Which 4k player?

[cameron paterson]

Would this Sony 4k have noticeably better sound with movies and music over the Sony UBP X800? I tried the Panasonic UB420 and the Sony sounded much better than the Panny with music especially! Only want this Sony if it will have better sound...

Sony ES UBP-X1100ES

4K Ultra HD Blu-ray player with Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth®

www.crutchfield.com

 

[Movie2099]

Would this Sony 4k have noticeably better sound with movies and music over the Sony UBP X800? I tried the Panasonic UB420 and the Sony sounded much better than the Panny with music especially! Only want this Sony if it will have better sound...

Sony ES UBP-X1100ES

4K Ultra HD Blu-ray player with Wi-Fi® and Bluetooth®

www.crutchfield.com

The Sony 1100ES will have more features. Not sure it will necessarily "sound" better. What kind of sound improvement are you looking for? Is this for movies? music?

 

[cameron paterson]

The sound was more crisp and authorative and better kick coming from the front speakers

 

[Movie2099]

The sound was more crisp and authorative and better kick coming from the front speakers

So you're plugging your speakers into the 4k player? not AVR?

 

[cameron paterson]

No theyre plugged into the AVR. I only tested the sound with music and the Sony blows away the Panny!

 

[Movie2099]

No theyre plugged into the AVR. I only tested the sound with music and the Sony blows away the Panny!

Panasonic has been known to have a better picture than the Sony's. Can't speak to the sound. But if the sound is going through your AVR and being processed into whatever sound codec you choose, then it really shouldn't matter. I would not think one "blows away" the other in sound performance.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Sounds like a setting issue.

 

[Gmoney]

Sonys 4K X700 sounds great! to me anyways for music CD and Movies also.

 

[bruin62]

this is where i get confused on bluray players. if the player is set to bitstream isn't the player just playing the disc the reciever does the work like atmos or do you still need a player that supports atmos even if your receiver already does?

 

[mtrycrafts]

Panasonic has been known to have a better picture than the Sony's. Can't speak to the sound. But if the sound is going through your AVR and being processed into whatever sound codec you choose, then it really shouldn't matter. I would not think one "blows away" the other in sound performance.

Depends on the music.
If one segment has more wind blowing, then it will blow it away.

 

[j_garcia]

this is where i get confused on bluray players. if the player is set to bitstream isn't the player just playing the disc the reciever does the work like atmos or do you still need a player that supports atmos even if your receiver already does?

Yes, that is right. With a digital connection, the receiver is always decoding it. Via an analog connection would be the only time it is not.

 

[Trebdp83]

The receiver will decode it if bitstream is set for output. Setting the player to output PCM will result in it decoding the signal and multichannel PCM signals being sent to the receiver. But, Dolby Atmos metadata and DTS:X metadata will be lost when doing so. The player should always be set to bitstream.

 

[j_garcia]

IMO, PCM is for devices that don't have their own decoding. It would not be used in the case of most AVRs, since I have not seen an AVR did not have the major codecs in a LONG time.

 

[Trebdp83]

Right, but some will fiddle with settings and may not know much about what different settings actually do to output signals. And, some may have receivers with cross upmixing restrictions for Dolby and DTS. If they do not have height speakers and aren't concerned with Atmos or DTS:X, they can decode all signals in the player and they can potentially free up any cross up mixing restrictions from the receiver as it won't care about cross up mixing a multichannel PCM signal. There are so many combinations of devices and speaker configurations out there that there simply is not one universal setting for everybody.

 

[mtrycrafts]

IMO, PCM is for devices that don't have their own decoding. It would not be used in the case of most AVRs, since I have not seen an AVR did not have the major codecs in a LONG time.

You are not that old.

 

[j_garcia]

You are not that old.

I don't know about that lol. I think it was about when prologic started to be replaced with Dolby Digital and DTS that there was a year or two where some AVRs did not have DTS; pretty much all of them did Dolby. Players at that time had built in decoding and the expensive ones had built in D to A and analog out. My first Sony AVR and my first Marantz did not have DTS. I bought the Marantz because it had multichannel inputs and bought the first Panny player that had DTS and multichannel analog outs.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I don't know about that lol. I think it was about when prologic started to be replaced with Dolby Digital and DTS that there was a year or two where some AVRs did not have DTS; pretty much all of them did Dolby. Players at that time had built in decoding and the expensive ones had built in D to A and analog out. My first Sony AVR and my first Marantz did not have DTS. I bought the Marantz because it had multichannel inputs and bought the first Panny player that had DTS and multichannel analog outs.

Yes, but that was just the other day.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Yes, but that was just the other day.

It does go fast!!!

I used to always leave sources set to pcm. Only since Atmos have I set to bitstream. Iirc, in the “olden” days, one reason for pcm was so you didn’t lose menu sounds, secondary audio , and possibly trailer audio(that might be my sometimers kicking in).

 

[snakeeyes]

I did briefly have one Sony AVR in 1999 or something that had Dolby digital but lacked DTS. It was part of a HTIB 5.1 that was a return item (no box actually) at Best Buy.