# Should I sell my two Sony BDP-CX7000ES changers?



## NotBananas

I have two Sony BDP-CX7000ES changers for a while and they are absolutely the cat's meow in performance and convenience. They each hold 400 BR movies and I can watch any by scanning through the menu system. I think the time had come for me to seriously thinking of selling them.

The simple reason is that I have successfully setup my computer with 10TB of disk storage (four 4TB and two 2TB hard disks) in a DLNA network system. I copied about 50 BR movies to my computer and when I compare the video/audio with the original BR disc, I don't see any difference! I can't tell which one it playing on the Sony and which is streaming from my computer. The copy maintained the aspect ratio, the sound system (5.1, 9.2, etc.).

I calculated that a 10TB storage capacity can hold about 2,000 BR movies, if each movie uses about 4.5Gb storage uncompressed. That's a lot of movies, and I can always keep adding 4TB hard disc for more storage. The limitation is that each hard disk must be assigned a drive letter, so 26 drives is the max I can add without using partitioning software which combines physical drives to one logical drive. I'm a long way from that (I have 6 drives now).

As someone said in another thread, the beginning of the end of physical media is here. 

Can you think of any reason why I shouldn't sell them yet?


----------



## wgmontgomery

How much can you get for them?


----------



## NotBananas

eBay sellers get an average of between $1,500-$2,000 in used but good condition. Sony quit making them a few years ago, so whatever is out there is the only supply left.


----------



## wgmontgomery

NotBananas said:


> eBay sellers get an average of between $1,500-$2,000 in used but good condition. Sony quit making them a few years ago, so whatever is out there is the only supply left.


Wow! Are you able to get lossless audio via streaming, too? If you can get the same quality video and audio via streaming and don't mind the time it will take to load everything, selling the Sonys may be worth a look. I would suggest getting a bit more input from others first, and -if you DO sell them- you may want to check-out stereolist.com.


----------



## NotBananas

As a matter fact, loading and streaming the video from my PC is instant through the DLNA server software on the PC. With the BR changer I have to wait a minute or so for it to find and load the disc.

Another advantage is that I don't have to watch all the nonsense about the FBI warning, coming attractions, and other junk they have on the BR disc and just watch the movie directly because I select just that file. I still have all the other files on the PC and if I want to see them they are just another video I can select. This is true for movies with alternate endings, trailers, outtakes, etc. I always save them as well, but now I can watch the movie immediately without seeing the other stuff.

If anyone looked at the contents of a BR disc on your computer, it's all just a bunch of data files exactly like you have on the PC but instead of a file type of WMV, AVI, MKV, etc. it's called m2ts type for BR and VOB type for SD-DVD. I use a purchased separate software to convert the BR or DVD to any of the other common lossless files types on the PC. I use MKV type which seems to be the better of the other file types to convert to.

You have to be careful because some conversion software convert all audio to just plain stereo. The one I use allows me to select to keep original format or to convert to stereo.


----------



## hjones4841

NotBananas said:


> if each movie uses about 4.5Gb storage uncompressed.


I think your estimated file size is low. A BR full clone to ISO will be from 20-45 GB per disc. Also remember that a hard drive in a NAS is good for 2-3 years (at least that is what I am getting - just going thru some replacements now). That shiny disc will last far longer.


----------



## Jungle Jack

NotBananas said:


> I have two Sony BDP-CX7000ES changers for a while and they are absolutely the cat's meow in performance and convenience. They each hold 400 BR movies and I can watch any by scanning through the menu system. I think the time had come for me to seriously thinking of selling them.
> 
> The simple reason is that I have successfully setup my computer with 10TB of disk storage (four 4TB and two 2TB hard disks) in a DLNA network system. I copied about 50 BR movies to my computer and when I compare the video/audio with the original BR disc, I don't see any difference! I can't tell which one it playing on the Sony and which is streaming from my computer. The copy maintained the aspect ratio, the sound system (5.1, 9.2, etc.).
> 
> I calculated that a 10TB storage capacity can hold about 2,000 BR movies, if each movie uses about 4.5Gb storage uncompressed. That's a lot of movies, and I can always keep adding 4TB hard disc for more storage. The limitation is that each hard disk must be assigned a drive letter, so 26 drives is the max I can add without using partitioning software which combines physical drives to one logical drive. I'm a long way from that (I have 6 drives now).
> 
> As someone said in another thread, the beginning of the end of physical media is here.
> 
> Can you think of any reason why I shouldn't sell them yet?


Hello,
I have said the end of physical media is near, but I find it to be a frightful thought. I honestly hate the idea of not having physical backups of media. Already, that Kindle Book, any purchase from Apple or Amazon's Music Store is only being licensed for you to use. 

I understand it is different when one is backing up their own physical media, but the implications are frightening to me. Given your situation, it does make sense to sell your BDP's. Most do not have a TB of Hard Drive Space let alone 10.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## wgmontgomery

Jungle Jack said:


> Hello,
> I have said the end of physical media is near, *but I find it to be a frightful thought**. I honestly hate the idea of not having physical backups of media. Already, that Kindle Book, any purchase from Apple or Amazon's Music Store is only being licensed for you to use.
> 
> Cheers,
> JJ


A big *+1*! 

*emphasis _added_.


----------



## hjones4841

wgmontgomery said:


> A big *+1*!
> 
> *emphasis _added_.


Yep. I have had 4 hard drives fail so far this year. Two in my NAS's, one in a PC and one in a DVR. Everything is on UPS and well ventillated, but 2-3 years or so of 24/7 is about it. MUCH less for one particular brand... but I won't go there. But, I don't spend the money for enterprise drives. Maybe I should.


----------



## NotBananas

*hjones4841:* Yes, you are correct in the tradeoff between the shiny disk and the life expectancy of any hard disk. Having been in the computer industry for over (dare I say) 40 years, I found that to keep my computers (and hard disks) from dying too quickly, and including all my HT equipment, I never shut down any of my equipment! It runs 24/7 except for the displays.

I have an "old" (in computer years, like dog years) PC among my 4 PC's that's over 6 years old (Pentium 4 with 2gb RAM BIOS can't support more, a 500gb hard disk) that hasn't been shut off in 6 years except when I moved 2x and is still running. Having a BSEE, I learned that most of the electronics fail or weakened due to thermal shock when you first power it on.

Some people say that the bearings wear out on the drive if kept on forever, but I haven't found that to be true. The expansion and contraction of the hard disk platters and R/W heads during power on and off causes more damage in the long run than any spindle bearing wear. This is especially true on the TB capacity drives, since the bit density per sq.in. of vertical magnetization is huge compared to older technology drives with horizontal magnetization technology (similar to magnetic tape).

I do have RAID 1 on my system, being that a 4TB drives cost only about $230, so a little redundancy goes a long way (thus the acronym RAID=Redundand Array of Inexpensive Disks). The key work here is inexpensive drives.

Maybe the hard disk gods are smiling on me for the last 25 years.

*Jungle Jack:*Having 10TB drives is no big deal anymore. I purchased 4TB drives for $230 each which are available at several on-line stores (I remember when 100GB drives cost twice as much). Obviously it must be used with Windows 7 which can configure a large capacity drive as one logical drive. These are just the standard SATA drives, not enterprise drives.

*hjones4841:* I'm not cloning the BR to my hard disk. I'm using a BR Copy software which converts it to a PC format video file type MKV. I can convert to other formats also, like AVI or MP4, but I found MKV to be the highest resolution after conversion. As an example the BR movie "Star Trek Nemesis" when converted uses only 10GB of disk space. This movie is almost 2hr. so the file size is a little larger than the typical 1.5hr. long movie.


----------



## NBPk402

I just sold 3 Sony DVD changers and I am going with ripping BluRays to my HDD. I hope that I will have good luck with the drives holding out. When I get some more cash I am going to get some more 4t drives.


----------



## koyaan

I have 4 older Sony Megachangers, 2 for CDs 2 for DVDs, and find that I rarely use them. If you can get that kind of money for your changers, I'd sell and move on.


----------



## NotBananas

The two I have are BR changers, not the older DVD changers, thus the difference in price.
These also have the feature which automatically looks up the title and artwork using Gracenotes (which Sony had bought) and populates the actors, genre, etc. in the internal menu as soon as you insert the BR disk. If it can't find it, then you can enter all the info manually using the remote. Obviously it has to be connected to your home network.
Speaking of remotes: the two remotes can be switched as #1 and #2 along with the changers, so they don't interfere with each other.


----------



## 8086

NotBananas said:


> I have two Sony BDP-CX7000ES changers for a while and they are absolutely the cat's meow in performance and convenience. They each hold 400 BR movies and I can watch any by scanning through the menu system. I think the time had come for me to seriously thinking of selling them.
> 
> The simple reason is that I have successfully setup my computer with 10TB of disk storage (four 4TB and two 2TB hard disks) in a DLNA network system. I copied about 50 BR movies to my computer and when I compare the video/audio with the original BR disc, I don't see any difference! I can't tell which one it playing on the Sony and which is streaming from my computer. The copy maintained the aspect ratio, the sound system (5.1, 9.2, etc.).
> 
> I calculated that a 10TB storage capacity can hold about 2,000 BR movies, *if each movie uses about 4.5Gb storage uncompressed.* That's a lot of movies, and I can always keep adding 4TB hard disc for more storage. The limitation is that each hard disk must be assigned a drive letter, so 26 drives is the max I can add without using partitioning software which combines physical drives to one logical drive. I'm a long way from that (I have 6 drives now).
> 
> As someone said in another thread, the beginning of the end of physical media is here.
> 
> Can you think of any reason why I shouldn't sell them yet?


This thread may be old, but I must correct a bit of mis-information:

Blu-ray discs hold between 25GB single layer and 50GB dual layer (Gigabytes GB, not Gigabits Gb) of compressed video and audio. A 10 TB (terrabyte TB, not terrabit Tb) Drive will hold about 198 BD movies with some storage loss due to disc formatting. A typical DVD holds 4.5GB single layer and 8.5GB dual layer using compressed video. 

Personally, I would keep the two Sonys as a supplimental jukebox (music, BD & DVD) unit for less frequently watched movies, cause deleting and re-ripping to your maxed hard drive is a pain in the tail. Also hard drives fail and take with them, all of your data or movies.


----------



## NotBananas

I use software to rip the BR disks (single or dual layer) which converts it to any computer file format (mkv, avi, mwv) I want, and any resolution I want, ranging from 1920x1280 down to 720x640. If it were to just copy the BR to my hard disk as a one to one direct copy byte by byte, I would agree with the size requirements. The software I'm using converts it to any format I want (avi, mov, wmv, flv, etc.) I use the MKV format, which I found to be the highest resolution for the smallest size file. A typical converted BR disk uses anywhere from 1 to 6 gig of disk space.

Also, the free DLNA software I use is Serviio that streams the movies to my 80" Sharp in the home theater or the 60" Sharp in the master bedroom, upconverts the video for max resolution, regardless of original size on the hard disk. As an example, the movie "Lord Of The Rings, The Return of the King" is a 4hr 23min BR movie which I converted to mkv file with a size of 18.8Gb with a resolution is 1,280x532 (wide screen) format. Another one "Mission Impossible III" is only 4.5Gb and it's also 1,280x544 wide screen with full 5.1 sound.

Some of the older movies that have been re-issued in BR or standard DVD format is usually saved in a smaller file size, typically around 712Mb and they are still upconverted by Serviio to be the same video quality as the original.

So far I have 844 movies in my computer, of which about 40% are BR and the rest standard DVD resolution and using only about 0.750tb (750gb) of the 4tb disk space. I have another 4tb drive which I use as a mirror of the main drive for backup. These drives cost only about $220 on Amazon, so the cost is nothing compared with the price just a few years ago.

One advantage of the DLNA server is that it can be watched on any TV in my house that's connected through the WiFi or hardwired network cable to my media server, which is just simply my computer on my desk. Most all TV's now have a wireless network capability built in.

The Sony BR changer can only be watched in the home theater room.


----------



## 8086

NotBananas said:


> I use software to rip the BR disks (single or dual layer) which converts it to any computer file format (mkv, avi, mwv) I want, and any resolution I want, ranging from 1920x1280 down to 720x640. If it were to just copy the BR to my hard disk as a one to one direct copy byte by byte, I would agree with the size requirements. The software I'm using converts it to any format I want (avi, mov, wmv, flv, etc.) I use the MKV format, which I found to be the highest resolution for the smallest size file. A typical converted BR disk uses anywhere from 1 to 6 gig of disk space.
> 
> Also, the free DLNA software I use is Serviio that streams the movies to my 80" Sharp in the home theater or the 60" Sharp in the master bedroom, upconverts the video for max resolution, regardless of original size on the hard disk. As an example, the movie "Lord Of The Rings, The Return of the King" is a 4hr 23min BR movie which I converted to mkv file with a size of 18.8Gb with a resolution is 1,280x532 (wide screen) format. Another one "Mission Impossible III" is only 4.5Gb and it's also 1,280x544 wide screen with full 5.1 sound.
> 
> Some of the older movies that have been re-issued in BR or standard DVD format is usually saved in a smaller file size, typically around 712Mb and they are still upconverted by Serviio to be the same video quality as the original.
> 
> So far I have 844 movies in my computer, of which about 40% are BR and the rest standard DVD resolution and using only about 0.750tb (750gb) of the 4tb disk space. I have another 4tb drive which I use as a mirror of the main drive for backup. These drives cost only about $220 on Amazon, so the cost is nothing compared with the price just a few years ago.
> 
> One advantage of the DLNA server is that it can be watched on any TV in my house that's connected through the WiFi or hardwired network cable to my media server, which is just simply my computer on my desk. Most all TV's now have a wireless network capability built in.
> 
> The Sony BR changer can only be watched in the home theater room.


I dont see any point in removing or downsizing the resoulution from 1920x1080 to 1280x544. You may as well save some cash and go with the DVD widescreen version.


----------



## NotBananas

The resultant file size is a function of the software that rips the BR. I just set it to max resolution, and it does the rest.
I've done a few experiments with BR ripping. I took the same movie, in this case Mission Imposible III, and ripped it in three different resolutions: 1280, 1024 and 720. I saw no difference between the first two, and it just started to be noticeable a little bit at 720. BTW, my wife and friends couldn't see any difference even at 720, but being a purist, I kept the 1280 version.

Another BR I experimented with is Star Trek - The Next Generation when it came out with 3 episodes in BR version. The original BR disk has 42gb of data total, and the ripped to disk copy at 1,920x1,080 with Dolby 5.1 sound has 16gb of data for all three episodes. I then re-ripped it to 1,280 and the resolution on the screen looked identical to the 1,920 version.

Again, I believe the Serviio software upconverts the video stream in real time, thus the quality is the same as the BR disc.

I can honestly say I cannot tell the difference between the BR disk and the streaming video. You'd have to see it to appreciate it.

I did a lot of experimenting with many other videos, and found that many of the remakes of old movies that were originally issued in DVD format and now were re-issued in BR still have the same resolution because they were not re-mastered, just dumped to BR from the old source. The fact that they were re-issued in BR gave the studio extra income without having to do any improvements, but the public thought because it's BR, (remember "The Emperor's New Clothes" fairy tale?) it must be better.


----------



## 8086

NotBananas said:


> The resultant file size is a function of the software that rips the BR. I just set it to max resolution, and it does the rest.
> I've done a few experiments with BR ripping. I took the same movie, in this case Mission Imposible III, and ripped it in three different resolutions: 1280, 1024 and 720. I saw no difference between the first two, and it just started to be noticeable a little bit at 720. BTW, my wife and friends couldn't see any difference even at 720, but being a purist, I kept the 1280 version.
> 
> Another BR I experimented with is Star Trek - The Next Generation when it came out with 3 episodes in BR version. The original BR disk has 42gb of data total, and the ripped to disk copy at 1,920x1,080 with Dolby 5.1 sound has 16gb of data for all three episodes. I then re-ripped it to 1,280 and the resolution on the screen looked identical to the 1,920 version.
> 
> Again, I believe the Serviio software upconverts the video stream in real time, thus the quality is the same as the BR disc.
> 
> I* can honestly say I cannot tell the difference between the BR disk and the streaming video. You'd have to see it to appreciate it.
> *
> I did a lot of experimenting with many other videos, and found that many of the remakes of old movies that were originally issued in DVD format and now were re-issued in BR still have the same resolution because they were not re-mastered, just dumped to BR from the old source. The fact that they were re-issued in BR gave the studio extra income without having to do any improvements, but the public thought because it's BR, (remember "The Emperor's New Clothes" fairy tale?) it must be better.



That really depends on your equipment. Higher end screens may reveal flaws you dont see on your display. This was really noticeable years ago when Pioneer still made Kuro Plasma the level of visible detail was so much greater than anything it sat next to at Magnolia.


----------



## primetimeguy

NotBananas said:


> The resultant file size is a function of the software that rips the BR. I just set it to max resolution, and it does the rest.
> I've done a few experiments with BR ripping. I took the same movie, in this case Mission Imposible III, and ripped it in three different resolutions: 1280, 1024 and 720. I saw no difference between the first two, and it just started to be noticeable a little bit at 720. BTW, my wife and friends couldn't see any difference even at 720, but being a purist, I kept the 1280 version.
> 
> Another BR I experimented with is Star Trek - The Next Generation when it came out with 3 episodes in BR version. The original BR disk has 42gb of data total, and the ripped to disk copy at 1,920x1,080 with Dolby 5.1 sound has 16gb of data for all three episodes. I then re-ripped it to 1,280 and the resolution on the screen looked identical to the 1,920 version.
> 
> Again, I believe the Serviio software upconverts the video stream in real time, thus the quality is the same as the BR disc.
> 
> I can honestly say I cannot tell the difference between the BR disk and the streaming video. You'd have to see it to appreciate it.
> 
> I did a lot of experimenting with many other videos, and found that many of the remakes of old movies that were originally issued in DVD format and now were re-issued in BR still have the same resolution because they were not re-mastered, just dumped to BR from the old source. The fact that they were re-issued in BR gave the studio extra income without having to do any improvements, but the public thought because it's BR, (remember "The Emperor's New Clothes" fairy tale?) it must be better.


I guess the key there is 'you' don't see a difference. Must be a function of your eyes, viewing distance and TV because you are throwing away a lot of information when you compress the file size down. Resolution is one thing and may be harder to tell during mostly still shots. Watch a high action scene and compare the Blu-Ray to your highly compresses rip and see if you can tell a difference. 

And keep in mind that Serviio upscaling is not getting this lost information back. Your TV can take a 480i SD signal and scale it to 1080p but that doesn't make it HD and will look nothing like it.


----------



## NBPk402

Advantage of ripping a movie versus a changer is...

If you have a changer and you are watching a movie no one else can watch a movie from that changer where as when they are ripped any one can watch any movie including the one you are watching at a dif location.


----------



## primetimeguy

ellisr63 said:


> Advantage of ripping a movie versus a changer is...
> 
> If you have a changer and you are watching a movie no one else can watch a movie from that changer where as when they are ripped any one can watch any movie including the one you are watching at a dif location.


Agree 100%. 

My main comment to the OP was to reconsider compressing the video. I would recommend keeping the uncompressed main video/audio which on average would be about 30gb/movie. So a 1.5tb drive for $150 would replace the $1500 changer.


----------



## hjones4841

primetimeguy said:


> Agree 100%.
> 
> My main comment to the OP was to reconsider compressing the video. I would recommend keeping the uncompressed main video/audio which on average would be about 30gb/movie. So a 1.5tb drive for $150 would replace the $1500 changer.


Aren't you off by a decimal point, assuming 400 blu rays? 400 discs x 30gb per disc/1000 gb per tb = 12 tb.


----------



## primetimeguy

hjones4841 said:


> Aren't you off by a decimal point, assuming 400 blu rays? 400 discs x 30gb per disc/1000 gb per tb = 12 tb.


LOL, yep! Doesn't seem as cost effective now does it.  Oh well. Still my recommendation. Take what he gets from selling the disc changers and invest in hard drives.


----------



## phillihp23

Full Blu Ray MKV files are usually anywhere from 18-24 GB, most on the higher side. Digital Copies have advantages for home networking. But hard media (Disc) is always nice for a dedicted room.


----------



## hjones4841

Can MKV do HD audio?


----------



## primetimeguy

Yes, mkv is just a container, many people rip full res bluray to mkv


----------



## hjones4841

primetimeguy said:


> Yes, mkv is just a container, many people rip full res bluray to mkv


Maybe it was menus that MKV does not support. I rip my DVDs to ISO to keep the menus.


----------



## Daedal

I don't think that there is any doubt about the correct answer as long as you have properly ripped your BluRays and are happy with the result. The Sony pieces are now out of production and I suspect the reason is that most people who have a serious setup are going to hard-drive based storage rather than these expensive and somewhat cumbersome pieces.

I have a similar setup using twin 6T LaCie drives and a dedicated Mac Mini. For CDs it works beautifully based on iTunes and its lossless aif. format files. I have about 3000 CDs ripped into less than 2T. For DVDs I use VLC as a player and do a mirror rip using MediaGrabber. The ripping is facilitated by AnyDVD as an encryption cracker. There are some occasional problems but nothing that can't be readily fixed. I have 500 DVDs ripped into 3.8T.

My problem, for which you appear to have the solution, is ripping BluRays. I get them ripped using MediaGrabber and AnyDVD but the audio tracks are in stereo and the menu packets are missing. video is perfect. Would you mind sharing with me what software you are using to rip and to crack the BD encryption. I have been unable to figure out if my problem is AnyDVD or MediaGrabber and haven't been able to find anyone who admits to ripping BDs properly - until I saw your post.

If you can rip BDs properly, I don't see the point of the Sony pieces. On the other hand, if I can't figure out how to properly rip BluRays, I may be a buyer!

Cheers


----------



## hjones4841

Daedal said:


> On the other hand, if I can't figure out how to properly rip BluRays, I may be a buyer!
> 
> Cheers


From all that I have read, ripping blu rays is illegal and therefore shall not be discussed here at HTS. 

Some would say that ripping DVDs is of questionable legality, but I have read that interpretation of the fair use clause or rule or whatever it is called includes ripping DVDs. However, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of what I read - you know that everything you read on the internet is accurate, right?


----------



## 8086

hjones4841 said:


> From all that I have read, ripping blu rays is illegal and therefore shall not be discussed here at HTS.
> 
> Some would say that ripping DVDs is of questionable legality, but I have read that interpretation of the fair use clause or rule or whatever it is called includes ripping DVDs. However, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of what I read - you know that everything you read on the internet is accurate, right?


RIPPING Blu-rays is legal if you live outside the USA. In Daedal's case, he lives in Canada.


----------



## hjones4841

8086 said:


> RIPPING Blu-rays is legal if you live outside the USA. In Daedal's case, he lives in Canada.


But this forum is based in USA. I am quite sure if you ask Sonnie he will agree that copyright infringement is not to be discussed here.


----------



## 8086

hjones4841 said:


> But this forum is based in USA. I am quite sure if you ask Sonnie he will agree that copyright infringement is not to be discussed here.


Of course, it would be up to Sonnie; but he's at no liability for what users post on his forum. 

(I don't want to sound like I am for or against. Just sticking to the facts)


----------



## Sonnie

I have liability to my conscience and to that of moral and ethical standards. If it is illegal, we do not want to discuss it. It is just so plainly clear in our forum rules. No wavering.


----------



## lcaillo

And that is the only fact that matters.


----------



## NotBananas

Daedal: I use "Pavtube Video Converter Ultimate" which retains the original sound format instead of downconverting to stereo like most others. The filesize obviously depends on the original format (1080p, 720p, etc.) but most have a file size that's reasonable. 

Example is "Ghost Rider - Spirit of Vengeance" Bluray was converted to 8.4gb using MKV format. When I A/B the movie playing it on my Sony DBP-CX7000ES and switching it to my media server back and forth, I could not tell the difference in either in video or audio quality. And I have an Sharp 80" LED-LCD display and I sit about 9ft. from the screen (full theater immersion experience).

Don't forget, any CD, DVD or Bluray is already digital, all you are doing is converting one digital bit stream to another, so there's no loss of information.

RE: _Legality of ripping any media:_ This question has been discussed since the first time I made a copy of Jascha Heifetz's Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto to my used Western Electric wire recorder (not tape recorder, that's all I could afford). The simple answer in my opinion is you are not violating copyright laws if you have paid for the original copy and it's for your own use and not sell it for money. The same could be argued about computer software. As long as you use it for your own backup of the original purchased item, you are not violating any laws.


----------



## primetimeguy

NotBananas said:


> Don't forget, any CD, DVD or Bluray is already digital, all you are doing is converting one digital bit stream to another, so there's no loss of information.


If you are going from the main feature movie on the Blu-Ray (approx 20+gb) down to 8gb in mkv you have indeed lost a lot of information. It may be digital but you still lose information. Just like converting a CD to mp3, there are losses.


----------



## tonyvdb

Correct, digital can still be compressed and the quality will suffer big time.


----------



## 8086

NotBananas said:


> Daedal: I use "Pavtube Video Converter Ultimate" which retains the original sound format instead of downconverting to stereo like most others. The filesize obviously depends on the original format (1080p, 720p, etc.) but most have a file size that's reasonable.
> 
> Example is "Ghost Rider - Spirit of Vengeance" Bluray was converted to 8.4gb using MKV format. When I A/B the movie playing it on my Sony DBP-CX7000ES and switching it to my media server back and forth, I could not tell the difference in either in video or audio quality. And I have an Sharp 80" LED-LCD display and I sit about 9ft. from the screen (full theater immersion experience).
> 
> Don't forget, any CD, DVD or Bluray is already digital, all you are doing is converting one digital bit stream to another, so there's no loss of information.
> 
> RE: _Legality of ripping any media:_ This question has been discussed since the first time I made a copy of Jascha Heifetz's Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto to my used Western Electric wire recorder (not tape recorder, that's all I could afford). *The simple answer in my opinion is you are not violating copyright laws if you have paid for the original copy and it's for your own use and not sell it for money. The same could be argued about computer software. As long as you use it for your own backup of the original purchased item, you are not violating any laws.*


If you paid for it, then its your right to do with it as you like. If you created it, then it's your right to earn compensation. 

Fair use laws (USA).
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use


----------



## NotBananas

I'm still puzzled as to why Sony quit making these fantastic changers. Obviously they never consulted the consumer who wants this type of changer. No other had taken it's place so far, many years after it's been discontinued.

Some say because it had analog output which could defeat the digital copy protection of movies. If that's the case, they could easily have removed the analog output from the design and just have the HDMI output.

It can't be the cost of manufacturing, because when I looked inside, it's a simple jukebox mechanism to change disks.


----------

