Panasonic DP-UB820EB

[What Hi-Fi?]

Panasonic’s 4K Blu-ray player is a great all-rounder that promises plenty on paper – and also delivers.

Panasonic DP-UB820EB : Read more

 

[philmcgowan]

You guys really need to stop reviewing the sound of Blu Ray players in the manner you appear to be doing so.

In this review, you're commenting on the Dolby Atmos sound, which must mean you're using the HDMI connection for the BluRay player to an AV receiver.

What that means is that the BluRay player is doing absolutely nothing to the sound, it's simply passing the data from the disc to the receiver and all the processing and digital to analog conversion is happening on the AV receiver, soundbar, or TV (if you're using built in speakers which dear god I hope you aren't).

The only time you should ever be reviewing the sound of a BluRay player is if you're using the built in Analog outputs of the player. In that case then yes, absolutely, the built in audio processing of the player is being put to the test.

But if you're just passing audio from the BluRay player over HDMI, it's simply a data transfer. No sound processing should be happening on the player side if you set it up right. It just sends the Dolby Atmos data to the receiver and all the processing and conversion is happening there.

 

[Johan-J]

You guys need to CONTINUE reviewing the sound of Blu-ray players in the manner you are doing so.

Picture wise there's not much difference between all tested 4K players nowadays when playing a 4K disc. But sound wise there are some differences. This because the internal chip does 'translate' the audio track on the disc before it sends it to the receiver through HDMI. For example, hearing the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan you'll notice that the Sony X700 has more subtlety while the Panasonic UB820 has a more weighty (with excellent and dynamic bass) and vibrant sound that feels more energetic.

I own (or owned) the following 4K Blu-ray players and sound wise from best to less good in my opinion are:
1. Panasonic UB820 (and UB 420): most weighty and vibrant sound and suited for the best movie experience
2. LG UBK90: quite similar sound but just not as refined
3. Sony X700: subtle sound with good and solid bass
4. Samsung M9500: natural and balanced sound but could be more dynamic
5. Sony X800M2: detailed sound but the bass is not strong and dynamic enough for movies


Johan (The Netherlands)

 

[Arron]

You guys really need to stop reviewing the sound of Blu Ray players in the manner you appear to be doing so.

[...]

But if you're just passing audio from the BluRay player over HDMI, it's simply a data transfer. No sound processing should be happening on the player side if you set it up right. It just sends the Dolby Atmos data to the receiver and all the processing and conversion is happening there.

No and no.

Are the 1s and 0s that arrive from each player the same? Yes. Does that mean they sound the same? No. All circuits make noise. What you're hearing from each player is noise and jitter.

A longer explanation from an audio engineer:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ld68LCIRqQg

 

[manicm]

As long as a disc is being rotated, the notion of bits is bits is a fallacy in the context of a physical transport, audio and visual DACs and so on.

So you’re BOTH wrong.

Which is why I’ve long called for movie discs and players to be binned in the nearest rubbish dump. We have the bandwidth, allow consumers to purchase and download digital copies of 4K movies.

Why on Earth are we still using movie discs?

 

[Arron]

Why on Earth are we still using movie discs?

Because most people don't have the disc space for a collection. Standard digital downloads of movies are 1-4GB each -- not a problem. But they're much lower quality than Blu-Rays which are normally 35-50GB each. I ripped all of my discs onto a NAS and it cost me £600 just for the hard drives. The NAS is already over 80% full.

 

[manicm]

Because most people don't have the disc space for a collection. Standard digital downloads of movies are 1-4GB each -- not a problem. But they're much lower quality than Blu-Rays which are normally 35-50GB each. I ripped all of my discs onto a NAS and it cost me £600 just for the hard drives. The NAS is already over 80% full.

Disk space is really not an issue these days - and I'm not talking about using a NAS. I'm talking about solid state, discless 4K or higher video players with a USB port where you can just plug a stick, or drive in to watch movies. You don't need to store every purchased download there - that's what portable disk drives are for.

I'm essentially talking about the video equivalent of music streamers, but with a USB-A/USB-C port.

Also, studios can make available compressed 4K videos in the format that Netflix uses in order to save space.

 

[Arron]

Disk space is really not an issue these days - and I'm not talking about using a NAS.

Disc space really is still an issue. I had to buy 24TB for my collection. That was skipping most of the extras on the discs. Movie files are big. We'll get there in the next decade but we're not there now. USB sticks with the same capacity as a Blu-Ray are about £15 each versus a few pence for the disc.

I'm talking about solid state, discless 4K or higher video players with a USB port where you can just plug a stick, or drive in to watch movies. You don't need to store every purchased download there - that's what portable disk drives are for.

I'm essentially talking about the video equivalent of music streamers, but with a USB-A/USB-C port.

Many players allow you to plug in an USB stick and play files and you can already stream movies that you rented/bought with an Amazon Prime Stick, Apple TV, etc. but...

Also, studios can make available compressed 4K videos in the format that Netflix uses in order to save space.

The quality suffers a lot. You might not notice if you only ever watch streaming services but put a movie on Netflix then switch to the same movie on Blu-Ray. There's a huge difference. Pretty much exactly what you'd expect if you took a 50GB movie file and recompressed it to remove 45GB of the data.

Again, we'll get there one day but we're not there yet.

 

[MickyG]

Why on Earth are we still using movie discs?

Because some people, myself included, want something in a physical medium - much like some people like to collect CDs or vinyl records. If you don't understand why that is, then no explanation will suffice.

 

[KrystynaHaywood]

Which is why I’ve long called for movie discs and players to be binned in the nearest rubbish dump. We have the bandwidth, allow consumers to purchase and download digital copies of 4K movies.

Why on Earth are we still using movie discs?

It's simple to answer really... I for one am fed up of paying for monthly subscriptions, and in my 10 years before retirement will have built up a good bank of my favourite films and series then I enjoy watching over, so I can reduce down my subscriptions in pension times. I used the downloaders and accounts a few years ago, and n ow, Ultraviolet, Flixter and Vudu, all I signed up into and GONE.... That is why I now use Movie Discs... chuff to all of them.... I enjoy Netflix, Prime and I get the positives of being able to watch new content on a regular basis, but frustrating that each service has their own content, so you have to subscribe to all, although Amazon is the better buy as an Amazon customer. Like Vinyl's, you can't beat that vintage feeling of owning a vinyl or a Blu-Ray... All these subscriptions, and I still can't play Superman films for free as part of membership... That's why we're still using movie discs...