it this way: If someone drinks their coffee all the time with sugar or Coffee Mate, they're not going to like plain coffee (or just coffee with some cream, but no sugar). If you just give them both right after each other, no matter how good the plain coffee is they won't like it. Now if they spend a few weeks adapting to coffee with less and less sugar and additives to get to drinking plain coffee, now they'll notice all sorts of nuances in the plain coffee (if it's good, of course). They might go back to the coffee mate and find it overly sweet and fake tasting compared to the plain coffee, which before they couldn't stand.
Of course, that isn't for everyone. Some people don't like plain coffee no matter what, just like I don't drink scotch neat no matter how good it is, and I usually prefer an old fashioned to straight bourbon given the choice. But if you take someone that's used to a very bright, over blown, highly contrasty image and give them a totally neutral image, they'll have a similar reaction to the coffee drinker since that's what they've been used to for years. I know it sounds very pompous to say "You don't know what you like, just watch it neutral", but you can say "Just try it for a week and see what you think, then if you still don't like it you can go back", and often after giving their eyes a week to get used to the different image, they'll see the details and such that they didn't see before, and the vivid modes will now seem harsh and blown out. Some people still won't like it and will go back, but if you just see a flash of neutral for 30 seconds at a time, you almost certainly won't like it for the reasons I mention here.

That was very interesting to read. I agree with accuracy, but thanks to manufacturers using visual pop to sell a product, the average consumer thinks that is the norm.

For some reason,when colour is exagerated, people in general think it looks great. And lighting conditions play a huge part. For those who watch in a bright room during the day,they get used to the vivid settings. Correct setting in a bright daytime room has a negative impact on perception and the usual "It looks dull" reply is what they say.

The best way I found to get someone quickly accustomed to the correct standard, is by showing the film in a darkened room. That becomes an easier sell and they adjust to it easier. Not that I am an expert but use my limited technical knowledge at home. The eyes deceive for sure.

That's why this thread has been a huge help to me. Because I have learned the why to and the why not to argument. So I get a healthy balance. I can respect everyone's opinion and enjoy reading what people say.

But I have got used to the Direct setting on the BDP S790 and could not be happier. I see great clarity and have finally convinced myself that there is no need to add anything to the picture.

For films encoded onto DVD or Blu ray with poor blacks, then the clear black enhancement would be useful there. A kind of post adjustment or home remastering as it were

And bad transfers still happen which amazes me. Even sometimes by big studios..
WarrenD is offline  
post #1193 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 08:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bakerwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Peach State
Posts: 2,840
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisccheese View Post

.....And if people think they can get a 250 dollar sony and a 200 dollar 7.1 hdmi receiver for less than the 500 dollar oppo 93 ok.

wisccheese,

I think one of the posters was referring to the cost delta between the Sony S790 and the Oppo BDP-95, which wasn't registering with me since the BDP-93 (same video capabilities of BDP-95) is much closer in price to the S790.

Pioneer Elite PRO-151FD

Zektor MAS7.1

Classé CA-2200/CA-5200

Oppo BDP-105, Denon DVD-5910CI, Cambridge 752BD, Cambridge 640C V2

Paradigm Signature S8, Paradigm Signature ADP1

Paradigm Signature ADP3, Paradigm Signature C5

REL R-505 Sub (2)

Oppo BDP-93, BDP-103D, Pioneer BDP-320

Sony BDP-S790

bakerwi is offline  
post #1194 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 08:25 AM
Member
 
WarrenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by wisccheese View Post

Due to joerod's review, tested oppo 95, 93 and sony s790. Apples and oranges, here. As 95 beats 93 easily on sound quality, sounding much more realistic on analog 7.1 outs to legacy equipment, 93 was out for me. 95 easily beats s790 on audio (it has beaten multithousand processors in reviews, so not a shock). s790 only has left, right dolby digital out for legacy equipment; you have to buy hdmi processor or receiver which at nearest BB was $500+. So best value of video and audio is actually the 93. And best audio (for $500 more) is the 95 which also has high end stereo out rated at A+, though for me it did not consistently win over older Sony ES cd player.
So why did I keep the s790? The test dvd - Austin Powers, Raiders. Bluray - CaddyShack, There's Something About Mary, T2, Hugo
Despite famed Qdeo upscaling, Sony much better, with clearer picture on dvds, near bluray sharpness. Did question whether 95 defaults had more pleasing color and better contrast, but pic was bit hazy. Clear win for Sony upscaling. Bluray Caddyshack pool scene a revelation with Sony, very realistic, other grainier scenes due to older picture cleaned up with the Sony. Still good to very good with Oppo though. Both Sony and Oppo downmixing sound to center on There's Something about Mary. Oppo very good pic, but Sony on apartment scenes could see everything in apartment clearly. Actors looked more realistic, too. T2, Sony slightly better with clearer Arnold and Terminator, but have to give 95 win due to much better sound quality. Hugo, Sony little clearer, but Oppo 95 tended to look better throughout, perhaps due matted colorized picture, so with sound a win for 95.
You do need a very good cable to see these differences, just as joerod has a very high end projector. Other factors, Oppo tends to have more hdmi handshake issues, taking 2 - 4 times when Sony takes 1 - 2 times. Sony much faster on pause and play, and on changing settings during movies. Sony does seem to have more judder (motion distortion) and color artifacts than Oppo which gets worse when using the higher settings joerod recommends. Sony does go darker in dark scenes, though Oppo may look better as can see more shadow detail. Sony will still go bright in bright scenes, though, but may have to adjust contrast for better whites.
Still wondering whether I should have kept 95 and Sony for different movies, that's how good the 95 movie sound is.

That makes me happy to hear the Sony Upscaler is high quality. Before my DVD's would look slightly hazy or soft. Not any more. Like I said before, that was the real reason I purchased the player. Because the Sony BDP S570 I owned previously was more than adequate for Blu Ray. But the S790 has a better renedering of dimensionality comapred to the S570. At least to my eyes and perception. That is what I go by.

The sound of the S790 to my ears has a punch. But because I am going through an Onkyo receiver, I assume the Onkyo is doing the processing sound wise anyway. I may sound strange, but for me picture first and sound second. As long as the sound is above average, then I am a happy customer.

Coming from VHS, the sound you get at home these days is amazing in comparisson. Speakers would have an impact too on sound. And that adds another angle to the debate.

By the way, I noticed the Sony has fine realism. Even DVD's look more film like than before.
WarrenD is offline  
post #1195 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 08:42 AM
Member
 
WarrenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

If I understand correctly, all 4K projectors upscale on their own anyway, so an upscaler built into the player is not necessary. The upscaler in a player may or may not be better than the one in the projector, but even if it were absent in the player, the image would be upscaled regardless. If I am correct.
Second, you don't need the 790 for sacd. The sony 590 offers support for sacd as well. The 390 does also.
The 790 offers a faster processor, dual hdmi outs, and "super bit mapping," whatever that does.
In order to establish picture quality, 3 types of data are needed:
1. objective test results on dynamic range and accuracy
2. screenshots
3. A-B-C (etc) tests double blind where neither the viewers nor testers know which player's image is being displayed.
I have become increasingly skeptical of all PQ claims in the absence of such data. What's most bothersome are those who say that one player is better than another, when in fact they only own one player.

The new processor I have noticed makes say Youtube load way faster than on the S570. And it crashes less when using the internet as in I get less "Network error" messages than before. Using a wireless internet setting on the BDP S570, sometimes it would take 2 minutes to load a 5 minute video. Not anymore.

No doubt a 4k display will have a superlative upscaler built in. I would be surprised if it did not. But a 4k display for me is too expensive at the moment. So out of my price range. But in about 8 years, it may be affordable to the average earner.
WarrenD is offline  
post #1196 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 08:53 AM
Member
 
WarrenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

I'm not sure what you mean by "the same". With DVDs, what you've been given on-disk is not what you see on-screen.
(A quibble is that if you use a digital connection, the on-disk video isn't being converted to PAL or NTSC color encoding. That only happens if you use a player's analog video output.)
If you're watching a Region 1 DVD video, its on-disk digital frame resolution is usually 720x480 pixels, a ratio of 15:10 (i.e. 3:2). It's usually composed of two interlaced fields of 720x240 pixels updated at a rate just slightly slower than 60 times per second. Region 2 DVDs usually have an on-disk digital frame resolution of 720x576 pixels. (Some are recorded at 704x480 or 704x576; progressive, non-interlaced, video is also supported.)
If the vertical resolution of 480 pixels is used on a display, 720 horizontal pixels have to be stretched horizontally to provide an 853x480 16:9 widescreen view (often called "anamorphic" or "enhanced for wide screen TVs") or compressed horizontally to provide a 640x480 4:3 "full screen" view. In either case, it means that the on-disk image was recorded using non-square pixels. This was no big deal in the age of analog CRT TVs. It adds a little complexity with modern square-pixel digital displays. How your player and/or display resample those recorded pixels to display the image on your screen is determined by how you've configured your player and TV.
Presumably your HDTV is capable of displaying 60 fps (my understanding is that that's required by the HD standards) so at least no speed-up or slow-down is required.

My TV can display 60 FPS or 50 FPS as well as 24 FPS. But on PAL DVD playback it plays them back at 50 FPS and that is non-defeatable. But a Region 1 DVD can be played back at 60 FPS or 24 FPS if that setting is required.

In the UK, you can only get 24 FPS Blu Ray playback if the TV is 1080p. Otherwise if the set is 720P, then the playback is at 25 FPS even if it is Blu ray.

So far there is no way around PAL speedup in the UK with DVD's. No player on the market offers the ability to slow it down to 24 FPS. I wish there was though. I am sure that they have the technology, but even when films are broadcast on HD TV, they are at 25 FPS like Sky HD.

So let me ask. If you play a PAL DVD in the USA, is it converted to 30 or 60 FPS?
WarrenD is offline  
post #1197 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 09:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Selden Ball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: upstate NY
Posts: 6,630
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked: 358
I configured my Sherwood player to always output 1080i60, so that's what it does, no matter what it's playing. I dunno what hacked players do.

(My projector shuts down if there are too many framerate changes in too brief a time, and either my pre/pro or the projector starts glitching after playing 1080p60 for a couple of hours, so I picked 1080i60 as a non-too-unreasonable compromise.)

Selden
Selden Ball is online now  
post #1198 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 11:56 AM
Member
 
WarrenD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: London
Posts: 179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Selden Ball View Post

I configured my Sherwood player to always output 1080i60, so that's what it does, no matter what it's playing. I dunno what hacked players do.
(My projector shuts down if there are too many framerate changes in too brief a time, and either my pre/pro or the projector starts glitching after playing 1080p60 for a couple of hours, so I picked 1080i60 as a non-too-unreasonable compromise.)

I know the voltage is different in the UK to the USA. So a PAL DVD recorded at 25 FPS played back on your Sherwood at 1080i60 technically has no PAL speedup. So I assume it must be slowing it down by 4%, therefore the voices are in correct pitch.

You know what, some thing that makes me laugh is when I hear people say that PAL DVD's at 25fps have chipmunk voices. Hello, if that were the case, no one would watch them. It is a marginal difference and you need to have a good sense of pitch to begin to even notice. A 10 or 15% speedup would be a different matter.

In fact, until Blu Ray came out with 24FPS, I had no idea that the PAL DVD's were slightly sped up. Sounded normal to me.

On any UK Blu ray player whether it has been region hacked or not. A PAL DVD will play at recorded speed. Even if the player is set to output 24FPS, as soon as it detects it is PAL, it goes at PAL speed.
WarrenD is offline  
post #1199 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 12:10 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
htwaits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 24,772
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Hester View Post

Shorter cables causing issue is new to me. I do know they are recommended by Monoprice and other makers of HDMI switches/splitters for better performance using those types of products.
It's new to me too, and as I described, I have short cables in two installations that are also only 28AWG. They are working fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian-HD View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by htwaits View Post

BUT, recently someone posted that short cables under four feet could cause trouble.

If you are going from BD>>AVR>>Display, both cables have to be over 4 feet?
Nope. The recommendation at Monoprice is that you use 24 AWG cables at least four feet long if you are using their HDMI switches. That's their carefully worded suggestion.

The only guess that I can make is that short 28AWG cables combined with Monoprice switches might cause HDMI hand shake trouble. Keep in mind that guesses from me are just that -- guesses.

With an OPPO HDMI switch, and short 28AWG cables, I've never had any problems. The OPPO threads are blessed with several experts, and I don't believe that there has ever been much if any discussion about short 28AWG cable problems.
htwaits is offline  
post #1200 of 3550 Old 06-11-2012, 12:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
audiofan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 413
Quote:
Originally Posted by johncourt View Post

Again, I ask you, where is your evidence to back up your claim. There are really only two kinds: screenshots or screencaptures, or test data.
Forgive my skepticism, but in the past you've made the claim that oppo delivered superior picture quality compared to the sony, even though you've never owned or used the sony.

Nope ( and get it right before you keep fanning flames)! never said it delivered a better picture at all,May have said the Oppo delivers a reference picture (which it does with empirical test data to back that up, do your research!) If you read my post I'm looking at the Sony as a second player and not to replace my 95. I'm doing my research gathering info. As for cables I'm the only one needed convincing on the matter and like others I post my experience. Best way to know is to try for yourself, in the end data can only tell you so much! let your Brain tell you yes or no.
audiofan1 is online now  
Reply Blu-ray Players

Tags
Blu Ray Players , Sony , Sony Bdps790 3d Blu Ray Player , Sony Blu Ray Disc Player Bdp S790 , Sony Open Box Bdp S790 3d Blu Ray Disc Player
Gear in this thread

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