Any Significant Change in Audio Sound over Past 10-12 Years or So [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Any Significant Change in Audio Sound over Past 10-12 Years or So



EdwardGein
03-03-2010, 12:38 AM
Features aside, is there really any difference in the audio sound for say a $1200 Denon 7,1 receiver like mine, the Denon 3801 which came out 10+ years ago and current Denon or similar Receivers to ones listening ear? I use mine for both TV, Blu-ray and CDs. I'm happy with the sound and I've never seen a need to get a more current model.

klif570
03-03-2010, 04:57 AM
Features aside, is there really any difference in the audio sound for say a $1200 Denon 7,1 receiver like mine, the Denon 3801 which came out 10+ years ago and current Denon or similar Receivers to ones listening ear? I use mine for both TV, Blu-ray and CDs. I'm happy with the sound and I've never seen a need to get a more current model.

I saw a question on another forum about dac's and how some older dac's are written off, although back in the day they had great reviews. Well, of course there are improvements, but I don't think they are as big as the manufacturers (or some reviewers) claim them to be.

Good question, maybe there's someone on the forum who's done a side by side comparison of older and new receivers?

poppachubby
03-03-2010, 05:55 AM
I use an older Sony A/V for my HT and am quite happy also. Sure, there's been "improvements" as Dolby continue to improve things. Personally, I am happy with what I have and will wait until I am forced to make a purchase. Either my Sony will die, or it will become obsolete. In the meantime, I am enjoying it's capability.

If you have a TOTL Denon from 10 years ago, it will still sound as sweet as alot of new gear. It just won't have the newst codecs. If I was you, and you want to upgrade, have a look at your speakers.

02audionoob
03-03-2010, 06:23 AM
I don't think the sound quality is an issue, but you'd benefit from a way to process the high-def audio formats that are on Blu-ray, if you don't already. I replaced my AV receiver primarily to get HDMI in and decoding of DTS-HD and TrueHD audio.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-03-2010, 08:08 AM
Features aside, is there really any difference in the audio sound for say a $1200 Denon 7,1 receiver like mine, the Denon 3801 which came out 10+ years ago and current Denon or similar Receivers to ones listening ear? I use mine for both TV, Blu-ray and CDs. I'm happy with the sound and I've never seen a need to get a more current model.

I have to agree with the audionoob type guy. Lossless audio on Blu ray is the closest to the studio master tapes as we have been in hometheater. Dolby Digital(while sounding fair) was just another step to get us this close, but IMO it was never a cigar. Dts HD Master audio and Dolby TrueHD would be the prime reason I would upgrade my receiver, especially a non HDMI receiver. 7.1 lossless would also be another reason, as very few receivers have 7.1 analog inputs, and even fewer players have 7.1 analog outputs.

EdwardGein
03-03-2010, 05:23 PM
I'm getting my True Audio Blu Ray sound which is awesome by using the Denon's Analog inputs and it sounds great. I specifically got my Blu-Ray player because it had Analog outputs to do this. If some Blu-Ray players didn't come with Analog outputs, I would have replaced my Denon with one that has HDMI (I connect the video portion of the Blu-Ray by HDMI direct to my HDTV). It sounds like I'm of the same mindset as a few of you- until my Denon dies, I'll stick to it unless there's suddenly a receiver for which I'll notice a 15% or better improvement in sound quality to my ears.

TheHills44060
03-03-2010, 08:27 PM
As far as amplification goes I think you'll be fine with your current receiver. When i was still using an my Onkyo receiver from 1990 is easily beat the pants off of any of the more recent Onkyo's i'd heard in it's same price range.

i can't say if that is true of Denon as well but the with the way you're using it in your setup i agree with poppa and would suggest an speaker upgrade if you are looking for a sound change.

pixelthis
03-04-2010, 01:08 PM
Features aside, is there really any difference in the audio sound for say a $1200 Denon 7,1 receiver like mine, the Denon 3801 which came out 10+ years ago and current Denon or similar Receivers to ones listening ear? I use mine for both TV, Blu-ray and CDs. I'm happy with the sound and I've never seen a need to get a more current model.

The amps are better.
The amps in a modern receiver could run at full power...for about a minute.
But in order to get the new formats(DTS MASTER, DOLBY TRUE HD) you will need a receiver that can handle those.
Used to be that an older receiver with a 5.1 or 7.1 in could take the input from a BLU
player with 7.1 out, but that window is closing fast, 7.1 out is being phased out.
Are the new formats worth a new receiver?
YES.
You can always add an outboard amp or two (or three).:1:

pixelthis
03-04-2010, 01:09 PM
The quality of teh amps is relative BTW.
Ever since receivers went from two channel to multichannel the amps have sucked.:1:

kevlarus
03-04-2010, 01:55 PM
The amps are better.
The amps in a modern receiver could run at full power...for about a minute.
But in order to get the new formats(DTS MASTER, DOLBY TRUE HD) you will need a receiver that can handle those.
Used to be that an older receiver with a 5.1 or 7.1 in could take the input from a BLU
player with 7.1 out, but that window is closing fast, 7.1 out is being phased out.
Are the new formats worth a new receiver?
YES.
You can always add an outboard amp or two (or three).:1:


Are you sure the 7.1 phono outs are being phased out ?

I must admit, when I went looking for Sony's blu-ray player, I couldn't find it in the BDP-5x0 series, which I could have sworn had the phono outs for it. Looks like only their higher end ES series does that now -- for a price.

I'm not about to replace the receiver at this point. It's only 2yrs old and my system before that was 15yrs old. Guess I'll just continue grabbing standard DD/DTS from the TV optical.

EdwardGein
03-04-2010, 04:23 PM
I'm a bit unclear what you're saying. I getting fantastic true audio 5.1 sound (I don't have room for 7 speakers & sub in my apt.- just 5 speakers and sub by using my Panasonic BD55 analog outputs to my Denon Receiver. I realize not all bluray players have analog outputs and I paid extra for this because of it.According to Panasonic the Analog Connection sound will be just as good as HDMI connection sound. I don't quite know what you mean by Dolby True HD (I've been a bit out of the loop) as I thought the sound coming out of a Blu Ray player is called True Audio which I love and is so superior to regularDolby 5,1/7.1 sound.

As for amplification, I live in an apartment and while I can play things reasonably loud, if I wanted it so loud that someone would think World War 3 has begun, I'd get kicked out of my apartment!

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-06-2010, 08:27 AM
Are you sure the 7.1 phono outs are being phased out ?

I must admit, when I went looking for Sony's blu-ray player, I couldn't find it in the BDP-5x0 series, which I could have sworn had the phono outs for it. Looks like only their higher end ES series does that now -- for a price.

I'm not about to replace the receiver at this point. It's only 2yrs old and my system before that was 15yrs old. Guess I'll just continue grabbing standard DD/DTS from the TV optical.

No he is dead wrong about the 7.1 analog outputs being phased out. He is mistaking the component outputs/inputs for video, which will close in 2013. 5.1 analog outputs are not going to be found on budget players because of the associated costs of its inclusion. HDMI is easier and cheaper to implement because the receiver becomes the workhorse - doing all of the post processing instead of the player. This way you can get rid of the extra cost of DAC's and the supporting analog paths, which drives the cost to manufacture the player downward. You will only find 5.1 or 7.1 analog outputs on more expensive players.

kevlarus
03-08-2010, 08:23 AM
No he is dead wrong about the 7.1 analog outputs being phased out. He is mistaking the component outputs/inputs for video, which will close in 2013. 5.1 analog outputs are not going to be found on budget players because of the associated costs of its inclusion. HDMI is easier and cheaper to implement because the receiver becomes the workhorse - doing all of the post processing instead of the player. This way you can get rid of the extra cost of DAC's and the supporting analog paths, which drives the cost to manufacture the player downward. You will only find 5.1 or 7.1 analog outputs on more expensive players.


Thanks for clearing that up. I guess my bottom line question would then be, is there a noticeable difference in the audio in a 5.1 system in a small room (DD vs DD HD, or DTS vs DTA-HD).

pixelthis
03-08-2010, 12:44 PM
Are you sure the 7.1 phono outs are being phased out ?

I must admit, when I went looking for Sony's blu-ray player, I couldn't find it in the BDP-5x0 series, which I could have sworn had the phono outs for it. Looks like only their higher end ES series does that now -- for a price.

I'm not about to replace the receiver at this point. It's only 2yrs old and my system before that was 15yrs old. Guess I'll just continue grabbing standard DD/DTS from the TV optical.

No.
The 7.1 inputs are being phased out, on receivers.
This is because 7.1 outputs is being phased out on BLU players.
Thats what I meant.
This has nothing to do with component video.
Dont know where Talky made that connection.
If thats the way he makes connections I would love to see his gear, and the way IT is connected.:1:

pixelthis
03-08-2010, 12:46 PM
Component is being phased out, at least on DVD players, BTW
Look for it to disapear soon.:1:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-08-2010, 07:36 PM
No.
The 7.1 inputs are being phased out, on receivers.
This is because 7.1 outputs is being phased out on BLU players.
Thats what I meant.
This has nothing to do with component video.
Dont know where Talky made that connection.
If thats the way he makes connections I would love to see his gear, and the way IT is connected.:1:

Pix, get out of the budget basement dumpster. 7.1 analog audio inputs and outputs are not disappearing at all. They can be found on receivers and players that you just can't afford which is why YOU don't see them. I found three models from just the Toshiba line of Blu ray players that have them, and I found 10 receivers that have them with just one search.

If you want to know how my gear is connect, just ask stupid. It is better than making retarded assumptions, but I know you just cannot help yourself.

I only use HDMI connections period.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-08-2010, 07:37 PM
Component is being phased out, at least on DVD players, BTW
Look for it to disapear soon.:1:

We are not talking about DVD players, as they will disappear soon as well.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-08-2010, 07:51 PM
Thanks for clearing that up. I guess my bottom line question would then be, is there a noticeable difference in the audio in a 5.1 system in a small room (DD vs DD HD, or DTS vs DTA-HD).

It really depends on how well that room is acoustically treated, and how well your speakers can resolve fine detail. I setup my friends Klipsch quintet based 5.1 system, and you could hear the noticeable difference between DD and DTHD. His room is acoustically treated.

I have a 7.1 system in a 12x15x8 ft acoustically treated room based on upgraded ADS L-300 mini monitors, and you REALLY can the difference between lossy and lossless.

klif570
03-09-2010, 04:40 AM
We are not talking about DVD players, as they will disappear soon as well.

In your fantasy land they probably will.

kevlarus
03-09-2010, 07:37 AM
It really depends on how well that room is acoustically treated, and how well your speakers can resolve fine detail. I setup my friends Klipsch quintet based 5.1 system, and you could hear the noticeable difference between DD and DTHD. His room is acoustically treated.

I have a 7.1 system in a 12x15x8 ft acoustically treated room based on upgraded ADS L-300 mini monitors, and you REALLY can the difference between lossy and lossless.

Thanks for the info.

Sounds like it would pay to rent a blu player and actually try it using the audio outs of the player and do an A/B comparison of the audio from the same source (yeah, ok, blu will do DD-HD, DTS-HD or DD via toslink). The TV will send DD via optical to the receiver so won't be switching between a DVD or blu player.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-09-2010, 11:22 AM
In your fantasy land they probably will.

And in your fantasy land will it last forever. There have already been three manufacturers who have announced they will no longer manufacture DVD players. Oppo was the first.

You are going to have to let go of old ideas and old technology ole bean, they don't last forever.

Tarheel_
03-10-2010, 01:46 PM
And in your fantasy land will it last forever. There have already been three manufacturers who have announced they will no longer manufacture DVD players. Oppo was the first.

You are going to have to let go of old ideas and old technology ole bean, they don't last forever.

Maybe we need to clarify the statement. Yes, big manufacturers will stop producing DVD players, but they will not become extinct for many, many years. Case in point, look at the VCR player. Those can be found online in many places as well as brick/mortar stores.

Just because the big boys move on doesn't mean there aren't others to pick up the baton. If you can find VCR players today I'm sure you can find a new DVD player in 10 years. Plus, with the conversion from DVD to Blu, most movie studios will/should include both formats for some time.

kevlarus
03-10-2010, 01:57 PM
Maybe we need to clarify the statement. Yes, big manufacturers will stop producing DVD players, but they will not become extinct for many, many years. Case in point, look at the VCR player. Those can be found online in many places as well as brick/mortar stores.

Just because the big boys move on doesn't mean there aren't others to pick up the baton. If you can find VCR players today I'm sure you can find a new DVD player in 10 years. Plus, with the conversion from DVD to Blu, most movie studios will/should include both formats for some time.

They'll stop making DVD players as the bluray players can also play dvd's, hence it won't leave people out in the cold who already have a DVD collection. Dropping specific dvd players allow the electronic companies (and consumers) to benefit from economies of scale.

Sony's latest unit (this summer I think) will play bluray,dvd,cd and sa-cd. They are all the the same form factor, unlike the vhs/beta vs. dvd (red & blue lasers not withstanding).

pixelthis
03-11-2010, 02:12 PM
Pix, get out of the budget basement dumpster. 7.1 analog audio inputs and outputs are not disappearing at all. They can be found on receivers and players that you just can't afford which is why YOU don't see them. I found three models from just the Toshiba line of Blu ray players that have them, and I found 10 receivers that have them with just one search.

If you want to know how my gear is connect, just ask stupid. It is better than making retarded assumptions, but I know you just cannot help yourself.

I only use HDMI connections period.

Just trying to find you something to eat.
Wait, you can eat crow.
The new seven series Integra (1400 bucks) has no analog input, or so I was told.
And none of teh new Blu players do, excepr maybe some off brand crap.:1:

E-Stat
03-11-2010, 04:48 PM
Features aside, is there really any difference in the audio sound for say a $1200 Denon 7,1 receiver like mine, the Denon 3801 which came out 10+ years ago and current Denon or similar Receivers to ones listening ear?
While it probably won't make much difference with movies, the DACs found on newer units will most likely sound better with musical content. From a practical standpoint, newer units using HDMI connectivity also eliminate a lot of the cable jungle - especially if you pipe the video through the receiver for switching purposes (which I do not with my pre-HDMI receiver).

rw

E-Stat
03-11-2010, 04:50 PM
Maybe we need to clarify the statement. Yes, big manufacturers will stop producing DVD players, but they will not become extinct for many, many years. Case in point, look at the VCR player. Those can be found online in many places as well as brick/mortar stores.
Agreed. Don't forget that there are numerous companies today who continue to make dedicated CD players at various budget points.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-11-2010, 05:37 PM
Just trying to find you something to eat.
Wait, you can eat crow.
The new seven series Integra (1400 bucks) has no analog input, or so I was told.
And none of teh new Blu players do, excepr maybe some off brand crap.:1:

So you are saying NONE of the new Blu ray players have 7.1 outputs. Well, how about this one;

http://www2.panasonic.com/consumer-electronics/shop/Video/Blu-ray-Disc-Players/model.DMP-BD85K.S_11002_7000000000000005702#tabsection

or this one

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665945151

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665532071#specifications

or perhaps this one

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Products/HomeEntertainment/Blu-rayDisc+DVD/EliteBlu-rayDiscPlayers/BDP-09FD

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Products/HomeEntertainment/Blu-rayDisc+DVD/EliteBlu-rayDiscPlayers/ci.BDP-23FD.Kuro

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Products/HomeEntertainment/Blu-rayDisc+DVD/EliteBlu-rayDiscPlayers/ci.BDP-05FD.Kuro?tab=B

and this one

http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/tv-video/blu-ray/blu-ray-players/BD-C6900/XAA/index.idx?pagetype=prd_detail&tab=spec


See how wrong a foo can be:1:

Receivers

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Products/HomeEntertainment/AV-Receivers/EliteReceivers/ci.SC-09TX.Kuro?tab=B

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Products/HomeEntertainment/AV-Receivers/EliteReceivers/ci.SC-25.Kuro?tab=B

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665532068#specifications

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PUSA/Products/HomeEntertainment/AV-Receivers/EliteReceivers/ci.SC-27.Kuro?tab=B

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665968170#specifications

So, its seems that you have not checked in enough places. So do you like your crow with salt and pepper, or BBQ sauce;)

Woochifer
03-11-2010, 09:27 PM
Maybe we need to clarify the statement. Yes, big manufacturers will stop producing DVD players, but they will not become extinct for many, many years. Case in point, look at the VCR player. Those can be found online in many places as well as brick/mortar stores.

When was the last time you saw a standalone VCR in a store? ALL of the VCRs produced over the last four years have been DVD/VCR combos, and even those are becoming harder to find. And all of the major studios stopped releasing VHS titles about four years ago.


Just because the big boys move on doesn't mean there aren't others to pick up the baton. If you can find VCR players today I'm sure you can find a new DVD player in 10 years. Plus, with the conversion from DVD to Blu, most movie studios will/should include both formats for some time.

All Blu-ray players can play DVDs. That's the exact reason why standalone DVD players will probably be gone within two years. It makes no sense for DVD players to remain in production when the price points on Blu-ray players continue to creep closer and closer to those for DVD players.

Woochifer
03-11-2010, 09:32 PM
Agreed. Don't forget that there are numerous companies today who continue to make dedicated CD players at various budget points.

rw

Difference though is that there remains a market for high end CD players, and for CD changers (which you never saw a lot of with DVDs). The high end DVD player market is gone because most of the enthusiasts who care about video quality have moved onto HD, and the price points on entry level DVD players have gone about as low as they can possibly go. This all points to the DVD player market's demise once the Blu-ray price points get within closing distance of DVD players.

Tarheel_
03-12-2010, 06:24 PM
When was the last time you saw a standalone VCR in a store? ALL of the VCRs produced over the last four years have been DVD/VCR combos, and even those are becoming harder to find. And all of the major studios stopped releasing VHS titles about four years ago.



All Blu-ray players can play DVDs. That's the exact reason why standalone DVD players will probably be gone within two years. It makes no sense for DVD players to remain in production when the price points on Blu-ray players continue to creep closer and closer to those for DVD players.

OK, you got me on the standalone VCR thingy...

But your in too deep to see my other point...a fine example goes like this..my daughter's DVD player broke the other week. I needed a replacement..so, do i go out and purchase a $100+ Blu ray for her tube tv OR purchase a new DVD player for $30 shipped?
Point is, most people outside of this hobby put budget ahead of picture quality. As long as there is a need for inexpensive DVD players then they will be produced. Not everyone has a HDTV or cares about having 'the' best picure. Most folks just want a movie and want it cheap whether it's the player or a DVD movie.

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-12-2010, 11:19 PM
OK, you got me on the standalone VCR thingy...

But your in too deep to see my other point...a fine example goes like this..my daughter's DVD player broke the other week. I needed a replacement..so, do i go out and purchase a $100+ Blu ray for her tube tv OR purchase a new DVD player for $30 shipped?
Point is, most people outside of this hobby put budget ahead of picture quality. As long as there is a need for inexpensive DVD players then they will be produced. Not everyone has a HDTV or cares about having 'the' best picure. Most folks just want a movie and want it cheap whether it's the player or a DVD movie.

Tarheel, you are ignoring the manufacturing cycle here. Once Blu ray players get to the price point that DVD players are(and they are almost there), they are going to abandon the DVD format big time. Oppo is the first manufacturer to do so, and in not so short a time others will follow. No manufacturer is going to continue to produce a player with such slim profit margins when they can support a player with a higher profit margin that can do the same thing. It is not going to happen.

I know you probably do not realize that the argument you are advancing is the same argument that folks supporting VHS had when DVD came along. They were saying it right on this website big time, and look what happened to VHS.

If my kid was young, and their DVD player broke, I would do exactly what you did. It was a smart move, but not a move you are going to be able to repeat in the future.

E-Stat
03-13-2010, 09:11 AM
Once Blu ray players get to the price point that DVD players are(and they are almost there), they are going to abandon the DVD format big time
Agreed. I look forward to the time when one can choose from half a dozen different Blu Ray models around $30.

Inexpensive DVD players (http://www.walmart.com/browse/TV-Video/DVD-Blu-ray-Players/All-DVD-Players/_/N-94iuZaq90Zaqce/Ne-2p4j?catNavId=1060825&tab_value=21675_All&ic=48_0&ref=125875.425766&search_sort=4&selected_items=+)

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-13-2010, 09:18 AM
Agreed. I look forward to the time when one can choose from half a dozen different Blu Ray models around $30.

Inexpensive DVD players (http://www.walmart.com/browse/TV-Video/DVD-Blu-ray-Players/All-DVD-Players/_/N-94iuZaq90Zaqce/Ne-2p4j?catNavId=1060825&tab_value=21675_All&ic=48_0&ref=125875.425766&search_sort=4&selected_items=+)

rw

The price of a Blu ray player does not have to get that low before DVD is gone. You must have been really busy during the transition from VHS to DVD. :rolleyes:

Woochifer
03-13-2010, 06:02 PM
OK, you got me on the standalone VCR thingy...

But your in too deep to see my other point...a fine example goes like this..my daughter's DVD player broke the other week. I needed a replacement..so, do i go out and purchase a $100+ Blu ray for her tube tv OR purchase a new DVD player for $30 shipped?

In two years, Blu-ray pricing will be at or near that point, which would make DVD players redundant and obsolete. My 9-year old DVD player in the kid room recently broke as well, and that got replaced by a $40 DVD player as well. If this happens two years from now, it will likely be replaced by a similarly priced Blu-ray player.


Point is, most people outside of this hobby put budget ahead of picture quality. As long as there is a need for inexpensive DVD players then they will be produced. Not everyone has a HDTV or cares about having 'the' best picure. Most folks just want a movie and want it cheap whether it's the player or a DVD movie.

Right now, the household penetration for HDTVs is above 60 percent, and nearly all of the new TVs sold are now HD. Global TV production also shows that the vast majority of TV production is HD. Doesn't matter if people care about the best picture quality or not, HDTV is now the cheap TV.

The arguments about the market not being ready for Blu-ray were valid four years ago, but they aren't anymore. For any number of different reasons, that's why I've been saying that the market is not ready for downloads to take over. Four years from now, the market conditions very well might point to how and when that will happen. The point is that market conditions change, but they also have be properly situated for new technologies to take over. Right now, the market conditions have setting up for Blu-ray to surpass the DVD format, and the trends are pointing in that direction.

People like cheap, but they will also pay to get what they want, when they want it. That's why over 75% of the video market consists of new releases, which happen to carry the highest average prices for purchase (except during week-of-release promotions) and rental. Videos that have been out for a while or have been released previously are much greater in number, yet attract much lower demand. That's why the prices are so low, because they don't sell at higher prices. As I've pointed out to Smokey before, falling DVD prices are not a sign of high demand and a healthy market.

E-Stat
03-13-2010, 07:18 PM
The price of a Blu ray player does not have to get that low before DVD is gone. You must have been really busy during the transition from VHS to DVD. :rolleyes:
Gone is a relative term. I still watch some of my VCR titles because I have no intention of buying most of them again in a different format. I suspect that folks will be watching their DVD collections for decades on inexpensive players - whatever format they may be capable of delivering.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-14-2010, 08:45 AM
Gone is a relative term. I still watch some of my VCR titles because I have no intention of buying most of them again in a different format. I suspect that folks will be watching their DVD collections for decades on inexpensive players - whatever format they may be capable of delivering.

rw


Since a Blu ray player can play DVD's, I suspect that inexpensive player would be a Blu ray player. Unless you like DVD/VHS combo's, if your VCR goes on the fritz, that will be all that is left to play the tapes on. I transferred every tape I wanted to keep to DVD and to a hard drive, and basically boxed all of my VCR's. I didn't want to be stuck with a lot of tapes, and nothing to play them on.

E-Stat
03-14-2010, 09:09 AM
A DVD can be played on a Blu ray player, so their DVD collection won't suddenly have nothing to play on. A DVD collection is not going to stop anyone from moving up to Blu ray.
When the players eventually drop to the $30-$50 level, I'm sure that the relative number of players in the field will converge. I'm surprised at how many DVDs are actively getting marketed today. Whether we're talking Barnes & Noble or Walmart, space devoted to DVDs continues to dwarf that of BR. I also note that most new releases are offered in both formats. New Moon (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001OQCV56?ie=UTF8&tag=newmoondl-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B001OQCV56) is a typical example. As will be "Up in the Air", "2012", "Princess and the Frog", "Where the Wild Things Are", etc. And for those who like to purchase television collections, they seem to be exclusively in the DVD format. I suspect many folks are quite content with DVDs. It would seem that those who release the content agree.

On the plane back from skiing in Utah yesterday, there was a girl sitting next to me watching a DVD on her laptop. My youngest sister-in-law watches movies on her PC and does not want BR because she can't play them - even when her parents have a BR player in the family room. Most PC transports require the newer SATA interface that is not found on quite a few computers in the field.

Don't get me wrong, I love BR. For any movie I really want to buy today, it will be in that format. Even for a non-videophile like me having slightly over 100 titles across the three mediums (~8 BR). Only one of my four players is BR capable.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-14-2010, 12:04 PM
When the players eventually drop to the $30-$50 level, I'm sure that the relative number of players in the field will converge. I'm surprised at how many DVDs are actively getting marketed today. Whether we're talking Barnes & Noble or Walmart, space devoted to DVDs continues to dwarf that of BR. I also note that most new releases are offered in both formats. New Moon (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001OQCV56?ie=UTF8&tag=newmoondl-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B001OQCV56) is a typical example. As will be "Up in the Air", "2012", "Princess and the Frog", "Where the Wild Things Are", etc. And for those who like to purchase television collections, they seem to be exclusively in the DVD format. I suspect many folks are quite content with DVDs. It would seem that those who release the content agree.

I never said that DVD production was going to stop tomorrow, but it will end in the very near future. All one has to do is look at the overall market for DVD. Sales down 20% from 2005 here in the US, but a lot higher in Japan. DVD replicators are either laying off, scaling down production, or going out of business as the orders from the studios are shrinking. Disney used to place very large orders of DVD's to replicators, but that has been significantly scaled back in the last two years. That goes for Warner, Universal, Paramount, and Sony as well. That is 80% of the DVD business right there. Oppo just announced it was getting out of the DVD player manufacturing business, and the majors will be making that same announcement in the near future(Sony, Panasonic etc). Worldwide DVD sales are falling everywhere, and rentals are growing(but down from 2006) or holding steady. Did you see the price of the DVD versus the Bluray. That would be $20.49 for DVD versus $21.99 for the Blu ray. The price disparity for new releases has almost been wiped out, that is why Blu ray sales are taking a larger and larger piece of the disc sales pie.

Neither Walmart nor(and especially) Barnes and Nobles can be looked upon for DVD trends. Walmart uses the DVD as a loss leader to get folks into their stores. There have far more titles on display because the format itself has more titles. Barnes and Nobles DVD sales are below the radar, they are dead last as a retailer of DVD's. The best place to look for a trend for DVD is Best Buy, as they are the leading seller of DVD's and Blu rays. Over the last year, the two Best Buys in my area have consolidated DVD space, decreased the amount of titles they carry, and have greatly expanded their Blu ray space and the selection of titles they carry. Blu ray players have demos going non stop, and DVD players are in boxes.

As far as television programming on DVD, sales have been very disappointing for the studios. Sure there is the one or two popular shows that sell well, but for the most part, sales are pretty dismal. Blu ray also has a pretty good selection of television programming with Amazon offering 663 titles, but only a few of them are selling well. Offering television programming on disc usually happens when you have run out(or low) of catalog titles to release. That is a last ditch effort to get additional revenue from the format which is falling quite rapidly. That is not a sign of health, that is for sure.

For few years studios did offer dual inventories of movies on both VHS and DVD, but when VHS fell below 50% off their high mark, the studio pulled the plug on it. The same will happen with DVD, that you can bet on. The buzz around Hollywood pegs the studios kicking DVD to the curb at Christmas of 2011. We'll see if that pans out, but the fact there is a buzz is very telling. Everything points to DVD bowing to Blu ray much in the same fashion as VHS bowed to DVD, and the cassette tape bowed to the CD. It is very expensive to produce movies in two formats, and they are quickly looking for a way to not have to do it. I heard this argument before right on this website when DVD was first marketed. Many here at the time said that DVD would never supplant VHS because of the amount of titles VHS has on the market, and the players were cheaper. Doesn't this sound familiar?


On the plane back from skiing in Utah yesterday, there was a girl sitting next to me watching a DVD on her laptop. My youngest sister-in-law watches movies on her PC and does not want BR because she can't play them - even when her parents have a BR player in the family room. Most PC transports require the newer SATA interface that is not found on quite a few computers in the field.

With just about every new Blu ray release there is a digital copy that can be downloaded directly to the hard drive, so there is no need to carry a DVD on trips anymore unless the movie has not been released on BR. I personally no longer carry DVD on trips, as my laptop is full of movies derived from those digital copies. As a matter of fact, a growing number of my DVD's are already on hard drives that I can just attach to my laptop or PC. That digital copy is meant to wean us off of DVD. Your example is not going to stop the demise of DVD.


Don't get me wrong, I love BR. For any movie I really want to buy today, it will be in that format. Even for a non-videophile like me having slightly over 100 titles across the three mediums (~8 BR). Only one of my four players is BR capable.

Your Blu ray player can play DVD's, and that is why you will probably see DVD player support disappear from the major manufacturers before you see Hollywood pull the plug on it. Will there be cheap DVD players around for a while? That answer is yes, but the cheaper DVD players do not last that long, and as more Blu ray players drop below the $100 dollar mark, it will be hard to justify purchasing a cheap player for a format that is no longer supported by new movie releases. That is what happened to the cassette, VHS, and now DVD.

E-Stat
03-14-2010, 01:22 PM
Did you see the price of the DVD versus the Bluray. That would be $20.49 for DVD versus $21.99 for the Blu ray.
Yes, I did. The DVD was a special edition set which included other content. For equivalent releases, the difference is about five bucks which for some folks, a 20% upcharge is significant.


For few years studios did offer dual inventories of movies on both VHS and DVD, but when VHS fell below 50% off their high mark, the studio pulled the plug on it... The buzz around Hollywood pegs the studios kicking DVD to the curb at Christmas of 2011.
Sounds reasonable, but is clearly not the case today.


Everything points to DVD bowing to Blu ray much in the same fashion as VHS bowed to DVD, and the cassette tape bowed to the CD.
I would really like to believe that is the case, but understand there is a profound difference in your two examples: form factor convenience. The tape formats were always larger and did not support immediate indexing. Blu Ray is simply higher quality. Just like SACD. Hmmm. Why didn't higher resolution audio take off? Or your sacred cow, multi-channel? Why are most folks still downloading dreadful 128k MP3s? I don't presume to understand what the greater market will do because most folks just want convenience and "good enough" quality.


It is very expensive to produce movies in two formats, and they are quickly looking for a way to not have to do it.
I'm sure you're correct - yet they are continuing to do that will ALL the major releases. My outside guess is that if they simply released BR, overall sales would tank today.


Many here at the time said that DVD would never supplant VHS because of the amount of titles VHS has on the market, and the players were cheaper. Doesn't this sound familiar?
Back to fundamental differences in convenience and quality. Convenience benefit=none. Quality difference=Significant for you and I, but for the general populace?



With just about every new Blu ray release there is a digital copy that can be downloaded directly to the hard drive, so there is no need to carry a DVD on trips anymore unless the movie has not been released on BR.
That assumes the buyer already has a BR player. Statistically, that is not yet prevalent.


Your example is not going to stop the demise of DVD.
You miss my sentiment. If the DVD format were to disappear tomorrow, I couldn't care less. All new releases I buy are BR. The greater question has to do with folks who don't spend time like you and I discussing audio and video quality. My mother-in-law couldn't care less. Most of my family couldn't care less.

Pet peeve time: Don't you just hate it when you see 4:3 content distorted everywhere on wide screen monitors at airports, sports bars, restaurants, etc.? I find it absolutely amazing that most folks seem to like watching fat faced people in fun house mirror environments. I love true 16:9 content - if it was recorded that way. If the source is 4:3, then I like watching it in 4:3 - devoid of the image distortion.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-14-2010, 03:44 PM
Yes, I did. The DVD was a special edition set which included other content. For equivalent releases, the difference is about five bucks which for some folks, a 20% upcharge is significant.

Yes, but most Blu ray disc use BD live for their extras, the DVD cannot do that. Almost all Blu ray disc come ready for BD live content, even if none ever exists. And lastly, a lot of Amazon.com information on Blu ray is not correct, or not complete. I bought a title on there just recently that stated on the website the audio was 5.1, and when the disc came it was 7.1. I have also had disc that didn't show it was BD live enabled, and when the disc came, it was.



Sounds reasonable, but is clearly not the case today.

No, but the window for DVD will be smaller.



I would really like to believe that is the case, but understand there is a profound difference in your two examples: form factor convenience. The tape formats were always larger and did not support immediate indexing. Blu Ray is simply higher quality. Just like SACD. Hmmm. Why didn't higher resolution audio take off? Or your sacred cow, multi-channel? Why are most folks still downloading dreadful 128k MP3s? I don't presume to understand what the greater market will do because most folks just want convenience and "good enough" quality.

All of the quirks with the formats aside, the VCR was in 90% of homes when DVD was released. Tape sales both pre recorded and blank where a multi billion dollar business. Folks put up with all of the quirks because they wanted the product. Laserdisc did everything the DVD did(Except progressive scanning) in terms of viewing conviences, but it was not accepted by the public. If it had, the price of the players would have come down immediately, ending that argument. MP3 is a easy to encode, widely accepted way of sending and storing portable audio in a worldwide culture that has shifted audio from the home listening excersize to a mobile one. Multichannel audio over the net was impossible, and it was also impossible for portable listening as well. That is ONE of the reasons SACD didn't take off, along with the fact a lot of audio enthusiast where two channel analog only guys(or gals), and didn't care for digital(or multichannel), along with almost universal non support from the major record companies, even Sony. Let's add in the inconvient way to connect the player to the pre-amp or receiver into the mix to season things up.



I'm sure you're correct - yet they are continuing to do that will ALL the major releases. My outside guess is that if they simply released BR, overall sales would tank today.

That is because you are in a transition window, and window that will be shorter than the window was between VHS and DVD if things continue the way they are going. If what is predicted comes true, DVD sales will have fallen to the threshold that took VHS down by 2012. It would not make good business sense to cease DVD production right now because you are making revenue from two places with one rising, not just one that is falling. You keep that window open just long enough for one to overtake the other, and then you allow the format to sunset. At some point it will become too expensive to support two formats based on sales revenue. There are other pipelines now for SD video.



Back to fundamental differences in convenience and quality. Convenience benefit=none. Quality difference=Significant for you and I, but for the general populace?

Well, the funny thing is the rate of adoption for the Blu ray format has been greater sooner than DVD, VHS, HDTV, CD, VOD and various other electronics that have come to the market in the last 30 years. Since a lot of folks purchased HDTV's ahead of the DTV transition, it is no wonder - its a perfect storm for high definition video. Think of it this way. Had the format war not happened, and Blu ray was the only format introduced in 2007, how dead do you think DVD would be today based on these facts? If there was no format war(of which kept alot of folks on the sidelines), the plug would have been pulled, or at least 90% out of the wall by now.




That assumes the buyer already has a BR player. Statistically, that is not yet prevalent.

Statistically you are correct, but time is not exactly static.



You miss my sentiment. If the DVD format were to disappear tomorrow, I couldn't care less. All new releases I buy are BR. The greater question has to do with folks who don't spend time like you and I discussing audio and video quality. My mother-in-law couldn't care less. Most of my family couldn't care less.

I found out during the DTV transition that a lot of elderly folks didn't care about DVD either. It did just fine. Time doesn't stand still. A lot of folks were perfectly content with VHS when DVD came along. Things change. Everything is trending towards HD, not SD.


Pet peeve time: Don't you just hate it when you see 4:3 content distorted everywhere on wide screen monitors at airports, sports bars, restaurants, etc.? I find it absolutely amazing that most folks seem to like watching fat faced people in fun house mirror environments. I love true 16:9 content - if it was recorded that way. If the source is 4:3, then I like watching it in 4:3 - devoid of the image distortion.

rw

LOLOL. Mine is 4:3 for films. Most were never shot that way, and should never be presented that way EVER!. Pan and scan was an abomination from h-e double toothpicks. However everyone seemed to want it, and that is why VHS was predominately a 4:3 format. The other reason is there would be even less resolution than 240 lines of resolution in widescreen on a format that was already low resolution in the first place. That is why I liked Laserdisc better. I was a Laserdisc junkie.

E-Stat
03-14-2010, 04:01 PM
Yes, but most Blu ray disc use BD live for their extras,
Though such is not advertised as to its existence. Stealth benefits. Seems to me not a good commercial approach. Why wouldn't you advertise what you would get by paying more?


Folks put up with all of the quirks because they wanted the product.
Exactly. Quirks are now gone with mere DVDs. The expense of Laserdisc players ($1000+) didn't take hold. $30 players did.


That is ONE of the reasons SACD didn't take off, along with the fact a lot of audio enthusiast where two channel analog only guys(or gals)
Yours truly included. The cost was prohibitive for the benefit, not to mention practical aspects like space requirements.


Let's add in the inconvient way to connect the player to the pre-amp or receiver into the mix to season things up.
True, but none of which applies in the DVD-->BR conversion. Cabling is identical.


Well, the funny thing is the rate of adoption for the Blu ray format has been greater sooner than DVD, VHS, HDTV, CD, VOD and various other electronics that have come to the market in the last 30 years.
Along with the cost. The first VCR decks were in excess of $1000. I bought my BR unit for under $200.


. Since a lot of folks purchased HDTV's ahead of the DTV transition, it is no wonder - its a perfect storm for high definition video.
Given that DVDs exceeded the fifty year old NTSC standards for resolution and aspect ratio, the solution already existed.


If there was no format war(of which kept alot of folks on the sidelines), the plug would have been pulled, or at least 90% out of the wall by now.
I don't find much value spending time with any speculations.


The other reason is there would be even less resolution than 240 lines of resolution in widescreen on a format that was already low resolution in the first place. That is why I liked Laserdisc better. I was a Laserdisc junkie.
Exactly. The DVD format eliminated those objections. I remember the Laserdisc format quite well with both audio reviewer friends having players. The hardware and software alike were very expensive.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-15-2010, 12:32 PM
Though such is not advertised as to its existence. Stealth benefits. Seems to me not a good commercial approach. Why wouldn't you advertise what you would get by paying more?

If you are into Blu ray disc, and do not know about BD live, you are brain dead or deaf. Seriously. It has been advertised to the hilt, and it is shown very dominately in the disc menu. Almost every Blu ray begins with a marketing spiel on the Blu ray format which prominately features BD Live. It is accompanied by music and sound effects pegged at just below 0 level reference so you cannot miss it.



Exactly. Quirks are now gone with mere DVDs. The expense of Laserdisc players ($1000+) didn't take hold. $30 players did.

It is THOSE quirks that are gone, DVD has its own set. Had folks bought in to Laserdisc, both the cost of the player and software would have been driven downward.



Yours truly included. The cost was prohibitive for the benefit, not to mention practical aspects like space requirements.

With the exception of the space requirements, your reasoning is exactly why I never really embraced two channel vinyl. That, and the limitations of just two channels was a turn off for me.


True, but none of which applies in the DVD-->BR conversion. Cabling is identical.

Not exactly. Component is the connector of choice for DVD, and HDMI is the choice for Blu ray. On the audio side, co-axial and toslink are for DVD, and once again HDMI is for Blu ray. HDMI connectors on DVD players were a last ditch effort to squeeze more out of the format than what is really there.(not to mention it is not apart of the DVD standard). It was all marketing in this case. They were added because you cannot upscale an image without it, at least not to 1080p. Upscaling a SD image from the player is a waste of time, because the image must be upscaled to the television's native resolution before the picture is even shown.(it is better done a television level) There are some Blu ray players and quite a few receivers with 5.1 and 7.1 outs and ins, however they are on the mostly high end players. Upscaling DVD from the player level skews the colorspace of the format, as the upscaling chips attempt to insert frames to emulated 1080p.


Along with the cost. The first VCR decks were in excess of $1000. I bought my BR unit for under $200.

When Blu ray was first introduced, the players were over $1000 as well. The piss poor performing Samsung BP-1000 was $999 when the format rolled out. The only way into the format for less than that was a $599 PS3(which is a bargain if I ever saw one). If you paid $200 dollars for yours, you must have purchased it in the last year or so., as there have been no players at that price level at the beginning of 2009.



Given that DVDs exceeded the fifty year old NTSC standards for resolution and aspect ratio, the solution already existed.

Not exactly. DVD's native resolution(and the resolution it is authored it) is 480i. Broadcast NTSC is a 525i format. DVD is based on the NTSC standard, and is just a hair above the resolution of Laserdisc(it was 425i). The only difference between between DVD and standard definition broadcast is one is purely a analog medium, and the other is all digital.


I don't find much value spending time with any speculations.

It is quite a logical speculation based on the exit of HD DVD, and the quick adoption rate after that.


Exactly. The DVD format eliminated those objections. I remember the Laserdisc format quite well with both audio reviewer friends having players. The hardware and software alike were very expensive.
rw[/QUOTE]

Yes, it eliminated THOSE objections, but create a few more. The DVD introduced us to edge enhancement, ringing around hard edges, halos, DNR, prefiltering, pixelation, and banding, all issues that were not present on Laserdisc. Yes, Laserdisc was expensive, but it was the best analog video experience that was currently available at the time. It was not only the player and software that was expensive, but the video chain downstream as well. It was a waste on direct view CRT, and what really brought out the best of the format was a 9" three gun CRT projector with a great line doubler from Runco, or DRC from Sony. This cost more 35 laserdisc players, and that is a conservative estimate.

E-Stat
03-15-2010, 01:06 PM
If you are into Blu ray disc, and do not know about BD live, you are brain dead or deaf. Seriously.
*Most* people are still getting converted to Blu Ray and may need some assistance. Marketing that assumes immediate expert knowledge for a new product is itself a brain dead concept.


It has been advertised to the hilt, and it is shown very dominately in the disc menu. Almost every Blu ray begins with a marketing spiel on the Blu ray format which prominately features BD Live.
Is that always identical to "special content" found on DVDs? I don't recall ever seeing that specifically mentioned.


Not exactly. Component is the connector of choice for DVD, and HDMI is the choice for Blu ray.
For folks buying units today, you'll find HDMI connectivity on DVD players. A couple of the list I previously posted do.


The only difference between between DVD and standard definition broadcast is one is purely a analog medium, and the other is all digital.
And of course, the ability to display the 16:9 format without letter boxing. I certainly get better results with DVD output on my older Oppo unit than I do with non-HD broadcast.

rw

pixelthis
03-15-2010, 01:23 PM
I doubt that Blu players will ever hit 30$.
They are down to under a 100$, then there will be an inflation blowout, and by the time they get the currency stabilized they will sell for maybe 10 bucks, everything will be cheaper.
But its not going to play out like with DVD players, there is going to be a massive shift
in the economy, as peeps realize this is a depression, not a recession.
Its playing out on graphs just like the last depression.
Hard to predict what will happen in todays world, really.
Except that it will be bad.:1:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-15-2010, 02:02 PM
*Most* people are still getting converted to Blu Ray and may need some assistance. Marketing that assumes immediate expert knowledge for a new product is itself a brain dead concept.

BD live is a point and click option right in the menu. It does not take any expert knowledge to access BD live, or know that it exist. The intro is so in your face that if you don't get it, you are brain dead or deaf. It tells you exactly what to do in great detail, all you have to do is follow the instructions. This does not require any level of expertise, and the marketing is on every disc.



Is that always identical to "special content" found on DVDs? I don't recall ever seeing that specifically mentioned.

It could be that content and more. Java gives The Blu ray platform far more power to do interactive things than DVD could have ever hoped for. There were several extras on Pirates of the Carribean Blu ray would could do that could not be done on the DVD. I can only think of a few examples of content offered on DVD that was not offered on Blu ray. It was largely based on the length of the movie, and the size disc the studio chose to release the movie on. Anything that DVD can do, Blu ray does like it is on steriods.



For folks buying units today, you'll find HDMI connectivity on DVD players. A couple of the list I previously posted do.

Not true. Only upscaling DVD players have HDMI outputs as there would be zero reasons to put it on a non upscaling DVD player. All it would do is increase parts costs with no end benefit.



And of course, the ability to display the 16:9 format without letter boxing. I certainly get better results with DVD output on my older Oppo unit than I do with non-HD broadcast.

rw

If you are using the enternal tuners in your television, I would not doubt that is true. But I know some folks that have spent a lot of money on a high quality antenna(tweaked to the hilt), and an external high quality tuner connected to a high quality monitor that would disagree with you. Anamorphic squeezing can be done on broadcast as well as DVD and Laserdisc for that matter. It is not unique to DVD.

E-Stat
03-15-2010, 03:13 PM
BD live is a point and click option right in the menu.
How many folks who use DVD players attach them to the Internet? While I have a home network, I don't. My player does not have 802.11G Wi-Fi access. How many do?


Not true.
I suggest you look at the list again. Surely you're not the moron your response indicates. If you need for me to tell you which ones have HDMI connectivity, I'll be happy to assist.


If you are using the enternal tuners in your television, I would not doubt that is true.
I refer to cable boxes by Motorola and Scientific Atlanta. HBO does not broadcast 16:9 over the cable in a non-HD format that I've used for the past ten years.

rw

BallinWithNash
03-15-2010, 09:37 PM
Wow and this was supposed to be about audio sound haha ... And I am going to have to agree with E-Stat unless production companies just completely stop making movies in DVD format DVD's will be around for awhile longer because cheap people like me who have an HDTV (but only bought it for playing my 360 on) are perfectly fine with DVD quality and I stream most of my movies from Netflix to my TV in a HQ format.
And btw I have a blu ray player ... its my dad's and the only reason my dad bought it is cause he just bought a new 52" LED Samsung TV. And it will be hooked up to that but as for me I still watch everything on a DVD or via the web. And still will for awhile longer until I am forced to upgrade

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-16-2010, 11:44 AM
How many folks who use DVD players attach them to the Internet? While I have a home network, I don't. My player does not have 802.11G Wi-Fi access. How many do?

All profile 2.0 players MUST have either a ethernet connection, or a wireless one. If you do not have an ethernet connection, then you are using a 1.1 profile player, and that explains the cheap price. All Blu ray players released these days are profile 2.0 players.



I suggest you look at the list again. Surely you're not the moron your response indicates. If you need for me to tell you which ones have HDMI connectivity, I'll be happy to assist.

No thanks, don't need your assistance.
Non upscaling player, no HDMI

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?sourceid=navclient&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-14,GGLR:en&q=DVD+players&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=10354861991648613348&ei=tsCfS7GHB47CsgP7q9mbCw&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCAQ8wIwAg&os=tech-specs

Here is another

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?sourceid=navclient&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-14,GGLR:en&q=DVD+players&um=1&ie=UTF-8&cid=10947481275221449253&ei=tsCfS7GHB47CsgP7q9mbCw&sa=X&oi=product_catalog_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCgQ8wIwBA&os=tech-specs

http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/Coby-DVD514-Compact-DVD-Player/4033975/product.html

http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/Samsung-DVD-P191-DVD-Player-Refurbished/4359351/product.html


Now here are the upscaling models


http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/electronics/352695011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_e_1_4_last

So before you call somebody a moron moron, check your information. There is no need for an HDMI interface if you are not going to upconvert the video, and not every DVD player is a upconverting one just as I said. Lastly, everyone is not buying upscaling DVD players, as not everyone has two or more televisions with an HDMI interface.



I refer to cable boxes by Motorola and Scientific Atlanta. HBO does not broadcast 16:9 over the cable in a non-HD format that I've used for the past ten years.

rw

The video performance of most set top boxes leaves a lot to be desired.

E-Stat
03-16-2010, 04:34 PM
All profile 2.0 players MUST have either a ethernet connection, or a wireless one. If you do not have an ethernet connection, then you are using a 1.1 profile player, and that explains the cheap price. All Blu ray players released these days are profile 2.0 players.
Mine does have an ethernet connection, but again I hardwire from my router only to the office PC which is nearby. Back to the question regarding inexpensive DVD players, I know that my mother-in-law would rather just put in the other disk than have to buy and place an access point repeater close enough to her inexpensive BR player. One must spend more or possess extra equipment in order to enjoy added content. Which returns to the cost question!


Non upscaling player, no HDMI
I'm not sure how upscaling DVD players vs. non-upscaling units entered into the topic of cheap players using HDMI. My observation is simply that one can buy an expensive DVD player using HDMI cabling. There were four such examples in my Wal-Mart link that do ranging from $29 to $59. HDMI is clearly NOT the sole domain of Blu Ray players. Regardless of resolution, the convenience of the single cabling can be found with mere DVD players.



There is no need for an HDMI interface if you are not going to upconvert the video, and not every DVD player is a upconverting one just as I said.
I'll repeat for clarity: The convenience of using HDMI cabling can be found on DVD players. Period. There is the Curtis unit. There is the Magnavox unit. There is the Philps unit. There is the Sony unit. Comprende senior?


The video performance of most set top boxes leaves a lot to be desired.
I won't disagree, but simply observe that is the only way one can get certain cable content. The NTSC format does not support a 16:9 aspect ratio. Mere DVD players do. Therein lies a difference.

rw

kevlarus
03-17-2010, 09:25 AM
I'm not sure how upscaling DVD players vs. non-upscaling units entered into the topic of cheap players using HDMI. My observation is simply that one can buy an expensive DVD player using HDMI cabling. There were four such examples in my Wal-Mart link that do ranging from $29 to $59. HDMI is clearly NOT the sole domain of Blu Ray players. Regardless of resolution, the convenience of the single cabling can be found with mere DVD players.
rw


What Sir T. was getting at, is that if the DVD has HDMI connector, then it is upconverting to the HD resolution. Just look on Best Buy site. Any DVD only players that have the HDMI connector are upconverting to the HD resolution (in the $39-59 range). There were 1 or 2 that didn't and only had component out (Memorex MVD2016BLK).

pixelthis
03-17-2010, 11:46 AM
What Sir T. was getting at, is that if the DVD has HDMI connector, then it is upconverting to the HD resolution. Just look on Best Buy site. Any DVD only players that have the HDMI connector are upconverting to the HD resolution (in the $39-59 range). There were 1 or 2 that didn't and only had component out (Memorex MVD2016BLK).

wrong
DO not pass go, no 200$ for you.
No reason why a SD DVD player can't have a HDMI plug.
As a matter of fact I saw a RCA P.O.S with nothing but a HDMI port,
and no upconversion.
One doesnt nessesarily mean the other.
As (cue the Darth Vader music) Hollywood increases its efforts to get rid of analog
connections(like component) you are going to see more and more 480p DVD players
with HDMI only.:1:

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-17-2010, 12:12 PM
Mine does have an ethernet connection, but again I hardwire from my router only to the office PC which is nearby. Back to the question regarding inexpensive DVD players, I know that my mother-in-law would rather just put in the other disk than have to buy and place an access point repeater close enough to her inexpensive BR player. One must spend more or possess extra equipment in order to enjoy added content. Which returns to the cost question!

If cost was such an issue as you state, the BR format would not have had the fastest adoption rate of any CE device made in the last 40 years. Considering that traffic to BD live servers is growing at almost 75% per month means there are quite a few Blu ray players connected to the internet and it is growing.

If you do not set up an ethernet connection to your profile 2.0 player, then it is your loss. It makes getting firmware upgrades more difficult, and you have essentially wasted your money on a 2.0 profile player when a 1.1 would do.
If the player has the connections, and the software is the gateway, if you don't connect to the internet, it is no fault of the format. None of this is going to stop DVD from being dropped, and it is going to happen, you can bet on it.



I'm not sure how upscaling DVD players vs. non-upscaling units entered into the topic of cheap players using HDMI. My observation is simply that one can buy an expensive DVD player using HDMI cabling. There were four such examples in my Wal-Mart link that do ranging from $29 to $59. HDMI is clearly NOT the sole domain of Blu Ray players. Regardless of resolution, the convenience of the single cabling can be found with mere DVD players.

I think rather than just arguing for the sake of it, you need to re-read what I said. I said the component connections were the CHOICE connection of DVD, and HDMI was the CHOICE connection for Blu ray. The CHOICE meaning that is how it is commonly connected, not whether the connection can be found on either format. You said the cabling was identical, and that is only partially true as there are far more DVD players without the connection than there are that do. Also not every DVD player sold today has HDMI connection, but every Blu ray player does. Does the words "common association" mean anything to you?

Upscaling and non upscaling entered the picture when you attempted to equate all DVD players with HDMI. That would be misleading.



I'll repeat for clarity: The convenience of using HDMI cabling can be found on DVD players. Period. There is the Curtis unit. There is the Magnavox unit. There is the Philps unit. There is the Sony unit. Comprende senior?

While it can be found on DVD players, it is not the connection associated with DVD. It is a recent addition, not apart of the format from day one. We are talking about the connection most used by both formats. HDMI is not the most used connection for the DVD format, component is. Just saying it is on the player does not mean everyone uses it.



I won't disagree, but simply observe that is the only way one can get certain cable content. The NTSC format does not support a 16:9 aspect ratio. Mere DVD players do. Therein lies a difference.

rw

Not very well versed on NTSC are we? The DVD format is based on the NTSC format, and the NTSC format can display any aspect ratio that the film industry uses. All interlaced formats are based on NTSC. You every heard of widescreen video tape? I used to have tapes that displayed 1:85:1 and 2:35:1 aspect ratios. 1:85:1 is so close to 1:78:1(or 16x9) it is not funny. Laserdisc is based on NTSC, and films released on the format carried the orginal aspect ratio of the movie. Haven't you heard of Letterboxing?

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-17-2010, 12:17 PM
wrong
DO not pass go, no 200$ for you.
No reason why a SD DVD player can't have a HDMI plug.
As a matter of fact I saw a RCA P.O.S with nothing but a HDMI port,
and no upconversion.
One doesnt nessesarily mean the other.
As (cue the Darth Vader music) Hollywood increases its efforts to get rid of analog
connections(like component) you are going to see more and more 480p DVD players
with HDMI only.:1:

I hate to bring this to you ignorant one, the the sunset of component outputs applies only to Blu ray, not DVD. One does mean the other, because you can only get faux 1080i from the component outputs, but you can get faux 1080p from HDMI.

Secondly you are going to have to show me a non upscaling DVD player that has an HDMI output. It would be stupid to include the connection just to pass 480p. Component does that just fine.

E-Stat
03-17-2010, 05:36 PM
If cost was such an issue as you state, the BR format would not have had the fastest adoption rate of any CE device made in the last 40 years.
Despite that, one can find continue to find DVD players for a fraction of the cost of BR units. People still buy them. DVD is not dead until there are not units available.


I think rather than just arguing for the sake of it...
Why yes, that is exactly what you did when you attempted to *correct* my statement that they use the same connectors and are not "inconvient way to connect the player". Many do and are no less inconvenient. There are multiple DVD players that use HDMI connectors. I pointed out four from one source. Are you having difficulty understanding that?


While it can be found on DVD players, it is not the connection associated with DVD.
*Associated* or not, one can buy a $29 DVD player with the convenience of a HDMI cable. Perhaps if you read that to yourself quietly multiple times, the concept will set in.


The DVD format is based on the NTSC format, and the NTSC format can display any aspect ratio that the film industry uses.
I sit corrected. A 16:9 aspect ration is not *associated* with fifty years of NTSC televisions.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-18-2010, 08:55 AM
Despite that, one can find continue to find DVD players for a fraction of the cost of BR units. People still buy them. DVD is not dead until there are not units available.

I guess handwriting on the wall means nothing to you. I hope sand tastes really good to you, because a format that has lost 20% of its market in less than five years is basically toast. All of your comments are a repeat of exactly what I saw when DVD was introduced. DVD is toast, I think everyone who follows home theater knows that.



Why yes, that is exactly what you did when you attempted to *correct* my statement that they use the same connectors and are not "inconvient way to connect the player". Many do and are no less inconvenient. There are multiple DVD players that use HDMI connectors. I pointed out four from one source. Are you having difficulty understanding that?

Attempted to correct? It was corrected.

The reason I am having difficulty is because your comments have no context. DVD players with HDMI were only brought to the market in the last three years. They came just behind the introduction of Blu ray in 2006. HDMI receivers were not brought in to the market until late 2005, just before the introduction of the Blu ray format. You have from 1997 till 2007 that all DVD players and receivers had only component inputs and outputs. Do you really think they have sold enough DVD players and receivers in three years to completely supplant all of the non HDMI based DVD players and receivers sold in the ten years before that? I think not. My point to you, and I'll make it again: DVD is associated with component hookups, and Blu ray is HDMI. HDMI is recent to DVD, and not many people are using it as a single connection to their systems which makes your comments misleading and disingenuous. A comment without context is like an air sandwich.

When one looks at the sales of upscaling versus non upscaling DVD players, it is like 70 percent to 30 percent in favor of the non upscaling DVD players(and yes NDP reports separate the two). So while there is a flood of players on the market, it is apparent to me based on NDP reports, the masses are still buying non HDMI based DVD players. Those who have purchased HDMI based DVD players are not using single connection hookups because there still is more non HDMI based receivers out there than there are HDMI based ones.



*Associated* or not, one can buy a $29 DVD player with the convenience of a HDMI cable. Perhaps if you read that to yourself quietly multiple times, the concept will set in.

Look, everyone knows you can buy one. That is not the point. The point is are they using the HDMI hookup to pass the video and audio, and that answer is probably not. All one has to do is venture away from Audioreview(or even view some of the questions here), and go to other sites to know that when people purchase a HDMI based receiver, they are not doing it to support a DVD player. It is usually a Blu ray player. Considering the fact that HDMI based receivers were put on the market to support Blu ray players, not DVD players. A more likely scenario is that those DVD player with HDMI are going directly to the television, while the audio is being transmitted via toslink or co-axial connections. This is not indicative of a single cable hookup.



I sit corrected. A 16:9 aspect ration is not *associated* with fifty years of NTSC televisions.

rw

Thank the mother, some progress :rolleyes5:

E-Stat
03-18-2010, 03:55 PM
DVD players with HDMI were only brought to the market in the last three years...Look, everyone knows you can buy one.
He does comprehend. Praise the Lord!

When one shells out money today, what once was true is no longer true. Where once one had to use more cables, now they don't. Where once your statement was correct, now it is not. The relevance is why aren't more folks buying BR than they are? Because DVD players keep getting cheaper and more convenient!

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-18-2010, 07:16 PM
He does comprehend. Praise the Lord!

When one shells out money today, what once was true is no longer true. Where once one had to use more cables, now they don't. Where once your statement was correct, now it is not. The relevance is why aren't more folks buying BR than they are? Because DVD players keep getting cheaper and more convenient!

rw

This response is BS, and it looks like you have hatched another air sandwich. If what you say is true, then why are sales of DVD's dropping like they are? Why are studio's placing orders for fewer DVD for replication. Why are DVD replicators either cutting back staff, losing money, or going out of business?

BR sales for January and February have been up close to 76% over last year. Cineram(a BR replicator) just open four more replication lines and added a new shift and employees. A Blu ray replication facility in Seattle just opening up two more lines, and Panasonic has up their replication capacity by 80%. So I think it is a stupid question to ask why folks aren't buying more Blu rays than they are.

E-Stat
03-19-2010, 04:54 AM
This response is BS,
You can choose to accept the fact that the studios continue to release on DVD or not.

You can choose to accept the fact that DVD players (including those with HDMI) continue to be sold or not.

You can choose to accept the fact that the medium is not dead or not.

Feel free to create your own reality. As for me, I choose to observe facts.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-19-2010, 10:56 AM
You can choose to accept the fact that the studios continue to release on DVD or not.

They will for a short time as I stated previously.


You can choose to accept the fact that DVD players (including those with HDMI) continue to be sold or not.

I thought we already acknowledged this.


You can choose to accept the fact that the medium is not dead or not.

It is not quite dead, but certainly dying.


Feel free to create your own reality. As for me, I choose to observe facts.

rw

Or your idea of facts

E-Stat
03-19-2010, 01:57 PM
They will..
We already acknowledged this...
It is not quite dead...
I'm glad you are now able to accept these easy to demonstrate facts. No BS involved. You seem to be pained by these truths. :)

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-20-2010, 10:20 AM
I'm glad you are now able to accept these easy to demonstrate facts. No BS involved. You seem to be pained by these truths. :)

rw

What you call truths(or half truths) with no context is meaningless. Your comment stated that the cabling between the two formats is the same. That is only half true. I would offer it is not being used in the same way on both formats, and not all DVD players have HDMI connections(all Blu ray players do). That is providing context to the comment.

You say that DVD is not dead. That is half true. I say it is dying pretty quickly(sales dropped 13% in the last two months on top of year to year losses), and support for it will be gone in less than two years at the rate of current market erosion. That is providing context to the comment.

You say that the studios are still releasing new content to the DVD format. That is true, but not for long, as we are in a transitional period. That is providing context to the comment. You love the surface, and I say the devil is in the detail.

You love to make blanket statements and assumptions without providing detail to them. That is called an air sandwich, as you have the bread, but nothing in between them. Your defense of a dying format is laughable, but since you are still stuck at stereo, it is understandable.

Since you know nothing about me, then it is logical to accept the fact that you do not know what pains me. What you call truths do not pain me. They are too shallow to pain me.

E-Stat
03-20-2010, 11:29 AM
What you call truths...
Remain statements of fact. There is nothing more to discuss.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-20-2010, 12:02 PM
Remain statements of fact. There is nothing more to discuss.

rw

Remain statements of fact to you is more appropriate. And you are right, there is nothing more to discuss. Seems you have ran out of red herring bullet points.

E-Stat
03-20-2010, 12:17 PM
Remain statements of fact to you is more appropriate.
Let's see if we can figure out the cause of your confusion.

1. Is it possible to buy a DVD player today with HDMI connectivity? Here (http://www.google.com/products?q=dvd+players+hdmi&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=PyulS-TGNMyXtgeb3fDBDg&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQrQQwAg) are ten examples. Any questions?

2. Is if possible to buy current (and even yet to be released) content in the DVD format?. One month from now, you will be able to buy Avatar (http://www.amazon.com/Avatar-Sam-Worthington/dp/B002VPE1AW/ref=ed_oe_dvd) on DVD. Any questions?

Obviously, you have no idea as your reply (or lack thereof) will conclusively prove. What was that term you used? Air sandwich? Zero substantiation for bizarre conclusions?

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-20-2010, 12:53 PM
Let's see if we can figure out the cause of your confusion.

1. Is it possible to buy a DVD player today with HDMI connectivity? Here (http://www.google.com/products?q=dvd+players+hdmi&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=PyulS-TGNMyXtgeb3fDBDg&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQrQQwAg) are ten examples. Any questions?

Yes I do. Does every DVD player come with HDMI connectivity. The answer is no. Are the HDMI connected players the only ones selling? The answer is no, they make up a small piece of the sales pie when compared to non HDMI DVD players. When every DVD player has HDMI connections, then you have a point. Until then, your responses are pointless if not lightweight and misleading.


2. Is if possible to buy current (and even yet to be released) content in the DVD format?. One month from now, you will be able to buy Avatar (http://www.amazon.com/Avatar-Sam-Worthington/dp/B002VPE1AW/ref=ed_oe_dvd) on DVD. Any questions?

Yes, will this go on forever?. The answer is no. History has proven this. Still do not get the concept of a transitional period do you?


Obviously, you have no idea as your reply (or lack thereof) will conclusively prove. What was that term you used? Air sandwich? Zero substantiation for bizarre conclusions?

rw

My conclusions are bizarre to folks that love to skim the surface of an issue. They are not so bizarre when the person has the ability to look in depth into the issue. As you can see, I am not fan of non critical thinking people. That is why you and I seem to get tangle when we interact.

E-Stat
03-20-2010, 01:05 PM
Yes I do.
Then answer my question. Can you choose to have the same convenience if that is what you want? There are at least ten different ways to do that. Some may choose otherwise if their TV does not support HDMI. Which, by the way is a very relevant question. Not only do some folks not care about BR quality, their current TV/monitors do not support HDMI connectivity. Three out of my seven do not. Such is typical. They choose what works with what they have. Comprendre Senior?


My conclusions are bizarre to folks that love to skim the surface of an issue.
These are simple yes and no questions that continue to elude you.

rw

Sir Terrence the Terrible
03-20-2010, 01:30 PM
Then answer my question. Can you choose to have the same convenience if that is what you want? There are at least ten different ways to do that. Some may choose otherwise if their TV does not support HDMI. Which, by the way is a very relevant question. Not only do some folks not care about BR quality, their current TV/monitors do not support HDMI connectivity. Three out of my seven do not. Such is typical. They choose what works with what they have. Comprendre Senior?


These are simple yes and no questions that continue to elude you.

rw


I thought you said there was nothing left to discuss. Your motivation is become very apparent. You are majoring in minors at this point, and I am through wasting my time with you. That is all......

pixelthis
03-21-2010, 02:02 AM
Let's see if we can figure out the cause of your confusion.

1. Is it possible to buy a DVD player today with HDMI connectivity? Here (http://www.google.com/products?q=dvd+players+hdmi&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=PyulS-TGNMyXtgeb3fDBDg&sa=X&oi=product_result_group&ct=title&resnum=3&ved=0CDQQrQQwAg) are ten examples. Any questions?

2. Is if possible to buy current (and even yet to be released) content in the DVD format?. One month from now, you will be able to buy Avatar (http://www.amazon.com/Avatar-Sam-Worthington/dp/B002VPE1AW/ref=ed_oe_dvd) on DVD. Any questions?

Obviously, you have no idea as your reply (or lack thereof) will conclusively prove. What was that term you used? Air sandwich? Zero substantiation for bizarre conclusions?

rw

I wonder why people bother arguing with TALKY, its like talking to a stone wall.
COMPONENT will be gone in a few years, count on it, except for a few cheap players from some rice paddy in a third world country, maybe.:1: