Do all Blu-ray players output the same quality sound and vision?

[m0n5t3r]

As far as I can see the panasonic DMP-BD79 doesn't have a digital out, just HDMI, so how could you be comparing?

Well in the absence of an answer to this it can only be concluded that you haven't conducted any meaningful audio comparison between £50 and £300 players. I am also skeptical about your conclusions as to video. Obviously if having the more expensive player is important to you that's fair enough.

Wrong!

I have tried more than I care to count from friends and family probably 12 or 13 without counting, most were older so have a digital out of somekind, those that didn't I had to run the audio cable from the tv to the DAC but that was only 3 of them in total.

The biggest difference by far was the audio between players but the picture quality really only noticeably changed between makes. The £100 to £200 approx sony and panasonics were identical in picture quality but the sound was noticeably better with the more expensive ones. But then everything was noticeablyy better with the £1k Arcam.

Personally I have just bought a £250 Pioneer BDP450, which to my ears and eyes was the best value for what I wanted. If I had a large collection of DVD-A and SACD I would have bought the Arcam but I do most of my music streaming via Qobuz FLAC.

I cannot talk about Digital Out, but via HDMI, there's no difference between players. You cannot get HD audio via digital optical or coaxial, so I would recommend an AV receiver for your future upgrade.

By the way, I hope you bought the Pioneer BDP 450 for £179 and not £250. I posted a link to the deal in your other thread.

Yes, I did pay £179. Managed to borrow one first to test. IMO far better all round than the plastic Sony's and Panasonics.

HD Audio is just for surround sound, which I have no interest in at all and will never buy an AV receiver. I have listened to many of them and the quality of the sound vs a good stereo is not good enough. Okay if you want explosions going off behind you etc. then you want surround and need a receiver.

 

[bigboss]

HD Audio is just for surround sound, which I have no interest in at all and will never buy an AV receiver. I have listened to many of them and the quality of the sound vs a good stereo is not good enough. Okay if you want explosions going off behind you etc. then you want surround and need a receiver.

Not really. HD audio is a lossless codec. If you don't use HDMI for audio, you get a lossy codec like Dolby Digital which is compressed and inferior.

 

[m0n5t3r]

HD Audio is just for surround sound, which I have no interest in at all and will never buy an AV receiver. I have listened to many of them and the quality of the sound vs a good stereo is not good enough. Okay if you want explosions going off behind you etc. then you want surround and need a receiver.

Not really. HD audio is a lossless codec. If you don't use HDMI for audio, you get a lossy codec like Dolby Digital which is compressed and inferior.

Only with regards to "Surround Sound", Coaxial is almost deliberately included for Hi-Fi people like myself listening in Stereo.

If you have an AV Receiver and want surround then obviously HDMI is the only sensible choice and is the best.

IIRC - HDMI is 16bit (cant remember the khz but its higher than the others - larger bandwidth) Coaxial is capable of 24bit for DVD-A & SACD. I think that's why high end DACS have Optical & Coaxial and not HDMI

 

[bigboss]

HDMI supports 24-bit as well. Coaxial bandwidth is restricted to 1.5Mbps. Check Dolby TrueHD for example:

Dolby TrueHD: Premium Lossless Audio for Home Theater Entertainment

Dolby® TrueHD delivers 100 percent lossless sound for movies and music that is bit-for-bit identical to the studio master, designed for your high-definition home theater.

Dolby TrueHD Benefits:

Supports up to eight channels of 96 kHz/24-bit audio and six channels of 192 kHz/24-bit audio

Eight full-bandwidth (7.1) channel playback takes full advantage of Blu-ray Disc™ capabilities

Future support for up to 16 discrete channels of 100 percent lossless audio

Advanced 96k upsampling provides a new level of fidelity from movies, television programming, and concert videos

Through coaxial, you're certainly compromising on sound, unless you get a blu ray player with analogue outs and let the player decode audio.

 

[bigboss]

http://www.dolby.com/us/en/consumer/technology/home-theater/dolby-truehd.html

http://www.avforums.com/threads/an-attempt-to-explain-high-definition-audio.984906/

http://www.avforums.com/threads/whats-better-dts-master-audio-via-hdmi-cable-or-coaxial-cable.1133986/

The bit rate for HD audio is up to 27Mbps, whereas coaxial supports only 1.5Mbps which is just about enough for Dolby Digital etc. (not HD audio)

 

[AlbaBrown]

No.

Many claim that they all output exactly the same data, using the age old argument that digital is digital, ignoring the fact that error correction is needed in all digital circuits (because of many factors affecting the information and timing).

And that error correction is perfect when dealing with documents etc, so it will be perfect with the massive variables of audio. and has no effect on neighbouring circuits....

So if we all followed that logic, all CD players/DAC chips would sound exactly the same I guess.

I think the more relevant question to ask is whether there are any genuinely good enough TVs out there nowadays to see the differences in source quality.

 

[bigboss]

Many claim that they all output exactly the same data, using the age old argument that digital is digital, ignoring the fact that error correction is needed in all digital circuits (because of many factors affecting the information and timing).

And that error correction is perfect when dealing with documents etc, so it will be perfect with the massive variables of audio. and has no effect on neighbouring circuits....

So how will imperfect digital error correction actually look like? Punchier colours? Livelier audio? How does digital error translate into that? During bad weather, when there's a disruption to your Sky digital signal, you get blocks of picture loss, unlike noise in analogues of the olden days. That is how digital error looks like.

 

[cheeseboy]

No.

yes

Many claim that they all output exactly the same data, using the age old argument that digital is digital,

it's not an argument it's fact. That computer you just wrote that on is proof that data is data.

ignoring the fact that error correction is needed in all digital circuits (because of many factors affecting the information and timing).

no it's not. Error correction is only on devices, circuits, software that has it built in.

And that error correction is perfect when dealing with documents etc, so it will be perfect with the massive variables of audio.

erm, it's just data. It doesn't see it as a document, or audio, just data.

and has no effect on neighbouring circuits....

hang on, now you're talking about circuits, so we're talking electronics now and not software based? I'm confused. No wait, I think you're confused

So if we all followed that logic, all CD players/DAC chips would sound exactly the same I guess.

no, if we followed that logic, all cd players made with exactly the same parts would sound exactly the same. Oh wait, they do. What makes them different might be different op-amps, capacitors etc, which all have been proven to change the sound. But yes, if you are talking specifically about chips, then yes they will. It depends what one does with the said chip afterwards.

I think the more relevant question to ask is whether there are any genuinely good enough TVs out there nowadays to see the differences in source quality.

now that's a fair enough question, and the answer is yes. How do you think things get mastered/edited for cinema tv?

 

[m0n5t3r]

Through coaxial, you're certainly compromising on sound, unless you get a blu ray player with analogue outs and let the player decode audio.

Not compromising, all that other stuff you mentioned is related 100% to surround sound and not stereo sound. Coaxial supports 24bit/192khz as well and doesn't require the larger bandwidth as it's only sending music and no video or surround sound.

If it made any difference to stereo equipment then high end DACS would use HDMI and not Coaxial or Optical.

It just boils down to what you prefer, my 2 closest friends and myself all focus mainly on Hi-Fi and all of us have the same kind of setup. 47in Panasonic Smart, Blu-Ray, DAC, Stereo Amp & Speakers. A couple of my other friends who have never bothered with Hi-Fi have TV, Blu-Ray, AV Receiver & 7.1 Surround.

 

[bigboss]

Not compromising, all that other stuff you mentioned is related 100% to surround sound and not stereo sound. Coaxial supports 24bit/192khz as well and doesn't require the larger bandwidth as it's only sending music and no video or surround sound.

27.7Mbps bandwidth is for audio only. Video is a separate 40Mbps.

Bandwidth requirements for different audio formats:

Dolby Digital: 640Kbps

DTS: 1.5Mbps

DTS-HD: 6Mbps

LPCM: 27.7Mbps

Dolby TrueHD: 18.4Mbps

DTS-HD Master Audio: 24.5Mbps

Anything over 1.5Mbps is not supported by coaxial.

 

[bigboss]

Your ideal player would have been the older Panasonic DMP-BDT320 which had a 2-channel analogue out, which would allow the player to decode HD audio and send it to your stereo ampifier. Let me check which of the current players on sale still have that....

 

[bigboss]

Amongst the current crop, Panasonic DMP-BDT500 is your best option, and I would recommend that over the Pioneer 450, and use the analogue outs to connect to your amplifier.

 

[theflyingwasp]

From reading this thread it seems if you bought a mid level Blu ray player and your movie collection is pretty much all blu ray there is no benifet from buying a high end Blu ray player unless you intend to use it as a CD player aswell.

i went from the Panasonic 220 to the oppo 103 and I would be lying if I said I found a difference in picture quality.i have about 200 DVDs that I will never rebuy on Blu ray and that's when the oppo works it magic.im watching napoleon dynamite right now and it looks no different to an average Blu ray.

Spend the extra money on a better tv and get a decent hdmi cable the set the tv up properly and the Blu ray player shouldn't really matter that much.i love the oppo but I'd rather have the £500 in my pocket .the Panasonic 220 won the what hifi budget award player in 2012 and that player instead of being relegated to the bedroom should have done me proud until 4k Blu ray players are released .hopefully they will be backwards compatible with 1080p I'm not holding my breath tho combined with the non backwards compatibility of the consoles I'm going to end up with a 20ft high rack!

At the risk of returning to an old argument, I find it interesting and rather inconsistent that you agree there is no difference in blu ray picture quality between players but continue to advocate buying a more expensive HDMI cable.

Yes I do think there is a difference in blu ray quality BUT not at mid level to high end players.like I said I did not benifet from buying the oppo over my old award winning panasonic that was half the price but no name cheapy models for £50 next mid/high end players on a good TV set up might be a different story.the cheapest blu ray in Argos was a toshiba at £59.99 I'd like to see that spinning avatar next to a mid/high end player but in the end the best blu ray player in the world won't perform on a rubbish tv connected by a pound land cable.

 

[m0n5t3r]

Bandwidth requirements for different audio formats:

Dolby Digital: 640Kbps

DTS: 1.5Mbps

DTS-HD: 6Mbps

LPCM: 27.7Mbps

Dolby TrueHD: 18.4Mbps

DTS-HD Master Audio: 24.5Mbps

Anything over 1.5Mbps is not supported by coaxial.

I agree with you, but the ones highlighted are totally irrelevant to Stereo Amplification

 

[bigboss]

Bandwidth requirements for different audio formats:

Dolby Digital: 640Kbps

DTS: 1.5Mbps

DTS-HD: 6Mbps

LPCM: 27.7Mbps

Dolby TrueHD: 18.4Mbps

DTS-HD Master Audio: 24.5Mbps

Anything over 1.5Mbps is not supported by coaxial.

I agree with you, but the ones highlighted are totally irrelevant to Stereo Amplification

It's not irrelevant. Linear PCM stereo, which is lossless, is 2.7Mbps, which again cannot be handled by coaxial.

You may wish to read this technical paper, which includes stereo scenario as well:

http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/TrueHD_Tech_Paper_Final.pdf

Remember there's a difference between Dolby TrueHD and Dolby Digital when reading it.

It's totally upto you. If you think you're getting the best sound, fair enough. In my opinion, you can get even better sound for less (considering the Panasonic is cheaper than the Pioneer).

 

[m0n5t3r]

It's not irrelevant. You may wish to read this technical paper, which includes stereo scenario as well:

http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/TrueHD_Tech_Paper_Final.pdf

Remember there's a difference between Dolby TrueHD and Dolby Digital when reading it.

It's totally upto you. If you think you're getting the best sound, fair enough. In my opinion, you can get even better sound for less (considering the Panasonic is cheaper than the Pioneer).

:wall: :wall: :wall: :wall: :wall:

DOLBY has nothing to do with regular hi-fi or music, it is used solely in Film & TV. I have 2 speakers... i.e. "Stereo", not 3, 5 or 7!

 

[bigboss]

So you're buying a blu ray player but not watching any blu ray films then? My suggestion is about blu ray fims with 2-channel sound.

 

[m0n5t3r]

So you're buying a blu ray player but not watching any blu ray films then?

:rofl: You must either be mentally challenged or purposfully trying to get a reaction.

Seriously, what does your comment have to do with my previous post?

 

[bigboss]

So you're buying a blu ray player but not watching any blu ray films then?

:rofl: You must either be mentally challenged or purposfully trying to get a reaction.

Seriously, what does your comment have to do with my previous post?

This is what you said:

DOLBY has nothing to do with regular hi-fi or music, it is used solely in Film & TV.

Hence my question. No need to be rude to me; I'm only trying to help you here, as I have helped you with blu ray player suggestions including the Pioneer 450 in your other thread (and you didn't even have the courtesy to thank me for it).

 

[m0n5t3r]

So you're buying a blu ray player but not watching any blu ray films then?

:rofl: You must either be mentally challenged or purposfully trying to get a reaction.

Seriously, what does your comment have to do with my previous post?

This is what you said:

DOLBY has nothing to do with regular hi-fi or music, it is used solely in Film & TV.

Hence my question. No need to be rude to me; I'm only trying to help you here, as I have helped you with blu ray player suggestions including the Pioneer 450 in your other thread (and you didn't even have the courtesy to thank me for it).

Thank you for your help looking at the BDP450.

I was not being rude, I was asking a question because your response was incredibly obtuese.

Hi-Fi Amps and other equipment do NOT support Dolby, I don't like or want surround sound. I love watching films but as all TV's these days have rubbish speakers my options were either to buy a Soundbar or put the audio through my DAC & Hi-Fi. Giving me much better sound than the TV or a soundbar and access to DVD-A and SACD at the same time.

My current rubbish panasonic Blu-Ray is so bad it sometimes takes over a minute to load a disc when it gets confused easily plus every time i switch it off the TV and Blu-Ray refuse to talk to each other again until i remove the HDMI lead and plug it into another socket. Which is a real PITA as the TV has no access to the connections without being completely removed from the wall.

 

[bigboss]

Since Hi-Fi amps do not support Dolby / LPCM, will it not help if LPCM gets decoded by the player itself, and then send it to the amplifier for amplification only? This is only possible if the player has analogue outs.

LPCM is closest to studio master with 2.0 stereo sound.

 

[bigboss]

Of course that would mean your current DAC will not be used, and player's internal DAC will be used instead.

 

[professorhat]

m0n5t3r - you're missing the point by thinking Dolby is only related to surround sound. Films have stereo soundtracks which can be output losslessly in Linear PCM - a coaxial connection does not have the bandwidth to transmit this. That's all bigboss is trying to say.

 

[m0n5t3r]

Since Hi-Fi amps do not support Dolby / LPCM, will it not help if LPCM gets decoded by the player itself, and then send it to the amplifier for amplification only? This is only possible if the player has analogue outs.

LPCM is closest to studio master with 2.0 stereo sound.

Internal DAC's will be rubbish, my DAC is £400 worth just being a DAC, so a £200 Blu-Ray will not be anywhere near as good. Plus CABLES....

Digital Cable is Digital cable within reason, I wouldn't use a poundland one but a £20 one is fine. Analogue Cables are a different story, my RCA cables from my DAC to my Amp are £150 worth, so better to now put my CD player and Blu-Ray through digital as a source and let my far superior DAC deal with it and only use 1 really good interconnect.

The DAC has already managed to improve my £600 CD Player!

 

[bigboss]

Of course, but there's only so much a DAC can do when presented with lossy sound. Besides, the Panasonic has a coaxial connection as well, allowing you to compare.