Any Significant Change in Audio Sound over Past 10-12 Years or So

[E-Stat]

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]

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.

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-e...702#tabsection

or this one

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...52921665945151

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...specifications

or perhaps this one

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU...ayers/BDP-09FD

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU....BDP-23FD.Kuro

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU...5FD.Kuro?tab=B

and this one

http://www.samsung.com/us/consumer/t...etail&tab=spec


See how wrong a foo can be

Receivers

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU...9TX.Kuro?tab=B

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU...-25.Kuro?tab=B

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...specifications

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/PU...-27.Kuro?tab=B

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/...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]

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]

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_]

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]

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]

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

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Agreed. I look forward to the time when one can choose from half a dozen different Blu Ray models around $30.

Inexpensive DVD players

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.

[Woochifer]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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 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]

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 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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

*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]

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]

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]

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/catal...&os=tech-specs

Here is another

http://www.google.com/products/catal...&os=tech-specs

http://www.overstock.com/Electronics...5/product.html

http://www.overstock.com/Electronics...1/product.html


Now here are the upscaling models


http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers...rsr_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]

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]

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).