Sony PS3 Slim to BDP-S370 Very Bad Move

[Clare Newsome]

maxflinn:
there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

 

[aliEnRIK]

maxflinn:
So your saying all bluray players are equal?

i have read that rik , not saying its what i believe , but lets face it , a bit of googling , weve all done it , and there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

ill do my own testing before i say what i think ...

I recall my first upscaling dvd player was a pioneer which in fact WAS the very first upscaling dvd player you could buy

Using the same coaxial cable, my pioneer LX50 dvd player sounded FAR better, as did my PS3 via hdmi

If all they had to do was take information of the disc and send to the amp then sound should be the same on every player. It most certainly isnt though

 

[Anonymous]

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:
there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

i had a nice pic in mind for this reply , damm those copyright lawyers

 

[strapped for cash]

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:
there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

They did once, but that was a very long time ago...

 

[007L2Thrill]

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:

there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

Lol, Good response.

 

[007L2Thrill]

professorhat:

edsib1:It could just as easily be done in software on a general purpose CPU but would take far too long to respond to the input.

Funnily enough, I'm pretty sure this is how the PS3 decodes onboard, using its cell processor. I remember hearing (from what I seem to remember was a fairly reliable source) that Sony didn't include the necessary chip to allow bitstreaming on the original PS3 because they said the cell could carry out the decoding process better. Whether that's true or not, I don't know, but if it is, it certainly suggests Sony believe where the soundtrack is decoded makes a difference.

Of course, they may just have said that to "market" that they didn't put the necessary hardware in to save costs...

I remember reading somewhere the reason why the PS3 fat can't output HD bitsteam audio is that it lacks the updated HDMI output chip, as the new slim as.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Hi,

Having now compared my PS3 to my Panny DMP-BD80 i can assure you that the Panny player is vastly superior for all movie duties.

I wanted more than anything for my PS3 to be just as good as 1 piece of kit in the living room to cover all my needs would have been ideal. Both machines were calibrated (well tv settings to suit) with DVE disc and i can honestly, but guess i don't really want to, say that the Panny is superior in depth, movement, colour, greatest difference in detail. Tried on 2 TVs and my PJ.

Use LCD kit. Not sure if the same can be said for Plasma as they tend to manage a lesser signal with less visible artefacts than an LCD. ( This is why i didn't like WHF HDMI test, Pioneer could make straw look like gold).

So as Sony is apparently better than Panny i can only assume that it is far better than a PS3.

Lastly my fat PS3 had a firmware update before it died enabling 'bitstream'. Sony were just holding back.

Regards,

Cookie Monster

 

[TKratz]

SamsonD:bigboss:

I think PS3 is one of the most under rated blu-ray players. I struggle to notice a difference between the PS3 & my Panasonic BD60. In fact, for blu-ray playback, it was hard to notice a difference even with my friend's Denon 2500BT. I did not check panning shots closely, though. All this comparison made on my 50-inch Kuro.

But considering the versatility the PS3 offers, it's a fantastic player.

Dr BB. Denon 2500BT? I think you need to have your eyes checked.

Well, I don't!

I attended a blind test of different Blu Ray players on a calibrated SIM2 projector (that is at 25k projector, and one of best available if anyone shouldn't know). We were more than 20 people, some of them highly trained reveiwers.

Blu Ray players on test:

- Panasonic BD50

- Denon 2500BT

- Denon 3800

- Pioneer LX91

- PS3

There were a couple more, but I do not remember which.

I wouldn't have believed this if I hadn't attended myself, but neither of us was able to differentiate any of the players when outputting a pure 1080p24 signal!

I am not saying all blu ray players are identical, because some blu ray players can process the 1080p signal. But if your intention is the pure 1080p24 picture I agree with Bigboss. There is no difference, and I would challenge anyone to take a blind test.

DVDs and CDs is a completely different story. Here there are major diffences, especially on analog sound, but also in the deinterlacing and upscalling capabilities.

 

[TKratz]

bigboss:FunkyMonkey:

For example, the 470 gives smoother blu ray pictures in 1080p60Hz mode than the PS3 did in 1080p24Hz. Which shows that the 3:2 pulldown (correct phrase?) processing is pretty perfecton these modern machines. Onyl problemo is there is no option to force through 24Hz picture on teh 470, as there is on the PS3. Which is bad for my TV which can do 1080p24Hz but does not tell a HDMI connected device that it can!

But isn't 1080p/24Hz as the director intended?

Exactly! Couldn't have put that better myself!

But I have come to experience that not everyone wants what the Director intended...

 

[Anonymous]

so , lizards do rule the earth ....

as chandler would say ... i knew it

 

[bigboss]

TKratz: I attended a blind test of different Blu Ray players on a calibrated SIM2 projector (that is at 25k projector, and one of best available if anyone shouldn't know). We were more than 20 people, some of them highly trained reveiwers.

Blu Ray players on test:

- Panasonic BD50

- Denon 2500BT

- Denon 3800

- Pioneer LX91

- PS3

There were a couple more, but I do not remember which.

I wouldn't have believed this if I hadn't attended myself, but neither of us was able to differentiate any of the players when outputting a pure 1080p24 signal!

I am not saying all blu ray players are identical, because some blu ray players can can process the 1080p signal. But if your intention is the pure 1080p24 picture I agree with Bigboss. There is no difference, and I would challenge anyone to take a blind test.

DVDs and CDs is a completely different story. Here there are major diffences, especially on analog sound, but also in the deinterlacing and upscalling capabilities.

Great post TKratz!

I think that's the achievement of blu-ray as a format. I myself couldn't believe that I could not spot a difference when it came to pure 1080p/24Hz picture. I don't think anything is wrong with my vision.......I still tweaked with the settings of my TV to achieve a better picture even after it was professionally calibrated.

 

[007L2Thrill]

Cookie Monster:

Lastly my fat PS3 had a firmware update before it died enabling 'bitstream'. Sony were just holding back.

No, the update was for the slim and not the fat, mine is up to date and it still can not play DD HD, DTS MA, it's a hardware limitation in the HDMI chipset used in the original "fat" PS3 that prevents HD audio bitstreaming.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

If you choose to be sarcastic in response to posters' comments, please ensure you read carefully. What I said was that the BDP470 at 1080p60Hz gave better panning results than the PS3 at 1080p24Hz. That was an example to illustrate that the picture processing technology in the BDP470 and therefore the 370 was far superior to the PS3. In other words, a non-native refresh rate of 60Hz using 3:2 pulldown which means that the 470 has to "fill in 3 frames out of every 5" to spit out 60Hz, and it does this with aplomb.

Now, someone said that we are in the digital domain. But they show a severe lack of how PCM digital signals are processed. Now I do not profess to fully understand the PCM decoding process either. However, I DO know that the digital soundwave has to be "shaped" to translate the pure digital signal, which may be deoded the same, but has to be shaped before converting to analogue. This is also called bitmapping, e.g. the PS3 can convert music (PCM) signals into Bitmap Type 1, 2 or 3.

So all digital signal processing is NOT the same. We are NOT dealing with zip files. We are dealing with a digital representation of a PHYSICAL entity.

 

[Anonymous]

the oppo bd83 is said , by many reviewers , to be the best player , but only because of its extra functions , sacd playback , the ability to skip trailers , piracy warnings , fast loading speeds , dvd upscaling , etc ..

on pure blu-ray picture quality , there are , and this is info ive read on the web , not first hand experience (yet) , no differences ...

thats what ive read anyway , on many different sites ..

one wonders what to believe ...

 

[FunkyMonkey]

FrankHarveyHiFi:

FunkyMonkey: The reason I went for the 470 rather than a PS3 slim is that I had read that panning shots were better. I have definitely noticed this. For example, the 470 gives smoother blu ray pictures in 1080p60Hz mode than the PS3 did in 1080p24Hz. Which shows that the 3:2 pulldown (correct phrase?) processing is pretty perfecton these modern machines. Onyl problemo is there is no option to force through 24Hz picture on teh 470, as there is on the PS3. Which is bad for my TV which can do 1080p24Hz but does not tell a HDMI connected device that it can!

Are you sure it can't play back 24Hz?

Yes. Early models of my Samsung telly, which was one of the first 1080p models could not tell the attached HDMI source that it was capable of 24Hz. THis was a "hidden" feature of the set. An early PS3 update acknowledged thsi by adding a 24Hz ON option, where previously, only Off or Auto were available. I hope Sony add the On function to teh 470 so that I can FORCE my TV to accept the 24Hz signal. After all, I DO want what the "director intended".

 

[bigboss]

FunkyMonkey:

If you choose to be sarcastic in response to posters' comments, please ensure you read carefully.

I didn't mean to be sarcastic, Funkymonkey. I'm sorry if you felt that way. What I meant was, when a 1080p/24 disc is being played back on a 1080p/24 display, there is usually no appreciable difference in the quality between players. Anything beyond that, is extra processing by the players which may not be as the director intended.

 

[007L2Thrill]

So not to start an argument, I am understanding this right, there are a few posts that I have come across saying there is no differences in BLU RAY players, plus it goes for mains cables and HDMI cables, but it does seem to be the same people, to me are you sure you are in the right hobby as I can tell the difference and many other people on here can and the what hifi crew, plus Clare as posted this

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:

there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

So she feels there are differences as well.

But one good thing is, if you feel that none of them make much difference then it will save you a lot of money.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

maxflinn:

the oppo bd83 is said , by many reviewers , to be the best player , but only because of its extra functions , sacd playback , the ability to skip trailers , piracy warnings , fast loading speeds , dvd upscaling , etc ..

on pure blu-ray picture quality , there are , and this is info ive read on the web , not first hand experience (yet) , no differences ...

thats what ive read anyway , on many different sites ..

one wonders what to believe ...

Believe what you see and hear. Simples

 

[FunkyMonkey]

bigboss:FunkyMonkey:

If you choose to be sarcastic in response to posters' comments, please ensure you read carefully.

I didn't mean to be sarcastic, Funkymonkey. I'm sorry if you felt that way. What I meant was, when a 1080p/24 disc is being played back on a 1080p/24 display, there is usually no appreciable difference in the quality between players. Anything beyond that, is extra processing by the players which may not be as the director intended.

It's okay, I wasn't referrring to your post.

I find the panning scenes on the PS3 are a bit juddery even in the native 24Hz playback. I found the same scenes judder free playing back at 60Hz on Sony's latest model, the 470. Strange, but true. But it shows how powerful the picture processign is on the latest blu ray players.

 

[bigboss]

007L2Thrill:

So not to start an argument, I am understanding this right, there are a few posts that I have come across saying there is no differences in BLU RAY players, plus it goes for mains cables and HDMI cables, but it does seem to be the same people, to me are you sure you are in the right hobby as I can tell the difference and many other people on here can and the what hifi crew, plus Clare as posted this

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:

there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

So she feels there are differences as well.

But one good thing is, if you feel that none of them make much difference then it will save you a lot of money.

WHF staff are experts who review equipments day in & day out. So their eyes may be better trained to spot the differences than ours (maybe yours as well). The question is: are you willing to spend that much more extra for a superior performance you may not notice? Only you can answer that.

No purchase is a bad purchase. Not to forget; there's a lot more to a blu-ray player than mere 1080p/24Hz video playback. If you factor in DVD & audio performance, then there are significant differences.

I am in the right hobby. I still keep tweaking my Kuro & Yamaha every now & then in the middle of a programme to improve the performance, much to the annoyance of my OH

Yes, I have saved a lot of money by reviewing many cables & blu-ray players.

 

[Anonymous]

007L2Thrill:
So not to start an argument, I am understanding this right, there are a few posts that I have come across saying there is no differences in BLU RAY players, plus it goes for mains cables and HDMI cables, but it does seem to be the same people, to me are you sure you are in the right hobby as I can tell the difference and many other people on here can and the what hifi crew, plus Clare as posted this

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:

there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

So she feels there are differences as well.

But one good thing is, if you feel that none of them make much difference then it will save you a lot of money.
as ive stated clearly , i have not compared blu-ray players myself , so i dont know from experience whether or not they do indeed differ in playback quality , i have read many different views on this , some claim there is a difference , and some claim there isnt , i dont know who,s right , although im leaning towards the view that there are no appreciable differences , and im perfectly entitled to say so if i like , its a free world we live in , im sure yourself , and anybody else would agree ?

 

[Anonymous]

FunkyMonkey:maxflinn:

the oppo bd83 is said , by many reviewers , to be the best player , but only because of its extra functions , sacd playback , the ability to skip trailers , piracy warnings , fast loading speeds , dvd upscaling , etc ..

on pure blu-ray picture quality , there are , and this is info ive read on the web , not first hand experience (yet) , no differences ...

thats what ive read anyway , on many different sites ..

one wonders what to believe ...

Believe what you see and hear. Simples

well i havnt compared , so i cant say i see ..

but ive heard , quite a lot , that there are no differences

but maybe the people whom ive heard , cant see to well , i havnt heard that , i guess we,ll have to wait and see

 

[007L2Thrill]

maxflinn:007L2Thrill:

So not to start an argument, I am understanding this right, there are a few posts that I have come across saying there is no differences in BLU RAY players, plus it goes for mains cables and HDMI cables, but it does seem to be the same people, to me are you sure you are in the right hobby as I can tell the difference and many other people on here can and the what hifi crew, plus Clare as posted this

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:

there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

So she feels there are differences as well.

But one good thing is, if you feel that none of them make much difference then it will save you a lot of money.

as ive stated clearly , i have not compared blu-ray players myself , so i dont know from experience whether or not they do indeed differ in playback quality , i have read many different views on this , some claim there is a difference , and some claim there isnt , i dont know who,s right , although im leaning towards the view that there are no appreciable differences , and im perfectly entitled to say so if i like , its a free world we live in , im sure yourself , and anybody else would agree ?

Max, soz mate it was not intended towards you or anyone, it was just was my one penny thought scanning the posts and being a bit drunk and I only quoted Clare's reference and I needed to post yours other wise it would of made no sense, so I apologize if you thought it was towards you.

Peace to all, and remember we are all here to have fun, now I will shut up and go and have something to eat.

Cheers.

 

[bigboss]

FunkyMonkey: I find the panning scenes on the PS3 are a bit juddery even in the native 24Hz playback. I found the same scenes judder free playing back at 60Hz on Sony's latest model, the 470. Strange, but true. But it shows how powerful the picture processign is on the latest blu ray players.

That's something very interesting! I must check that out.

 

[Anonymous]

007L2Thrill:maxflinn:007L2Thrill:

So not to start an argument, I am understanding this right, there are a few posts that I have come across saying there is no differences in BLU RAY players, plus it goes for mains cables and HDMI cables, but it does seem to be the same people, to me are you sure you are in the right hobby as I can tell the difference and many other people on here can and the what hifi crew, plus Clare as posted this

Clare Newsome:maxflinn:

there are many who say blu-ray players barely differ at all ...

There are many who say lizards rule the earth, too, but it doesn't make it true....

So she feels there are differences as well.

But one good thing is, if you feel that none of them make much difference then it will save you a lot of money.

as ive stated clearly , i have not compared blu-ray players myself , so i dont know from experience whether or not they do indeed differ in playback quality , i have read many different views on this , some claim there is a difference , and some claim there isnt , i dont know who,s right , although im leaning towards the view that there are no appreciable differences , and im perfectly entitled to say so if i like , its a free world we live in , im sure yourself , and anybody else would agree ?

Max, soz mate it was not intended towards you or anyone, it was just was my one penny thought scanning the posts and being a bit drunk and I only quoted Clare's reference and I needed to post yours other wise it would of made no sense, so I apologize if you thought it was towards you.

Peace to all, and remember we are all here to have fun, now I will shut up and go and have something to eat.

Thanks.
no problem at all , im a little drunk too , but being irish , im going to get a bite to drink