Do you watch only Blu Rays just because?

[Hyfi]

Do you watch only Blu Rays just because you own a Blu Ray player?

Just curious as to who watches ONLY Blu disks. I have only watched 2 Blus on my OPPO since I got the unit. Since a lot of movies don't have great action, sound and visual effects, what is the big deal just watching a plain old DVD?

When a movie comes around that would benefit from watching in Blu, I will but for the most part, DVD and downloaded avi files have been all I have watched since getting the oppo. I love the DNLA functionality and the use of my 2TB network drive.

I'm not too concerned with the additional $.50 from RedBox but for what? Just to say I saw a movie in Blu? Anyway, all those extra $50 will add up nicely in my retirement account.

[Woochifer]

Do you own a HDTV, and if so, do you watch other HD sources on it? That would provide the answer in most cases.

For me, whenever I purchase or rent a movie, I'm getting it in Blu-ray if I have a choice. With my Directv service, I upgraded to the HD receiver and HD service when I got the HDTV. Basically, anytime I have a choice with the program or channel I'm watching, I will opt for the HD version.

I will still watch SD programs or DVDs if that's what I have available. But, I much prefer HD. With movies, it's that much closer to the resolution on the big screen and the original intent of the cinematographer. With TV programs and sports, you see more of the action and the detail. Going back to SD, it's like purposely making things fuzzy/hazy on purpose. You're not going to purposely throw a blanket over your speakers when listening to music, so why do the same thing with video programming, if you have a choice?

Doesn't matter if it's a big blockbuster or indie flick -- ALL movies look better in HD and it makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience. It won't make a crappy movie into five-star cinema, but then again, a high end audio setup won't fix lousy music either.

With the question you're posing about Blu-ray, it needs to be extended into HD viewing in general. Is the added resolution important enough for you to upgrade your cable/satellite service?

Given that you bring up downloading and DLNA media servers, the question can be reversed -- do you watch only downloaded/streaming content just because? Does convenience mean more than quality? And of course, that same question can be asked on the audio side.

[hifi-freak]

More extras (on movies), better audio...

[eisforelectronic]

Only Blu-rays, only HD programming. If it's not 720p, 1080i or 1080p, it doesn't get watched at my house. the only exception I've made in recent memory was for "the Walking Dead".

[Smokey]

Doesn't matter if it's a big blockbuster or indie flick -- ALL movies look better in HD and it makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience.

That would be true if studios step up to plate and give us a new HD remaster of film on bluray disc. But looking at some of bluray movie reviews (like Chevy Chase's Vacation), that don't seem to be the case.

They say picture quality of bluray edition looks excatly like the DVD edition....

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=36337

[02audionoob]

I choose the material first, format second. I'll happily watch DVD on my HDTV. I'm not going to let better technology stop me from watching something that isn't readily available in HD.

[Hyfi]

Do you own a HDTV, and if so, do you watch other HD sources on it? That would provide the answer in most cases.

For me, whenever I purchase or rent a movie, I'm getting it in Blu-ray if I have a choice. With my Directv service, I upgraded to the HD receiver and HD service when I got the HDTV. Basically, anytime I have a choice with the program or channel I'm watching, I will opt for the HD version.

I will still watch SD programs or DVDs if that's what I have available. But, I much prefer HD. With movies, it's that much closer to the resolution on the big screen and the original intent of the cinematographer. With TV programs and sports, you see more of the action and the detail. Going back to SD, it's like purposely making things fuzzy/hazy on purpose. You're not going to purposely throw a blanket over your speakers when listening to music, so why do the same thing with video programming, if you have a choice?

Doesn't matter if it's a big blockbuster or indie flick -- ALL movies look better in HD and it makes for a more enjoyable viewing experience. It won't make a crappy movie into five-star cinema, but then again, a high end audio setup won't fix lousy music either.

With the question you're posing about Blu-ray, it needs to be extended into HD viewing in general. Is the added resolution important enough for you to upgrade your cable/satellite service?

Given that you bring up downloading and DLNA media servers, the question can be reversed -- do you watch only downloaded/streaming content just because? Does convenience mean more than quality? And of course, that same question can be asked on the audio side.

Good questions back. I happen to be in a major minority when it comes to all this.

The only HD TV material I watch is whatever is HD over the air - antenna style. But yes, everything looks better in HD. Lots of the movies I have streamed via DNLA have been older movies or ones that I cannot see the benefit of renting as Blu. A chick flick in HD is still just a chick flick, right.

I was using a PC that is connected to my system to watch AVIs over the network but since I got the OPPO, I no longer need to fire up the PC unless I end up with a rare format the 93 does not like. It is very convenient.

I have two HD TVs and 2 non. The one in my bedroom is a 25 y/o Sony now being driven by one of those cheapo digital converter boxes. The PQ is just fine.

Now you posed the question back for music. I have 4 different systems ranging from great to just ok. I can drive speakers in my family room from system 2 or use system 4 that is also in that room. I do both and have no problems. However I do use system 1 most of the time and just blast it throughout the house.

[recoveryone]

Woo has very good points, for I too only watch HD channels via the cable box, but when it comes to blu rays I get a lot more pickier. First off the Cost ceiling for me is $20 for 98% of all the Blu Ray Disk I own, 2nd is the type of movie, I only buy BR that push the envelope of the format (Graphics and Audio). When you look at any Reference list of titles you will see Action, SciFi, Animation. So to spend extra money just for the sake of it being BR is not cost effective in my book. Now I say that due that I buy all of the movies in my home, so thats titles for the kids, wife and my own taste. I am the only one that cares about visual or audio difference,, so I'm not going to spend the money on those that could care less.

[Tarheel_]

Woo has very good points, for I too only watch HD channels via the cable box, but when it comes to blu rays I get a lot more pickier. First off the Cost ceiling for me is $20 for 98% of all the Blu Ray Disk I own, 2nd is the type of movie, I only buy BR that push the envelope of the format (Graphics and Audio). When you look at any Reference list of titles you will see Action, SciFi, Animation. So to spend extra money just for the sake of it being BR is not cost effective in my book. Now I say that due that I buy all of the movies in my home, so thats titles for the kids, wife and my own taste. I am the only one that cares about visual or audio difference,, so I'm not going to spend the money on those that could care less.

I'm mostly in the same boat, however, some of Disney's movie look the absolute best in blu so we love to add those and do a family night.

I also watch HD DVD movies. I have the player and movies are cheap on the bay. Great machine to upconvert as well.

Also, you may want to create a Wish List on Amazon. I load my most wanted movies on blu and check it often as the prices moves up or down. Great to recall which movies you want, their release dates and their prices, etc.

[Woochifer]

That would be true if studios step up to plate and give us a new HD remaster of film on bluray disc. But looking at some of bluray movie reviews (like Chevy Chase's Vacation), that don't seem to be the case.

They say picture quality of bluray edition looks excatly like the DVD edition....

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=36337

Problem with your comparison is that you're comparing an actual viewing of the DVD with a review of the Blu-ray. Is this reviewer trustworthy, or do they resort to hyperbole to make a point? There are some tech press hacks who claim that upsampled DVD is indistinguishable from Blu-ray. Of course, these are almost always the same people pushing online streaming and downloading, and actively campaigning against optical disc media. I disregard them because their comments about Blu-ray are always disingenuous at best, given their extreme bias towards online video.

There have been many online sh*tstorms stirred up because of poorly done Blu-ray transfers. But, just because a Blu-ray transfer was poorly done from inferior master sources does not negate the picture quality upgrade that comes from higher resolution. Keep in mind that most DVDs were originally downsampled from HD masters.

The issue with poorly done Blu-ray transfers is that they use older HD masters, and the scanning technology has greatly improved over the last decade. And in HD, flaws in the master source are much easier to see on Blu-ray than on a heavily DNR'd and edge enhanced DVD.

The bottomline question that you're not really answering is whether that poorly done Blu-ray transfer still looks better than the DVD copy. Among all the most widely discussed bad Blu-ray transfers I'm familiar with (e.g., the MPEG-2 versions of The Fifth Element and Dracula, the first release of Gladiator, et al), the answer to that question remains an overwhelming yes.

Honestly, I don't know of a single case where anyone has honestly said that the DVD version looks better than the Blu-ray.

[pixelthis]

Only Blu-rays, only HD programming. If it's not 720p, 1080i or 1080p, it doesn't get watched at my house. the only exception I've made in recent memory was for "the Walking Dead".

YEAH, my Amc isn't HD either, but the entire series was in HD on ONDEMAND,
thank the lord.
I watch quite a few DVDS at work during downtime, and I spent extra for a portable
(PANASONIC) that would play DIVIX, etc, up to 720p. Its nice.
But nothing beats BLU. You won't watch a disc in BLU unless it resembles a video game,well, thats your loss.
ONE of the best BLU discs I have seen is NICK and Nora, a love song to NEW YORK,
basically, and it is beautiful. I don't need robots from the future( although I did a four
movie Terminator marathon recently). Ben Button was rather amazing, also.
Blu is the HT promise fulfilled, and the only reason your DVD is as tolerable as they are
is they are deinterlaced and the pic is as good as possible.
BUT THATS RECENT. The best thing about Blu is not what it contains, but what it leaves out.
MOIRE PATTERNS, jagged diagonal lines, ghosting.
I had a concert of SHERYL CROW, and the one thing even more annoying than her
suburban haircut was her boom mike, which "jagged" in the middle. If that works
for you , fine. I have a bunch of BLU discs, several are replacements for DVD,
because I love movies and will only watch them in as pristine a condition as
possible, because time spent watching a movie is time you don't get back, basically.
Wizard of OZ came on recently, and I WAS AMAZED, TO SAY THE LEAST.
My god, what they have done to this movie, which will be my next BLU disc, BTW.
IF YOU CAN SETTLE for "DVD" then why did you waste money on the OPPO,
is all I want to know.:1:

[BadAssJazz]

The PQ on blu ray is so stunning that it is my preferred choice when it comes to watching a movie. If the movie is released in BR format, I'll wait to see it, even if there are tons of standard DVDs available.

The exception to this rule would be if it's a classic movie that I've seen hundreds of times already. At times like that, even a streaming video with average PQ will do.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The bruhaha behind Dracula was built strongly on ignorance, bad comparison, and in some cases self interests. Some folks were comparing a non approved transfer with a director approved one - saying the non approved one was correct, and the approved one wasn't.

As an owner of more than 1500 Bluray's, I have far more that look super good than I have that look super bad. As a matter of fact the bad or mediocre ones I have you can count on two hands out of 1500. Sound wise, there is no competition here, Bluray is far superior in that respect. Streaming has its place, and I still watch an occasional DVD. But Bluray is the choice format in my family, and I am going to eventually replace my DVD's with Bluray's as quickly as I can.

[Woochifer]

Good questions back. I happen to be in a major minority when it comes to all this.

The only HD TV material I watch is whatever is HD over the air - antenna style. But yes, everything looks better in HD. Lots of the movies I have streamed via DNLA have been older movies or ones that I cannot see the benefit of renting as Blu. A chick flick in HD is still just a chick flick, right.

If you're talking about Redbox, the difference between DVD and Blu-ray is all of FIFTY CENTS. To me, that's just a no brainer to go with the HD option. The benefit to renting Blu-ray is simple -- higher resolution, more detail, and more involving experience overall.

And with older movies, IMO that's where you see the biggest benefit to going with Blu-ray. With well-done Blu-ray transfers, you get to see a lot of the microdetail and film grain that formerly, you could only see on the big screen. Blu-ray preserves the cinematography and the original look of the film print.

DVD and other low res sources (including HD broadcasts on cable/satellite and OTA) don't have the bandwidth to display that much detail without macroblocking or other compression artifacts popping up. So, what those sources have to do is blur out the fine detail using noise reduction, and then resharpen the picture using edge enhancement.

If anything, the Blu-ray just looks more natural and true to life. And that applies, no matter what kind of movie you're watching.


I was using a PC that is connected to my system to watch AVIs over the network but since I got the OPPO, I no longer need to fire up the PC unless I end up with a rare format the 93 does not like. It is very convenient.

And there's the crux of it -- you're opting for convenience over quality, which is exactly what won out on the audio side. With video, consumers going to bigger screens has also driven the demand for higher resolution. At larger sizes, the benefits of HD are more apparent, so that's what has held the line in general for higher res. When you're already at home, the convenience factor is less prominent in general. Yes, there are consumers like you who will opt for the whole house networking, but indeed that's not the norm just yet.

With audio, the market is driven by portable and mobile devices. Consumers are perfectly fine with MP3 resolution, since they can take their music on the go. And while you're on the go, you're not in an environment that benefits as much from high end audio components or formats. That allows convenience to win out.

[Smokey]

Is this reviewer trustworthy, or do they resort to hyperbole to make a point? There are some tech press hacks who claim that upsampled DVD is indistinguishable from Blu-ray.

If you look at major film review sites, the bluray version of this movie does not get high remarks. For example look at this review from DVD Verdict. He ask:

"Is it worth a double-dip if you already have the DVD? Based on video quality alone, I'm not seeing a drastic enough increase in fidelity to warrant a re-purchase."

http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/vacationbluray.php


The bottomline question that you're not really answering is whether that poorly done Blu-ray transfer still looks better than the DVD copy.

I think the better question would be is whether poorly done bluray is worth %50 more in price than DVD copy?

[Swish]

....I haven't watched a Blu-Ray movie since receiving my PS3 from my wife as a Christmas present. We have Netflicks but only via streaming, and you can't get Blu-Ray that way yet (can you?). Once my HT room is finished (give me 4 to 6 weeks), I'll certainly want to get me some Blu-Ray. I'll probably change my Netflicks from streaming to delivery + streaming and pay the extra money.

[Hyfi]

BTW.
IF YOU CAN SETTLE for "DVD" then why did you waste money on the OPPO,
is all I want to know.:1:

First of all, I didn't waste my money. I saved for close to a year to buy the BEST player I could that would do everything the OPPO does and also play music CDs fairly well. The unit is for video in one system and audio in a second.

Redbox does not have a whole lot on Blu that interest me but as I said, I will rent them when the right ones are available.

I was a latecomer to HT in the first place and bought an el-cheapo HK not even knowing much about HDMI and the HKs lack of it. The DVD player I had didn't have it either.

With the OPPO, I have everything one could want in a player so as I continue to upgrade when money permits, I will have a decent HT setup.

You wouldn't believe how many people have purchased the 93 just to stream Netfix. Apparently more than will use it for DVD and Blu if you look at the AVS official 93 thread.

I also hope that I never have to buy a $68 player for myself. I don't think the OPPO will die prematurely.

[Hyfi]

If you're talking about Redbox, the difference between DVD and Blu-ray is all of FIFTY CENTS. To me, that's just a no brainer to go with the HD option.

Maybe your income level or current status of independently wealthy is different than mine or my retirement goals. I chince out on many things in order to be prepared for what will no doubt be an ugly time when my wife and I get old and need help and care.

Every FIFTY CENTS I save adds up to DOLLARS in the bank. But, it's not just about the money. Like I said, a chick flick in HD is still a chick flick. I don't give a rats ass about the grain of the film if there is no real action or sound effects to display. I'm not an HD snob.



And there's the crux of it -- you're opting for convenience over quality, which is exactly what won out on the audio side. With video, consumers going to bigger screens has also driven the demand for higher resolution. At larger sizes, the benefits of HD are more apparent, so that's what has held the line in general for higher res. When you're already at home, the convenience factor is less prominent in general. Yes, there are consumers like you who will opt for the whole house networking, but indeed that's not the norm just yet.

When I bought this unit, I had every intention of watching Blu's. As I have repeated, there are not many in RedBox that I care to bother whether it's just a little bit better just to say I did.

I do like convenience. I also happen to have a huge hard drive full of movies a friend of mine ripped from his collection. I guess you would just trash the drive and run out and re-purchase them all.

I only have my whole house wired because I picked up trashed PCs and rebuilt them. I work in the field so keeping networking skills honed is something I need to keep up on. I have helped friends wire their whole houses when remodeling or building.

No it's not the norm because most people can't think past Ipod-Earbud.



With audio, the market is driven by portable and mobile devices. Consumers are perfectly fine with MP3 resolution, since they can take their music on the go. And while you're on the go, you're not in an environment that benefits as much from high end audio components or formats. That allows convenience to win out.

Well here is where I am still old school. I don't have a portable player of any kind. I will not put dirty little ear buds in my ears to listen to inferior sounding audio. I do have and NOW listen to some of the music I have on hard drives but ONLY because of the ease of the streaming features of the OPPO. I listen to Pandora or LastFM at work very low on crappy little PC speakers.

But, I listen to 95% of my music from a CD on a real audio system.
Can you say that?

I am an Audio Snob!

[recoveryone]

OK Boys lets keep it above the belt, no need to attack anyone for their choices.

[BadAssJazz]

But, I listen to 95% of my music from a CD on a real audio system.
Can you say that? I am an Audio Snob!

***Blows whistle and tosses yellow flag.***

Ahhhh, this one takes me back! I can remember a time when someone once said something similar to me, because I didn't use tube amplification or a turntable. For the most part anything digital was anathema to him. I think we have to chalk this one up to "diff'rent strokes, for diff'rent folks" this time. There will always be the human element when it comes to matters of preference. Do we really have to draw lines in the sand about everything?

Don't get me wrong, I think blu ray IS the next level from a visual and audio standpoint, but I'm willing to make concessions for subjective preference. My mother still prefers her VHS VCR to everything else. Not even an S-VHS. I've given her DVD players and let her borrow my old Samsung Blu Ray player. She wants no part of any of the newer technologies. It's pointless to try and convince her. Besides, who am I to argue with Mum? She likes what she likes.

[pixelthis]

Maybe your income level or current status of independently wealthy is different than mine or my retirement goals. I chince out on many things in order to be prepared for what will no doubt be an ugly time when my wife and I get old and need help and care.


Every FIFTY CENTS I save adds up to DOLLARS in the bank. But, it's not just about the money. Like I said, a chick flick in HD is still a chick flick. I don't give a rats ass about the grain of the film if there is no real action or sound effects to display. I'm not an HD snob.


No, you are an anti HD snob.
Is CASABLANCA a "chick" flick"? CHASING AMY? And so on. And if a difference in fifty cents is a deal breaker for you, you don't have a retirement problem, you have a survival problem. THAT extra fifty cents is the biggest bargain in HT right now.



When I bought this unit, I had every intention of watching Blu's. As I have repeated, there are not many in RedBox that I care to bother whether it's just a little bit better just to say I did.


MAYBE, but purchased BLU discs can now be had for six bucks, close to what A BLOCKBUSTER RENTAL used to be. Watching DVD makes less and less sense.



I do like convenience. I also happen to have a huge hard drive full of movies a friend of mine ripped from his collection. I guess you would just trash the drive and run out and re-purchase them all.


NOT WITH STORAGE so cheap these days. I like to rip stuff to disc and take to work.
But would having a DVD or other SD copy keep me from replacing the title with BLU?
ACTUALLY I am in the process of replacing a bunch of old classics and giving away the
DVD copies to friends. If you are a penny pincher this is actually a good time to do so,
what with video stores shutting their doors. I have picked up several hardly used discs for as little as four bucks.


I only have my whole house wired because I picked up trashed PCs and rebuilt them. I work in the field so keeping networking skills honed is something I need to keep up on. I have helped friends wire their whole houses when remodeling or building.


And THAT has to do with the price of eggs how?



Well here is where I am still old school. I don't have a portable player of any kind. I will not put dirty little ear buds in my ears to listen to inferior sounding audio. I do have and NOW listen to some of the music I have on hard drives but ONLY because of the ease of the streaming features of the OPPO. I listen to Pandora or LastFM at work very low on crappy little PC speakers.

Time to join the 21st century. With a file player you can plug it into your car unit, the aux on a decent sounding portable. AND those bootleg movies you were talking bout?
WATCH them on a file player.



But, I listen to 95% of my music from a CD on a real audio system.
Can you say that?

MORE LIKE 70%, and the rest of the time , records and lossless on my computer.
You could never tell the difference. My chief playback device cost eight hundred bucks, can you say that?(see below).

I am an Audio Snob!
GOOD for you. I am an audio lover, which is why I paid the ridiculous price of four
c-notes for a clock radio type device that actually sounds decent for occasional listening,
and have three players in my system that are dedicated to disc audio playback.
Which brings up something else, mainly hi-res audio, like Sheryl Crows Sound STAGE,
Diana Kralls Rio, etc. DO YOU LOVE music enough to spring for some audio
discs in BLU format? JUST CURIOUS.:1:

[pixelthis]

That would be true if studios step up to plate and give us a new HD remaster of film on bluray disc. But looking at some of bluray movie reviews (like Chevy Chase's Vacation), that don't seem to be the case.

They say picture quality of bluray edition looks excatly like the DVD edition....

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=36337

TALK about "stepping up to the plate", you might want to try it, SMOKE,
and pull the trigger on a HD set. Then you could talk from experience instead
of what people "say".
YES, there are BLU discs out there that are BLU in name only. AND believe it
or not, still a few 720p discs from the start of the format.
And some "up converted" 720p editions which, of course, produces no additional res.
But even a poorly done disc is a 100% better than the best DVD. And I have always
heard that you don't get a res increase with upconversion, however DVD does tend
to look a ton better on a BLU player. At least that has been my experience, especially with "superbit" DVD editions, which look really good on a BLU player.:1:

[Hyfi]

No, you are an anti HD snob.
Is CASABLANCA a "chick" flick"? CHASING AMY? And so on. And if a difference in fifty cents is a deal breaker for you, you don't have a retirement problem, you have a survival problem. THAT extra fifty cents is the biggest bargain in HT right now.


Casablanca is a 1942 Black and White no action no sound movie.

What is my survival problem? So you are advising me to spend extra money to watch an old B&W movie instead of adding money to a retirement account? Where is your logic in that? I may not have the same type of Law Enforcement Retirement plan as you, in fact the only one I have is the one I add to.



MAYBE, but purchased BLU discs can now be had for six bucks, close to what A BLOCKBUSTER RENTAL used to be. Watching DVD makes less and less sense.


So now you are advising me how to spend my money, and earlier you criticized me for how I already spent my money. I don't need to buy every movie I watch. I can't watch the same movie hundreds of times like I can listen to Music.

Your critisizing me is pretty funny since only 6 months ago you were crying about how broke you were and justifying why you purchased, and in your words, "cheap and questionably built" Emotiva Amp.

Now you are going to tell me how to spend my money?



NOT WITH STORAGE so cheap these days. I like to rip stuff to disc and take to work.
But would having a DVD or other SD copy keep me from replacing the title with BLU?
ACTUALLY I am in the process of replacing a bunch of old classics and giving away the
DVD copies to friends. If you are a penny pincher this is actually a good time to do so,
what with video stores shutting their doors. I have picked up several hardly used discs for as little as four bucks.

Again, you cry broke one week then tell us how you are repurchasing your whole library. Again, I do not have the desire to own every movie I watch. Just how many times are you going to watch all of the ones you buy? 5x in 15 years? May as well rent for $1 each time and it's still cheaper.


And THAT has to do with the price of eggs how?

It was in reference to a comment that woochifer made about convenience. Try actually reading the posts.



Time to join the 21st century. With a file player you can plug it into your car unit, the aux on a decent sounding portable. AND those bootleg movies you were talking bout?
WATCH them on a file player.

And what is wrong with watching the movies on my TV? Why would I want to watch a great movie on a 2" to 6" screen? Does 21st Century mean buying every little gadget the next guy has? Or just doing everything you do?



My chief playback device cost eight hundred bucks, can you say that?(see below).

Yes I can because if I would have paid List Price and Tax on my Rotel, it would have been close but when you add the $300/pair Synergistic cables in, well....

And it appears you wasted your money since you can't tell the difference between a record, a cd, and something playing in your car off of a ipod.



DO YOU LOVE music enough to spring for some audio
discs in BLU format? JUST CURIOUS.


I doubt it because the OPPO is not my main playback unit. I get pretty decent sound out of well recorded CDs already.



GOOD for you. I am an audio lover, which is why I paid the ridiculous price of four
c-notes for a clock radio type device that actually sounds decent for occasional listening,


What did you get? A Bose Wave?

[recoveryone]

What did you get? A Bose Wave?

WOW that was a shot below the belt :yikes: :eek:

[pixelthis]

Casablanca is a 1942 Black and White no action no sound movie.


and is considered to be one of the best movies ever, if not the best.
You need to listen to what a movie says, not just sit there and count the explosions


What is my survival problem? So you are advising me to spend extra money to watch an old B&W movie instead of adding money to a retirement account? Where is your logic in that? I may not have the same type of Law Enforcement Retirement plan as you, in fact the only one I have is the one I add to.


I DON'T have a "law enforcement plan" either, but in the great scheme of things
fifty cents is no biggie to enjoy a movie I might not be here to enjoy next week


So now you are advising me how to spend my money, and earlier you criticized me for how I already spent my money. I don't need to buy every movie I watch. I can't watch the same movie hundreds of times like I can listen to Music.


Maybe not, but concerts and video collections are timeless. And spend your money
any way you want. At the end of the day people always regret what they did not do,
not what they did.


Your critisizing me is pretty funny since only 6 months ago you were crying about how broke you were and justifying why you purchased, and in your words, "cheap and questionably built" Emotiva Amp.

WHICH turned out to be one of the best things I HAVE EVER BOUGHT.
Live and learn.



Now you are going to tell me how to spend my money?


At the end of the day it won't matter. I have been wiped out three times in the last 17 years.
"SAVING" money has only deprived me of experiences never to come again, while the
govt or some banker is enjoying my money.


Again, you cry broke one week then tell us how you are repurchasing your whole library. Again, I do not have the desire to own every movie I watch. Just how many times are you going to watch all of the ones you buy? 5x in 15 years? May as well rent for $1 each time and it's still cheaper.

THATS the point, broke as I AM I can still spring for a disc every once in awhile.
AS anybody can tell you, the really decent ones have to be purchased, they can't be found
to be rented

It was in reference to a comment that woochifer made about convenience. Try actually reading the posts.

THAT MIGHT WORK


And what is wrong with watching the movies on my TV? Why would I want to watch a great movie on a 2" to 6" screen? Does 21st Century mean buying every little gadget the next guy has? Or just doing everything you do?

to each his own, but I have crossed a lot of time wasters off my wish list by first
watching them during spare time



And it appears you wasted your money since you can't tell the difference between a record, a cd, and something playing in your car off of a ipod.


THATS not what I said. I said that you could not tell the diff between a lossless
audio file and a CD, which you can't. Try reading the posts.


I doubt it because the OPPO is not my main playback unit. I get pretty decent sound out of well recorded CDs already.


GOOD FOR YOU




What did you get? A Bose Wave?
Don't be insulting, please. Its a Yamaha tsx-130(see below).
I lug it to work to listen to, everybody loves it. I shouldn't have bought it, but fell in love with the sound. My eight gig USB drive has about 130 CD's, and whatever CD's I drag along.
IS IT "audiophile" quality? Heck no! But it is quality. MODERN tech allows
music lovers to listen to their tunes wherever they are, with or without "cheap" earbuds
(I take my Sennheiser cans on holidays). TRUE love finds a way.:1:

[Woochifer]

If you look at major film review sites, the bluray version of this movie does not get high remarks. For example look at this review from DVD Verdict. He ask:

"Is it worth a double-dip if you already have the DVD? Based on video quality alone, I'm not seeing a drastic enough increase in fidelity to warrant a re-purchase."

http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/vacationbluray.php

"drastic enough increase" but still an increase nonetheless. If someone doesn't already own that movie, and they want the best possible picture quality, then why would they opt for the DVD? Just because it's not as good as it should or could be does not negate the fact that there's still an "increase in fidelity." Whether it's enough for someone is their judgment call to make.


I think the better question would be is whether poorly done bluray is worth %50 more in price than DVD copy?

But, again even a poorly done Blu-ray will still look better than the DVD (and I've yet to hear of an exception to this), so your question is based on a double standard.

[Woochifer]

Maybe your income level or current status of independently wealthy is different than mine or my retirement goals. I chince out on many things in order to be prepared for what will no doubt be an ugly time when my wife and I get old and need help and care.

Every FIFTY CENTS I save adds up to DOLLARS in the bank. But, it's not just about the money. Like I said, a chick flick in HD is still a chick flick. I don't give a rats ass about the grain of the film if there is no real action or sound effects to display. I'm not an HD snob.

But, again if I've already made the investment in HDTV, I want to maximize the enjoyment out of that. That's why I upgraded my satellite receiver to HD, and why I got a Blu-ray player. It's not about being a HD snob, it's just getting the most out of my TV.

A chick flick is still a chick flick, but watching a chick flick in SD makes the time even less tolerable!



Well here is where I am still old school. I don't have a portable player of any kind. I will not put dirty little ear buds in my ears to listen to inferior sounding audio. I do have and NOW listen to some of the music I have on hard drives but ONLY because of the ease of the streaming features of the OPPO. I listen to Pandora or LastFM at work very low on crappy little PC speakers.

But, I listen to 95% of my music from a CD on a real audio system.
Can you say that?

I am an Audio Snob!

Yep, and that's why I brought up the audio examples. Obviously, you're not going to avoid listening to music just because it's on an inferior system. But, the vast majority of your listening uses uncompressed CDs played through a component-based audio system. You buy CDs, rather than digital downloads. In most cases, the downloads are cheaper. A $0.50 differential might not be not worthy for your video viewing, but it seems that you're fine with paying more to get the CD

So, I think you can relate to someone on the video side who wants to do as much of their viewing as possible through HD sources.


First of all, I didn't waste my money. I saved for close to a year to buy the BEST player I could that would do everything the OPPO does and also play music CDs fairly well. The unit is for video in one system and audio in a second.

Yep, the Oppo is about as good a performance value as there is. It's a Swiss Army knife that pretty much does it all. And it can output native DSD and PCM streams from SACD and DVD-A at full resolution via HDMI, if you eventually buy a compatible AV receiver.


With the OPPO, I have everything one could want in a player so as I continue to upgrade when money permits, I will have a decent HT setup.

That's the beauty of home theater, you don't have to buy everything all at once. Swap components out and enjoy the improvements.


You wouldn't believe how many people have purchased the 93 just to stream Netfix. Apparently more than will use it for DVD and Blu if you look at the AVS official 93 thread.

Actually, I doubt that a lot the AVS crowd would buy an Oppo just for Netflix and not use the DVD or Blu-ray capability at all. I can believe that a lot of them would spend more time viewing Netflix streams than discs. But, except for a few bitter HD-DVD fanboys, I don't see too many people on that site, especially Oppo owners, that don't play Blu-rays at all.

[Woochifer]

....I haven't watched a Blu-Ray movie since receiving my PS3 from my wife as a Christmas present. We have Netflicks but only via streaming, and you can't get Blu-Ray that way yet (can you?). Once my HT room is finished (give me 4 to 6 weeks), I'll certainly want to get me some Blu-Ray. I'll probably change my Netflicks from streaming to delivery + streaming and pay the extra money.

Wow, not even out of curiosity? That's will power! :cool:

With Netflix, you can opt for the one-disc plan, and Blu-ray is one of the options. My wife doesn't really care because most of her Netflix rentals are TV series that aren't yet available on the streaming service. I will say that the picture quality on the Netflix streaming is surprisingly good, but it's definitely a step down from broadcast HD and Blu-ray. And on occasion, it can look downright awful.

[Smokey]

If someone doesn't already own that movie, and they want the best possible picture quality, then why would they opt for the DVD?

May be because DVD cost half ($6.99 vs $13.49) :D

Not withstanding newer title releases, most poeple have owned or seen the movie on DVD. And the main reason they buy bluray is to get that "wow" factor from improved picture and sound. If the wow factor is not there like the movie Vacation, I would consider that a bad buy.

[Hyfi]

But, again if I've already made the investment in HDTV, I want to maximize the enjoyment out of that. That's why I upgraded my satellite receiver to HD, and why I got a Blu-ray player. It's not about being a HD snob, it's just getting the most out of my TV.

I wanted a flat screen tv, it happens to be HD. I do not have to watch everything in HD to get through the day.





Yep, and that's why I brought up the audio examples. Obviously, you're not going to avoid listening to music just because it's on an inferior system. But, the vast majority of your listening uses uncompressed CDs played through a component-based audio system. You buy CDs, rather than digital downloads. In most cases, the downloads are cheaper. A $0.50 differential might not be not worthy for your video viewing, but it seems that you're fine with paying more to get the CD

I actually have only purchased about 5 CDs over the last 3 years so it does not apply to me.




Actually, I doubt that a lot the AVS crowd would buy an Oppo just for Netflix and not use the DVD or Blu-ray capability at all. I can believe that a lot of them would spend more time viewing Netflix streams than discs. But, except for a few bitter HD-DVD fanboys, I don't see too many people on that site, especially Oppo owners, that don't play Blu-rays at all.

I have read thru all 9000+ posts and plenty are about streaming and netflix.

[Hyfi]

and is considered to be one of the best movies ever, if not the best.
You need to listen to what a movie says, not just sit there and count the explosions



Great, so now your telling me I need to buy a 60 year old B&W film that has no visual or sound effects, in Blu, so I can listen to the dialog.

I guess if I had you logic, I would be broke 3 times in 17 years too.

Nice radio by the way. I have never seen or heard one but it is pretty. I still have an old Proton clock radio dual alarm in the Bedroom that sounds decent for what it was 18 years ago.

[Woochifer]

May be because DVD cost half ($6.99 vs $13.49) :D

But, again you're using the double standard. Note that I was talking about picture quality. If that's somebody's priority, there's no reason to opt for the DVD. You're focusing primarily on the price.


Not withstanding newer title releases, most poeple have owned or seen the movie on DVD. And the main reason they buy bluray is to get that "wow" factor from improved picture and sound. If the wow factor is not there like the movie Vacation, I would consider that a bad buy.

Not true at all. If I'm a fan of the movie, I'm simply going after maximum viewing enjoyment, and the picture quality's a big part of that. That's why I watch movies on the big screen, and that's why I primarily buy Blu-ray now. Once you buy a HDTV and start watching most of your programming in HD, it's a jarring experience going back to SD because you're now used to the higher HD resolution.

[Woochifer]

I wanted a flat screen tv, it happens to be HD. I do not have to watch everything in HD to get through the day.

Which is all well and good, but I also assume that you're not going to give up your audio rigs and start listening to everything through an iPod dock. You asked the original question about why people watch Blu-ray, and the audio analogy provides the answer for someone like you who prioritizes music.


I have read thru all 9000+ posts and plenty are about streaming and netflix.

But, again how many of them are talking about buying the Oppo only for the Netflix streaming capability, and not using the DVD and Blu-ray playback at all? You were saying that most of the AVS posters fell into that group. And I find that hard to believe given that AVS is a hardcore video enthusiast audience, and there are many less expensive devices out there for Netflix streaming.

[Hyfi]

But, again how many of them are talking about buying the Oppo only for the Netflix streaming capability, and not using the DVD and Blu-ray playback at all? You were saying that most of the AVS posters fell into that group. And I find that hard to believe given that AVS is a hardcore video enthusiast audience, and there are many less expensive devices out there for Netflix streaming.

Ok so Only was not the right word. Read thru the last 400 pages, it's all about netfix and different streaming problems and comparisons to netflix quality on PS3 vs the OPPO.

I am assuming you have not really read the whole Official OPPO 93 thread but maybe you glanced over several hundred posts because they didn't apply to Blu Ray only.

[pixelthis]

May be because DVD cost half ($6.99 vs $13.49) :D

Not withstanding newer title releases, most poeple have owned or seen the movie on DVD. And the main reason they buy bluray is to get that "wow" factor from improved picture and sound. If the wow factor is not there like the movie Vacation, I would consider that a bad buy.

I HAVE a stack that I PAID 6.00 for each, one (FAST AND FURIOUS) cost 10.
HATE to burst your bubble, but "VACATION is hardly a classic, nobody is going to
pay for what a complete redo will cost. This is true of a lot of films, and so BLU
just becomes a marketing gimmick.
BUT even just a transfer usually looks decent, the only time I would be P.O'ed with
this treatment is to have a real classic done this way.
TOTAL RECALL is the only BLU disappointment so far, quite a record, although I
lower the bar a bit for "cheapies".:1:

[harley .guy07]

I watch both on my Oppo and since the video upsampling in the BDP 83 is very good for converting DVD to 1080p I will sometimes buy a movie used on DVD instead of blue ray because it is so much cheaper and the movie is either older or would not really benefit having it in blue ray like some of the action films or something with a awesome sound track or great video. I have watched some of my older DVD's on my Oppo and they look quite good when being upsampled to my Samsung LED tv. But movies like Avatar and the like really do benefit both audio and video wise by having the blue ray copy if you have the equipment that can really bring out what the format has to offer.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I watch both on my Oppo and since the video upsampling in the BDP 83 is very good for converting DVD to 1080p I will sometimes buy a movie used on DVD instead of blue ray because it is so much cheaper and the movie is either older or would not really benefit having it in blue ray like some of the action films or something with a awesome sound track or great video. I have watched some of my older DVD's on my Oppo and they look quite good when being upsampled to my Samsung LED tv. But movies like Avatar and the like really do benefit both audio and video wise by having the blue ray copy if you have the equipment that can really bring out what the format has to offer.

You would really be surprised at the quality of some of the older films you assume would not benefit from a Bluray release. Let's go over a few.

Blade Runner
Baraka
The Searchers
Lawrence of Arabia
Blazing Saddles
Guns of Navarone
Casablanca
The Adventures of Robin Hood
The Godfather
Apocalypse Now
Taxi Driver
The Wizard of Oz
2001: A Space Odyssey
Full Metal Jacket
How the West Was Won

I have about twenty more oldies that look beautiful on Bluray, so older titles can look more beautiful and film like on Bluray than on DVD.

[harley .guy07]

Oh i know I have seen some of them I just go with how important the film is to me and how much money I want to spend on it. If it a classic or something that I have always loved then Blue ray all the way, If it is something for my friends kids to watch when they come over DVD.

[Woochifer]

I watch both on my Oppo and since the video upsampling in the BDP 83 is very good for converting DVD to 1080p I will sometimes buy a movie used on DVD instead of blue ray because it is so much cheaper and the movie is either older or would not really benefit having it in blue ray like some of the action films or something with a awesome sound track or great video. I have watched some of my older DVD's on my Oppo and they look quite good when being upsampled to my Samsung LED tv. But movies like Avatar and the like really do benefit both audio and video wise by having the blue ray copy if you have the equipment that can really bring out what the format has to offer.

Quite the contrary, I think a lot of older movies actually benefit more from Blu-ray. You're making a flawed assumption that newer movies benefit the most from Blu-ray's higher resolution. In fact, with many newer movies going to digital cinema for production, and digital intermediaries for post-production work, the 35mm and 70mm film used on older movies is actually higher in resolution than the digital sources being used with newer movies. (Only with 4k resolution does digital cinematography and post-production begin to approach the resolution of 35mm film, and most digital cinema right now remains at 2k)

The challenge has always been transferring all of that resolution from the film source into the digital domain, without introducing all kinds of artifacts into the image. With digital cinema and digital intermediaries, it's a direct transfer with no physical mechanism required. It looks clean because it is clean.

However, with 35mm film there's more texture and nuance in the image capture, and the cinematographer will purposely choose the film stock with a particular look in mind. A DVD cannot display all that detail without the image macroblocking and breaking up, so the producers will apply noise reduction to blur out the detail, and then resharpen the image with edge enhancement. If done right, the DVD can look pretty decent, but it also obscured much of the detail and cinematography in the process.

Blu-ray can display all of that detail and textured look from film without the image breaking up. If the purpose of home theater is bringing you closer to the theatrical experience, then Blu-ray does that far better than the DVD format does. Compare a well done Blu-ray with the DVD version, it's like looking outside after cleaning a dirty window.

[harley .guy07]

I was not saying anything about resolution on older movies because I know that film had better resolution. I was referring to my preference and how much money I am prepared to spend on any certain movie. If there is an older movie on blue ray that have wanted for a while then I get it but if it is a movie that I would not mind having but I don't see fit to spend the extra for the blue ray copy I will buy the cheaper DVD copy since I will have it mostly for occasional entertainment at best. The resolution thing is the same thing going on with still SLR camera's too in that a lot of camera buffs still prefer the 35 mm image over digital jut like the older movie camera's used 35 or 70 mm camera's. I see what you are saying and I agree and I do own several older movies that are classics that look better in Blue Ray and thus I bought them in that format because it is the best available right now.

[pixelthis]

I was not saying anything about resolution on older movies because I know that film had better resolution. I was referring to my preference and how much money I am prepared to spend on any certain movie. If there is an older movie on blue ray that have wanted for a while then I get it but if it is a movie that I would not mind having but I don't see fit to spend the extra for the blue ray copy I will buy the cheaper DVD copy since I will have it mostly for occasional entertainment at best. The resolution thing is the same thing going on with still SLR camera's too in that a lot of camera buffs still prefer the 35 mm image over digital jut like the older movie camera's used 35 or 70 mm camera's. I see what you are saying and I agree and I do own several older movies that are classics that look better in Blue Ray and thus I bought them in that format because it is the best available right now.

THE " resolution" thing is just a part of the advantage of owning BLU.
All aspects of the picture are improved, and they say the disc itself is more sturdy.
IF COLLECTING, you need to get the media in the best format you can, IMHO.
And "film" does not always offer "better" resolution, but BLU transfers tend to be
worked over, or remastered before being transfered, and there are other things like
the improved menu system, etc.
BLU is basically "state of the art", and is really not that much more expensive.
I have replaced several DVD's in my collection, and haven't regretted it once(well, maybe once).:1:

[harley .guy07]

It is finally starting to come down in price to match some DVD prices I have seen over the past few months so my mind will probably change on this now but There is a shop in my town that sells used DVD's for like 3 bucks and blue rays for around 12 so it really depends on how much I like the film.

[pixelthis]

It is finally starting to come down in price to match some DVD prices I have seen over the past few months so my mind will probably change on this now but There is a shop in my town that sells used DVD's for like 3 bucks and blue rays for around 12 so it really depends on how much I like the film.

Thats usually the case.
I usually wait for a format to become somewhat established, for prices to come
down a bit. Didn't work with SACD and DVDA, but is working with BLU.
also my taste is somewhat eccentric, so my stuff is cheaper, mostly.
ANOTHER thing that helped the collector is the unfortunate collapse of
the video store industry.
WHEN movie gallery died I picked up a ton of very slightly used BLU discs,
some for as little as four bucks. One of my best discs, Blade Runner, I got that
way.
When of modest means you have to keep your eyes out.:1: