Anybody Got a Blu Ray Disc player?

[Ed]

We're considering buying a Blu Ray player to replace a deceased DVD player, but I haven't talked to anybody who has one yet to get their opinions.

One of my concerns is that everything I've read recommends using an HDMI cable for the best signal. Problem is, my HDTV only has one HDMI input, and it's already occupied by the cable from the HiDef satellite receiver. Would I get nearly as good an image using composite cables rather than HDMI? :confused:

Also, any input re: brands would be appreciated. I'm leaning toward (but not 'married to') Sony simply because I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Sonyphile. :D

[Mufasa]

You probably will not be able to see any measurable difference between using HDMI versus Component cables- but there are some potential differences to be aware of.

There's no technical limitation with component cables from carrying a 1080p signal- however, content producers like the Hollywood studios can enable DRM (digital rights management) copyright measures that could possibly cripple the video output over a component connection and not allow it to be presented at full-HD resolution.

Currently I don't believe there is any blu-ray content on sale today that currently has this "feature" enabled but the studios have the option to enable this and is probably the reason behind the big push to recommend using HDMI.

Depending on your TV and blu-ray player there can be a difference between the two- on my home setup, I have a Sony PlayStation 3 as a blu-ray player in my setup. When using a digital connection (HDMI or DVI)- I can get a true 1 to 1 pixel mapping (no overscan in the image) while if I use a component connection there's about a 3% overscan of the image. For most users it's something they wouldn't notice.

There are times when using a component connection actually can be better than HDMI- but that all depends on your particular setup and the scaling hardware being used.

I also have my particular home theater setup calibrated depending on the input to use a different colorspace for HD versus non-HD sources (ITU Rec 709 versus ITU 601) and even digital (PC) versus video signal black and white signal levels (16, 235 for video, 0, 255 for PC signals).

You also now have the extended gamut color space (xvYCC) which should not be confused with Deep Color. The reasoning behind xvYCC is that in the days of analog broadcasting, the values 1-15 and 235-254 were reserved for undershoot or overshoot (that's where you'll hear people refer to whether a DVD player can pass blacker than black or whiter than white signals, because in analog systems 16 is used to represent pure black, and 235 was used to represent pure white).

With a digital signal there is no under or overshoot, so those values 1-15 and 235-254 can potentially be used to represent colors and result in a more vivid picture because you can get deeper reds, greens and blues (about 1.8 times the color information of sRGB) but only if your player and TV have support for xvYCC and in that case you have to use HDMI (and actually needs to support HDMI 1.3 specifications).

How is it even possible to squeeze more color into an image? Everything is essentially mapped to the analog colorspace and standard sRGB values, but for instance to get a deeper red, you would assign a negative coefficient (a value from 1-15) to green to compensate in the end image. If your player or TV doesn't support this- it just ignores the value for backwards compatibility.

It still is fairly rare to find a TV that supports the extended RGB gamut or HDMI 1.3 but the difference is noticable (more than say TVs which advertise 120Hz refresh versus 60Hz).

As for blu-ray players, the Sony PS3 is an excellent blu-ray player, and is the most future proof since an upcoming firmware update means the player will be fully compliant with Blu-ray profile 2.0 (you'll see movies with a BD-Live sticker on them to indicate that they have the latest and greatest interactive features which require a player that conforms to the 2.0 spec). It also was at the time of launch one of the more affordable blu-ray players, has some very good standard DVD upconversion when measured with the Silicon Optix HQV benchmarks and just happens to play games too.

[Twinsowner]

Holy Cow!! Now that is an answer!!!!

[azcavalier]

One of my concerns is that everything I've read recommends using an HDMI cable for the best signal. Problem is, my HDTV only has one HDMI input, and it's already occupied by the cable from the HiDef satellite receiver. Would I get nearly as good an image using composite cables rather than HDMI? :confused:

Also, any input re: brands would be appreciated. I'm leaning toward (but not 'married to') Sony simply because I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Sonyphile. :D

I don't have one, but I've looked into it. Two suggestions:

1. Go with Panasonic. They have a great track record with DVD players. And in this case, www.cnet.com agrees with me. Check it out there.

2. To solve the one HDMI input problem, you have three choices. First, you can get a new A/V Receiver or HDMI switch (look this up on Amazon). These will have multiple HDMI inputs on it, with one HDMI output to the TV. Then you just tell the receiver (or switch) what you're doing at the time, whether it be a DVD, Satellite, etc. Second, you can get a new TV with multiple imputs. Third, you can just use another method to connect the player. This is definitely the cheapest.

[Ed]

You probably will not be able to see ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Silicon Optix HQV benchmarks and just happens to play games too.

:huh:

Uhmmmmmmmm....lemme see if I got this right. You're saying perhaps I should call the Geek Squad? :confused:

[Actually, I did understand about 80% of that; it's that somewhat-foggy 20% that will probably either kill me or burn the house down. :eek: ]

I've been looking for a good excuse to buy a PS3; maybe this is it!

Thanx for the input, folks.

And I just noticed that I said "composite" instead of "component" in the original post. D'Oh!!! Senior moment! :old:

[Jasper]

OK, can you translate all that to English?

Seriously though since there are obviously a couple of you here who really understand all this I would like to ask you a few questions. Please understand I am absolutely technology challenged so my questions are VERY basic!

1. Can a Blu-Ray disc play on a DVD player?

2. Can a DVD play on a Blu-ray player?

3. Are non-digital televisions compatible with Blu-Ray players? (I realize I may not get optimal picture quality but frankly I think the quality of DVD is good enough and don't see why we need yet another new format!)

4. Are there any realistic dates out there as to when DVD will disappear and Blu-Ray take over?

5. Just what the heck does Blu-Ray stand for?

Thanks for your help!

[RedSoxFan]

We have two Blu Ray players.
Sony BDP-S500
Pioneer Elite (for the media room)

Both are great players.
Can't help the HDMI part -- don't quite undertand all that stuff!!

[Mufasa]

1. Can a Blu-Ray disc play on a DVD player?

No, you cannot play Blu-Ray discs on a standard DVD player (see question 5 for details)

2. Can a DVD play on a Blu-ray player?

It's not a requirement in the industry, but most Blu-ray players are backwards compatible with standard DVDs (to add to some confusion, there is another competing format, HD-DVD which is all but practically dead now and that is not compatible with Blu-ray)

There are some Blu-ray players (like the Sony BDP-S1 that CANNOT play back standard audio CDs). Most of the other blu-ray players to my knowledge can.

3. Are non-digital televisions compatible with Blu-Ray players?

Yes, most Blu-ray players can be hooked up to non digital (or non HDTV) sets using component or in some cases S-video (or as a last resort a composite aka the yellow video cable) but you don't get the benefits of an HD picture.

4. Are there any realistic dates out there as to when DVD will disappear and Blu-Ray take over?

It probably will be a while before DVDs completely disappear. I think VHS movie sales started to completely disappear from stores around 2002 if I remember correctly.

It all depends on how quickly Blu-ray is adopted by consumers since now that Blu-ray has won this round of the HD disc format war, the studios are anxious to move forward with Blu-ray because of the DRM measures and additional storage space/interactive content features.

A major questionmark in the industry though is what role downloadable or on-demand HD content will have.

5. Just what the heck does Blu-Ray stand for?

Blu-ray refers to the blue-violet laser (405 nm) they use as opposed to the red laser used in DVDs (650 nm). Because the blue-violet laser has a shorter wavelength than a red laser, you can store more data closely together on a blu-ray disc which translates into more capacity on a disc.

[Mufasa]

:huh:

Uhmmmmmmmm....lemme see if I got this right. You're saying perhaps I should call the Geek Squad? :confused:

[Actually, I did understand about 80% of that; it's that somewhat-foggy 20% that will probably either kill me or burn the house down. :eek: ]

I've been looking for a good excuse to buy a PS3; maybe this is it!

Thanx for the input, folks.


You can do much better than calling on the geek squad.

Really, you probably won't notice a difference between HDMI or a Component connection.

HDMI can potentially give you a better picture- but it all depends on your equipment and particular setup and whether that really would be that important to you.

There are even debates over just how many colors the human eye can really differentiate. Having additional color information (a wider colorspace gamut) means that you might notice smoother transitions among colors.

A good example is if you're watching a DVD like Finding Nemo and in some of the ocean shots- with a limited colorspace you might notice a sort of banding effect- where you can see the layers of the ocean water and on some TV sets it might even look a bit splotchy. If you had additional color information those gradients would all look smooth and blended together (that is, if the content is authored to take advantage of using the expanded colorspace available).

One of the baffling things about Blu-ray discs or any HD content these days is that it is still up to the studios to properly author the discs to take advantage of the format. There are some discs where they have just been mastered poorly (the first release of The Fifth Element on Blu-ray is a good example- that disc had some nice picture quality on some releases on DVD that were widely used as a reference disc but the first blu-ray version was such a bad transfer).

Up to this point a lot of the Disney Blu-ray titles have been excellent- the Pirates films in particular look really great for live action transfers, and the Pixar transfers like Ratatouille are pretty much flawless.

Ed- do you have any DVI inputs on your TV?

Also, you should think about how long a cable run you'll need to go from your player to your TV. If you had a really long cable run (over 50 feet), it sometimes is better to go with a component connection in that situation.

[Jasper]

1. Can a Blu-Ray disc play on a DVD player?

No, you cannot play Blu-Ray discs on a standard DVD player (see question 5 for details)

2. Can a DVD play on a Blu-ray player?

It's not a requirement in the industry, but most Blu-ray players are backwards compatible with standard DVDs (to add to some confusion, there is another competing format, HD-DVD which is all but practically dead now and that is not compatible with Blu-ray)

There are some Blu-ray players (like the Sony BDP-S1 that CANNOT play back standard audio CDs). Most of the other blu-ray players to my knowledge can.

3. Are non-digital televisions compatible with Blu-Ray players?

Yes, most Blu-ray players can be hooked up to non digital (or non HDTV) sets using component or in some cases S-video (or as a last resort a composite aka the yellow video cable) but you don't get the benefits of an HD picture.

4. Are there any realistic dates out there as to when DVD will disappear and Blu-Ray take over?

It probably will be a while before DVDs completely disappear. I think VHS movie sales started to completely disappear from stores around 2002 if I remember correctly.

It all depends on how quickly Blu-ray is adopted by consumers since now that Blu-ray has won this round of the HD disc format war, the studios are anxious to move forward with Blu-ray because of the DRM measures and additional storage space/interactive content features.

A major questionmark in the industry though is what role downloadable or on-demand HD content will have.

5. Just what the heck does Blu-Ray stand for?

Blu-ray refers to the blue-violet laser (405 nm) they use as opposed to the red laser used in DVDs (650 nm). Because the blue-violet laser has a shorter wavelength than a red laser, you can store more data closely together on a blu-ray disc which translates into more capacity on a disc.

Thank you very much!! I have asked these same 5 questions of several people who are supposedly experts in the field (including some at electronics stores)and never have received a straight answer until now!

Thanks!!

[Ed]

Ed- do you have any DVI inputs on your TV?

Also, you should think about how long a cable run you'll need to go from your player to your TV. If you had a really long cable run (over 50 feet), it sometimes is better to go with a component connection in that situation.

It's got loads of other inputs (USB, S-video, RGB, component, etc.), but only 1 HDMI and no DVI inputs. :(

Distance is no problem at all; the player will reside about 3 feet from the TV. (50 feet away in this house would put the other end in the neighbor's garage.)

We're not super-serious videophiles; we just like a nice clear, crisp picture and good audio. Our old eyes aren't sharp enough to even notice the relatively minor banding effect. And from what I've been reading since posting this and from your replies, it sounds like we'll probably be perfectly happy using a component setup. :thumbsup:

Thanks for all the info! It's been a big help.

Now, if I could just get that 8-track player in my truck to work right.......