blu-ray players .. how do they improve them ??

[admin_exported]

hypothetical scenario ..
ok youve got a kuro , calibrated , and youve got two bluray players , the sony bdp-s760 from last year , and this years sony bdp-s370..

youve got several blu-ray movies , and an award winning chord or whatever hdmi cable ..

so first up is the 760 , beautiful , crisp images etc etc , great sound ..its a great player ..

now you switch to the 370 , supposedly better , as reviews here suggest ..

but how can it be better ? what makes it better ? i cant figure it out ..

the only thing that i can think of , is that the 760 doesnt read the data from the blu-ray discs properly , it doesnt retrieve and send all the data to the kuro , but the 370 retrieves more data , it sends more data to the kuro , does it send every single piece of data on the disc ? if so , how can any future blu-ray player better it ? what can it do that improves the already perfect data transfer ?
the kuro is the tv , obviously ,its job is to display whatever data it receives , and its the best there is at doing that , so what does the 370 do that improves the image ? or for the sake of pedantism , what could any blu-ray player , deemed to display better picture quality than the 760 , actually do to create this better image ? beats me ...

 

[007L2Thrill]

Hard to say not being a engineer, but all comes down to components used, the better player should have better capacitors, resistors , better clocks etc, plus better DACS and transports, its endless.

 

[Anonymous]

Maxflinn, I have wondered the same. The S760 'blew the competition out of the water' as WHF put it, only a few months ago, and this is a player with 'trickle-down technology' from the flagship S5000ES blu-ray player, costing £1k.

Now, along comes a cheapo S370 (I bought one, so I know - the build quality is rubbish with the tiniest buttons which would be even tiny by a baby's standards, let alone an adult) that can be had for about £110.00 that beats the S760 for picture AND sound???????

How is that possible? makes no sense? So, the next £400 Sony player will sure be better than the S5000ES????

 

[The_Lhc]

Two things Max, 1) it's a little early to suggest the 370 is "perfect" and 2) blu-ray is so callled because it uses a blue laser, which is a relatively new innovation, it's only in recent years that blue lasers have been powerful enough to actually be usable in an optical storage system. The brighter the laser the better the data retrieval and it's entirely likely that newer models have better lasers and therefore are better at retrieving the data off the disc, meaning less error-correction (or guessing), hence the better picture.

 

[Anonymous]

the_lhc:Two things Max, 1) it's a little early to suggest the 370 is "perfect" and 2) blu-ray is so callled because it uses a blue laser, which is a relatively new innovation, it's only in recent years that blue lasers have been powerful enough to actually be usable in an optical storage system. The brighter the laser the better the data retrieval and it's entirely likely that newer models have better lasers and therefore are better at retrieving the data off the disc, meaning less error-correction (or guessing), hence the better picture.
hi lhc, i didnt say it was perfect , what i mean is just that , hypothetically , if it did indeed retrieve all the data , and transfer it correctly and all intact , then , wouldnt it be perfect ? how could it be improved upon ?

i see you have explained to some degree , and if your right , then the perfect blu-ray player cant be far away , right ? new models can only offer more functionality , faster load times etc ?

 

[Anonymous]

This discussion could be carried through any digital technolgy surely, and must have also been raised when the CD format was developed...and it obviously comes down to the quality of the technology in all its forms, from the disc format itself through to the player (reader). High end manufacturers can provide everything from lasers to chips of much higher standard throughout which ultimately provides a purity of digital information that can't be supplied by inferior quality components. We have to remember that the bluray disc is just a carrier of information, like a file format, and this in turn will be improved and developed from what is commercially available at the moment, as CD developed with SACD etc. There is a multi-billion dollar industry behind the development of digital information storage and it's usages and it is a never ending quest for the purest of signal but ultimately there will always be an erosion of the original information and a downgrading in the original recording made...it is a series of compromises throughout the journey from musician to final auditioning on your own home system, for example. The goal is the minimum amount of information loss and it is the higher quality components with the most direct (uncompromised) signal path and highest capacity for retrieval that achieve this... That's just my opinion anyway...!

 

[The_Lhc]

maxflinn:
the_lhc:Two things Max, 1) it's a little early to suggest the 370 is "perfect" and 2) blu-ray is so callled because it uses a blue laser, which is a relatively new innovation, it's only in recent years that blue lasers have been powerful enough to actually be usable in an optical storage system. The brighter the laser the better the data retrieval and it's entirely likely that newer models have better lasers and therefore are better at retrieving the data off the disc, meaning less error-correction (or guessing), hence the better picture.
hi lhc, i didnt say it was perfect ,

Ahem, "if so , how can any future blu-ray player better it ? what can it
do that improves the already perfect data transfer?"

what i mean is just that , hypothetically , if it did indeed retrieve all the data , and transfer it correctly and all intact , then , wouldnt it be perfect ? how could it be improved upon ?

That's the point though, it isn't perfect, so it can be improved upon. You'd be better off asking this question about CD players, that's a technology that's 30 years old, not 5, so could be considered fully mature and is much simpler, in that it only deals with 2 channels of lower bit and sample-rate audio and yet, if reviews are to be believed, is still being improved to this day.

i see you have explained to some degree , and if your right , then the perfect blu-ray player cant be far away , right ? new models can only offer more functionality , faster load times etc ?

I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer...

 

[Anonymous]

ahem , hypothetically speaking

..

anyway , two good explanations there from yourself and ricardo

 

[Anonymous]

I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer...

why thank you kind sir...and I am in total agreement with your explanation and you're right also to refer to CD as I have of course...although I do think that even CD and Bluray will become redundant as the future lies with direct digital transfer of information which will miss out the 'middle man' of the disc itself which is just a carrier of information...

 

[The_Lhc]

maxflinn:ahem , hypothetically speaking

..

But as a hypothetical question, it's pointless. You ask, if this blu-ray is hypothetically perfect, how can it be improved upon and the answer would be it can't. But the blu-ray player ISN'T perfect, that's the entire point, so it can be improved upon and there is no hypothetical situation to consider.

 

[Anonymous]

the_lhc:
maxflinn:ahem , hypothetically speaking

..

But as a hypothetical question, it's pointless. You ask, if this blu-ray is hypothetically perfect, how can it be improved upon and the answer would be it can't. But the blu-ray player ISN'T perfect, that's the entire point, so it can be improved upon and there is no hypothetical situation to consider.

lol , true

 

[bigboss]

When a 1080p/24 disc is being played back on a 1080p/24 display, there is usually no appreciable difference in the quality between players. Unlike in the days of SD DVD where we had to contend with video DACs, deinterlacing, and later, scaling, a 1080p/24 Blu-ray Disc source connected digitally to a 1080p/24 display device poses almost no room for mishaps.

The only way that pictures can be degraded, is when the players start meddling with the picture, like introduce combing/interlacing artefacts. That's where the room for improvement is, IMO; for players to stop meddling with the picture quality.

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

 

[TheHomeCinemaCentre]

Better quality components is the simple answer. There are differences in all the bluray players even if you only look at bluray playback. Bring in CD and DVD playback and there is even more to differentiate. There is a big gulf in performance from the entry level Sony/Panasonic and the flagship Denon/Marantz although when you factor in cost you do get a lot for your money sub £200.

As for 1080p/24 there are still differences between outputs of the players.

 

[nads]

I stopped worrying and have a few more BD discs and they all look great on the Panna. 35.

 

[cstanwhf]

Better components used as what others had said and better technology at lower price.

Techology designed for more up-market model being used for the cheaper model.

Just like technology for the S5000ES being used for the S760 to make it "blow the competition out of the water" etc.

While the S370 do not have the same technology as the S760, it may have even newer technology, newer chipset and components to improve it's performance.

Just like in display, who would have thought thet Pioneer could improved on their 7th generation Plasma display? Were the 7th generation not considered the best then? Now the 8th generation is considered the best.

Improvement in component and technology plays a part. Otherwise, there is no point doing RD if a certian product is considered to be unable to improve upon.

Just my humble opinion.

 

[The_Lhc]

The other reason it's a pointless question is because, I'd suggest, it's impossible to build a perfect player of anything. Perfection implies absolute accuracy in every component, down to the Planck scale. It's unlikely we could ever achieve that.

 

[aliEnRIK]

Id compare it to a cd player like someone mentioned on page 1

I auditioned some VERY expensive cd players a few years back, ranging from 3k to 10k

My personal thoughts were as this thread suggests ~ how can they possibly improve? I honestly thought I wouldnt be hearing any differences

How wrong was I, and the fact my dad walked away with a unit costing 8.5k goes some way to show the differences that WERE heard

As well as frequency response, the 'noise floor' can be measured (Distortion). Its amazing how such a minute drop in distortion can make such a difference. The unit also used twin 64bit DACS which obviously also made a difference. Maybe they not only have better power supplies but some form of mains conditioning too?

Taking cd players into account, I think its going to be a long way off before the true limits are hit.

My question though is this ~ if a cd player on a computer can (Supposidly) retrieve ALL the information off a disk in a couple of minutes, how come a cd player cannot play that information at NORMAL speed!

My only thoughts are jitter ~ jitter doesnt matter to a computer as its simply saved to hardrive exactly as it should be. To get a cd player to get the timing EXACTLY right must take a lot more than we think

Or there is another train of thought. Perhaps its incredibly easy to make the perfect cd player, but ALL hifi manufacturers dont want that as it would mean businesses collapse?

 

[Anonymous]

Now that I have had 24 hrs to give this topic some thought, I would agree with Maxflinn's original point but would take it one stage further and question how far does bluray have to go before any improvements in video quality are beyond human perception ? What I mean is, for both audio and video, there must be a point where the human ear or eye can no longer pick up on the miniscule improvements that can be made with the technology. This goes someway in expalining why big steps have to be taken, for example 3D TV's or SACD music discs. The limits of the standard technology, be it HD video or digital audio can only go so far surely before we are unable to notice any improvement at all...so the question is, where do we go after 3D blu-ray has run it's course...

 

[The_Lhc]

It's another hypothetical question, we aren't anywhere near that yet, if the ever improving CD player is to be believed.

 

[strapped for cash]

Ricardo65,

If you take that rationale to its logical conclusion, all digital hardware would perform to an equal standard; and as we are all aware, this is undoubtedly not the case. Sorry to disagree, but just wanted to chip in with my two pence worth!

I think you're right, however, about manufacturers having to find ways for products to evolve and render obsolete older equipment at frequent intervals. With regard to 3D, this filters down from the same need for filmmakers and theatres to "brand" their products as cutting edge, different, or new -- in principle to retain audience interest and hope we continue to pay for tickets, buy blu ray discs, hopefully ultimately in 3D, and equipment that will allow us to "enjoy" that "experience".

It's called synergy -- multinational conglomerates have diversified interests (i.e. some of the largest corporations in the world have interests in film production and electrical hardware manufacturing, among other ventures). Anti-capitalist rant over...

 

[Anonymous]

ricardo65:Now that I have had 24 hrs to give this topic some thought, I would agree with Maxflinn's original point but would take it one stage further and question how far does bluray have to go before any improvements in video quality are beyond human perception ? What I mean is, for both audio and video, there must be a point where the human ear or eye can no longer pick up on the miniscule improvements that can be made with the technology. This goes someway in expalining why big steps have to be taken, for example 3D TV's or SACD music discs. The limits of the standard technology, be it HD video or digital audio can only go so far surely before we are unable to notice any improvement at all...so the question is, where do we go after 3D blu-ray has run it's course...

thats where im coming from ricardo , last years 760 was touted as the preverbial dogs , a few months later , and its not in the same league as the cheap 370 ??

ive watched blu-rays recently on a friends sony player , the first ever consumer sony , it was mega expensive when it came out , he got it for nothing from a rich uncle who "upgraded" to a sony 760

i cant say my 360 or a ps3 , all of which were used on the same , sony 46v4000 looked any better

..

maybe its my eyesight , i dont know , many people are convinced that newer players look better , im confused ...

 

[Deleted member 2457]

I heard we are going to have hologram tv's as the new big thing.

 

[aliEnRIK]

maxflinn:

ricardo65:Now that I have had 24 hrs to give this topic some thought, I would agree with Maxflinn's original point but would take it one stage further and question how far does bluray have to go before any improvements in video quality are beyond human perception ? What I mean is, for both audio and video, there must be a point where the human ear or eye can no longer pick up on the miniscule improvements that can be made with the technology. This goes someway in expalining why big steps have to be taken, for example 3D TV's or SACD music discs. The limits of the standard technology, be it HD video or digital audio can only go so far surely before we are unable to notice any improvement at all...so the question is, where do we go after 3D blu-ray has run it's course...

thats where im coming from ricardo , last years 760 was touted as the preverbial dogs , a few months later , and its not in the same league as the cheap 370 ??

ive watched blu-rays recently on a friends sony player , the first ever consumer sony , it was mega expensive when it came out , he got it for nothing from a rich uncle who "upgraded" to a sony 760

i cant say my 360 or a ps3 , all of which were used on the same , sony 46v4000 looked any better

..

maybe its my eyesight , i dont know , many people are convinced that newer players look better , im confused ...

Is the 46V4000 properly calibrated?

 

[Anonymous]

no rik , just manually adjusted by me , but it wouldnt make a difference , the tvs settings were the same for all the players..