It's not much worse than that of DVD, it does depend on the Blu-Ray player tho as BD is generally encoded at 24htz and on a HD ready set has to be displayed at 50htz so can cause extra jerkieness to picture.
-
When should you upgrade your hi-fi? How to control ‘upgradeitis’
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
rob_981:
professorhat:JohnNewman:However it is worth noting that the motion was unquestionably smoother from the Denon DVD player...no question about it. The BD player looked positively jerky by comparison. That'll most likely be down to lack of 24fps on your TV as well. Which Sony was it out of interest?
Eh? Will the lack of a 24fps TV mean that the picture from a Blu Ray player will be jerky? My TV is only HD Ready and not 24fps. Does this mean the picture will be jerky? I know it won't be as good as through a full HD TV, and I'm prepared for that (although I do know the picture will be better (not to mention the sound) - I think BBC HD is really impressive), but I don't want a jerky picture. I'm planning on getting the Sony S350.
Bluray will be better than BBC HD. And jerkiness and judder are terms. You are not going to see your screen shaking around. Most people wouldn't even notice judder.
professorhat:JohnNewman:However it is worth noting that the motion was unquestionably smoother from the Denon DVD player...no question about it. The BD player looked positively jerky by comparison. That'll most likely be down to lack of 24fps on your TV as well. Which Sony was it out of interest?
Eh? Will the lack of a 24fps TV mean that the picture from a Blu Ray player will be jerky? My TV is only HD Ready and not 24fps. Does this mean the picture will be jerky? I know it won't be as good as through a full HD TV, and I'm prepared for that (although I do know the picture will be better (not to mention the sound) - I think BBC HD is really impressive), but I don't want a jerky picture. I'm planning on getting the Sony S350.
Bluray will be better than BBC HD. And jerkiness and judder are terms. You are not going to see your screen shaking around. Most people wouldn't even notice judder.
rob_981
Well-known member
Cool. As long as I don't notice a jerky picture, I'm sure it'll be great. And if I do notice it, it'll be a good excuse to invest in a full HD TV! So it's win-win.
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
rob_981:Cool. As long as I don't notice a jerky picture, I'm sure it'll be great. And if I do notice it, it'll be a good excuse to invest in a full HD TV! So it's win-win.
I like the way your mind works!
I like the way your mind works!
Sliced Bread
Well-known member
professorhat:JohnNewman:However it is worth noting that the motion was unquestionably smoother from the Denon DVD player...no question about it. The BD player looked positively jerky by comparison.
That'll most likely be down to lack of 24fps on your TV as well. Which Sony was it out of interest?
As I say, at the moment, the full benefits of Blu-Ray are very much only available for people who are willing to put the money in to get a decent setup. Once you have that though, you really can tell the difference. A friend of mine has recently been staying with me as his relationship with his girlfriend broke up and he wasn't the sort of person who was that bothered with Blu-Ray. A month on and, now he's watched some good examples of the format at my place, he wants his favourite films to come out in that format as, in his own surprised words, "It really is so much better isn't it?!".
It was the model that was the first Sony to have profile 2.0, (I cannot remember the exact one though). It shouldn't be the 24FPS as my TV does not support it. Both DVD and BD player were playing a standard frame rate. It wasn't the case that the frame rate was bad, it just wasn't as good as my Denon. I'm sure there are other BD players that are better though. I'm not going to knock a whole format due to experience with one player.
That'll most likely be down to lack of 24fps on your TV as well. Which Sony was it out of interest?
As I say, at the moment, the full benefits of Blu-Ray are very much only available for people who are willing to put the money in to get a decent setup. Once you have that though, you really can tell the difference. A friend of mine has recently been staying with me as his relationship with his girlfriend broke up and he wasn't the sort of person who was that bothered with Blu-Ray. A month on and, now he's watched some good examples of the format at my place, he wants his favourite films to come out in that format as, in his own surprised words, "It really is so much better isn't it?!".
It was the model that was the first Sony to have profile 2.0, (I cannot remember the exact one though). It shouldn't be the 24FPS as my TV does not support it. Both DVD and BD player were playing a standard frame rate. It wasn't the case that the frame rate was bad, it just wasn't as good as my Denon. I'm sure there are other BD players that are better though. I'm not going to knock a whole format due to experience with one player.
Interesthing thread...
I own a blue ray player with a decent setup (Onkyo 605, Kef 2005.2, Panasonic BD30 and Tosh WLT66 - only HD ready but soon upgrading to a new sony or panasonic). Even on my older TV I can clearly see a difference in picture quality with BD over my extensive DVD collection. The sound tracks pumped through the onkyo blow you away litterally in the case of die hard 4 etc. Sure we all have our oppinions but when crunching the actual numbers etc blue ray is simply better. Whether your setup or your demos have reflected this is irrelevant to the actual facts. For actual numbers see here http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-2.html .
Michael
I own a blue ray player with a decent setup (Onkyo 605, Kef 2005.2, Panasonic BD30 and Tosh WLT66 - only HD ready but soon upgrading to a new sony or panasonic). Even on my older TV I can clearly see a difference in picture quality with BD over my extensive DVD collection. The sound tracks pumped through the onkyo blow you away litterally in the case of die hard 4 etc. Sure we all have our oppinions but when crunching the actual numbers etc blue ray is simply better. Whether your setup or your demos have reflected this is irrelevant to the actual facts. For actual numbers see here http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-2.html .
Michael
michael.seigal:
Interesthing thread...
Whether your setup or your demos have reflected this is irrelevant to the actual facts. For actual numbers see here http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-2.html .
Michael
The statistics don't mean anything. The quality of any disc is dependent on the care and attention taken by the studio to provide a presentation that takes makes full use of the advantages provided by the format. There are a lot of bad BD transfers out there. Even as someone who has invested a fair amount of money in Blu Ray tech and media, I advised others to hold fire if they're fairly happy with their current set-up. DVD still has a lot to offer and I'm still very selective about which Blu-Rays I buy. For example, I'm not really that bothered about buying my favourite comedies on Blu-Ray, but I am when it comes to big budget action films - as I believe that those are the films where I will enjoy the difference most. Year on year the technology gets better and cheaper. By the that many people, possibly including, does think about getting Blu-Ray, they'll probably get a killer machine a a fraction of the cost of today's top decks.
Interesthing thread...
Whether your setup or your demos have reflected this is irrelevant to the actual facts. For actual numbers see here http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-2.html .
Michael
The statistics don't mean anything. The quality of any disc is dependent on the care and attention taken by the studio to provide a presentation that takes makes full use of the advantages provided by the format. There are a lot of bad BD transfers out there. Even as someone who has invested a fair amount of money in Blu Ray tech and media, I advised others to hold fire if they're fairly happy with their current set-up. DVD still has a lot to offer and I'm still very selective about which Blu-Rays I buy. For example, I'm not really that bothered about buying my favourite comedies on Blu-Ray, but I am when it comes to big budget action films - as I believe that those are the films where I will enjoy the difference most. Year on year the technology gets better and cheaper. By the that many people, possibly including, does think about getting Blu-Ray, they'll probably get a killer machine a a fraction of the cost of today's top decks.
Sliced Bread
Well-known member
FuzzyinLondon:michael.seigal:
Interesthing thread...
Whether your setup or your demos have reflected this is irrelevant to the actual facts. For actual numbers see here http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-2.html .
Michael
The statistics don't mean anything. The quality of any disc is dependent on the care and attention taken by the studio to provide a presentation that takes makes full use of the advantages provided by the format. There are a lot of bad BD transfers out there. Even as someone who has invested a fair amount of money in Blu Ray tech and media, I advised others to hold fire if they're fairly happy with their current set-up. DVD still has a lot to offer and I'm still very selective about which Blu-Rays I buy. For example, I'm not really that bothered about buying my favourite comedies on Blu-Ray, but I am when it comes to big budget action films - as I believe that those are the films where I will enjoy the difference most. Year on year the technology gets better and cheaper. By the that many people, possibly including, does think about getting Blu-Ray, they'll probably get a killer machine a a fraction of the cost of today's top decks.
Agreed. The technology also needs to be well implemented; my SACD player sounds no where near as good as my CD player, despite being a much lower resolution. However I agree that BD's potential is obviously superior to DVD, and in time excellent players will be available at good prices.
Interesthing thread...
Whether your setup or your demos have reflected this is irrelevant to the actual facts. For actual numbers see here http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6463_7-6462511-2.html .
Michael
The statistics don't mean anything. The quality of any disc is dependent on the care and attention taken by the studio to provide a presentation that takes makes full use of the advantages provided by the format. There are a lot of bad BD transfers out there. Even as someone who has invested a fair amount of money in Blu Ray tech and media, I advised others to hold fire if they're fairly happy with their current set-up. DVD still has a lot to offer and I'm still very selective about which Blu-Rays I buy. For example, I'm not really that bothered about buying my favourite comedies on Blu-Ray, but I am when it comes to big budget action films - as I believe that those are the films where I will enjoy the difference most. Year on year the technology gets better and cheaper. By the that many people, possibly including, does think about getting Blu-Ray, they'll probably get a killer machine a a fraction of the cost of today's top decks.
Agreed. The technology also needs to be well implemented; my SACD player sounds no where near as good as my CD player, despite being a much lower resolution. However I agree that BD's potential is obviously superior to DVD, and in time excellent players will be available at good prices.
Nothing I've read is a compelling enough argument. My DVD has an astounding picture, mind you it is a £1k machine and I guess with a £100 machine it may be different. Or indeed if my TV was bigger than its present 42 inches, or I had a projector.
ÿ
ÿ
I have over 1000 DVDs and 3 or 4 DVD players the most expensive being a Pioneer which I paid over ?1000 for. There is no comparison in either picture quality or sound quality. I don't plan on replacing all those DVDs but I will now only buy new movies released on BD and replace select titles from my collection.
If you don't see the benefit of replacing your system fair enough. When did you pay that £1000 for your DVD player. I hope it wasn't in the last 14 months.
If you don't see the benefit of replacing your system fair enough. When did you pay that £1000 for your DVD player. I hope it wasn't in the last 14 months.
Bullseye:I have over 1000 DVDs and 3 or 4 DVD players the most expensive being a Pioneer which I paid over ?1000 for. There is no comparison in either picture quality or sound quality. I don't plan on replacing all those DVDs but I will now only buy new movies released on BD and replace select titles from my collection.If you don't see the benefit of replacing your system fair enough. When did you pay that £1000 for your DVD player. I hope it wasn't in the last 14 months.
2nd hand for £260 including a vdH d102 III interconnect. Been laughing ever since. I wouldn't dream of paying £1k for a movie player of any description. A hifi component, yes.
The DVD player satisfies my needs 100% as it's used sparingly. Don't really watch TV, but when I do watch a DVD I never fail to be impressed with just how good it looks. That's the crux of the matter, I'm not trying to provoke reaction, I seriously don't understand why anyone would need something that's better. Something else I don't understand is buying a DVD/BD from a shop - why? Do you watch them more than once? If not, isn't that money straight down the pan? With music, a decent CD will be played hundreds of times which makes its cost about 5p to 10p per listen.ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
2nd hand for £260 including a vdH d102 III interconnect. Been laughing ever since. I wouldn't dream of paying £1k for a movie player of any description. A hifi component, yes.
The DVD player satisfies my needs 100% as it's used sparingly. Don't really watch TV, but when I do watch a DVD I never fail to be impressed with just how good it looks. That's the crux of the matter, I'm not trying to provoke reaction, I seriously don't understand why anyone would need something that's better. Something else I don't understand is buying a DVD/BD from a shop - why? Do you watch them more than once? If not, isn't that money straight down the pan? With music, a decent CD will be played hundreds of times which makes its cost about 5p to 10p per listen.ÿ
ÿ
ÿ
The Pioneer was one of the first Progressive Scan players I guess I am a sucker for home movies lol
To me I think it depends on the quality of the DVD and the upscaling on the DVD player you're comparing it to.
You can tell the difference easily on a good properly set up tv and player, note stores aren't the best places to compare, but that said some of the better DVD discs and upscaling players run it close. eg. Put "House of Flying Daggers" on Denon 1940 DVD and Pioneer Kuro and I think you'll be convinced its Blu Ray at 1st glance. I haven't got the Blu Ray version of H of FD to try back to back, but upscaled its so superb I doubt theres a massive difference. However, with many more mediocre discs, the difference in sharpness if not visible detail is marked between Blu Ray and DVD. End of the day, its the quality of the disc recording as much as the player. You can't judge one against the other on a single in store viewing using random discs.
You can tell the difference easily on a good properly set up tv and player, note stores aren't the best places to compare, but that said some of the better DVD discs and upscaling players run it close. eg. Put "House of Flying Daggers" on Denon 1940 DVD and Pioneer Kuro and I think you'll be convinced its Blu Ray at 1st glance. I haven't got the Blu Ray version of H of FD to try back to back, but upscaled its so superb I doubt theres a massive difference. However, with many more mediocre discs, the difference in sharpness if not visible detail is marked between Blu Ray and DVD. End of the day, its the quality of the disc recording as much as the player. You can't judge one against the other on a single in store viewing using random discs.
Bullseye:The Pioneer was one of the first Progressive Scan players I guess I am a sucker for home movies lol
WTF is a progressive scan player?
It's funny, I've just been doing a project at work for a well known high street retailer and part of my job has been to write copy about a plethora of products in digital photography, MP3, TV, STB, SatNav, Mobile telephony etc and the amount of utter Blox that the manufacturers 'blind' their customers with is amazing. Most products are 'me toos' and do exactly the same thing as the competition but there is all this proprietry technology these days that is supposed to make things sound great, where in fact it means jack.
ÿ
WTF is a progressive scan player?
It's funny, I've just been doing a project at work for a well known high street retailer and part of my job has been to write copy about a plethora of products in digital photography, MP3, TV, STB, SatNav, Mobile telephony etc and the amount of utter Blox that the manufacturers 'blind' their customers with is amazing. Most products are 'me toos' and do exactly the same thing as the competition but there is all this proprietry technology these days that is supposed to make things sound great, where in fact it means jack.
ÿ
I don't know if I can answer this directly in player terms but in film terms I can offer my understanding, to be corrected if anyone knows better, there are 2 methods of encoding video, interlaced and progressive. With the interlaced method, 1/2 of the information is discarded from every frame so on a picture of 720 lines (pal) only 360 lines are recorded. In the next frame the same happens again but its the alternate lines that are recorded and so on. When played back on a tv, the picture rate is so great that you don't notice the fact that each frame only has 1/2 the lines and that the gaps are actually being filled in by the next frame. Its a great way of producing smaller video but arguably produces a picture that isn't as sharp because in the fraction of the second between frames, the picture may have moved slightly so the lines that are filled in to complete the picture, aren't the exact same lines that would have been recorded if the full frame was saved.
Progressive is the opposite, with progressive, the full picture ie 720 lines is recorded on every frame. This makes for a sharper picture according to some for the reason stated above.
I'm presuming with a progressive player, its able to play back a disc recorded in progressive as a progressive recording whereas presumably an interlaced player would discard 1/2 the information from every frame even with a progressive disc.
Progressive is the opposite, with progressive, the full picture ie 720 lines is recorded on every frame. This makes for a sharper picture according to some for the reason stated above.
I'm presuming with a progressive player, its able to play back a disc recorded in progressive as a progressive recording whereas presumably an interlaced player would discard 1/2 the information from every frame even with a progressive disc.
professorhat
Well-known member
JoelSim:The DVD player satisfies my needs 100% as it's used sparingly. Don't really watch TV, but when I do watch a DVD I never fail to be impressed with just how good it looks. ... Something else I don't understand is buying a DVD/BD from a shop - why? Do you watch them more than once? If not, isn't that money straight down the pan? With music, a decent CD will be played hundreds of times which makes its cost about 5p to 10p per listen.
Joel, I think what you're not understanding is there are people (like myself) who watch films as much as you listen to music. So the same argument you use for buying CDs works on buying DVDs / Blu-Rays and the systems to make the most of them.
If you can think of it that way, you can probably at least empathise as to why we love it, even if you can't understand it personally.
Joel, I think what you're not understanding is there are people (like myself) who watch films as much as you listen to music. So the same argument you use for buying CDs works on buying DVDs / Blu-Rays and the systems to make the most of them.
If you can think of it that way, you can probably at least empathise as to why we love it, even if you can't understand it personally.
Gerrardasnails
Well-known member
professorhat:JoelSim:The DVD player satisfies my needs 100% as it's used sparingly. Don't really watch TV, but when I do watch a DVD I never fail to be impressed with just how good it looks. ... Something else I don't understand is buying a DVD/BD from a shop - why? Do you watch them more than once? If not, isn't that money straight down the pan? With music, a decent CD will be played hundreds of times which makes its cost about 5p to 10p per listen.
Joel, I think what you're not understanding is there are people (like myself) who watch films as much as you listen to music. So the same argument you use for buying CDs works on buying DVDs / Blu-Rays and the systems to make the most of them.
If you can think of it that way, you can probably at least empathise as to why we love it, even if you can't understand it personally.
And what would you think Joel if some dvd fan came on the Hifi forum and said, "I went into Sevenoaks today and I saw cd players costing over £1000. I cannot see the point of it when my micro system plays cds that sound great to me."!!!?
Joel, I think what you're not understanding is there are people (like myself) who watch films as much as you listen to music. So the same argument you use for buying CDs works on buying DVDs / Blu-Rays and the systems to make the most of them.
If you can think of it that way, you can probably at least empathise as to why we love it, even if you can't understand it personally.
And what would you think Joel if some dvd fan came on the Hifi forum and said, "I went into Sevenoaks today and I saw cd players costing over £1000. I cannot see the point of it when my micro system plays cds that sound great to me."!!!?
professorhat: Joel, I think what you're not understanding is there are people (like myself) who watch films as much as you listen to music. So the same argument you use for buying CDs works on buying DVDs / Blu-Rays and the systems to make the most of them.
If you can think of it that way, you can probably at least empathise as to why we love it, even if you can't understand it personally.
I think that's a great point.
My brother in law has a 37" LG LCD, and a £199 home cinema in a box type thing. He considers his system to be superior to mine, as mine 'isn't even surround sound'! My mate, who's heavily into car stereo systems, can't understand why I've spent all this money on a system with 'just two speakers' and 'not that much bass'. They're both eejits, obviously, but still...
I constantly read threads on PC forums from people wanting their music to come through every cheap 7.1 speaker that's attatched to their computer. It's their preference, and they're obviously entitled to do whatever makes them happy, but I don't think they're motivated by all-out quality.
I think people comparing DVD with Blu-Ray and thinking there's not much of a difference is similar to people comparing compressed MP3 to lossless or CD. We appreciate the difference, though not everyone would. Just as many folk can't tell the difference vetween compressed and uncompressed music, those that don't have much passion for video may not appreciate the benefits of Blu Ray.
I've had a few decent DVD players, and I'm quite keen to add an Arcam to my system as I don't believe all this 'PS3 is the best upscaler EVER' stuff, so I'd rather have a decent player for the SD DVD's that I own. But I've no interest in buying any more DVD's, as I've not seen a DVD player yet that isn't comfortably outperfomed by a PS3 playing Blu-Ray. Even my 360 HD-DVD player is leagues ahead of my either my PS3 or DVD recorder playing DVD's.
I mean, even my missus thinks there's a big difference, and that's saying something. As such, I'll have to suffer the Sex and the City movie Blu-Ray at the weekend. So there are some drawbacks...
If you can think of it that way, you can probably at least empathise as to why we love it, even if you can't understand it personally.
I think that's a great point.
My brother in law has a 37" LG LCD, and a £199 home cinema in a box type thing. He considers his system to be superior to mine, as mine 'isn't even surround sound'! My mate, who's heavily into car stereo systems, can't understand why I've spent all this money on a system with 'just two speakers' and 'not that much bass'. They're both eejits, obviously, but still...
I think people comparing DVD with Blu-Ray and thinking there's not much of a difference is similar to people comparing compressed MP3 to lossless or CD. We appreciate the difference, though not everyone would. Just as many folk can't tell the difference vetween compressed and uncompressed music, those that don't have much passion for video may not appreciate the benefits of Blu Ray.
I've had a few decent DVD players, and I'm quite keen to add an Arcam to my system as I don't believe all this 'PS3 is the best upscaler EVER' stuff, so I'd rather have a decent player for the SD DVD's that I own. But I've no interest in buying any more DVD's, as I've not seen a DVD player yet that isn't comfortably outperfomed by a PS3 playing Blu-Ray. Even my 360 HD-DVD player is leagues ahead of my either my PS3 or DVD recorder playing DVD's.
I mean, even my missus thinks there's a big difference, and that's saying something. As such, I'll have to suffer the Sex and the City movie Blu-Ray at the weekend. So there are some drawbacks...
bigblue235:
I'll have to suffer the Sex and the City movie Blu-Ray at the weekend. So there are some drawbacks...
You'll be delighted to know the Blu-ray version is the extended cut
(I watched it on Monday. Sci-fi/sport-loving geek-girl that I am, I was still in tears at least three times
)
I'll have to suffer the Sex and the City movie Blu-Ray at the weekend. So there are some drawbacks...
You'll be delighted to know the Blu-ray version is the extended cut
(I watched it on Monday. Sci-fi/sport-loving geek-girl that I am, I was still in tears at least three times
Clare Newsome:You'll be delighted to know the Blu-ray version is the extended cut
(I watched it on Monday. Sci-fi/sport-loving geek-girl that I am, I was still in tears at least three times
)
Tears? That's all I need, more tears
I'm just waiting for her to come back from her best friend's wedding, en route to which the airline decided to lose her suitcase, containing all her priciest toiletries, make-up and shoes. I'm sure you understand her pain Clare! And you're now telling me I have to put up with Sex in the City Extended Cut ? Oh lordy. It'll be a wet weekend then!
Oh, and AV geek that I am, I almost put it on to see what the PQ was like
(I watched it on Monday. Sci-fi/sport-loving geek-girl that I am, I was still in tears at least three times
Tears? That's all I need, more tears
Oh, and AV geek that I am, I almost put it on to see what the PQ was like
OK THE PICTURES ARE NOT ALWAYS BETTER BUT THE SOUND IN BLU RAY IS BETTER BY A GOOD MARGIN ITS NOT ALL ABOUT THE PICTURE ONLY I FEED BLU RAY DIGITAL INTO MY X-CAN V3 AMP AND SENNHISER HD 650 VIA X-DACV3 AND WATCH SOME MUSIC BLU RAY DISCS AND THIS BEATS DVD HANDS DOWN BUT I AM WAITING PATIENTLY FOR SOME DEICENT ARTISTS TO BE RELEASED ON BLU RAY
dvdaudio:OK THE PICTURES ARE NOT ALWAYS BETTER BUT THE SOUND IN BLU RAY IS BETTER BY A GOOD MARGIN ITS NOT ALL ABOUT THE PICTURE ONLY I FEED BLU RAY DIGITAL INTO MY X-CAN V3 AMP AND SENNHISER HD 650 VIA X-DACV3 AND WATCH SOME MUSIC BLU RAY DISCS AND THIS BEATS DVD HANDS DOWN BUT I AM WAITING PATIENTLY FOR SOME DEICENT ARTISTS TO BE RELEASED ON BLU RAY
Great point, but please TURN THE CAPS LOCK OFF!
Great point, but please TURN THE CAPS LOCK OFF!
Joel, You are as content with your dvd system as some one who has a Denon DM 30 (with the basic Mission speakers and the out of the box speaker cables) but who listens to it once or twice a week.
If they said;
'Yeah, I heard an Arcam the other day and, to be honest, I can't see the point. My cassette player I had as a teenager was more than adequate for my needs, but I got the Denon cheap of a mate and only buy the odd cd.'
what would you say ? You'd leave them to their little world and continue to argue the toss about the effect of 'warm sounding interconnects on a bright amp system' on here with people of a like mind.
Each to their own I say.
If they said;
'Yeah, I heard an Arcam the other day and, to be honest, I can't see the point. My cassette player I had as a teenager was more than adequate for my needs, but I got the Denon cheap of a mate and only buy the odd cd.'
what would you say ? You'd leave them to their little world and continue to argue the toss about the effect of 'warm sounding interconnects on a bright amp system' on here with people of a like mind.
Each to their own I say.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
Something is not right and I’m hoping a forum member will help me
- Started by Fuel4life1234
- Replies: 7
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram