Diary of a Blu-Ray Virgin

[John Duncan]

As many of you know, I'm not a huge fan of (waggles fingers) "Home Cinema". But I've just bought a new, bigger TV for the living room and when the opportunity to "borrow" a Blu-ray player from the fabled WHF?SV stock room came along, I couldn't resist.

So, have I finally been converted to the attractions of high-definition home cinema? Find out in my latest blog. Clicky

 

[professorhat]

So to summarise... good innit?

 

[John Duncan]

Thanks very much. Might need some crossheads adding bu...oh you mean the player...

Indeed. But it was drummerman I think who once said that I can always be relied upon for the pithy one-liners, but never give enough opinion. So I thought I'd give him 1500 words of it. And it didn't seem fair to get a couple of loaners in quick succession without giving back something to the, er, community. Blaggage behoves bloggage, I feel.

 

[The_Lhc]

JohnDuncan:Serendipitously, a day or two later Andy Kerr wandered over and asked "JD, putting an article together about reference discs - what Blurays do you use to show off your kit?". When I replied that I didn't have a Bluray player (none too loudly, this being the WHFS&V office after all and not wanting to be seen as Amish Boy)

It's less embarrassing than saying "I don't have any friends to show it off to", which would have been my answer...

 

[chebby]

JohnDuncan: Needing a new, small telly for the bedroom, I struck upon the cunning ruse of getting a big telly for the sitting room, and moving the others around. Agreed upon by the Finance Director, I soon found myself returning from Richers with a Sony 32NX503, which is - and we have family consensus here - a great telly.

I am glad to see there is at least one other person on the planet (apart from me) who thinks that 32" is a big enough TV (unless you live in a converted Abbey).

Even when we upgraded from a 26" Samsung to a 32" Samsung, I worried whether things had gone too far and sat staring, slack jawed, at this monolithic black thing like something from 2001 Space Odyssey. (I refrained from waving a beef bone at it though.)

Good essay John. The S370 was our first BluRay player and it was bought for £99 (Tesco) a few months ago as a convenient means to move iPlayer to the telly. We still only have a handful of BluRay discs though, and I am still buying mostly DVDs. Our girls like to borrow from my collection and they only have DVD players. So if I bought BluRay discs they wouldn't be able to borrow them (and I can't afford to buy two more players).

I can't see me ever having any more than a small collection (mostly duplicates of favourite DVDs) of choice movies on BluRay.

 

[manicm]

Yes size does not always count, but in some instances it can. I understand that JD has limited space and his 32" choice was the correct one.

But if you have the space there's no doubt a bigger screen has a nicer scale - I managed to just cut it with a 37" about 2.2 away from sofa - and I'm glad I made the choice. It's just right - and at the store staring at the 2 sizes side by side there was simply no question. I also took value for money into account as well. I could have got a Sony 32" 100hz for the price of my Samsung 37" 5 series 50hz. I'm ignorant about the missing 50 Hz and it's bliss.

 

[Anonymous]

Whats wrong with sitting 2 feet away and having a 50" ?

 

[manicm]

canada16:

Whats wrong with sitting 2 feet away and having a 50" ?

Apart from wilfully throwing money down the drain for no visible reason?

 

[kinda]

I tend to agree on size and some years ago 26" was a big TV. Unless programs have started shooting smaller footage then it still should be fine.

I had a 32" for a while and was worried about going smaller but went for a 26" to complement my projector. But at 3m 26" is fine, but I wouldn't really want to go smaller for some stuff. Each to their own but It's hard for me to understand why people would want to watch everytihng on 50"+ TVs and take up loads of livng room space. I think it's just what you get used to.

Obviously for films you don't get the scale or involvement on a 26" at 3m, but I turn the projector on for that.

 

[The_Lhc]

kinda:Each to their own but It's hard for me to understand why people would want to watch everytihng on 50"+ TVs and take up loads of livng room space.

Erm, the screens are flat dude, my 50" takes up way less floor space than my old 32" CRT did (does, it's currently causing subsidence in another room...).

 

[Big Chris]

Kinda, I'd say those of us who don't have projectors and have large screen TVs have bought them for exactly the same reason you have your projector. To watch movies!

If I had a button which magically changed my TVs dimensions to suit the stuff I was watching, then yes, I probably wouldn't pick a 55" TV to watch 'University Challenge'. Conversely, I wouldn't want to watch movies on a 19" TV.

A TV, for 95% of people, has to perform a number of roles. You need to factor in your preferences and make an informed decision.

 

[manicm]

I agree with Chris, I bought my tv primarily for movies, so the 37" was the sweet spot. 32" seemed too small for the outlay.

 

[John Duncan]

I agree, I think 37" is actually the 'right' size for my house and viewing distances, but as stated elsewhere, practicalities precluded it.

 

[kinda]

Yeah, don't get me wrong I do understand wanting a big screen for films, and it's whatever people fancy. 37" and the like aren't massive for general watchingor a room, and if it's big enough for films in the room, great.

I until fairly recently had a 32" CRT for both films and TV and was pretty happy.

It's just I'm always a bit bemused by people spending £1500+ on a massive TV when they could have a projector / smaller TV, and get two devices that suit films and TV better than the single big TV taking up more room.

Projectors aren't for everyone and need a bit of installing plus an amp for sound but for people accomodating huge screens and spending a bit you'd think they'd be pepared to go for it.

Big TVs in a corner still take up lots of space, and even on a wall dominate a room.

 

[simonlewis]

kinda if you said lounge to me, two things would spring to mind, a tv & a settee, i don't see whats wrong with a big tv it's what people expect to see in the lounge i would like a 50"+ & i sit 6 feet away.

 

[Anonymous]

kinda:
Big TVs in a corner still take up lots of space, and even on a wall dominate a room.

They would, but why would you buy a 50+ inch TV for home cinema and put it in a corner where you can't set up surround?

Up on, or flat against a wall it takes up the same room space as any size flat panel telly - give or take a few mill. Basics Shirley

 

[professorhat]

kinda:It's just I'm always a bit bemused by people spending £1500+ on a massive TV when they could have a projector / smaller TV, and get two devices that suit films and TV better than the single big TV taking up more room.

Projectors aren't for everyone and need a bit of installing plus an amp for sound but for people accomodating huge screens and spending a bit you'd think they'd be pepared to go for it.

The issue is, for the £2,000 (here or there) I spent on my Pioneer, I could have got a pretty decent projector. However, when you include a decent screen and installation costs, you're then looking at perhaps getting a projector more like £1,500. Then, add in a reasonable 32" TV and you're looking at a £1,000 projector. Okay, it'll be good for films, but I'll wager the picture quality isn't anywhere near that which I get from the Pio. I could leave out the TV but that means watching everything on the projector - I know some people do this but I wouldn't really to be honest, and I seriously doubt the other half would be happy about it.

So it sounds like a good idea, but when you really look into it, getting both is going to be a lot more expensive to get the same picture quality and most definitely a lot more hassle than just getting a larger TV. And as others have said, if it's wall mounted, a flat screen these days doesn't really take up much space.

And now, with most of my TV watching consisting of the HD channels on Freeview HD, the bigger TV lets me see the extra detail contained in even the likes of Masterchef!

 

[John Duncan]

kinda:It's hard for me to understand why people would want to watch everytihng on 50"+ TVs and take up loads of livng room space.

Precisely. I'm going to have to take a picture of my living room to show you that 32" is actually a very big, black, imposing thing in my living room. And I say again, if I'd put in a 37", I wouldn't be able to angle it in such a way that I could actually watch it...

One day, when I have a room that is for watching films in (ie when I don't live in Teddington), I'll have a 50/60" TV. I've never seen a projector I've liked.

 

[Anonymous]

I agree with Big Chris on the tv size is relative to what you want to watch on it. We have a 46" and sit just under 3m away from which probably the biggest I would want to go. I do find it's great for Freeview HD and 1:1.85 ratio movies. With 1:2.34 movies I sometimes wish it was bigger to give me the 16:9 impact as it were. For SD and gaming I think 42" would have been better. I find I'm having to scan my eyes all around the screen when gaming. Like in racing games just looking into the corner of the screen for racing position or revs I'm looking a bit too far from the road ahead. I think a lot of people on here, certainly married and family guys know that it's all a compromise between what we want and what we are allowed when it comes to tvs.

 

[Anonymous]

Big Chris:
Kinda, I'd say those of us who don't have projectors and have large screen TVs have bought them for exactly the same reason you have your projector. To watch movies!

If I had a button which magically changed my TVs dimensions to suit the stuff I was watching, then yes, I probably wouldn't pick a 55" TV to watch 'University Challenge'. Conversely, I wouldn't want to watch movies on a 19" TV.

A TV, for 95% of people, has to perform a number of roles. You need to factor in your preferences and make an informed decision.

Big Chris-How is the 760 compared to the 350? Is it better at upscaling dvds? I'm finding the motion on some dvds can be a little jerky especially region 1 dvds.

 

[John Duncan]

Have you tried setting it to NTSC when you watch region 1? Can you even do that nowadays or is that a stupid question in 1080p-land?

 

[Anonymous]

There is no option for that. The BD player is set to 1080p. It's a bit a of a faff to get it so that the amp or tv does the upscaling. I've tried it and they were not as good at the actual upscaling so the motion did come into it. It's only a slight jerkiness on things like slow pans. The wife has not noticed it. I think it is only really noticable after you have watched to tv or bd the start watching a dvd. If you just watch a dvd 'cold' then you have nothing to compare it against.

 

[Big Chris]

NSYGrinner:Big Chris:

Kinda, I'd say those of us who don't have projectors and have large screen TVs have bought them for exactly the same reason you have your projector. To watch movies!

If I had a button which magically changed my TVs dimensions to suit the stuff I was watching, then yes, I probably wouldn't pick a 55" TV to watch 'University Challenge'. Conversely, I wouldn't want to watch movies on a 19" TV.

A TV, for 95% of people, has to perform a number of roles. You need to factor in your preferences and make an informed decision.

Big Chris-How is the 760 compared to the 350? Is it better at upscaling dvds? I'm finding the motion on some dvds can be a little jerky especially region 1 dvds.

I'll have a more in-depth play today while The Wife's at work.

 

[laserman16]

Big Chris:NSYGrinner:Big Chris:

Kinda, I'd say those of us who don't have projectors and have large screen TVs have bought them for exactly the same reason you have your projector. To watch movies!

If I had a button which magically changed my TVs dimensions to suit the stuff I was watching, then yes, I probably wouldn't pick a 55" TV to watch 'University Challenge'. Conversely, I wouldn't want to watch movies on a 19" TV.

A TV, for 95% of people, has to perform a number of roles. You need to factor in your preferences and make an informed decision.

Big Chris-How is the 760 compared to the 350? Is it better at upscaling dvds? I'm finding the motion on some dvds can be a little jerky especially region 1 dvds.

I'll have a more in-depth play today while The Wife's at work.

Has your wife twigged that you have changed it yet?

BTW how is the Wife now, leg healing ok?

 

[Big Chris]

laserman16:Big Chris:NSYGrinner:Big Chris:

Kinda, I'd say those of us who don't have projectors and have large screen TVs have bought them for exactly the same reason you have your projector. To watch movies!

If I had a button which magically changed my TVs dimensions to suit the stuff I was watching, then yes, I probably wouldn't pick a 55" TV to watch 'University Challenge'. Conversely, I wouldn't want to watch movies on a 19" TV.

A TV, for 95% of people, has to perform a number of roles. You need to factor in your preferences and make an informed decision.

Big Chris-How is the 760 compared to the 350? Is it better at upscaling dvds? I'm finding the motion on some dvds can be a little jerky especially region 1 dvds.

I'll have a more in-depth play today while The Wife's at work.

Has your wife twigged that you have changed it yet?

BTW how is the Wife now, leg healing ok?

She hasn't twigged yet. Here's hoping she never does.

Her leg's on the mend thanks. She's back to work on reduced hours so she can avoid the rush hour traffic. Funny thing is, she had 4-odd months off work so has amassed loads of annual leave. She's got 2 weeks off from next week and she's still carrying a week over to next year.