# The end of BR and DVD mechanical devices?



## NotBananas (Apr 4, 2012)

I currently own two Sony BDP-CX7000ES Blu-Ray Players almost filled to capacity (400 each). Last year I decided to invest (more toys, yay!) in four 4tb hard disks, total 16tb capacity and install DLNA network software (Serviio=free). All my other devices support DLNA, and I started to burn my BR's and DVD, to my media server which is an ordinary PC with Windows 7. 

The software I used allows you to retain the original video resolution and audio format, so the average BR disk is burned to about 6-8gb per movie and DVD's are about 1gb-2gb. The file format I used is MKV which seems to be better than AVI or MPG. This is roughly equivalent to about 700-800 BR movies per 4tb drive.

When my wife and friends watched these movies through (not thru) my DLNA network, they couldn't tell the difference between the original BR and the video file on my computer when displayed on my 80" LED-LCD. Serviio upconverts the resolution to match the screen. 

So basically I'd give physical media like BR and DVD another 5yrs. before non-mechanical devices will replace them, just like CD's were replaced by MP3's.

Anyone wants to buy 2 Sony BDP-CX7000ES?


----------



## Jungle Jack (Jul 28, 2009)

NotBananas said:


> I currently own two Sony BDP-CX7000ES Blu-Ray Players almost filled to capacity (400 each). Last year I decided to invest (more toys, yay!) in four 4tb hard disks, total 16tb capacity and install DLNA network software (Serviio=free). All my other devices support DLNA, and I started to burn my BR's and DVD, to my media server which is an ordinary PC with Windows 7.
> 
> The software I used allows you to retain the original video resolution and audio format, so the average BR disk is burned to about 6-8gb per movie and DVD's are about 1gb-2gb. The file format I used is MKV which seems to be better than AVI or MPG. This is roughly equivalent to about 700-800 BR movies per 4tb drive.
> 
> ...


While I think it is wonderful that you have found a workaround, I personally rue the day when physical media is no longer available. I own thousands of DVD's, thousands of CD's, and hundreds of Blu-rays. I just find it spooky to have all of your on a Hard Drive or "in a cloud". I suppose it makes me somewhat of a luddite.


----------



## NotBananas (Apr 4, 2012)

I have experimented on having the files on "the cloud" and it worked well. The only downside is the time to upload each video. All internet providers download 10x faster than the upload speed. It takes me several hours to upload one BR movie. The only way to speed up the upload time is to pay for a very expensive T1 line where the upload is the same speed as download.

My "cloud" is just a web site that I have paying an annual fee of about $120 for 50gb of space. I use an FTP program to upload files, and access them directly in the media player through internet streaming, with VLC Media Player, exactly like Netflix or Amazon Prime (I have both).

I also resisted the transition from physical media to electronic delivery of videos, but being in the high tech world here in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's easy to get all the material needed.

The only high risk of having all my movies on hard disk is if it fails or crashes. I am now duplicating each 4tb hard disk in a RAID external drive holder (up to 8 drives), so if one fails, the other already has a mirror image of the failed one for backup.

There's absolutely no need for a dedicated fancy media server, which is nothing more than a re-packaged PC.

I'm also from the school of thought "if it ain't broken, don't fix it". One reason I think Sony quit production of the BDP-CX7000ES is because they saw the writing on the wall.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

While I agree that at some point there will be a SD card type of media rather than a disc CD has not been replaced by MP3 as I still buy all my music on a physical CD and have never had an issue finding it. The big issue with streaming is that there is not one format available that is uncompressed and includes the full 7.1 uncompressed audio format and until that is available BluRay is here to stay.


----------



## redsandvb (Dec 2, 2009)

I also prefer physical media with lossless audio and 1080p or better (new 4k, etc. sometime?) video. I don't think internet speeds are fast enough, at least not at sensible prices, for blu-ray or better equivalents. By that I mean the actual bitrates/files on blu-ray. On the other hand, I don't have eagle eyes or golden ears such that I can easily tell the difference between something like VUDU's HDX or Netflix's best 1080p w/ DD+. Hopefully when the day comes that physical media ends it's not at the expense of quality...even if I'm someone that can be fooled!


----------



## pharoah (Jul 21, 2012)

i like having physical media as well.personally i dont do mp3.if its not lossless i dont want it.i still buy cd's as well got a decent collection going.


----------



## Verse-n-Chorus (Apr 23, 2013)

The issue is lossy vs. lossless file compression.
For an electrical / computer audio compression codec that mathematically retains all data one can use the
Free Lossless Audio Codec [FLAC].
With a free / open source (LEGAL) player in WindO$ called foobar2000 ;
funny name but great & customiz-able software.
Similar issues exist for video.
looked up mkv file compression &
found out that is is free & open source ,
but did not find right away if it is lossless.
I have watched BR saved as mkv s & they looked great in 1080p.


----------



## beyond 1000 (Aug 28, 2008)

pharoah said:


> if its not lossless i dont want it.


exactly!


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

What software do you use to rip the BR to the hard drive?


----------



## NotBananas (Apr 4, 2012)

Aren't we all forgetting one tiny fact about any digital media? All human beings must hear, speak and see in analog! When converting from analog to digital to record it and convert it back from digital to analog to hear and see it, you are loosing an enormous amount of information from the analog signal, depending on the sampling rate. 

I don't care if the audio and video is sampled 1,000,000 times a second, it's still not analog! It's a close representation of analog. So the argument between lossy and lossless recording of a sampled analog sound or video is a moot point. Any digitizing of an analog signal is by definition lossy.

The end result is what counts. If the video and audio has an acceptable resolution so you can't see or hear the difference, then it doesn't matter if lossy or lossless.

I use "Aiseesoft Blu-ray Ripper" (I actually paid for it) which retains the original video and audio resolution. Many of my BR rips are typically 5-9 Gigs, obviously depending on the original size of the BR.

(This is one reason of the resurgence of vinyl which I have over 6,000 LP's I accumulated since the early 60's. Never having tossed them when CD's were the rage.)


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Yas and no, the longer the signal stays in the digital rheum and the less it is touched or converted the better the output. The biggest advantage to keeping the audio lossless (HD audio) is thats the only way you can get 7.1 or more discrete channels. Dolby digital is limited to 5.1 and DTS is 6.1 and both formats are caped at 20-20,000Hz (yes I know some will argue that it goes lower than 20Hz but very few recordings do. The uncompressed audio formats on Bluray dont have any limitations)


----------



## chashint (Jan 12, 2011)

NotBananas said:


> Aren't we all forgetting one tiny fact about any digital media? All human beings must hear, speak and see in analog! When converting from analog to digital to record it and convert it back from digital to analog to hear and see it, you are loosing an enormous amount of information from the analog signal, depending on the sampling rate.
> 
> I don't care if the audio and video is sampled 1,000,000 times a second, it's still not analog! It's a close representation of analog. So the argument between lossy and lossless recording of a sampled analog sound or video is a moot point. Any digitizing of an analog signal is by definition lossy.
> 
> ...


Meh, the resolution of digital signal processing surpassed the capabilities of human sight and hearing quite some time ago. Consumer grade display technology is making strides in that direction now even though there are still substantial color issues (certainly no worse than analog display issues) to overcome.
Pretty much all distortion happens in the analog realm in both audio and video reproduction.

Thanks for the software tip.


----------

