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

[pixelthis]

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

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

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

rw

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

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

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

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

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

[E-Stat]

If cost was such an issue as you state, the BR format would not have had the fastest adoption rate of any CE device made in the last 40 years.

Despite that, one can find continue to find DVD players for a fraction of the cost of BR units. People still buy them. DVD is not dead until there are not units available.

I think rather than just arguing for the sake of it...

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

While it can be found on DVD players, it is not the connection associated with DVD.

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

The DVD format is based on the NTSC format, and the NTSC format can display any aspect ratio that the film industry uses.

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

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Despite that, one can find continue to find DVD players for a fraction of the cost of BR units. People still buy them. DVD is not dead until there are not units available.

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

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

Attempted to correct? It was corrected.

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

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

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

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

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

rw

Thank the mother, some progress

[E-Stat]

DVD players with HDMI were only brought to the market in the last three years...Look, everyone knows you can buy one.

He does comprehend. Praise the Lord!

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

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

He does comprehend. Praise the Lord!

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

rw

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

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

[E-Stat]

This response is BS,

You can choose to accept the fact that the studios continue to release on DVD or not.

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

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

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

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You can choose to accept the fact that the studios continue to release on DVD or not.

They will for a short time as I stated previously.

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

I thought we already acknowledged this.

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

It is not quite dead, but certainly dying.

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

rw

Or your idea of facts

[E-Stat]

They will..
We already acknowledged this...
It is not quite dead...

I'm glad you are now able to accept these easy to demonstrate facts. No BS involved. You seem to be pained by these truths.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I'm glad you are now able to accept these easy to demonstrate facts. No BS involved. You seem to be pained by these truths.

rw

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

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

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

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

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

[E-Stat]

What you call truths...

Remain statements of fact. There is nothing more to discuss.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Remain statements of fact. There is nothing more to discuss.

rw

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

[E-Stat]

Remain statements of fact to you is more appropriate.

Let's see if we can figure out the cause of your confusion.

1. Is it possible to buy a DVD player today with HDMI connectivity? Here are ten examples. Any questions?

2. Is if possible to buy current (and even yet to be released) content in the DVD format?. One month from now, you will be able to buy Avatar on DVD. Any questions?

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

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Let's see if we can figure out the cause of your confusion.

1. Is it possible to buy a DVD player today with HDMI connectivity? Here are ten examples. Any questions?

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

2. Is if possible to buy current (and even yet to be released) content in the DVD format?. One month from now, you will be able to buy Avatar on DVD. Any questions?

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

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

rw

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

[E-Stat]

Yes I do.

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

My conclusions are bizarre to folks that love to skim the surface of an issue.

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

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

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


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

rw

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

[pixelthis]

Let's see if we can figure out the cause of your confusion.

1. Is it possible to buy a DVD player today with HDMI connectivity? Here are ten examples. Any questions?

2. Is if possible to buy current (and even yet to be released) content in the DVD format?. One month from now, you will be able to buy Avatar on DVD. Any questions?

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

rw

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