Official 2012 Sony BDP-S790 Thread - Page 19

I have the Epson 6500UB and it has great blacks and ultra sharp detail...even with the settings on the 6500 dialed into sharpness and gamma at 2.2-2.4 the sony was still able to show the vertical lines on the masonary of the castle in the opening scene of "Deathly Hallows". When i did A/B comparisons with direct and the other stock settings the masonary lookled "blurred" like it had a soft filter on it and you can not see the sharp lines on the masonry and in the courtyard where Snapes is looking down upon it...it may be correct but for me i prefer the image after the EQ. If you are a purist you will probably not like the 790. I on the other hand am not a purist and go for the eye candy every time...if there is something there that the director blurred then i want to see what it is? It's like Playboy..you want that soft filter to your women..OR...ha ha..Hustler ...you know?. ;-)

I have all of those controls set to "0" and have verified the picture looks the same as the "Direct" picture control.

And the PQ still has more "depth" and micro-contrast than the Oppo or Panasonic to my eye. I'm sorry, but I spent way too many years with high end audio and video to think we know how to measure everything that the human eye or ear can perceive. I have several audiophile playback apps for the Mac that all claim to be "bit perfect" but they all sound different.

I realize this is a very emotional topic here with a large number of "level matched amps all sound the same" & "blu-ray players all look the same", but my eyes and ears tell me otherwise.

The way I see it, I am comfortable with the notion that differences may exist that we do not know how to measure or even propose technical theorems for. THe other camp feels nothing is real unless it can be explained with current theory.

I certainly respect your opinion that the Sony (or any other properly functioning BDP) does not "look" different - that is the logical result of your personal dogma reinforced by your measurements. What I am disappointed in is people stating that any other viewpoint is incorrect and not even allowing that there might be other possibilities beyond/outside of current technical understanding.

Why can't the the other side respect those of us that feel the problem is we don't yet understand everything that influences visual or audible quality and we just aren't measuring the right thing(s) yet?

Well said KHOLLISTER, you beat me to the punch!

Same here. We are not supposed to like it because to much of a good thing is bad.

+1

Except for the fact that we understand exactly how HDMI works, and how sending the picture data works. You have just over 2 million pixels, and every single pixel is represented by 3 values: Either Y, Cb and Cr or Red, Green and Blue. Those each have a defined range (1-254, or 0-255) and can only send values in that range (excluding Deep Color, for which there is no content, but even then it's the same). A Blu-ray player serves, in its ideal state, as nothing more than a transport for this data with very few jobs:

- Read the source data
- Convert 4:2:0 to 4:2:2, 4:4:4 or RGB
- Send that over HDMI to display

Since we can test the conversion step and make sure that is being performed correctly, any difference between two devices that pass that is due to using non-identical setups, or a flaw in another device. Video is full of standards, from HDMI to BT 601 to BT 709 to ensure that, properly setup, the data is identical between different setups. In effect, the display is serving as a DAC, taking our digital bitstream and turning it into an analog signal from the display. If it gets the exact same data from two components, as we can prove it does, the images will be identical. Any perceived differences are just perception, not real.

A display can't invent data that isn't there but the mind can. You can think they are different, but if they are, it's because one isn't working correctly, not because one adds more "depth". Depth implies more contrast range and that can't be added when you are limited to the data on a disc. Saying we don't understand is incorrect, when we do understand exactly how HDMI works. It's a video connection, not gravity. You can believe differently, but its akin to thinking a movie looks better since you downloaded it with Internet Explorer and not Firefox.

Chris, How about reviewing a 790 and give us the real scoop on how Sony is altering the HDMI data to give what quite a few here feel is a very fine picture? If true then we should be able to adjust the settings on a projector to simulate what Sony is doing with the 790 to make any player such as the Oppo have a similar picture.
I'm not questioning you but would love to see how the 790 measures. How about a review?

Right on! Heck i have been calibrating tv's for about 25 years and i quit using the calibration dvd's light meters etc. years ago...i just do it by feel and use 3 blurays and i calibrate audio by feel also. It's like cooking, if you have to keep measuring with meters and graphs then the feel and warmth is not there. I always get the best compliments on my calibrations because i ask my friends "what they like". Why calibrate a flat image if they spent $3000 on an HDTV when i can give them a VERY colorful image that makes Peyton Manning look like he is about to break through their tv screen and is razor sharp to the point they were glad they did not get a 3D set!





'

In comparing images in the past I found Sony players to be pushing the intra-scene contrast and I could get them to look identical by lowering it (or raising it in the other player). Remember setting a value to 0 has no real reference... it could mean anything. Just like any default value has no real definition.

I think you may be misinterpreting what I said. I am not necessarily advocating intentionally dialing in inaccuracies to achieve a "pleasing" picture or sound - I am advocating that there can be visual or audible differences in components that measure the same. The question (which Chris and I obviously disagree on) is whether the "better" picture is actually the accurate one or not.

This comes up in high end audio all the time - if a given component makes an instrument "better" sounding, is it finally revealing the character inherent in the recording or is it euphonic coloration? The problem that gets at the root of what I'm advocating is that we can't know for sure since we do not have a known perfect model of what causes a given sonic perception.

I am not advocating throwing instrumentation and measurement out the window, I'm just proposing that we not disregard what we see or hear because it doesn't match what we expect based on our theoretical models and measurement science.

An example is color measurement. There are known display devices where the perceived color by a trained observer does not match what a spectroradiometer measures. Does this mean our color perception is wrong? No - it means the measurement science is imperfect because assumptions were made about spectral distributions and the human reaction to them.

There are TONS of capacitors diodes etc. in blu ray players, AV amps and HDTV's...you think they are all going to look and sound the same in the end?...that means that all of the "electronic guts" in the BD player, AV amp and HDTV have to perfom at 100% to be identical in picture quality and sound quality?
All tv's look different...all speakers sound different...all amps sound different...and yea..players do too. Like i posted before i had mentioned i had returned a Sony player a while back because it was not as bright as my other 3 players...just to make sure, i got the same results when watching on my 60 inch led and 50 inch plasma which are also in my home theater. I tested it out with my switcher and directly to the other sets just to make sure it was the bd player and not my amp or tv's. So either it could be a quality control issue with that unit or that model was just not up to par..BUT the sound was better than on the other players..hence why i really wanted the 790 to clean up the act that my previous Sony had left. Oh yeah...movies DO look better with IE an not FF!! But that's another discussion! heh heh

So what happens when a movie has reference playback to start with? and the enhanced settings are over kill or to much of a good thing? I'm not sure if no one knows this but the Qdeo in the Oppos have features that can be enhanced, maybe by another name but I keep one setting at default and another to personal taste but having a point of reference sure is nice

Most of what the QDEO does in the Oppo has nothing to do with a 1080p24 Blu-ray and it's features would be used on an interlaced Blu-ray (cadence detection) or online content (noise reduction and scaling) or DVD (scaling and more). With 1080p24 the main job it to get 4:2:0 YcbCr to a different color space and not alter the image in any other way. You can use the features on a Blu-ray at 1080p24 but then your output is no longer perfect possibly.

I'm done with the S590 review this week and then I will see if they have a 790 available. Running tests on all those features will take a long time. The detail ones would be done by eye. The contrast ones I can bench test I imagine.

Why do members change Brands and Models?
Sometimes to have the latest greatest?
Or, if like me, something is bugging you about your current model: then it's time to change. Just because the specifications and test results look good on paper, it may not necessarily translate into something you want to watch. You're buying something different in hopes that it will be totally satisfying without any glitches, and you can now concentrate on enjoying what you're watching. Now, if one can combine great specs, great results on paper, plus satisfy your total viewing requirements, a triple feature win win win. (Until some other annoyance crops up!)
Problems is these days, technology is constanly changing, the varieties of what we watch, and how we watch is now having so many complexities, I doubt there is any electronic device that will satisfy everyone. Just the nature of the beast. Will any of us be totally satisfied, and if were are, for how long?
For me, from what I've read, looking forward to a BDPS790 sitting on my shelf to replace the BDPS770 - which, I currently have no complaints about, excepting it won't play my Amazon UK BBC Frozen Planet (Region Free) - luckily won't have to send back - plays fine on my OPPO 93.
I Love Lucy, looks terrible on both the Sony and OPPO - I play that on my Toshiba HD where it looks great. So, sometimes it's best to have a variety on hand.

A USA S790 won't play the BBC frozen planet. That disk is 1080/50i if I recall. Only the uk/euro S790 players are able to playback 50Hz material.

What we need is a review with the Direct picture control. If (as I suspect) the Sony measures the same as the Oppo, etc, then we will have the basic audiophile dilemma - components that measure the same do not sound the same.

If there are measurable differences that deviate from the ideal for known test patterns, then we have the answer that the Sony is "EQ'ing" the video even with the enhancements set to what we believe to be the "off" position.

While it would be interesting to know what the various controls actually do, it isn't useful data for the debate I think we are having here.

I am assuming the 590 measures fine (as in the same as the Oppo)? It would be interesting for someone with both the 590 and 790 to offer whether they feel the BD PQ looks the same from both with "reference" settings.

As I recall, from a review somewhere, the only issue with the 590 was a RGB decoding error - YCbCr was as expected.

Do 50i DVDs have the same problem?

I have no problems watching Australian PAL (50i) region 0 DVDs on my S590. (I don't have any 50i BDs.) I seem to recall that enabling 24fps playback actually means "pass through the frame rate to the display". If that's the case, the problem probably is not in the player. More likely the problem is that the display device can't sync to 50i, which is seen in many display devices marketed here in the U.S.

I noticed such an observation, which was confirmed by my calibrator when I had the Sony BDP-S1000ES and an Oppo BPD-83 in my setup at the time. He clearly stated that the Oppo was more accurate than the Sony out of the box. I preferred the Oppo, but other's owning the same 2 transport preferred the Sony stating the picture was sharper, better contrast more pop. All those characteristics are nice if they appeal to the viewer, but it was more important to me that the picture be as accurate as possible as a starting point. I can always dial in the other characteristics if they appeal to me, but unless the transport has memory settings then these chacteristics would be applied to all the content being viewed.

This is the old preference versus reference.

Yes, PAL DVDs will not play in USA S790s (and S590s for that matter) and there is no PAL to NTSC conversion.

Fortunately you are mistaken. PAL Region 0 DVDs play fine on my Region 1 S590 purchased at the local Best Buy, projected using a Mitsubishi HC3800. I have configured the player to always scale its video to 1080i, which may be relevant. Of course, Region 2+4 PAL DVDs don't play in a Region 1 S590.

I can assure you I'm not. Check your signal from the S590.

You're right. My apologies.

I was confused about which BD player I'd tested for what. The S590 complains about an unknown disc format when a PAL Region 0 DVD is inserted. For a few minutes I thought I must have had a very vivid dream: I had a very distinct memory of watching umbrella's logo. (No, not that Umbrella Corporation! ) umbrella is an Australian DVD publisher, and their logo is a bright yellow rain umbrella hanging from a rotating clothes-drying umbrella.

I'd purchased a Sharp BD-HP35U a few days before buying the Sony. I had decided to replace it by the S590 for two reasons: the crude Sharp user interface annoys me greatly and the player seems to stop generating a video output signal briefly whenever it does an HDMI/HDCP handshake, unlike the Sony. I had not yet returned it, though, and now probably won't: I just now verified that it does play PAL region 0 DVDs in addition to 24/96 DAD audio discs (which I had not previously tested on it). The S590 plays neither. *sigh*

I agree, except how did your calibrator know the Oppo was the correct one? Was it because he read it somewhere, did he personally measure it, did he take it on faith that the Oppo was reference?

The problem is that most of us do not have a file that was literally the master for a particular blu-ray that we can do a direct comparison with (both by eye and by measurement). The "measurement clan" is, I believe, basing their declaration of reference on standard test patterns that have known content with which to make a comparison with the data stream coming off the BD. The potential problem with that is that actual movie content is far more complex and dynamic, and we actually do not know for sure that there couldn't be other factors in play that might alter the perfect transfer function.

I see this as similar to the fallacy that measuring audio equipment with static sine waves or impulse functions seems to have little to do with how it behaves with actual source material.

I will be the first to admit that I have no particular theories on how something like this could occur with digital video, but I have learned in almost 40 years of engineering (as well as a similar length of time fooling with high end audio) that it is the old axiom of "you don't know what you don't know" that usually comes back to bite you.

I am paraphrasing, but I believe he based this on the amount of tweaking (calibration) required on the display input for the Sony versus the display input for the Oppo both at their default settings.

Don't you think that it has to be more than the above and it was his opinion.

Sounds like faith.

Like I said I was paraphrasing and his comments were after he had completed the calibration for both inputs on my display. Do you want me to list the equipment he used with model numbers?

If it can make my display look better to my eyes, and sound better to my ears, I want one!
I do not care what SONY is doing to the signal but from what I am reading from
"OWNERS" on this thread I am in for a treat for $249.

Alright, I'll try to clear up and clarify some things I said, as I think some of them were either phrased poorly, or taken incorrectly, probably because of how it was written, so I'll cover as much as I can then.


That's not calibrating. Calibrating implies that you are have a standard you are trying to hit, and you're configuring it to hit that standard. The goal with calibrating a display, and having a Blu-ray player setup correctly, is that you replicate the content on the disc as accurately as possible.

Now, I'm not saying that should be what everyone wants. If you want something that has more color, even if it's not as accurate, or that is brighter, then do whatever you want. Really, the point is to enjoy the experience, but don't use the term "calibration" when what you're really doing is "tweaking" the controls to what you personally like. Personal preference goes out the door with a calibration, it's as close to the standard as you can get.


My real point is that with a player like the 790, when you're using the internal controls to move the player off of reference output, saying that the picture is "better" than the Oppo is just purely subjective, with nothing objective to back it up. The other issue is that all of the settings the 790 does you can probably do yourself, in your display controls, for the same benefit but also fewer tradeoffs.

Using the controls that remap the gamma cause a large drop in dynamic range. You can use the gamma control available in most current displays to do the same thing, but you don't lose dynamic range, so you're getting the benefit you were after, but without the tradeoff. Is your gamma now a reference 2.2? No, but if you prefer the picture, at least it looks better now than before.

The same goes for most of the sharpness and other controls. You can do all of those in your display just as easily, and get the same benefit from it. The main advantage with doing those in the display is since almost all displays have multiple picture mode memories, you can do one for 3D, one for Blu-ray, and one for DVD if you want and adjust them based on content (perhaps more sharpness and noise removal on DVD, higher gamma on 3D, etc...). With the player, you almost always have to remember to go in and adjust them yourself for each movie, which will lead to a worse picture each time.

Really, do what you enjoy, but when there are alternatives that can do the same thing, or better, it's a better way to go sometimes.


The other way to look at this is "The human eye is incredible adaptive and responds to shifts in color and white balance more easily, whereas an instrument doesn't have that adaptability and only can see the information presented to it."


The problem is confusing how analog stereo works with how HDMI works. Analog stereo sends a waveform through all those capacitors and cables and traces, and they all add some sort of change or distortion to it. It might be amazingly small, but it's there. HDMI is a packet-based digital output, so if it works, you can send the same data through 1,000 components and it won't change at all, and will always come out exactly the same.

HDMI operates more like Ethernet and TCP/IP do. The data is broken down into packets, encoded with error checking, and sent. If it goes incorrectly, you get a huge visible error on screen (either bright white blocks usually, or no image at all), not a barely noticeable shift (Micro-Contrast, as someone put it). It's as if you're sending an email from two different computers. The internals are completely different, the OS can even be different, but the packets of data are sent in such a way that if you inspect them from each, you will see that they are identical, and the exact same thing is going to arrive at your target.

Comparing HDMI to previous technologies, either in video or audio, is futile as it operates totally differently. It works, or it doesn't work, but the nature of it means that you aren't going to have subjective measures on it. A TV will get the exact same data from two correctly working players, and if nothing else is different (colorspaces, cables, what they are going through, etc...) the output will be exactly the same. If it's not, the display is broken, that's it.


Some prior Sony firmwares, and even the current one, had an issue with setting the Luma (Y component) output lower than reference, which would lead to a picture being dimmer. This is something we can test and verify, and it is because that player is working incorrectly that it happens. If it was working correctly, it would be identical. The fact that players can do this is why we test it.


The reference material and the Blu-ray content are the same. They're both 1080p24 or 1080p60, both 4:2:0 encoded. There is no difference playing one back than playing the other. Doing the conversion from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2, 4:4:4 or RGB is math. If it does the math right with the test pattern, it will do it right every single time. There are only so many possible values that can be sent over HDMI, and we test every single one of them. Saying that a movie is different than a test pattern in this case is like saying "If I do 1+1 on my calculator it will be 2, but if I do it really, really fast, it might be something else."


Analog audio and video have nothing to do with HDMI, as I related earlier. We know how HDMI behaves in its current version. If content starts using Deep Color, or higher frame rates, or different color spaces, then we'll adapt and find new ways to test it. As it is, if you have two players with the same reference output over HDMI, same colorspace, and same content, they will look identical on a screen. If they don't, it's time to look at something else in the chain and see what is wrong, or find some objective proof to back it up.

Test patterns with audio also have their purpose. You can see that a device is adding distortion of a certain type, or has a different response curve, or has poor channel separation compared to something else. Does it mean that some people don't like that distortion, or don't like boosted bass? No. Audio also doesn't have the same standards for content that video does, so with video we can easily say "This is what reference is, and anything else is a deviation of that" more than we can with audio.