# Blu-ray – is it all that?



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Ever the late adapter, I’m considering making the plunge to blu-ray now that they're increasingly available for rental. So, what I would like to know from those of you already in the game, is it worthwhile? I’m sure that picture quality is dependant on the transfer, but overall is the picture significantly improved over regular DVDs?

Also, I've seen complaints in blu-ray player reviews that performance with standard DVDs is not as good as with a standard DVD player. Is this just for test patterns, or will it be obvious with most SD discs and displays? A problem seems to be with 2:2 and 2:3 cadence patterns (not even sure what that is).

If it helps, my TV is 720p and our seating is about 10 ft. away from the screen, and we'd probably be using component video, not HDMI (at least initially)

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

If you are sitting close enough relative to your screen size, and you have a nice sound system...yes. What size is your screen?

With the rental option at netflix and redbox, and the price of hardware dropping, I'd say the picture and sound difference is worth the small investment.


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

I like the picture and sound on most of the blu-rays i've seen but then there are others that i wish ihadn't bought but overall, yes i think it's worth it.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Yes a BD player is a worthy investment, the PQ on most discs is superb and even on a 720p tv you should be able to tell the difference but if your TV supports 1080i it may well be worth using that resolution. As for players there is so many to choose from but I would recommend either the Oppo BDP80 or 83 as they give very good performance on BD and DVD, if don't want your budget to stretch that far then Sony, Panasonic also have excellent players and budget ones which probably start around the $100 mark.


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

On 1080p sets and with HDMI, the answer is a resounding YES, it's worth it, it's that much better, and with the right player, even on SD DVDs. The right player to me is the Panasonic, as it's that much more affordable than the Oppo.

On 720p, I can't say for certain.

2:2 and 2:3 cadence are both conversino algorithms that either convert or unconvert material shot in different formats and at the baseline, involve repeating frames (or un-repeating frames as necessary) to change the framerate of the source material to match that of the display. For instance:

Films are shot at 24p. In the old days, to display on a 480i TV with a 30Hz framerate (2 fields=1 frame) the 24p was first interlaced, then field 1 was repeated once and field 2 repeated twice, field 3 repeated once, field 4 repeated twice, hence the 2:3 moniker. I believe this was done before coding onto the DVD. The interlacing process introduces artifacts, especially when done with 20 yr old technology, or done poorly. With modern sets capable of doing a 120Hz (or higher) refresh rate, it's much better to take this 480i info and inverse the 2:3 to recapture the original 24p info and work from there. 2:2 is similar, and yet of course different, and really only applies to a very small number of programs, mainly certain concert discs, documentaries...

The Panasonic players (at least last years models) were the only ones less expensive than the Oppos that I saw that passed all these conversion tests that I saw. That means (to me at least) that for the most part you can forget all this 2:2 3:2 stuff and enjoy the movie.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Thanks for the feedback. So I take it no one has had any problems with their standard DVDs not looking as good as they did on their regular DVD players?

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

I have seen a lot of blu-rays and a lot of dvds many from my Panny player. 

If you like older movies you will see a huge step up in video transfer quality, but the later DVD movies are very similar in quality to blu-rays. Air Force One is an example of an excellent DVD that rivals blu-ray quality. But the step up is huge on some films. Star Trek:Wrath of Kahn is one of those IMO. DVDs are underrated IMO. I'm still not sure if it will beat out streaming in the long term though. I have my suspicions streaming will win if we can get the bandwidth high enough.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Yeah, I’m wondering the same way, that streaming may eventually do to DVD/blu-ray what downloads did to CDs. I think the only “ace in the hole” blu-ray has is that more people can _see_ the improvement of a hi-def picture than can _hear_ the difference between CDs and MP3s. But even if they get downloads on par with blu-ray and other hi-def content, there are still a lot of people who just like owning a copy of a movie.

Still, the players have gotten so cheap I guess there’s no good reason not to take the plunge. Thanks all for the input.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## lsiberian (Mar 24, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Yeah, I’m wondering the same way, that streaming may eventually do to DVD/blu-ray what downloads did to CDs. I think the only “ace in the hole” blu-ray has is that more people can _see_ the improvement of a hi-def picture than can _hear_ the difference between CDs and MP3s. But even if they get downloads on par with blu-ray and other hi-def content, there are still a lot of people who just like owning a copy of a movie.
> 
> Still, the players have gotten so cheap I guess there’s no good reason not to take the plunge. Thanks all for the input.
> 
> ...


Well for the most popular genres of music there really isn't a big difference with CDs which is why it fell so quickly, but in movies the most Popular Genres look and sound better on Blu-ray so I think it will hold it's own a bit longer. Action movies are definitely worth the blu-ray sound formats. For example the movie War(Jet Li, Jason Statham) uses uncompressed sound and is one of the great audio tracks I've felt. The Dark Knight is still the ultimate reference film IMO. 

Given the cost of player now I don't see the harm in an upgrade if you watch a lot of movies. I use netflix because I love old movies and have no place to store them all.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I agree with all said, BluRay is a worthy upgrade given the price of most players is resonable. I highly recommend the Panasonic DMP BD65, Its upconversion of standard DVDs is superb and playback of BluRay is rock solid.


----------



## ironglen (Mar 4, 2009)

I concur: I waited until earlier this year Wayne, but I can see the difference on my 720p 50" from 14ft away, of course, some dvds are closer to blu-ray quality than others, but we watch two movies a week via netflix and a tv series too and the blu ray picture is exceptional, if you view closer than 10ft I think you will definitely see the difference, even on 720p. I picked up a very good pioneer blu-ray player and dvd picture improved markedly: I'm confident the panasonic blu-ray players recommended will do the same.


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

Seems like a good time to post this again: http://carltonbale.com/1080p-does-matter


----------



## Rancho5 (Aug 20, 2009)

With BR's falling in prices, I'd take the plunge. I get them all at gohastings.com for super cheap so I've even replaced some of my action DVDs with BR but not many. If it were me, I'd go with the Panny BR player, although I eventually took mine back and got a PS3, which I don't regret at all.

For me, with a HD PJ and 110 screen the choice was pretty clear. DVD's were jaggy and when I tested a friends PS3 against my DVD player, (same video, same scene) the choice was clear.


----------



## the colors (Mar 28, 2008)

Being that I have just have started my equipment setup the BD player is a big jump from watching older DVDs but have to say some of the newer DVDs are to me just as good as some Blue ray discs. Found this with my kids Disney DVDs that were all scratched up and still played remarkably clear.


----------



## Drudge (Sep 1, 2008)

I just recently made the plunge myself with a new panny plasma and an Oppo BDP-83 from an old HD CRT that I could only watch DVD's at 480p.I found with DVD's upconverted to 1080p on the plasma looked a lot more grainy than on the CRT at 480p,but still had a good picture.With Blu-ray on the plasma it's a whole other story,picture looks better than OTA HD on the CRT and a very noticeable improvement over DVD.

On the audio side of things,I didn't find much of a noticeable improvement over the lossy codecs when it came to the lossless audio and was a little disappointed,but it shows how good the lossy codecs really are. 

To me the picture quality is what makes blu-ray worthwhile and with the wider availability of material to watch compared to a couple of years ago,it's definitely worth the plunge.:T


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Drudge said:


> On the audio side of things,I didn't find much of a noticeable improvement over the lossy codecs when it came to the lossless audio and was a little disappointed,but it shows how good the lossy codecs really are.


That all depends on your system if you have good to very good speakers/sub and a mid to high end receiver or PrePro setup the Uncompressed formats do make a very big difference. I have A/B them both on the same BluRay movie and there is no competition the uncompressed audio wins.


----------



## Drudge (Sep 1, 2008)

Well,I'm using the analog outputs of the player into the multichannel input of the Lexicon MC-12 and if I switch back and forth between the multi-channel input and the SPDIF with the higher bit rate lossy Dolby or DTS being output on the Blu-ray player with a blu-ray disc,I only notice a slight difference in the bass.

It's probably just the difference between the analog and the digital connection and since I don't have the ability to have the lossless audio passed via the HDMI connection and hear it that way,I may not have heard it yet in all it's glory.

My speakers are studio monitors that have pretty good(anechoic)response combined with Audyssey and minimal passive room correction and even when I listen to a DVD soundtrack with the lower bit rate lossy codecs there is not much of a difference that I hear with good soundtracks vs. the lossless Blu-ray audio,just maybe an ever so slightly smoother sound,but not anything significantly better.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

A lot of people do say that they do not notice much difference between Lossy and lossless soundtracks but it is IMO best passed over from the BD player via HDMI and let the processor handle the processing.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Thanks all for the comments. We made the plunge and snagged a Yamaha BD-S2900 off eBay. Woo hoo!

When it first came out, this player took a lot of guff both in reviews and on the Forums for its high price, and for conspicuously lacking features that other players had for a lot less money. But it got high marks for its video performance and build quality. And it is a monster - steel chassis and weighs nearly 13 lbs! Here’s an in-depth review, and here’s a discussion thread.

Well, I don’t have any use for any of those features the Yamaha was “lacking”; all I care about is picture quality. For the price we paid - only a bit more than the recommend Panasonic DMP BD6 and significantly less than the Oppo BDP-83 - it was a no brainer. The seller said it was bought new but never used. That appears to be accurate; for one thing, the remote still had the cheapie stock batteries in it.

We borrowed a blu ray of the _Dark Knight_ movie from our neighbor, and it was certainly impressive. We were duly impressed right away, in the early scenes of the movie, where the two clown guys are on the roof and break into a telephone box. All those hundreds of tiny wires were sharp and as clear as a bell. :T

One thing I was concerned about with the BD-S2900 reviews was negative comments about its picture quality with standard DVDs. But I noticed most of those comments had to do with test patterns and 3.3 and 3.2 cadences (thanks Greg, for pointing out that’s a non issue for all practical purposes). IOW, I was't seeing any comments based on viewing actual discs. 

We rented two copies of a DVD last night and sync’d them up in both the 2900 and our current standard DVD player, a Yamaha flagship model from a few years back. The verdict? The 2900’s picture was noticeably better: Colors richer and more accurate, whiter whites. Detail was slightly better as well. Subtle, but indeed better.

We also like the remote, the best of any DVD player we’ve ever had: Nice and large with white buttons on a black background, easy to see and use in dim lighting. Why do so many manufactures insist on supplying black remotes with tiny black buttons for their DVD players? :dizzy:

Needless to say, we’re impressed with this player, especially for the ridiculously low price we paid!

Again, thanks to all for your input. The comments about playing your standard discs on a blu ray player were especially helpful and encouraged us to make the plunge. :T :T :T It would have been something of a bitter pill to get a spiffy new player only to find that our library of standard discs was a step down in quality. 

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Good news Wayne :T The Dark Knight is an impressive disc to start with as the PQ and SQ is first class and it is a bonus it does your DVD's justice!!


----------



## lcaillo (May 2, 2006)

The BD-S2900 is a superb player. A good used one is a smart buy if the feature set is not an issue, as they were quite expensive.

I have very much enjoyed my blu ray player. I was late to the game, as I do not watch a lot of movies, and could play with lots of machines from my dealers if I needed one for testing and such. But since I own one, I have found that I watch more movies. I also like some of the features that I thought were silly, like being able to connect to the web and download a movie or listen to Pandora.


----------



## gsmollin (Apr 25, 2006)

Wayne,

I see you getting a lot of replies on this, and they are positive. I can add my positive. I have a 720p PJ and sit 12 ft.from a 6 ft screen. At that distance, 720p has just merged into a non-pixelated image. Any closer/larger I would need a 1080p PJ, and I am looking... 

Anyway, I occasionally watch a DVD, and I am instantly struck how it looks like a TV all over again. The color gamut of DVD is less than BD, and it really looks it. The sound is usually not too great; no DTS Master Audio, for sure. And the picture is just fuzzy. So if you aren't sure that BD is all that, I have a good test. Get your BD player, and watch BDs for slightly less than the 30 day return period. Then put back your DVD player and try it again. I think you will be quick to put the BD player back in the rack.


----------



## Rancho5 (Aug 20, 2009)

I hooked up a friends BR along side my DVD player, put in two exact movies and switched back and forth. The next week I bought a PS3 and haven't looked back.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Andre (Feb 15, 2010)

I beleived once I got the appropriate gear (Oppo, 70" DLP 1080P TV) if was worth it. I also sit closer then most (small room)... On a funny note, I recently got of a DVD collection of the Six Million Dollar Man. I brought it upstairs and popped it in my Oppo and turned on my 70. All I can say is OW!! 1970s resolution at 70" close up hurts. Looks just fine on my 32 at 14 feet though..


----------



## Josuah (Apr 26, 2006)

On some discs, I've really appreciated the cleaner sound of the lossless audio. I was always disappointed between the lossy soundtrack of a movie and the original lossless on the soundtrack CD.

Also, I have two players, one for DVD and one for Blu-ray, because I want the best DVD picture quality possible. Which gets back to your original question.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Ideally a dedicated player for each format is the best way of achieving optimum performance but with the likes of Oppo bringing out Universal Players like the BDP83/SE models that gap has been narrowed quite considerably.


----------



## denydog (Dec 20, 2008)

Too late to help the OP, but my recent experience was going from a 10+ year old DVD player to a cheap but current DVD player. The improvement in all my DVD's was amazing. Soon after, I bought a Blu-ray player, and the standard DVD's look about the same as on the current DVD player, with the Blu-ray discs slightly better. On the other hand, my wife doesn't notice the difference between DVD and Blu-ray at all.


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

That's a shame. My wife can tell, makes everything easier


----------



## Dave Upton (Aug 4, 2009)

Contrary to what many here say, I would argue the largest difference can actually be in the audio (if your system is revealing enough to let the lossless audio shine), PQ certainly is improved by raw data presence, you'll see more of the same compression even on a bad BD vs DVD - but overall I find the audio to be more impressive for films that aren't as visually pleasing. For some films, both are spectacular and really show off the format. Watching Avatar DVD vs Blu-Ray is a night and day difference.


----------



## eugovector (Sep 4, 2006)

I was also thought the audio was a more telling difference when BR and HDDVD first came out, but now that transfers are getting better, I'd say PQ has taken the edge.


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

BD has slowly matured into a good format and I would not be without what it offers, seeing HD films on the big screen with such good PQ really is the bees knees :bigsmile:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Even a 720p display looks good with HD over SD video. My SanyoZ4 720p projector with BluRay blows away any SD material I have seen.


----------



## glaufman (Nov 25, 2007)

I just love being able to tell people that I wasn't going to spring for it, but my wife's the one that talked my into buying the Pio Elite TV...


----------



## GranteedEV (Aug 8, 2010)

It's definitely all that. Besides the obvious Oppo choice, buy a PS3 slim, it's just an all-around great electronic to own.

After watching some well encoded movies in Blu Ray (IE Casino Royale) i don't think I could go back to DVD. I never before even realized how blurry DVDs were - in their prime I never got what people were talking about with "digital compression" because i wasn't seeing it. Now I can't help but notice it in every single DVD. Blu ray's look and sound _real_, DVDs look and sound like DVDs.

And mind you, I'm talking about the difference on a 46" display from 10 feet away, not a 100" projection screen or anything.


----------



## MatrixDweller (Jul 24, 2007)

I have an older 720p projector and a newer Sony BDP-S360 bluray player. The biggest things I notice with Bluray vs DVD (upconverted) are:

1. Better over all picture quality
i) Better color saturation
ii) Better black levels (on DVD black is slightly grey)
iii) Sharper more detailed image (not as pronounced if viewing from farther distances)
2. Better overall sound quality 
i) More information in the surround channels
ii) Better bass
3. Smudge/Scratch resistant disc
4. More extra features and interactive menus

For now BD-Live is not a big deal for me. Most of the time I don't even check it out when renting movies.


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

The one thing that stood out to me the other night while we watched a DVD was the sound, it seems so more defined on blu-ray and of coarse the picture quality can't be beat.:T


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

There has been a lot of good advice given and some I can see that is an emotional response. I have an older plasma 5 years old) that has a resolution of 1366 X 768 but are commonly called 720P. I have over a thousand movies on DVD that vary in quality from just OK to fantastic. We also have an HD DVD machine and a few movies in that format. We have watched DVD movies up-scaled to 1080i played through several DVD machines over the years and there is definitely a difference in the PQ depending on the up-scaling solution used by a given player. 

My HD DVD player (Toshiba HD-A35) has a very good solution and does a nice job but it is surpassed by my Pioneer Elite DV-49AV DVD player. The Pioneer has been passed in PQ by some of the solutions in the new av receivers, especially by the Marvell chip in the newer Pioneer receivers (also seems to be the choice for the new Oppo players that are coming out). Just keep in mind that NO chip can make a silk purse of a sows' ear as they say. A LOT depends on the quality of the transfer on a particular DVD.

Blu-rays have an inherent advantage in resolution from the get-go and just like an HD DVD movie look better than even an excellently up-scaled DVD, mostly in how sharp the backgrounds are. 

Some people assume that 1080P MUST be so much better than 720P since it has such a much higher pixel count. Well that is simply NOT true for all cases and this is not just my opinion, it is a scientific fact. Taking into account how well the human eye/vision system can resolve details and the screen size it is impossible for the eye to see any difference in resolution below a 50" screen size and perhaps even a little larger than that. In addition, it has been shown/proven in multiple tests and studies done for other industries/reasons that resolution is not the most important aspect of an image. Black level and contrast are just two items the eye is more sensitive to. 

Before people start to argue this, I am not trying to say that the image produced by 1080P displays isn't any better or even that you can't see a difference at say a 50" screen size, in some cases you can see one (so can I) but the main reason(s) isn't/aren't the resolution. There are other factors at work.

You might also be interested to know that a while back Pioneer did a very interesting thing. They had a demo in a darkened room with many calibrated displays and had the bezels masked off. The winner of the display "shoot-out" if you will, was a 720P plasma, not any of the 1080P displays.

One of the most annoying aspects of Hi Def format disk players (both HD DVD and Blu-ray) is the VERY slow loading and performance aspects. The PS3 and the Oppo players were for some time the only decent performing units available but the have been surpassed by the new Blu-ray machines, especially the new Sony line which performs on par with standard DVD players, and the have excellent PQ for both Blu-ray and upscaled DVD's. A nice bonus is they play SACD if that is of any importance to you.

Also the sound quality of Blu-ray discs are much higher as far as bit-rate goes and I believe any person with normal hearing, even if they had no idea what format they were listening to, would hear what they would probably describe as much better sound.


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

When I wrote this a few weeks ago...


Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> We made the plunge and snagged a Yamaha BD-S2900 off eBay. Woo hoo!
> 
> When it first came out, this player took a lot of guff both in reviews and on the Forums for... conspicuously lacking features that other players had for a lot less money. But it got high marks for its video performance and build quality.
> 
> Well, I don’t have any use for any of those features the Yamaha was “lacking”; all I care about is picture quality.


 ...I’ll admit I didn’t know jack flip about the “other features” many current-model blu-ray players are offering. Well, we recently spent a couple of weeks visiting my son in Dallas, and he had recently acquired a Sony “network” blu-ray player. Well, after a mere few days of Netflix and Pandora, we were hooked! We’ve never fooled with Netflix before because we rent movies only once or twice a year. But having access to all those old TV shows, vintage movies, etc. for no extra cost? It was a no-brainer. We just had to have it!

So I started looking for a player solely for its network capabilities. Fortunately, it appears that currently the only blu-ray players that have these features are the lower-end models from the “box store” brands, with the typical slow blu-ray disc loading and spotty user reviews on function and reliability. I say “fortunately” because in light of that I don’t feel shortchanged by getting the Yamaha BD-S29900. (Yamaha just came out with a more upscale network player, the BD-S667, but it doesn’t do Pandora. And initial reviews tell me its blu-ray picture quality isn’t as good as the BD-S2900.)

We settled on the LG BD550, and received one from an eBay seller yesterday. :jump: Today my wife played _Cagney and Lacey _all day while she worked (she works from home). For $12 a month this has to be the best entertainment value out there. :T

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Shackmonster said:


> Just keep in mind that NO chip can make a silk purse of a sows' ear as they say. A LOT depends on the quality of the transfer on a particular DVD.


I’d argue that the transfer is more important than anything else. :T




> You might also be interested to know that a while back Pioneer did a very interesting thing. They had a demo in a darkened room with many calibrated displays and had the bezels masked off. The winner of the display "shoot-out" if you will, was a 720P plasma, not any of the 1080P displays.


Can’t say that surprises me one bit. My Pioneer plasma blows away any LCD I’ve ever seen. :T

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## recruit (May 9, 2009)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Can’t say that surprises me one bit. My Pioneer plasma blows away any LCD I’ve ever seen. :T
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


Congratulations on the new player Wayne :T

Its a shame that Pioneer are not going to be making plasmas any more as I'd agree they had one of the best PQ you could buy...


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> I’d argue that the transfer is more important than anything else. :T
> 
> 
> Can’t say that surprises me one bit. My Pioneer plasma blows away any LCD I’ve ever seen. :T
> ...


Yes I agree that plasmas are much better for serious picture quality than any LCD and that "demo" was against 1080P plasmas as well. good luck with your new player.


----------



## bambino (Feb 21, 2010)

Congrats on taking the plunge Wayne.:T


----------



## akeoo7 (Feb 11, 2010)

Congrats Wayne on delving into the world of bluray.
Actually you have been missing a lot.
Even with a 720p resolution screen the difference with DVD is big, as for performance with standard dvds and plain dvds being better at that. Well ordinary dvd players do not upscale resolution, only those with HDMI do, so you can only compare upscaling with those.
Anyway your entertainement will have a new life now.


----------



## Shackmonster (May 5, 2007)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> When I wrote this a few weeks ago... ...I’ll admit I didn’t know jack flip about the “other features” many current-model blu-ray players are offering. Well, we recently spent a couple of weeks visiting my son in Dallas, and he had recently acquired a Sony “network” blu-ray player. Well, after a mere few days of Netflix and Pandora, we were hooked! We’ve never fooled with Netflix before because we rent movies only once or twice a year. But having access to all those old TV shows, vintage movies, etc. for no extra cost? It was a no-brainer. We just had to have it!
> 
> So I started looking for a player solely for its network capabilities. Fortunately, it appears that currently the only blu-ray players that have these features are the lower-end models from the “box store” brands, with the typical slow blu-ray disc loading and spotty user reviews on function and reliability. I say “fortunately” because in light of that I don’t feel shortchanged by getting the Yamaha BD-S29900. (Yamaha just came out with a more upscale network player, the BD-S667, but it doesn’t do Pandora. And initial reviews tell me its blu-ray picture quality isn’t as good as the BD-S2900.)
> 
> ...


Congratulations on getting your new Blu-ray player, I hope you and your family get many hours of pleasure from it. Myself, I plan on buying a new Sony player in the next few days, most likely the 370 as I don't care about/need any of the other features like networking or internet access. Sadly there is no Verizon FIOS where I am nor AT&T uverse so the internet access is good old DSL, far too slow for streaming anything hi-def.:hissyfit:


----------

