-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
My first player was 400$, a Sony that was slow as CHRISTMAS and out of date in six months. My second was a SHARP, died in less than a year. My fault, shoulda known better. I love my new 68$ player, looks and sounds great, dies, and I trashcan it and get one up to date. I HAVE SPENT ENOUGH ON BLU PLAYERS.
Pix, I'm just hoping that your luck with blu ray players has finally improved for the better. Reminds me of that commercial catchphrase from decades ago, "You could have had a V8!"
Granted, most have upgraded their BD players due to technological improvements, but that's some seriously bad voodoo that you've had to replace as many as you have because of flawed units. I'm not one to shop another guy's wallet, but I would definitely consider an Oppo if I had the same experiences as you, no matter if it cost me a couple hundred more than another manufacturer's player. Dependability and reliability would trump all other concerns.
After all, in the long-term, you're only shelling out more money to constantly replace price-conscious BR players than you would have spent if you had purchased, say, an Oppo BDP-80. :mad2:
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadAssJazz
Pix, I'm just hoping that your luck with blu ray players has finally improved for the better. Reminds me of that commercial catchphrase from decades ago, "You could have had a V8!"
Granted, most have upgraded their BD players due to technological improvements, but that's some seriously bad voodoo that you've had to replace as many as you have because of flawed units. I'm not one to shop another guy's wallet, but I would definitely consider an Oppo if I had the same experiences as you, no matter if it cost me a couple hundred more than another manufacturer's player. Dependability and reliability would trump all other concerns.
After all, in the long-term, you're only shelling out more money to constantly replace price-conscious BR players than you would have spent if you had purchased, say, an Oppo BDP-80. :mad2:
Only one (the SHARP) failed, and I managed to get it back with a memory wipe.
MY FIRST, a SONY, only had LPCM , couldn't tell what was coming out of it.
Gave it to my best friend, he had Cancer, but wanted one. Couldn't afford one.
I then bought the SHARP, paid too much, but all they had, only place I could buy one.
I LOVE my SHARP. But it got to where it would not play any of the newer discs, couldn't find a firmware update(thanks Sharp), so I bought the MAGNAVOX, and was pleasantly surprized, very nice. But cheap.
BEFORE throwing it in the dumpster, I THOUGHT I would try , in desperation, a reset
on the SHARP, and it worked , and without wiping the one firmware upgrade I could find for it. NOW it works great, the MAGNAVOX went back, happy ending.
THE fUNAI named MAGNAVOX was a very capable player, especially for 68 bucks,
but not even close to the SHARP aquos(a 232 price diff, after all.)
THE Aquos was a serious piece of kit, detachable power cord, full chassis, and most importantly, better DVD up-conversion. GLAD I could get it working, even tho I will
probably need a reset every once in awhile, and SHARP'S service stinks on ice. BIG SURPRIZE.
But they do make a great piece of kit. AND I have spent enough on BLU players,
although the first superfecta I hit at the track, I'M getting an oppo.:1:
-
All of this talk about blu ray players made me want to buy another one. And so I did. It's a sickness, I tell you! :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
yes, and according to you they can buy a dumbed down BLU player to match, locking them into inferiour tech for YEARS
How is a Blu-ray player that came out only a few months ago "dumbed down"? If the Blu-ray players that come out "YEARS" from now are that much better, then what's to stop someone from buying a new player at that time? In the meantime, they'll get years of HD viewing from their Blu-ray player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
SO NOW you are reduced to quoting your parents. My parents are constantly watching SD when a HD channel is available, and wouldn't know component from HDMI, as your parents probably don't.
You really need to buy some new reading glasses. Where am I "quoting" my parents. I know about my parents' TV because I used both component and HDMI-based video sources on that TV. No substitute for hands on experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
And component is never going to be as good as HDMI, too many technical challenges.
And if that's the case, then why did HDTV reviews need to cite cases in which the component video connectors produced a better picture than the HDMI connection?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
THE IMPROVENMENT is going to be slight, and for the thousandth time, if you set is so old that it has no HDMI inputs you have no business buying a BLU player,
YOU NEED A NEW MONITOR.. You are saying to buy a BLU player with compromised tech to accommodate an obsolete TV when you should be concentrating on a
decent TV.
And yet those HDTVs are still perfectly capable of rendering a reference spec HD resolution picture. Just because you buy a TV every few months doesn't mean that everybody else should follow you example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
even more reason to get a new set.
I CAN'T BELIEVE IT, this is the first time I HAVE EVER SEEN ANYBODY argue that
component is better than HDMI!!! Next thing you will be arguing about the reality of unicorns.
And where do I say that "component is better than HDMI"? All that I've pointed out is that there are cases where the component video connector will produce a better picture than HDMI. You're the only one arguing the unreality that HDMI is always better, no matter what anyone else's real world experience says.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
UPGRADE YOUR MONITOR FIRST. Only thing that makes sense
The only thing that makes sense is buying a Blu-ray player, if that's all you're shopping for. If someone's happy with their existing HDTV, then why would they want to stay with 480i sources?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
My five year old set looks fine for what it is, mainly 720p
And yet, you're arguing that a "720p" TV is only entitled to play 480i sources, because it's too old for HD sources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
And just makes more sense to upgrade your monitor either with or before your
BLU upgrade.
And again, if somebody's happy with their existing HDTV, it makes no sense to buy a new TV if all they need to add is a Blu-ray player. Might as well tell somebody that they need to buy a new house, when all they're looking for is a new car.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
Pix, you aren't being rational here. I'd rather buy a BDP for $100.00 give or take opposed to dropping $600.00 give or take for a new HDTV when I have a HDTV with just not the latest technology. Component inputs on a TV are valuable even if a Progressive Scan DVD player not to mention a BDP. People were impressed with High Definition at 720p or 1080i, which by the way is all you can get from broadcast networks, the big step is not 1080i to 1080p, that may not even be that important at all with a smaller screen.
And we're not yet even talking about the rest of home theater system. If someone also uses an older receiver that doesn't have HDMI switching, then that's yet another component that needs to get upgraded if HDMI is the primary priority. For someone who only wants to add a Blu-ray player, it is indeed irrational to expect them to upgrade the HDTV and AV receiver at the same time, if they already have those components in place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Worf101
Do you HAVE to trash everything you don't own or use? The OPPO players are great pieces of gear, even the basic ones are marvelous. True I don't use SACD or some of the other audio formats BUT when that machine UPDATES itself its and amazing thing to watch. Also if I do run across a Blu-Ray it won't play you go on-line to their forums and you'll find probably find a solution. I don't own a $68.00 Funai, but I'm not going to disparrage gear I don't own or use, that's just stupidity.
Oh man, why did you have to bring common sense into the discussion? I think I'm gonna pack my ball and go home! :cool:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadAssJazz
All of this talk about blu ray players made me want to buy another one. And so I did. It's a sickness, I tell you! :)
"Come on come on, get down with the sickness"...(DAWN of the dead).:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
How is a Blu-ray player that came out only a few months ago "dumbed down"? If the Blu-ray players that come out "YEARS" from now are that much better, then what's to stop someone from buying a new player at that time? In the meantime, they'll get years of HD viewing from their Blu-ray player.
I WATCHED a disc from 2009 yesterday thats 1080i, this tech is changing fast
Quote:
You really need to buy some new reading glasses. Where am I "quoting" my parents. I know about my parents' TV because I used both component and HDMI-based video sources on that TV. No substitute for hands on experience.
What I SAID,
Quote:
And if that's the case, then why did HDTV reviews need to cite cases in which the component video connectors produced a better picture than the HDMI connection?
WHY DO YOU KEEP bringing up stuff from years ago?
Quote:
And yet those HDTVs are still perfectly capable of rendering a reference spec HD resolution picture. Just because you buy a TV every few months doesn't mean that everybody else should follow you example.
EVERY FEW YEARS.
And the one I had five years ago is dull compared to my new one. AND NO SET
more than a few years old can produce a "reference" picture, the tech is changing too fast.
Quote:
And where do I say that "component is better than HDMI"? All that I've pointed out is that there are cases where the component video connector will produce a better picture than HDMI. You're the only one arguing the unreality that HDMI is always better, no matter what anyone else's real world experience says.
Real world "experience from several years ago. BUT YOU KEEP on believing the opposite
of what everybody knows, mainly that component is obsolete.
BEEN that way for years, requires two D/A conversions, that alone hobbles it.
Quote:
The only thing that makes sense is buying a Blu-ray player, if that's all you're shopping for. If someone's happy with their existing HDTV, then why would they want to stay with 480i sources?
If your old DVD player breaks then sure, get a new BLU player, nothing else makes sense.
But it also doesn't make sense to upgrade a perfectly good DVD player when you have a 1080i set, a 720p maybe.
BUT A SET with component only? THAT PUPPY is gonna be old.
AND YOU WILL need a BLU with a component out. My 2009 model has that,
but is showing its age. Already had to do a memory reset once already.
When I bought my MAGNAVOX, not one set I LOOKED AT HAD COMPONENT!!
Not one. Buying one with component is a compromise, and that is all I AM SAYING.
Quote:
And yet, you're arguing that a "720p" TV is only entitled to play 480i sources, because it's too old for HD sources.
i am just saying that compromising your BLU purchase to accomodate an obsolete
set is dumb. A 720P with HDMI should be quite nice, BTY
Quote:
And again, if somebody's happy with their existing HDTV, it makes no sense to buy a new TV if all they need to add is a Blu-ray player. Might as well tell somebody that they need to buy a new house, when all they're looking for is a new car.
What are they teaching in school these days, a car has nothing to do with a house.
HOWEVER a new car won't be as much "fun" if you only drive it on dirt roads.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
"Come on come on, get down with the sickness"...(DAWN of the dead).:1:
Good one. :thumbsup:
The Oppo BDP-93 has landed! Can't wait to get home and fire it up. Tron, Harry Potter, Unstoppable, Black Swan, The Fighter...not sure what to watch first.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadAssJazz
Good one. :thumbsup:
The Oppo BDP-93 has landed! Can't wait to get home and fire it up. Tron, Harry Potter, Unstoppable, Black Swan, The Fighter...not sure what to watch first.
DO YOURSELF a favor and try some SACD and(if you can find any) DVDA discs.
And of course some BLU music and music vid discs.
I played my DVDA of the DOOBIES The Captain and me yesterday. Listening
to South city midnight lady was fantastic. WHENEVER I think of the way
the industry pooch scr***d high res formats...GAWD :1:
-
[QUOTE=pixelthis]I WATCHED a disc from 2009 yesterday thats 1080i, this tech is changing fast
Nothing about the tech is changing. ANY Blu-ray disc done using 50/60 Hz HD video rather than 24fps film (or 1080p24 digital cinema cameras) is going to have a native output of 1080i60.
Blu-ray's native 1080p output format is 1080p24. Any output to 1080p60 requires deinterlacing or 2:3 pulldown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
What I SAID,
Nope, you were claiming that I was "quoting" my parents. Thanks for agreeing with me that there are exceptions to your claim that HDMI is always superior.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WHY DO YOU KEEP bringing up stuff from years ago?
Because many of those TVs are still in use, and their very existence debunks your presumption that HDMI always guarantees better performance. My advise is relevant those people who still have a need, and prefer to meet that need.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
EVERY FEW YEARS.
And the one I had five years ago is dull compared to my new one. AND NO SET
more than a few years old can produce a "reference" picture, the tech is changing too fast.
Of course an older TV can produce a reference picture, why do you think production houses still use CRTs as mastering references? Technology doesn't change the HD benchmark standards that are currently used (and were largely adopted back in 1992).
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
Real world "experience from several years ago. BUT YOU KEEP on believing the opposite
of what everybody knows, mainly that component is obsolete.
BEEN that way for years, requires two D/A conversions, that alone hobbles it.
But, if the scaler/deinterlacer used in the digital path is inferior to the one used on the analog path (common practice on early HDMI TVs), then the component video connection will result in a better picture. Again, my advice is aimed towards people who'd rather enjoy what they have, than obsess over what they don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
But it also doesn't make sense to upgrade a perfectly good DVD player when you have a 1080i set, a 720p maybe.
By that logic, then you're saying that anybody with a "720p" HDTV shouldn't bother with HD cable/satellite service either. And along those same lines, nobody should bother with watching HD on Fox or ABC (both 720p) either, since there's no difference between 480i and 720p in your view.
Hey, you were the one claiming that you couldn't tell the difference between DVD and Blu-ray on your old "720p" HDTV. I would assume that you don't bother with HD broadcasts either, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
i am just saying that compromising your BLU purchase to accomodate an obsolete
set is dumb. A 720P with HDMI should be quite nice, BTY
Yet, my parents' LG looks better when connected via component video than HDMI. That's something that I confirmed with a calibration disc, and reviews of other LG TVs from that era said the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
What are they teaching in school these days, a car has nothing to do with a house.
HOWEVER a new car won't be as much "fun" if you only drive it on dirt roads.:1:
Yeah, and a Blu-ray player has nothing to do with buying a new TV, if someone wants the same HD picture they currently get via broadcast and cable/satellite. Like I keep saying, if someone's happy with their current HDTV, why should they buy a new TV when all they need is a Blu-ray player?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
DO YOURSELF a favor and try some SACD and(if you can find any) DVDA discs.
No worries, I used to own an Oppo DV981 (which has SACD capabilities) and I still have my John Coltrane, Miles Davis, Stan Getz, Concord Jazz, Stevie Wonder, Police and a few other SACDs in a box somewhere. The music will be heard eventually. But first on deck are the movies.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
"Come on come on, get down with the sickness"...(DAWN of the dead).:1:
How Disturbing
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
How Disturbing
Out of context, maybe.
WITH SERIOUS actors like Sarah Poley and Ving RAMES (among others)
DAWN OF THE DEAD was one of the best zombie movies, and that was some of the music
played. Thought it fit.
BTW Mr PEA, you're such a DLP fan, they have been offering a special value on
HSN shopping network, two DLP sets, a "73 and an 82"(stands extra).
THE 2600 (or so) 82" has me salivating at the mouth. MIGHT want to check it out
(along with DAWN OF THE DEAD). While you're at it, try ZOMBIELAND.:1:
-
Pix, you should check your movie to see who the band is that does that song.
-
[QUOTE=Woochifer]
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
I WATCHED a disc from 2009 yesterday thats 1080i, this tech is changing fast
Quote:
Blu-ray's native 1080p output format is 1080p24. Any output to 1080p60 requires deinterlacing or 2:3 pulldown.
And what does this have to do with the price of eggs? I HAVE TWO 1080 interlaced
BLU discs, 1080i 60p. And my set handles 1080p24 quite nicely, as did my last one.
No pulldown for either type disc. HOWEVER, a component connection
quite often requires a downconversion to an inferiour format, 1080i or less.
MY friends older SAMSUNG would not pass 1080p over component, neither would
my old SONY. and none have said that component is "superiour"... all
have said that its inferiour. AND OF COURSE (yet again) any set old enough to
have no HDMI is not going to be 1080p.
Quote:
Nope, you were claiming that I was "quoting" my parents. Thanks for agreeing with me that there are exceptions to your claim that HDMI is always superior.
WITH MUCH OLDER SETS!!!
GET out of the last decade why don't you? AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT the fact that
"some" antique sets have "better" component than HDMI...
THAT IS NOT THE POINT!!!
The point is that those older sets DON'T HAVE HDMI AT ALL!!!
The only way you can hook up a BLU player is WITH component, so you
need an OLDER blu p[layer, since newer ones don't have component, which will
render it obsolete out of the box. AND MAYBE you should have your parents post,
maybe they make more sense
Quote:
Because many of those TVs are still in use, and their very existence debunks your presumption that HDMI always guarantees better performance. My advise is relevant those people who still have a need, and prefer to meet that need.
THOSE sets are in use because joe six has different priorities that your average HT nut.
THE reason these sets are still in use are primary monetary, not technical.
THE WAF (wife acceptance factor) allowed some guys too get one of those sleek new flat panels, but trade up to a 1080p? HARDLY. And your ignorance of the common man
(of which I AM ONE) is showing. WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN THE LAST FEW YEARS?
During the major recession that has been ongoing? HAVING a set that even runs has been
problematic for a lot of people starting their second year of unemployment, much less
upgrade for reasons not as complelling as groceries
Quote:
Of course an older TV can produce a reference picture, why do you think production houses still use CRTs as mastering references? Technology doesn't change the HD benchmark standards that are currently used (and were largely adopted back in 1992).
SO WHY DON'T we abandon 1080p since its so much easier to produce 1080i sets?
PRODUCTION houses use CRT because they are cheap, and as these wear out they will be replaced by panels. but anybody who thinks 1080i is even close to 1080p
needs to have their head examined, as well as their eyes.
Quote:
But, if the scaler/deinterlacer used in the digital path is inferior to the one used on the analog path (common practice on early HDMI TVs), then the component video connection will result in a better picture. Again, my advice is aimed towards people who'd rather enjoy what they have, than obsess over what they don't.
THIS is why your "advice" is nonsense. PEOPLE with a set old enough to not have HDMI
are not going to benefit from BLU very much. They buy a BLU player, hook it up to
their obsolete set, and they will wonder what the fuss is about. And you are right, people with such an older set should not obsess about what they don't have(a blu player)
if their antique set can't get the proper use out of it, better to wait and upgrade their set,
glad you finally agree with me on something
Quote:
By that logic, then you're saying that anybody with a "720p" HDTV shouldn't bother with HD cable/satellite service either. And along those same lines, nobody should bother with watching HD on Fox or ABC (both 720p) either, since there's no difference between 480i and 720p in your view.
YOU OBVIOUSLY slept through any logic class you might have had.
BLU is the best way to watch HD on the planet. WATCHING broadcasts has nothing to do
with watching BLU, and you need to stop trying to compare the two. AND STOP MISQUOTING ME, there is a huge difference between 480 interlaced and 720p,
but not so much between 480 progressive and 720p. I said the latter, not the former
Quote:
Hey, you were the one claiming that you couldn't tell the difference between DVD and Blu-ray on your old "720p" HDTV. I would assume that you don't bother with HD broadcasts either, right?
Apples and oranges. My first 1080i sets looked tons better than NTSC, and 720p looked better than them. And my first 1080p blew all of them away.
WATCHING BLU on a lesser set didn't mean much, didn't look much better, really,
than a decent DVD .
Quote:
Yet, my parents' LG looks better when connected via component video than HDMI. That's something that I confirmed with a calibration disc, and reviews of other LG TVs from that era said the same thing.
Riiiiight... from that era. NOT LOOKIN FOR SETS from that era, which makes what you're saying totally irrelevant
Yeah, and a Blu-ray player has nothing to do with buying a new TV, if someone wants the same HD picture they currently get via broadcast and cable/satellite. Like I keep saying, if someone's happy with their current HDTV, why should they buy a new TV when all they need is a Blu-ray player?
BECAUSE if their TV doesn't have HDMI then its way past time to upgrade.
WHY buy a BLU player except as a replacement for a busted DVD player if your set
can't get the full use out of it? Why put the cart before the horse? IF your set is so
old that it doesn't have HDMI then that is what you need to concentrate on.
And while in the store buying that new set, shell out a few bucks on a new BLU player,
they will be even cheaper then(if thats possible):1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
And what does this have to do with the price of eggs?
You're the one claiming that 1080i Blu-ray titles from 2009 have something to do with technology changing fast, and I'm pointing out that Blu-ray isn't capable of native 1080p60.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
I HAVE TWO 1080 interlacedBLU discs, 1080i 60p.
No such thing as "1080i 60p." It's either interlaced or progressive. Get your terminology straight before you persist in these trolling adventures of yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
And my set handles 1080p24 quite nicely, as did my last one.
No pulldown for either type disc.
Unless either TV was 120 Hz, they have to use 2:3 pulldown to display a 1080p24 output.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WITH MUCH OLDER SETS!!!
GET out of the last decade why don't you? AND QUIT TALKING ABOUT the fact that
"some" antique sets have "better" component than HDMI...
Thank you again for admitting that you were wrong on that point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
THAT IS NOT THE POINT!!!
That's exactly the point that I've been making all along, that there are exceptions to your inane rantings about HDMI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
The point is that those older sets DON'T HAVE HDMI AT ALL!!!
And my point was about specific TVs that have both component and HDMI connections.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
The only way you can hook up a BLU player is WITH component, so you
need an OLDER blu p[layer, since newer ones don't have component, which will
render it obsolete out of the box.
And those "OLDER blu p[layer [sp]" include all of the current Oppo players, the PS3, and the majority of Blu-ray players still found in retail stores. Are you saying that those players are obsolete?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
AND MAYBE you should have your parents post,
maybe they make more sense
Yes, they make a lot more sense than you do, thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
THOSE sets are in use because joe six has different priorities that your average HT nut.
THE reason these sets are still in use are primary monetary, not technical.
So, then why would somebody who has a tight budget need to buy a new HDTV when all they want is a Blu-ray player?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
THE WAF (wife acceptance factor) allowed some guys too get one of those sleek new flat panels, but trade up to a 1080p? HARDLY. And your ignorance of the common man
(of which I AM ONE) is showing.
Based on your rantings, your views and purchasing habits are rather uncommon, thankfully.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
During the major recession that has been ongoing? HAVING a set that even runs has been
problematic for a lot of people starting their second year of unemployment, much less
upgrade for reasons not as complelling as groceries
So, your solution for the "common man" is to have them spend more than they've budgeted on their home entertainment. I hear a Copland fanfare playing on the world's smallest violin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
YOU OBVIOUSLY slept through any logic class you might have had.
And you obviously don't know what logic is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
BLU is the best way to watch HD on the planet. WATCHING broadcasts has nothing to do
with watching BLU, and you need to stop trying to compare the two. AND STOP MISQUOTING ME, there is a huge difference between 480interlaced and 720p,
but not so much between 480progressive and 720p. I said the latter, not the former
So, if there's this huge difference between 480i and 720p, then why are you recommending that people that own 720p TVs stick with DVD rather than upgrade to Blu-ray? The mental gymnastics you play to justify all of these contradictions in your rantings is rather fascinating.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WATCHING BLU on a lesser set didn't mean much, didn't look much better, really,
than a decent DVD .
And yet you're claiming that there's this "huge difference" between 480i and 720p. So, which is it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
Riiiiight...from that era. NOT LOOKIN FOR SETS from that era, which makes what you're saying totally irrelevant
Nobody cares if you're "NOT LOOKIN FOR SETS from that era." My original post was directed towards somebody who might own an older set with inferior HDMI connections, or none at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WHY buy a BLU player except as a replacement for a busted DVD player if your set
can't get the full use out of it? Why put the cart before the horse? IF your set is so
old that it doesn't have HDMI then that is what you need to concentrate on.
But, once again, if someone has a HDTV that they're happy with, then it makes no sense to buy a new TV when all they want to add is a Blu-ray player. Any Blu-ray player that they buy now will work perfectly fine when they are ready to upgrade the TV.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Peabody
Pix, you should check your movie to see who the band is that does that song.
I knew but forgot. SORRY, will take a look next time I view this little gem, which will
probably be BLU.:1:
-
1 Attachment(s)
[QUOTE=Woochifer]You're the one claiming that 1080i Blu-ray titles from 2009 have something to do with technology changing fast, and I'm pointing out that Blu-ray isn't capable of native 1080p60.
DOESNT matter , it is capable of 1080p24, and with a 1080p set, 1080i is deinterlaced
A LOT BETTER , MUCH LIKE BROADCASTS IN 1080I.
Quote:
No such thing as "1080i 60p." It's either interlaced or progressive. Get your terminology straight before you persist in these trolling adventures of yours.
WHAT DO YOU THINK THE "i" STANDS FOR?
And I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND why you insist on stating the obvious, of course
there are only two types of signal, interlaced or progressive. Again, what the frack
does that have to do with the price of eggs?
Quote:
Unless either TV was 120 Hz, they have to use 2:3 pulldown to display a 1080p24 output.
WHICH tv? My set displays a 1080p 24fps signal perfectly, no "pulldown"
Quote:
Thank you again for admitting that you were wrong on that point.
And thank you for admitting that you are talking about tv sets at least a decade old,
which has nothing to do with anything
Quote:
That's exactly the point that I've been making all along, that there are exceptions to your inane rantings about HDMI.
NOT IN THIS DECADE.
EVERY set with HDMI on the market is better with that connection.
Tv sets from a decade ago are of no matter
Quote:
And my point was about specific TVs that have both component and HDMI connections.
NO, you said that if your set had NO HDMI that you needed to buy a BLU player with component, which is moronic in the extreme, because it ties you into an older BLU
player, if you can find one, and good luck on that
If your tv doesnt have HDMI then its not current, in fact, its quite old.
WASTE OF TIME to watch a BLU disc on such an old set, doesnt matter if component is better than HDMI(its not), doesnt matter if you buy a compromised player with component,
the pic on such an old set is not going to be worth a BLU player.
SIMPLE AS THAT
Quote:
And those "OLDER blu p[layer [sp]" include all of the current Oppo players, the PS3, and the majority of Blu-ray players still found in retail stores. Are you saying that those players are obsolete?
now that you mention it, ever notice that EVERY one of those player have instructions
that state that component is the inferiour connection?
These players are just offering an inferiour connection for obsolete TV sets, no reason to
use that inferiour connection
Quote:
Yes, they make a lot more sense than you do, thank you.
AND YOU MAKE NO SENSE AT ALL
Quote:
So, then why would somebody who has a tight budget need to buy a new HDTV when all they want is a Blu-ray player?
Why would anybody want to waste their time with a BLU player when their tv is obsolete?
AND WASTE THEIR MONEY ON obsolete gear.
Quote:
Based on your rantings, your views and purchasing habits are rather uncommon, thankfully.
And based on your postings you are totally clueless.
So, your solution for the "common man" is to have them spend more than they've budgeted on their home entertainment. I hear a Copland fanfare playing on the world's smallest violin.
Quote:
And you obviously don't know what logic is.
If you know you certainly don't practice it.
Quote:
So, if there's this huge difference between 480i and 720p, then why are you recommending that people that own 720p TVs stick with DVD rather than upgrade to Blu-ray? The mental gymnastics you play to justify all of these contradictions in your rantings is rather fascinating.
BECAUSE there is not that big a difference, really. AND when I had a 720p SET
I didn't waste my time on BLU, which was quite expensive back then, and not worth the trouble for the expense involved. And sorry if you don't understand, but I AM TALKING ABOUT 480 PROGRESSIVE, which you get when you deinterlace 480i.
Not that much diff between 480p and 720p. PLEASE stop misrepresenting what I SAY,
or do you just have comprehension problems?
Quote:
And yet you're claiming that there's this "huge difference" between 480i and 720p. So, which is it?
NOT "HUGE " but it is there. But this is another of your worthless arguments, since
480i is extinct for all practical purposes. Unless you have an obsolete old CRT that
can show interlaced programing, and in that case, why bother?
Quote:
Nobody cares if you're "NOT LOOKIN FOR SETS from that era." My original post was directed towards somebody who might own an older set with inferior HDMI connections, or none at all.
Your original post offered the lame advice that you need to waste money on a BLU player
that has component, and is therefore obsolete, unless they want to spend several hundred on a PS3 or OPPO, in order to accommodate an obsolete TV, which is probably in need of replacement IN OTHER WORDS, use an inferiour connection to see a compromised
picture, which is not going to show the full image that a BLU disc is capable of
GEE, is your system a load of compromised junk?
Quote:
But, once again, if someone has a HDTV that they're happy with, then it makes no sense to buy a new TV when all they want to add is a Blu-ray player. Any Blu-ray player that they buy now will work perfectly fine when they are ready to upgrade the TV.
AND WHEN THEY FINALLY GET a decent TV that is actually capable of showing a decent BLUE picture , they are going to wonder why you advised them to waste
their time.
AND THAT IS THE LAST thing I HAVE TO SAY ON IT.
Never argue with a birdbrain, it wastes your time and annoys the bird.:1:
-
1 Attachment(s)
Every since I HAVE COME ON THIS SITE I have heard that you need to buy compromised gear in order to accommodate obsolete gear you already have.
If you have a stack of old 8tracks, sure, you need an 8track player.
BUT IF YOUR MONITOR has no HDMI, then by its very nature its obsolete.
ADVISING SOMEONE to buy a BLU player for such an old set is like advising them
to buy hubcaps FOR THEIR HORSE , when what they need is an automobile.
IF your DVD player dies, then you might as well get a BLU player, BLU plays DVD better than a DVD player itself.
But don't waste your time even thinking about a BLU player if your set doesn't have HDMI.
Sure, its a free country, waste your time and money if you want.
IF your TV is that old, you need a new TV, one that has a decent picture, at least 720p,
1080p IS PREFERABLE.
And I am not being a "snob", that is a simple fact of life.
Its not just for BLU, 1080i broadcasts look spectacular in 1080p, deinterlacing producing
real improvement.
So get a BLU player, sure, but while you're at it, get a 1080p TV to go with it.
I SAW A 42" 1080P LED for less than five large today, if you can't afford that
thats not a crime, but why waste your money on BLU players and BLU discs
when your set is so old?
MAKES no sense. IT NEVER DOES to put the cart before the horse.:1:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
DOESNT matter , it is capable of 1080p24, and with a 1080p set, 1080i is deinterlaced
A LOT BETTER , MUCH LIKE BROADCASTS IN 1080I.
And guess what, this deinterlacing happens regardless of the connection standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WHAT DO YOU THINK THE "i" STANDS FOR?
And I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND why you insist on stating the obvious, of course
there are only two types of signal, interlaced or progressive. Again, what the frack
does that have to do with the price of eggs?
Because from your responses, it's obvious that you don't understand the obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WHICH tv? My set displays a 1080p 24fps signal perfectly, no "pulldown"
Case in point (see above).
If you don't have a 120/240 Hz that does a 5:5 frame repeat to display a native 1080p24 signal, it's doing 2:3 pulldown. Just because you don't know anything about this, doesn't mean it's not happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
And thank you for admitting that you are talking about tv sets at least a decade old,
which has nothing to do with anything
Pixelthis says 2006 = "a decade old" :out:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
NO, you said that if your set had NO HDMI that you needed to buy a BLU player with component, which is moronic in the extreme, because it ties you into an older BLU
And if that "older BLU" includes the CURRENT Oppo players and the PS3, then how is this moronic to buy a CURRENT player that includes both component and HDMI outputs? Just in case this is news to you, the inclusion of component video outputs does not exclude HDMI outputs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
if you can find one, and good luck on that
Let's see ... any Oppo player, any PS3, ... yeah, good luck finding one of those. :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
WASTE OF TIME to watch a BLU disc on such an old set, doesnt matter if component is better than HDMI(its not), doesnt matter if you buy a compromised player with component,
the pic on such an old set is not going to be worth a BLU player.
SIMPLE AS THAT
So, tell me again how the Oppo players are compromised, given that they are the highest performing units on the market?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
now that you mention it, ever notice that EVERY one of those player have instructions
that state that component is the inferiour connection?
But, again that doesn't apply to every TV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
AND YOU MAKE NO SENSE AT ALL
Not my fault that logic's not your strongsuit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixethis
Why would anybody want to waste their time with a BLU player when their tv is obsolete?
Let's see, a functional HDTV that can display full HD images and can accommodate a Blu-ray player is obsolete? Mmmm hmmm
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
AND WASTE THEIR MONEY ON obsolete gear.
Again, how's the Oppo or PS3 obsolete?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
BECAUSE there is not that big a difference, really. AND when I had a 720p SET
I didn't waste my time on BLU, which was quite expensive back then, and not worth the trouble for the expense involved.
In other words, you never actually tried a Blu-ray player on your "720p" TV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
And sorry if you don't understand, but I AM TALKING ABOUT 480 PROGRESSIVE, which you get when you deinterlace 480i.
And again, DVD is native 480i format. Progressive scan does nothing to change that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
Not that much diff between 480p and 720p. PLEASE stop misrepresenting what I SAY,
or do you just have comprehension problems?
I'm not mispresenting anything. You're the one claiming that a 480i format has no visible advantage over a native 1080p format when viewing on a 720p TV.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
NOT "HUGE " but it is there. But this is another of your worthless arguments, since
480i is extinct for all practical purposes.
480i is extinct? I didn't know DVDs and SD video feeds no longer exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
Your original post offered the lame advice that you need to waste money on a BLU player
that has component, and is therefore obsolete, unless they want to spend several hundred on a PS3 or OPPO, in order to accommodate an obsolete TV, which is probably in need of replacement IN OTHER WORDS, use an inferiour connection to see a compromised
picture, which is not going to show the full image that a BLU disc is capable of
GEE, is your system a load of compromised junk?
How's it a waste of money to buy a CURRENT Blu-ray player that also happens to meet an immediate need?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
AND WHEN THEY FINALLY GET a decent TV that is actually capable of showing a decent BLUE picture , they are going to wonder why you advised them to waste
their time.
How's it a waste of time when the Blu-ray player that they buy today will work perfectly with the TV that they buy later? In the meantime, they'll enjoy their Blu-ray player and still enjoy it when they actually ready to upgrade to a new TV. I don't know why incrementally adding according to need is such a difficult concept with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pixelthis
AND THAT IS THE LAST thing I HAVE TO SAY ON IT.
If only we were so lucky, as evidenced by the continued incoherency on display in your latest rant.
-
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Because from your responses, it's obvious that you don't understand the obvious.
And from your response, you don't "comprehend" the obvious
Quote:
If you don't have a 120/240 Hz that does a 5:5 frame repeat to display a native 1080p24 signal, it's doing 2:3 pulldown. Just because you don't know anything about this, doesn't mean it's not happening.
WRONG (as usual). In order to avoid 2:3 pulldown, BLU has a rate of 72hz.
EACH frame is shown three times(72 divided by three= 24). This gives a frame rate
of 24fps without pulldown.
WHEN THIS happens my set displays 1080p24.
Pixelthis says 2006 = "a decade old" .
Still irrelevant, like most of what you say.
Quote:
And if that "older BLU" includes the CURRENT Oppo players and the PS3, then how is this moronic to buy a CURRENT player that includes both component and HDMI outputs? Just in case this is news to you, the inclusion of component video outputs does not exclude HDMI outputs.
BECAUSE a "modern" player does not have component.
AND YOU WANT TO BUY A PLAYSTATION, and pay for a hackers crack addiction,
go right ahead
Quote:
Let's see ... any Oppo player, any PS3, ... yeah, good luck finding one of those. :rolleyes:
YEAH, for less than three hundred bucks
Quote:
So, tell me again how the Oppo players are compromised, given that they are the highest performing units on the market?
THEY COST THREE HUNDRED BUCKS. Yeah, this would be a great first player.
WHY BUY A three hundred player when your TV is as old as dino bones?
Quote:
But, again that doesn't apply to every TV.
JUST every one ever made.
Quote:
Not my fault that logic's not your strongsuit.
And not mine that average comprehension skills are above your skill set
Quote:
Let's see, a functional HDTV that can display full HD images and can accommodate a Blu-ray player is obsolete? Mmmm hmmm
IF ITS NOT 1080P. This is where BLU shines, and if your set won't display it, then
you're wasting your time with a BLU player
Quote:
In other words, you never actually tried a Blu-ray player on your "720p" TV.
ACTUALLY I DID...looked like really good cable. IF YOUR SET IS 720P, WHY PAY 300+ FOR A BLU player so you can watch the equivalent of basic cable?
Quote:
And again, DVD is native 480i format. Progressive scan does nothing to change that.
It doubles the resolution. THIS is the one time (deinterlacing) that you can get a res increase on a signal. DEINTERLACING does not change the fact that it starts out as an interlaced signal, but does improve it immensely
I'm not mispresenting anything. You're the one claiming that a 480i format has no visible advantage over a native 1080p format when viewing on a 720p TV.
Because it doesn't. 1080i is down converted and 480i is upconverted.
BOTH look rather decent. And similar.
Quote:
480i is extinct? I didn't know DVDs and SD video feeds no longer exist.
Not on my cable system. Without an adapter you can't get a signal.
AND dvd does still exist, and if you really wanted you could watch it on an old NTSC
set, but why bother? And any set you watch it on that is HD is going to upconvert it
weather you do or not. SO SURE its natively 480i, but it would cost you to actually watch
it in 480i. IF YOU ENJOY wasting your time, go right ahead
Quote:
How's it a waste of money to buy a CURRENT Blu-ray player that also happens to meet an immediate need?
If your set is not 1080p, why waste your time? You need to be saving your coin to
buy a decent monitor.
Quote:
How's it a waste of time when the Blu-ray player that they buy today will work perfectly with the TV that they buy later? In the meantime, they'll enjoy their Blu-ray player and still enjoy it when they actually ready to upgrade to a new TV. I don't know why incrementally adding according to need is such a difficult concept with you.
Yes, they will enjoy a picture that looks like a really good DVD, they will have to pay
300+ TO GET A SONY OR AN oppo to see this incredibly average picture on
their obsolete set with component, when if they bought a new set, they could see a much
better pic with a 100 buck(or less) blu player. AND SPENDING 300 plus on a
BLU player when your monitor is obsolete is not unwise, ITS STUPID.
Quote:
If only we were so lucky, as evidenced by the continued incoherency on display in your latest rant.
anybody follows your lame advice, they will be decidedly unlucky:1:
-
I have owned a Oppo BDP 83 for around a year now and I still love it. It works very well with Blue Ray with little lag time loading up, has a very good video processing circuit that up scales my DVD's to 1080p and they look great and to boot the unit makes a awesome transport for playing cd's,sacd,and DVD audio disks to my DAC. So in my opinion this unit is very good and probably one of the best things going at its price point for doing all of this with the quality that it does. I would only hope the 93 is as good and probably better at this as well. And also the Build quality on these units is some of the best I have seen for under the 1000 dollar price class as well.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by harley .guy07
I have owned a Oppo BDP 83 for around a year now and I still love it. It works very well with Blue Ray with little lag time loading up, has a very good video processing circuit that up scales my DVD's to 1080p and they look great and to boot the unit makes a awesome transport for playing cd's,sacd,and DVD audio disks to my DAC. So in my opinion this unit is very good and probably one of the best things going at its price point for doing all of this with the quality that it does. I would only hope the 93 is as good and probably better at this as well. And also the Build quality on these units is some of the best I have seen for under the 1000 dollar price class as well.
WELL, its common knowledge that without expensive equipment you don't get
a resolution increase when upscaling VIDEO, however I have noticed with all
of the BLU players I have used that the dvd video is quite good.
Might just be the total lack of any kind of flaw in the playback, but it usually looks
mighty good.:1:
-
i went for the Oppo BDP-83 for various reasons. SACD, DVD-A, plus the emerging trend of music on blu-ray. sure you can get a universal player for less than the Oppo (i paid $330 to my door for a used unit from Audiogon), but it was the least expensive player i found that did all of the above and also did PAL, which is important for me because i have several concert vids in the format.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by harley .guy07
I have owned a Oppo BDP 83 for around a year now and I still love it. It works very well with Blue Ray with little lag time loading up, has a very good video processing circuit that up scales my DVD's to 1080p and they look great and to boot the unit makes a awesome transport for playing cd's,sacd,and DVD audio disks to my DAC. So in my opinion this unit is very good and probably one of the best things going at its price point for doing all of this with the quality that it does. I would only hope the 93 is as good and probably better at this as well. And also the Build quality on these units is some of the best I have seen for under the 1000 dollar price class as well.
I've only owned the BDP-93 for a few short weeks now, but have absolutely no complaints with BR or audio (SACD) performance. In fact, I'm kicking myself for having waited so long to pull the trigger on a purchase. Time to find a new home for the Pioneer Elite Blu Ray player that it replaced.
It's also time to consider picking up either the Marantz AV8003 & MM7055 or Integra 80.2 & DTA 70.1. Getting back to separates is also long overdue, especially now that I have the space for it.
|