Panasonic BD55K or BD35K

S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
I've decided to take the Blu plunge. Did research over the past few weeks and have finalized Panasonic brand. The dilemma...BD55 or BD35?

As I understand, the BD55 has the following extra features, all others being the same...

1. DivX
2. 7.1 Analog
3. Coaxial output

I am trying to understand if the higher price of BD55 is worth investing in. Your opinion on this will help greatly.

A quick note...I have a old HK 247 receiver (non HDMI) which is hooked up to my 5.1 sound system. I am sending the video directly to my PJ via HDMI from an upconverting DVD player. I do plan to upgrade my system with a newer receiver in late 09, so need to understand how BD55 or BD 35 will (or will not) impact my upgrade. I will be using the player primarily for movies.
 
mperfct

mperfct

Audioholic Samurai
If you are using your older receiver, you won't be able to get the hi-def codecs unless you use the analog outs. You could still get DTS/DD from the 35 using the Optical out though. Depends on how much you want hi-def codecs I suppose when deciding between the 35 and 55. As far as future receivers, I don't think it matters on your future purchase, they both have similar capabilities, assuming you get a receiver with HDMI.

I've decided to take the Blu plunge. Did research over the past few weeks and have finalized Panasonic brand. The dilemma...BD55 or BD35?

As I understand, the BD55 has the following extra features, all others being the same...

1. DivX
2. 7.1 Analog
3. Coaxial output

I am trying to understand if the higher price of BD55 is worth investing in. Your opinion on this will help greatly.

A quick note...I have a old HK 247 receiver (non HDMI) which is hooked up to my 5.1 sound system. I am sending the video directly to my PJ via HDMI from an upconverting DVD player. I do plan to upgrade my system with a newer receiver in late 09, so need to understand how BD55 or BD 35 will (or will not) impact my upgrade. I will be using the player primarily for movies.
 
billy p

billy p

Audioholic Ninja
I've decided to take the Blu plunge. Did research over the past few weeks and have finalized Panasonic brand. The dilemma...BD55 or BD35?

As I understand, the BD55 has the following extra features, all others being the same...

1. DivX
2. 7.1 Analog
3. Coaxial output

I am trying to understand if the higher price of BD55 is worth investing in. Your opinion on this will help greatly.

A quick note...I have a old HK 247 receiver (non HDMI) which is hooked up to my 5.1 sound system. I am sending the video directly to my PJ via HDMI from an upconverting DVD player. I do plan to upgrade my system with a newer receiver in late 09, so need to understand how BD55 or BD 35 will (or will not) impact my upgrade. I will be using the player primarily for movies.
If your looking to upgrade your receiver in 09 than get the bd35. I returned my 55 because I decided to put the $120.00 in savings towards my new receiver. IMO the drop off from analog to digital was minimal.
 
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
Thanks for that insight. If I understand correctly...

- The main difference between BD35 and BD55 is the hi-def audio quality which is supported through the 7.1 analog outs.

- Analog (using 7.1 out in BD55) is better than digital (using co-ax in BD35) but the "drop off", which I guess refers to the deterioration in sound quality, from BD55 to BD35 is minimal.

- If one has a HDMI receiver, then it does not make a difference whether you own BD35 or BD55. Is this a correct statement? Or do I need to specifically have a receiver which has TrueHD/HD MA feature? For eg. the Marantz SR4003 has HDMI in/out but does not have TrueHD/HD MA. While Marantz SR5003 too has HDMI in/out but in addition also has TrueHD/HD MA capability. Are we saying that it will not make any difference if I have BD35 with either SR 4003 or SR 5003? This clarification will be very helpful because as pointed out, in that case I might as well invest in a good receiver than the player. Thoughts?
 
WooHoo

WooHoo

Audioholic
Thanks for that insight. If I understand correctly...



- If one has a HDMI receiver, then it does not make a difference whether you own BD35 or BD55. Is this a correct statement? Or do I need to specifically have a receiver which has TrueHD/HD MA feature? For eg. the Marantz SR4003 has HDMI in/out but does not have TrueHD/HD MA. While Marantz SR5003 too has HDMI in/out but in addition also has TrueHD/HD MA capability. Are we saying that it will not make any difference if I have BD35 with either SR 4003 or SR 5003? This clarification will be very helpful because as pointed out, in that case I might as well invest in a good receiver than the player. Thoughts?
The SR4003 would work but you have to have faith in the bass management you have on the BD player versus the bass management that would be present in say the SR5003. The whole issue of sending PCM versus bitstream to the receiver is confusing but the SR5003 at least gives you all the options versus the SR4003 where you would be dependant on the BD player for the decoding. Good Luck.
 
billy p

billy p

Audioholic Ninja
I agree

The SR4003 would work but you have to have faith in the bass management you have on the BD player versus the bass management that would be present in say the SR5003. The whole issue of sending PCM versus bitstream to the receiver is confusing but the SR5003 at least gives you all the options versus the SR4003 where you would be dependant on the BD player for the decoding. Good Luck.
The only way to ensure you're getting HD audio is either your player or receiver is capable of decoding it. I'm not a foremost expert on this subject but I do believe even earlier variations of HDMI 1.1, 1.2 will also pass it but only as LPCM. And with my experimenting with BR's hd audio I've noticed that PCM basically bypasses your receivers bass mgm.
 
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
Thanks guys. Looks like there is some known and unknown. In the grand scheme of things, it may be the safest bet to go with best capability on both ends (based on affordability of course) I will plan for BD55 for now.
 
M

MrTaxMan

Audiophyte
Hold on... I too wrestled between the BD35 and the BD55. In the end, I choose the 35.
- The main difference between BD35 and BD55 is the hi-def audio quality which is supported through the 7.1 analog outs.
The audio quality is the SAME in both. The BD55 in not superior to the BD35-- except it has more output options. But if you're connecting to your receiver via HDMI, those extra options are moot.

- Analog (using 7.1 out in BD55) is better than digital (using co-ax in BD35) but the "drop off", which I guess refers to the deterioration in sound quality, from BD55 to BD35 is minimal.
Analog 7.1 is better than co-ax... but not because of the players. It would be the case no matter what player/receiver combo you have. There is no drop-off when going to the BD35. They have the same electronics.

- If one has a HDMI receiver, then it does not make a difference whether you own BD35 or BD55. Is this a correct statement? Or do I need to specifically have a receiver which has TrueHD/HD MA feature? For eg. the Marantz SR4003 has HDMI in/out but does not have TrueHD/HD MA. While Marantz SR5003 too has HDMI in/out but in addition also has TrueHD/HD MA capability. Are we saying that it will not make any difference if I have BD35 with either SR 4003 or SR 5003? This clarification will be very helpful because as pointed out, in that case I might as well invest in a good receiver than the player. Thoughts?
This is true. If you have a newer HDMI receiver then you won't need the analog outputs and then you might as well save the money and get the BD35. Let it do all the decoding. I have a hi-end HDMI receiver but it does NOT have DTS-HD MA or TrueHD decoding. I don't need decoding in both places. I let my BD35 decode and pass the audio as PCM.
 
Nomo

Nomo

Audioholic Samurai
Thanks guys. Looks like there is some known and unknown. In the grand scheme of things, it may be the safest bet to go with best capability on both ends (based on affordability of course) I will plan for BD55 for now.
The problem with having the BD55 do the decoding and sending thru 7.1 or 5.1 analog is the loss of the receiver's bass management. the player will be responsible for among other tasks, the cross over frequency. I'm pretty sure on the BD55 it's a fixed 100hz. That's pretty high considering the Axioms in your signature can hit below 50hz on their own. The 100hz cross over will cause some of the dialog to be sent to the sub, something it's not really made to do.

Sending the bitstreamed audio thru HDMI to a receiver that can decode the formats is, IMO, the best option.

There's nothing wrong with spending the extra $100 or so for the extra output options, larger feet, and the blue light, especially if you have the money for it. But $100 can be a sizable upgrade in a receiver when the time comes.

Just a thought.
 
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
I was not aware of the fixed crossover in BD55. That's an interesting point and makes sense why I may not want to use Analogs out from the player to the receiver. And if that is the case, then it makes sense to go with BD35 and invest the difference in a receiver.

And nope...I do not have money I can spend on blue light :) It's just that I had about $150 in Amazon gift certificates and so the net I am paying out of pocket is pretty less.

I already ordered the BD55, but can always return it. For BD35 my option is going to Costco since they have a deal going on the BD35. But their model says "DMP-BD35AK"....note the extra "A". Not sure if this is any different from BD35K.

Maybe I can have a little showdown between the two.
 
Nomo

Nomo

Audioholic Samurai
Maybe I can have a little showdown between the two.
That would be of benefit to yourself and many here.
I for one would be interested in your conclusions should you decide to go that route.
 
billy p

billy p

Audioholic Ninja
I was not aware of the fixed crossover in BD55. That's an interesting point and makes sense why I may not want to use Analogs out from the player to the receiver. And if that is the case, then it makes sense to go with BD35 and invest the difference in a receiver.

And nope...I do not have money I can spend on blue light :) It's just that I had about $150 in Amazon gift certificates and so the net I am paying out of pocket is pretty less.

I already ordered the BD55, but can always return it. For BD35 my option is going to Costco since they have a deal going on the BD35. But their model says "DMP-BD35AK"....note the extra "A". Not sure if this is any different from BD35K.

Maybe I can have a little showdown between the two.
All you really need is the bd55, since its capable of doing both.:)
 
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
Got the BD55 last this past Friday. Played Batman Begins BR on it. Had it running in 15 minutes from the time I got the package inside the house, so all features were factory setting. First impressions are:

1. Clear and definite improvement from standard DVD even though my PJ is just 720p. Next I will be checking the upconversion capability using SD disc in BD55 (same movie)

2. Fabulous improvement in audio, even though I used coax. I have never experienced sound like this in my HT before, never knew my speakers could sound this way :D I will be trying the analogs in a few days and let's see the difference. As pointed out in the earlier post, with this test I should not need to get the BD35, we ll see.

I would like to hear what settings, if any, I should tweak on the BD55 to check different performances (both visual and audio) Meanwhile I will be going through the manual to play around a bit.
 
billy p

billy p

Audioholic Ninja
Once you set up the 55 with analog m/c just remember that all the BM will bypass your receiver. You'll need to set up and configure all your speakers via the player. Most of the discussions regarding the lack of bass which is encountered by using analog m/c can be offset by reducing the sound level on your mains which will help to better augment your sub into your set up. You'll need to do this because the player has no adjustment levels for the sub, only time or distance delays. Another thing to remember you must set the sub's output in the receivers EXT mode to a least +10dbs, I had mine set at +15. Once you have the analog and the digital connected to the BD55, you'll be able to switch out & distinguish between the two audio formats by using your receiver and decide for yourself. Otherwise, good luck.

Regards, Bill:)
 
Last edited:
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
Thanks Billy. I will plan on doing that.

Incidentally I decided to try out the analog output just a few minutes ago. I was able to fish out some old RCA cables, plugged them in, checked the connections properly and then started the movie....No sound! After re-checking the connections, flipping through the manual and fiddling with the player settings, I realized my receiver was set on DVD/Analog as the source. I changed this to 6 CH Direct and sound materialized! duh!

BUT, I was able to run the test for just a couple of minutes before I hit the "No HT Sound" curfew at home, so will continue testing tomorrow.

What you mentioned is exactly what I fear. My impression, from the brief listening, was that the sound quality (or depth) had deteriorated with the analogs. So I am a bit disappointed. Interestingly, the last posting on the "Bitstream vs PCM" thread in this forum asks the very question I have...What is the best configuration of a BD Player (BD55 in my case) and a non HDMI receiver to get the best audio output.

Video is non issue because I am sending a direct signal from player to PJ via HDMI.
 
billy p

billy p

Audioholic Ninja
IMO the coax! I spend a lot of time tweaking the analog and I was never 100% happy. Each time I switched back and forth between the two I just preferred the digital, although the analog had some benefits, the SQ via my receiver doing the processing just seemed better IMO. You'll need to do some tweaking of your set up and decide for yourself, I had both hooked up for about a week and its why I decide to return the 55 and buy a HDMI receiver. As for the SD playback the 55 does an excellent job, but once you view BR, yikes! :)
 
Last edited:
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
Agree on the BRs PQ, the only deterrent...the price of BRs. I am sure that will adjust over time.

One question...if I am to stick with the old non hdmi receiver for another year or so and if I go for BD35, would I use the 2 channel output or the optical for audio? I guess optical would be the way to go. Is optical better, worse or same as coax?

It may end being the case that BD55 is the best option for now for me in order to take the advantage of the coax.
 
billy p

billy p

Audioholic Ninja
Agree on the BRs PQ, the only deterrent...the price of BRs. I am sure that will adjust over time.

One question...if I am to stick with the old non hdmi receiver for another year or so and if I go for BD35, would I use the 2 channel output or the optical for audio? I guess optical would be the way to go. Is optical better, worse or same as coax?

It may end being the case that BD55 is the best option for now for me in order to take the advantage of the coax.
Only the 55 has coax & fiber optic, and the 35 has no coax. IMO they're are same!
 
S

sahihai

Junior Audioholic
Will keep BD55

I ve decided to keep BD55 and not try out the BD 35. This is mainly due to the reason that I ran audio tests using Coax versus Analog on the BD55 itself. I am pretty amazed at what output I get from the 6 channels in BD55. I ve read many threads and agree that bass management is a problem, but the output that the BD55 sends overall is pretty effective from a bass stand point too. All in all, I love what I hear and see from BD55. Also, comparing with Coax, I found the 6 channel output very good, so that is one reason the BD35 is out of question for me now.

I am not a AV techie, so my tests were purely on what I heard. But what I did do is play with as many settings as possible and measured the output using a SPL meter. Attached are the results which show the variations in the DB levels with various settings against Bitstream and PCM. The "Final" column is what I have decided to keep.

Of course, I will continue testing further with different content and update results if any.
 

Attachments

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top