Finally, totally in HD

[3db]

My Christmas present....

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=0665000FS10124075&catid=25323&logon=&langid=EN


I'm finally totally immersed in HD now. Got the Display, got the Blu-Ray, and got the receiver with the HD audio codecs...

 

[DJ in TX]

My Christmas present....

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=0665000FS10124075&catid=25323&logon=&langid=EN


I'm finally totally immersed in HD now. Got the Display, got the Blu-Ray, and got the receiver with the HD audio codecs...

I guess we know what you are thankful for this year , or at least one of the things. Congrats. I hope to be completely HD as well in the next 6 months or so. I wasn't really planning to go blu-ray for at least another year, but prices on players are getting ridiculously low.

 

[Adam]

Congratulations!

So, what are you watching?

 

[3db]

Congratulations!

So, what are you watching?

Have to wait for Christmas.

Will I notice big difference between standrad DVD upconverted and a Blu-Ray?

 

[Adam]

Will I notice big difference between standrad DVD upconverted and a Blu-Ray?

I forget which display you have, but odds are - YES!

Of course, it also depends on the source material. A well-made blu-ray disc will have quite a bit more detail to it than an upconverted DVD. After all, the DVD only has 480 lines of information.

 

[Alex2507]

Will I notice big difference between standrad DVD upconverted and a Blu-Ray?

So they say and it's also said that it depends on the movie.

What I have noticed on the well done Blu-rays that I have seen is that of course the primary object on the screen is more focused and everything else is focused as well so it doesn't matter what you focus on. It's all crystal clear.

I didn't read everything so I can only hope you were talking about video quality.
I'm too lazy to actually feel shame.

 

[3db]

So they say and it's also said that it depends on the movie.

What I have noticed on the well done Blu-rays that I have seen is that of course the primary object on the screen is more focused and everything else is focused as well so it doesn't matter what you focus on. It's all crystal clear.

I didn't read everything so I can only hope you were talking about video quality.
I'm too lazy to actually feel shame.

Yer safe... it was just video I was referring too

 

[mtrycrafts]

My Christmas present....

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=0665000FS10124075&catid=25323&logon=&langid=EN


I'm finally totally immersed in HD now. Got the Display, got the Blu-Ray, and got the receiver with the HD audio codecs...

Interesting page you posted The Monster cable costs as much as that Sony BD player Maybe that is all one needs is just that cable and it will play the discs as well

 

[PENG]

Yer safe... it was just video I was referring too

I kind of agree with Alex. I would also add that it depends a lot on the individual. I know many people just do not find much difference between a good quality DVD and an average quality BR using 50 to 55 inch screen from 10 ft away. This is assuming the BD player does a decent job in upscaling 480 to 1080. On the other hand, anyone should be able to notice a big difference between a good quality BR movie and an average to good quality DVD especially when watching from less than 10 ft.

 

[jostenmeat]

My Christmas present....

http://www.futureshop.ca/catalog/proddetail.asp?sku_id=0665000FS10124075&catid=25323&logon=&langid=EN


I'm finally totally immersed in HD now. Got the Display, got the Blu-Ray, and got the receiver with the HD audio codecs...

It's not the Tchaikovsky that you love (well, there is his 6th on there), and it's pretty expensive, and it's 1080i (hopefully your TV deinterlaces well), but I really do think you would love this title.

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60405

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

Interesting page you posted The Monster cable costs as much as that Sony BD player Maybe that is all one needs is just that cable and it will play the discs as well

Too funny!!

 

[Spesh]

Nice. I think i'm going to incorporate a blu ray player into the HTPC that i'm going to build.

 

[3db]

My first Blu Ray experience was with Star Trek

Just an update

I got the Sony BDPS360 Blu Ray player and played my 1st bluray, Star Trek. Since its my 1st BluRay, I have nothing to compare it too. I did notice an improvement in picture quality but as far as the soundtrack goes, I didn't notice any difference in sound quality over standard AC3. Anyone else reach the same conclusion of the lossless codecs over the lossy codecs? Could it be that the soundtrack for Star Trekl isn't stellar to begin with?

I must add that the loading times for this Blu Ray title was a little longer than a standard DVD but not painfully longer. I wonder if this player is a fairly fast laoding player.

 

[PENG]

Just an update

I got the Sony BDPS360 Blu Ray player and played my 1st bluray, Star Trek. Since its my 1st BluRay, I have nothing to compare it too. I did notice an improvement in picture quality but as far as the soundtrack goes, I didn't notice any difference in sound quality over standard AC3. Anyone else reach the same conclusion of the lossless codecs over the lossy codecs? Could it be that the soundtrack for Star Trekl isn't stellar to begin with?

I must add that the loading times for this Blu Ray title was a little longer than a standard DVD but not painfully longer. I wonder if this player is a fairly fast laoding player.

Congratulations! Now you can spend hours and hours playing with the thing during the holidays.

I also find it hard to discern the difference between the HD codecs and standard DTS. And that's the kind of things we have to be careful with hearsays such as "day and night difference", "huge improvements", blablabla that goes on and on........

By the way, I have a S350 and as far as I can tell it produces PQ and SQ as good as my other players but DVD upsaling is not as good as my PS3 and other players. I believe the S360 is supposed to do a better job upscaling, according to a couple of British reviews I read. NA reviews seem to be generally less kind to Sony players. For C$149.00 (or less) I cannot think of a better one.

 

[Vracer111]

Just an update

I got the Sony BDPS360 Blu Ray player and played my 1st bluray, Star Trek. Since its my 1st BluRay, I have nothing to compare it too. I did notice an improvement in picture quality but as far as the soundtrack goes, I didn't notice any difference in sound quality over standard AC3. Anyone else reach the same conclusion of the lossless codecs over the lossy codecs? Could it be that the soundtrack for Star Trekl isn't stellar to begin with?

I must add that the loading times for this Blu Ray title was a little longer than a standard DVD but not painfully longer. I wonder if this player is a fairly fast laoding player.

Are you certain that you were passing the Dolby True HD signal through your Receiver to your speakers? Sometimes you have to play with Receiver/Blu-Ray settings to get "Dolby True HD" or "DTS-HD Master Audio" to actually work. I have the BDP-S360 as well, connected to a NAD T-747, and it took a little playing with the setup on both to actually get the HD codecs working.

The sound track for Stark Trek Blu-Ray is really impressive, got a perfect Audio score in the review at AVS. The surround envelopment, dialog clarity, mid-bass, and bass is all excellent. I don't have the DVD of Star Trek to compare it against though. When I got the system playing HD codecs properly, the first comparison i did was WALL-E. There was definately a noticeable audio improvement with the Blu-Ray DTS HD Master Audio codec over the DVD Dolby Digital 5.1. Much more detailed sound environment, better clarity of bass, and dialog seemed more intelligible. To me the difference (though exaggerated in this example) is like listening to a song from an MP3 file, then putting the CD in and listening to the same song... there will be a noticeable increase in quality.

The loading times for the BDP-S360 is slow compared to many other Blu-Ray players from threads I've seen here and on AVS...but it really doesn't bother me too much either.

 

[3db]

Are you certain that you were passing the Dolby True HD signal through your Receiver to your speakers? Sometimes you have to play with Receiver/Blu-Ray settings to get "Dolby True HD" or "DTS-HD Master Audio" to actually work. I have the BDP-S360 as well, connected to a NAD T-747, and it took a little playing with the setup on both to actually get the HD codecs working. .

I'm positive that I'm getting the lossless audio becuase the Dolby True Digital is displayed on my Yamaha. Like you but in the opposite vain, I don't have the standard DVD to compare it too. Don't get me wrong. It sounds great but so does the regular DTS sound track on "Master & Commander" on regular DVD. I just thought there would be a huge step up in audio but I'm getting the feeling that the lossless codecs have been overhyped to some degree.

 

[Adam]

...I'm getting the feeling that the lossless codecs have been overhyped to some degree.

I haven't seen much hype on them, but I'm another person who didn't experience much (if any) difference. After reading a number of posts on here, I didn't really expect much, though. It seems that some people can tell a difference, and others can't. I bought my new receiver mostly for other features, but getting the new decoding was a plus.

 

[PENG]

It sounds great but so does the regular DTS sound track on "Master & Commander" on regular DVD. I just thought there would be a huge step up in audio but I'm getting the feeling that the lossless codecs have been overhyped to some degree.

Again, I have EXACTLY the same experience!! It sounds good but so does DTS/DD. I would say the following:

1. There are more noticeable difference between a disc with high quality transfer and one that is poor or medicre.

2. The difference I experience is like the difference between a good SACD and a Telarc CD. The differences are audible but you have to really listen hard to notice them. I suppose to certain extent it could also be due to our short memory. It is hard to really to A/B properly at home.

PQ is a different story, the differences are much greater for sure.

 

[jostenmeat]

Don't get me wrong. It sounds great but so does the regular DTS sound track on "Master & Commander" on regular DVD. I just thought there would be a huge step up in audio but I'm getting the feeling that the lossless codecs have been overhyped to some degree.

Well, first of all, in my subjective experiences, DTS always sounded significantly better than DD. What is the bitrate range for these two, oh was it something like 768 kps - 1.5 mps for DTS, and ~480-640 kps for DD?

Then not only is Master and Commander DTS, but it's one of the reference audio movie tracks according to those who care about these things. I've never seen the movie at home, because I'm disappointed that the video is not better.

Now, for many movies, I would also agree there is overhyping. I just don't think movie soundtracks need to be super resolving with audio. It's mostly processed stuff anyways for effects. OTOH, sometimes I swear the mix might be different, or if it isn't, then WOW. . . and I think of one in particular, oh wait I started a thread once . . . lemme fetch it:

TrueHD vs DD on the Dark Knight.

 

[PENG]

Then not only is Master and Commander DTS, but it's one of the reference audio movie tracks according to those who care about these things. I've never seen the movie at home, because I'm disappointed that the video is not better.

I have the M and C DVD and have no intention to replace it with a BR one. The sound effect is absolutely fantastic in regular DTS, and to me it is one of the best among my DVD, HDDVD and BR collection. It may be better in DTS-HD MA but I am not going to find out.

One thing I have not tried yet, is to do a comparison using one of those concert BR (presumably less processed sound) such as Chris Botti in Boston. I should have time to try it this weekend.