Naim DVD5 better then Blue Ray

[fr0g]

Andrew Everard:And of course more data is all there is to it...

I didn't say that.

And in many cases, no. Certainly once the amount of data is more than enough (such as digital cameras, and the quest for pixels)
But when the amount of data doesn't even fill the screen, and in fact only fills a quarter of it, then yes, the amount of data is VERY important.

 

[Anonymous]

Quite simply the jump in picture quality from DVD to Blu Ray isn't anywhere near the difference we all experienced from VHS to DVD and there are DVD players out there right now around the £600 and upwards mark that many would say knock spots off the current crop of Blu Ray players

We will have to see over the next year what the quality of future generation Blu Ray Players will reveal but reveal they will have to if the globe is goint to Ditch DVD proper for Blu Ray and yes.....if you've got £000's to spend on a Blu Ray Cinema set up then you're going to be thrilled by the spectacle...however the masses might not even consider spending more than around £1,500 on a set up and that's probably pushing it a little

In this game it all boils down to affordability and making people believe that Blu Ray is really the way forward and then again millions of us can't really see the difference between the two mediums in a £1,500 set up..........or can we?

 

[Andrew Everard]

fr0g:Andrew Everard:And of course more data is all there is to it...

I didn't say that.

And in many cases, no. Certainly once the amount of data is more than enough (such as digital cameras, and the quest for pixels)
But when the amount of data doesn't even fill the screen, and in fact only fills a quarter of it, then yes, the amount of data is VERY important.

And now we're back to the point at which my original comment was misinterpreted - I wonder when the next fake Italian will turn up...?

 

[Clare Newsome]

fr0g:Andrew Everard:And of course more data is all there is to it...

I didn't say that.

And in many cases, no. Certainly once the amount of data is more than enough (such as digital cameras, and the quest for pixels)
But when the amount of data doesn't even fill the screen, and in fact only fills a quarter of it, then yes, the amount of data is VERY important.

Yes, the amount of data is very important, but there are two other crucial considerations:

1) Just because a Blu-ray disc has the capacity to carry high-quality pictures/sounds, doesn't mean to say it's doing so. Way too many rush-released Blu-ray titles are poor-quality transfers that are effectively just upscales from the DVD master. My several-year-old Pioneer DVD player looks better playing the same title on DVD, upscaled via my receiver.

2) Picture detail is just one part of the visual-enjoyment equation: what about colour and motion-handling; about contrast? All things a good high-end DVD player will - unsurprisingly - trump a cheap Blu-ray player for.

That's why despite loving my PS3 for gaming and Blu-ray playback, I keep my old Pioneer in the AV rack for DVD duties (handy for all the multi-region discs I own, too).

We love the PS3 as a budget all-rounder - that's why it's a current Award winner - but it's just one option.

Hopefully for people with the money and inclination towards a higher-end all-round solution will have some superb Blu-ray products to choose from by the end of the year: when the best BD player on the market (for performance) remains a year-old Pioneer, it's not great.

 

[fr0g]

Tallyho:
Quite simply the jump in picture quality from DVD to Blu Ray isn't anywhere near the difference we all experienced from VHS to DVD and there are DVD players out there right now around the £600 and upwards mark that many would say knock spots off the current crop of Blu Ray players

We will have to see over the next year what the quality of future generation Blu Ray Players will reveal but reveal they will have to if the globe is goint to Ditch DVD proper for Blu Ray and yes.....if you've got £000's to spend on a Blu Ray Cinema set up then you're going to be thrilled by the spectacle...however the masses might not even consider spending more than around £1,500 on a set up and that's probably pushing it a little

In this game it all boils down to affordability and making people believe that Blu Ray is really the way forward and then again millions of us can't really see the difference between the two mediums in a £1,500 set up..........or can we?

Well I personally think the jump is just as big as from VHS to DVD. But of course as quality gets higher, equal jumps are perceptibly smaller.
I think the PS3 playing Casino Royale on BluRay is stunning. The DVD 5 cannot hope to match the detail. It may very well have a great picture, and may well have a better colour balance, or whatever, but there is no way it can match the 'detail' seeing as 3 quarters of the picture is made from guesswork.

 

[fr0g]

Clare Newsome:
fr0g:Andrew Everard:And of course more data is all there is to it...

I didn't say that.

And in many cases, no. Certainly once the amount of data is more than enough (such as digital cameras, and the quest for pixels)
But when the amount of data doesn't even fill the screen, and in fact only fills a quarter of it, then yes, the amount of data is VERY important.

Yes, the amount of data is very important, but there are two other crucial considerations:

1) Just because a Blu-ray disc has the capacity to carry high-quality pictures/sounds, doesn't mean to say it's doing so. Way too many rush-released Blu-ray titles are poor-quality transfers that are effectively just upscales from the DVD master. My several-year-old Pioneer DVD player looks better playing the same title on DVD, upscaled via my receiver.

2) Picture detail is just one part of the visual-enjoyment equation: what about colour and motion-handling; about contrast? All things a good high-end DVD player will - unsurprisingly - trump a cheap Blu-ray player for.

That's why despite loving my PS3 for gaming and Blu-ray playback, I keep my old Pioneer in the AV rack for DVD duties (handy for all the multi-region discs I own, too).

We love the PS3 as a budget all-rounder - that's why it's a current Award winner - but it's just one option.

Hopefully for people with the money and inclination towards a higher-end all-round solution will have some superb Blu-ray products to choose from by the end of the year: when the best BD player on the market (for performance) remains a year-old Pioneer, it's not great.

THANK YOU! A reasonable response from a WHF staffer on this thread AT LAST.
Yes, the PS3 is only a medium budget DVD player. Yes there are aspects of the picture that are not as good, and there are many BluRay titles that are simply bad upscaled versions of standard def material, or whatever. But given a nice HD disk, then the picture on a PS3 playing the same film, at full resolution, is better than that on ANY DVD player...

 

[Clare Newsome]

fr0g:
I think the PS3 playing Casino Royale on BluRay is stunning. The DVD 5 cannot hope to match the detail. It may very well have a great picture, and may well have a better colour balance, or whatever, but there is no way it can match the 'detail' seeing as 3 quarters of the picture is made from guesswork.

But then - see my post above - Casino Royale is a showcase title: Sony deliberately engineered it to be the best Blu-ray could be, visually. The HD master was made directly from the camera negative after the film was shot, rather than from a second-generation print/cinema print.

It was why it was bundled free with the first batch of PS3s that launched in the UK, for example, to show just what the format's capable of.

And I agree, there's no way a DVD (even one also transferred/downscaled from that spotless movie master) is going to compete for detail with that Blu-ray.

But that wasn't - and hasn't been - Andrew's point. If I was in his position, i'd stick with the Naim, too!

 

[fr0g]

Clare Newsome:If I was in his position, i'd stick with the Naim, too!

...So would I! The thread has only been fuelled by a lack of a direct answer...

 

[Andrew Everard]

fr0g:Clare Newsome:If I was in his position, i'd stick with the Naim, too!

...So would I!

I just had a Victor Meldrew moment.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Clare Newsome: Casino Royale is a showcase title: Sony deliberately engineered it to be the best Blu-ray could be, visually. The HD master was made directly from the camera negative after the film was shot, rather than from a second-generation print/cinema print.

And I agree, there's no way a DVD (even one also transferred/downscaled from that spotless movie master) is going to compete for detail with that Blu-ray.Having said that, BluRay has not yet used anywhere near it's storage capability regarding picture or sound, even that BluRay. Yes, some are mastered better than others just as with DVD, but of all the BD's I have viewed so far, all have been a noticeable improvement over the DVD version, and some are just stunning to watch. As good as expensive DVD players are or can be, as stated already, they're not going to compete with the level of detail, especially in long shots as a decent BD player.

As with most people's comparisons with SD and HD, it all boils down to what screen the comparison is being viewed on and the quality of source components. Everyone knows there's a big difference between low and high end plasma screens, and a huge difference between low end and high end projectors.

HD is the way forward, and after seeing figures of how the BluRay format is growing far quicker than DVD did within the same space of time, it won't be long before we're seeing budget BD titles (we already are to an extent). DVD quality will be dropping as quick as it's prices, otherwise film companies wil be losing money.

 

[Anonymous]

FrankHarveyHiFi: Sony deliberately engineered it to be the best Blu-ray could be, visually. The HD master was made directly from the camera negative after the film was shot, rather than from a second-generation print/cinema print.

HD is the way forward, and after seeing figures of how the BluRay format is growing far quicker than DVD did within the same space of time, it won't be long before we're seeing budget BD titles (we already are to an extent). DVD quality will be dropping as quick as it's prices, otherwise film companies wil be losing money.

In essence I agree that HD should be the way forward in terms of picture quality , but you'vre also got be 100% sure you're getting what is says on the tin....a High Quality Blu Transfer and at a reasonable price. HMV this afternoon was selling Casino Royale on Blu Ray for a staggering £25 , Amazon online exc P & P is selling it for £12.98 whereas I picked up the DVD a few months ago for £5 in HMV and for some unknown reason it's now £7 in the same shop.

I was more than happy with the film via a DENON DVD 1940 and for many millions of us mere mortals out here that old adage of " I'm more than happy with with I currently have" will determine whether or not DVD's become extinct or not and the fact that so many of us can buy good films on DVD for between £3 and say £7 will mean that Blu Ray Disc prices will have to fall quite rapidly by comparison very soon to even have a chance of tempting the most steadfast and resolute of DVD buyers in favour of continuing with DVD to convert wholly to Blu Ray

 

[fr0g]

Tallyho:FrankHarveyHiFi: Sony deliberately engineered it to be the best Blu-ray could be, visually. The HD master was made directly from the camera negative after the film was shot, rather than from a second-generation print/cinema print.

HD is the way forward, and after seeing figures of how the BluRay format is growing far quicker than DVD did within the same space of time, it won't be long before we're seeing budget BD titles (we already are to an extent). DVD quality will be dropping as quick as it's prices, otherwise film companies wil be losing money.

In essence I agree that HD should be the way forward in terms of picture quality , but you'vre also got be 100% sure you're getting what is says on the tin....a High Quality Blu Transfer and at a reasonable price. HMV this afternoon was selling Casino Royale on Blu Ray for a staggering £25 , Amazon online exc P & P is selling it for £12.98 whereas I picked up the DVD a few months ago for £5 in HMV and for some unknown reason it's now £7 in the same shop.

I was more than happy with the film via a DENON DVD 1940 and for many millions of us mere mortals out here that old adage of " I'm more than happy with with I currently have" will determine whether or not DVD's become extinct or not and the fact that so many of us can buy good films on DVD for between £3 and say £7 will mean that Blu Ray Disc prices will have to fall quite rapidly by comparison very soon to even have a chance of tempting the most steadfast and resolute in favour of continuing with DVD to convert wholly to Blu Ray

This is true. Although I am still sniggering at your 'laughing at me' for suggesting that a good quality BluRay (such as casino Royal) is better than an upscaled DVD (no matter how overpriced the player.) In fact that leads me to another thought...
How much profit do you reckon is made on a £2500 DVD5?
Now factor that in with the LOSS that every PS3 made in the early days.

 

[Anonymous]

Not laughing at you Fr0g...To the contrary...Just couldn't fathom out why were insisting that a PS3 would output a better more detailed image than a £2500 NAIM...For me it's a difficult one to get my head around...that's all

I have a PS3 and OK Blu Ray looks good on it but it isn't hugely better to the DVD picture output via my humble DENON DVD 1940 and for that reason I am unable to justify the ridiculous disproportionate difference in price

 

[fr0g]

Tallyho:
Not laughing at you Fr0g...To the contrary...Just couldn't fathom out why were insisting that a PS3 would output a better more detailed image than a £2500 NAIM...For me it's a difficult one to get my head around...that's all

I have a PS3 and OK Blu Ray looks good on it but it isn't hugely better to the DVD picture output via my humble DENON DVD 1940 and for that reason I am unable to justify the ridiculous disproportionate difference in price

Have you got a 1080P capable TV? And a copy of a decent BluRay transfer (such as Casino Royale)?
Have you got the settings right on the PS3?

I have tried a 1940 (and better), and the same film on my TV in 1080P looks like another world on BluRay compared to DVD.

 

[fr0g]

Tallyho:
Not laughing at you Fr0g...To the contrary...Just couldn't fathom out why were insisting that a PS3 would output a better more detailed image than a £2500 NAIM...For me it's a difficult one to get my head around...that's all

I have a PS3 and OK Blu Ray looks good on it but it isn't hugely better to the DVD picture output via my humble DENON DVD 1940 and for that reason I am unable to justify the ridiculous disproportionate difference in price

Also. If you have a digital camera, take an image. Resize it and save it to about a quarter the size of your PC screen (Lets say 600x400).
Now take the original, and resize it down to the full size of your display (assuming around 1200x800)

Make sure you have 2 saved pictures.
Now I use PSPX and Irfanview for editing, and viewing pictures, but use whatever you can to display both images full screen.
When you display the small image fullscreen it is doing exactly the same thing your TV, AV amp or DVD player is doing ...interpolating...(guessing the missing information).

Now there are some very expensive packages (software) that will do a better job of interpolating the image...some will do a very fine job, but none will ever regain the quality of the original image...

So no matter what you use to display the (same sourced) file, the original, full sized image will always be better.

You pay all that extra money in the case of the Naim, for a damn good attempt, and more importantly for the high fidelity sound.

 

[Anonymous]

fr0g:Tallyho:

Not laughing at you Fr0g...To the contrary...Just couldn't fathom out why were insisting that a PS3 would output a better more detailed image than a £2500 NAIM...For me it's a difficult one to get my head around...that's all

I have a PS3 and OK Blu Ray looks good on it but it isn't hugely better to the DVD picture output via my humble DENON DVD 1940 and for that reason I am unable to justify the ridiculous disproportionate difference in price

Have you got a 1080P capable TV? And a copy of a decent BluRay transfer (such as Casino Royale)? Have you got the settings right on the PS3? I have tried a 1940 (and better), and the same film on my TV in 1080P looks like another world on BluRay compared to DVD.

No Fr0g...don't have a 1080p TV....mine's an HD ready TV....and I find the best setting when watching is 720p......

 

[fr0g]

Tallyho:fr0g:Tallyho:

Not laughing at you Fr0g...To the contrary...Just couldn't fathom out why were insisting that a PS3 would output a better more detailed image than a £2500 NAIM...For me it's a difficult one to get my head around...that's all

I have a PS3 and OK Blu Ray looks good on it but it isn't hugely better to the DVD picture output via my humble DENON DVD 1940 and for that reason I am unable to justify the ridiculous disproportionate difference in price

Have you got a 1080P capable TV? And a copy of a decent BluRay transfer (such as Casino Royale)? Have you got the settings right on the PS3? I have tried a 1940 (and better), and the same film on my TV in 1080P looks like another world on BluRay compared to DVD.

No Fr0g...don't have a 1080p TV....mine's an HD ready TV....and I find the best setting when watching is 720p......

Ok. Well the advantage of BluRay is still there, but not as much...

Your TV is probably 1280 x 720 so in fact you only have about double, rather than 4 times the extra information of standard def.
(1280x720)= 921600 (less than 1 megapixel)
(1920x1080)= 2073600 (just over 2 megapixels)

(Standard def or 576i has just over 400000 pixels)

 

[lobby]

Right im a novice to this compared to some of you but i think when sony released their ps3 it was partly to with the hd war between hd discs and blu ray knowing that sony developed the the blu ray, it was a way of promoting the ps3 and blu ray and blu ray format has won. I dont buy blu discs for my ps3 because of the price and i also agree i dont think the picture or sound is vastly improved on a decent dvd player, but its new technology so it will get better but only as good as the quality of the software and not many blu ray discs offer all benefits in sound or picture. Cant compare the £2500 Naim player never seen it and unlikely to either . But every one knows blu ray won the battle and until every new film release is available on blu ray on the same release date then most people will buy dvd because dvd player exist everywhere and so many people have portable players and PCs plus the added factor of multiregion and huge amount existing titles.

 

[Anonymous]

Right then, as I started all this I feel obliged to give an update.

DVD5 installed last week. Picture on my Panasonics 37px80 plasma is fantastic, very natural colours, very smooth. Sound quality is the best I have heared from any DVD player and plays CD,s better then my Naim cd3.5 / Flatcap ( now sold ). I compared to other DVD players from Arcam, Meridian and Linn and my preference was for the Naim. Dealer service was excellent from demo to Installation and I was even loaned the shop DVD5 for two weeks while I was waiting for the delivery of mine. At the end of the day I'm one happy bunny.

 

[fr0g]

FloJoe:
Right then, as I started all this I feel obliged to give an update.

DVD5 installed last week. Picture on my Panasonics 37px80 plasma is fantastic, very natural colours, very smooth. Sound quality is the best I have heared from any DVD player and plays CD,s better then my Naim cd3.5 / Flatcap ( now sold ). I compared to other DVD players from Arcam, Meridian and Linn and my preference was for the Naim. Dealer service was excellent from demo to Installation and I was even loaned the shop DVD5 for two weeks while I was waiting for the delivery of mine. At the end of the day I'm one happy bunny.

Excellent to hear. I wish I had your budget

 

[Anonymous]

frOg, good evening

I got £ 600 for the CD3.5/Flat cap which helped plus some interest free from the shop where I have been buying Naim equipment from for some 20 years. Its taken me that long to very gradually climb the upgrade ladder. I,ve always found that if its twice as good, it always cost ten times as much. Very much law of diminishing returns I,m afraid, but I would expect the DVDV5 to still be in perfect working order and have some retained value after many years of use.

 

[John Duncan]

FloJoe:
frOg, good evening

I got £ 600 for the CD3.5/Flat cap which helped plus some interest free from the shop where I have been buying Naim equipment from for some 20 years. Its taken me that long to very gradually climb the upgrade ladder. I,ve always found that if its twice as good, it always cost ten times as much. Very much law of diminishing returns I,m afraid, but I would expect the DVDV5 to still be in perfect working order and have some retained value after many years of use.

Indeed, but not that much - cf top notch Arcam DVD players being sold end-of-line for a song. I have no doubt that the Naim is spectacular, but it's no investment (which is why I have a 2.5k stereo I paid peanuts for

).....

 

[fr0g]

JohnDuncan:FloJoe:
frOg, good evening

I got £ 600 for the CD3.5/Flat cap which helped plus some interest free from the shop where I have been buying Naim equipment from for some 20 years. Its taken me that long to very gradually climb the upgrade ladder. I,ve always found that if its twice as good, it always cost ten times as much. Very much law of diminishing returns I,m afraid, but I would expect the DVDV5 to still be in perfect working order and have some retained value after many years of use.

Indeed, but not that much - cf top notch Arcam DVD players being sold end-of-line for a song. I have no doubt that the Naim is spectacular, but it's no investment (which is why I have a 2.5k stereo I paid peanuts for

).....

Indeed. Pity I got into upgrading after I emmigrated. Ebay is almost non existant here, and I paid shop prices for my amp, speakers and DAC (Total of about £2600)

 

[John Duncan]

My MIL has a saying - you never remember life's economies...........

 

[Gerrardasnails]

JohnDuncan:FloJoe:
frOg, good evening

I got £ 600 for the CD3.5/Flat cap which helped plus some interest free from the shop where I have been buying Naim equipment from for some 20 years. Its taken me that long to very gradually climb the upgrade ladder. I,ve always found that if its twice as good, it always cost ten times as much. Very much law of diminishing returns I,m afraid, but I would expect the DVDV5 to still be in perfect working order and have some retained value after many years of use.

Indeed, but not that much - cf top notch Arcam DVD players being sold end-of-line for a song. I have no doubt that the Naim is spectacular, but it's no investment (which is why I have a 2.5k stereo I paid peanuts for

).....

I've mentioned this recently but with the advent of hdmi and upscaling dvd players, older offerings from Arcam and others that rely on component are just being shunned by punters. Film fans think that they have to have hdmi (even though £400 receivers can upconvert and upscale component). In my case the Arcam FMJ DV27A was bought by me for a staggering £293. It retailed four years ago at £1900. It plays cds like a dream (I've read reviews saying it is better than any cd player under £1k and I wouldn't argue). However, true audiophiles won't go near a dvd player for cd playback. Hence you are left with very little demand and therefore prices drop. My new dvd player is as good as the lauded Denon 1940 that I sold and yet only plays to 576p. When I get an upscaling receiver it will be even better. On top of that it plays cds better than I could wish to afford to have a cd player do. The reason the Naim DVD5 might not drop in price so drastically is the simple connection that is hdmi.