CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

**kal** · Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:01 pm Post subject:

Just buy the new $399 40Gb PS3 which is due out out Oct 28th. $399 in Canada and the US. Even comes with Spiderman 3 on Blu-ray.

See: http://www.us.playstation.com

$399 for what's considered the best Blu-ray player out there seems like a no brainer. Even if you don't play any games.

Kal

greg_mitch · Joined: 03 May 2006 Posts: 5320

that won't work too well behind my equipment cabinet door. I would rather not have to have it propped open for the remote to work. Are they coming out with an IR remote.

I would rather spend way less. I have several things that I would consider a no brainer before a $400 blu-ray player.

**kal** · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:50 am Post subject:

greg_mitch · Joined: 03 May 2006 Posts: 5320

Oh cool, I didn't know there was an IR solution. I have an MX850 that I will eventually program to control everything.

I don't think you could implement into an HTPC either for much less. I would rather a standalone for around $200. Who knows though, I have a birthday and xmas coming up. Thumbs Up

Z-Photo · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 1:39 pm Post subject:

I have been VERY impressed with the upconvert abilities of the PS3 on standard DVDs. About the best that I have seen.

kschmit2 · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject:

kschmit2 · Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:09 pm Post subject:

Welwynnick · Joined: 04 May 2006 Posts: 229 Location: Welwyn, Herts, UK

Hi Guys,

Haven't been around for months, but since I (finally) noticed that Dave has moved on, I thought I would give it a go again.

And so pleased to see that Kal has been cutting through the carp. This thread really got to the nub of some of the HDM issues. As successful as Transformers might be, it's not really the sort of material to test an audiophile surround system, and lossless audio won't be missed.

But there's another big piece of the jigsaw that you really have to see. Nature's Journey has finally been released with BD & HD versions that are optimsed for their respective bit-rate limits. The BD version runs 37 Mbps vs 26 Mbps for HD, and if you hadn't noticed, Xylon and msv have put together some fantastic screen shot comparisons:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=925595
http://hd-discs.mbmg.de/naturesjourney_bd-vs-hd/01_detail_2x.html

It's a blind comparison, so no-one knows which is which, but most have guessed. There are differences, but they are small. Have a look. I would just concentrate on the 200% pictures.

Nick

greg_mitch · Joined: 03 May 2006 Posts: 5320

I just looked at the mouse overs. I can't tell a difference in the 200% shot. the sky changes a little but I can't say which is "better".

Am I the only one who CAN'T see a difference? I haven't read the AVS thread.

garyfritz · Joined: 08 Apr 2006 Posts: 12088 Location: Fort Collins, CO

I've always been able to see subtle differences in these mouseover comparisons (but I agree I couldn't say which was "better"), but I can't see ANY difference in these AT ALL.

Even when you see subtle differences, unless there is a clear distinction of which one is better, I claim you'd never notice the difference when watching it. Live video only shows each frame for about 1/24 of a second, and the minor differences get integrated out as the images flash by. They would be identical to the eye IMHO.

**kal** · Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:56 am Post subject:

The differences are SO subtle in those screenshots that it's pretty much meaningless IMHO.

Any minor change to your setup will result in bigger differences than the bitrate differences between the two releases (again IMHO).

Kal

greg_mitch · Joined: 03 May 2006 Posts: 5320

Welwynnick · Joined: 04 May 2006 Posts: 229 Location: Welwyn, Herts, UK

Chuck27 · Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:46 am Post subject:

On a slight tangent, does anyone in Canada rent HD-DVD's yet? I had the misfortune of having to go to Toronto a few months back and in a Blockbuster they were selling them but not renting them.

Mad

When I saw Transformers was coming out on HD-DVD I spent the $34 at FS to get it, and I was not disappointed. Fantastic to watch...I realized afterwards that I had become totally immersed in the movie..and isn't that what having an HT is all about?

Chuck

kschmit2 · Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 11:52 am Post subject:

Welwynnick · Joined: 04 May 2006 Posts: 229 Location: Welwyn, Herts, UK

This is the opportunity for everyone to see once and for all how much bit-rate matters. Only problem is – it doesn’t!

There ARE differences, but even where they are visible at all, they are tiny and only readily seen when magnified. Don’t know about you, but I don’t watch films with a magnifying glass. This won’t be lost on any HD supporter, who ought to be chuffed that their format can do so well with so much lower bit-rate. NJ seems to have proven HD’s assertion that it is “good enough” after all.

But perhaps there are reasons why NJ doesn't make a great comparison after all. The pictures shown in the comparison links look very detailed, but pretty static to me, and the HD bit-rate is probably more than enough to capture everything. To me, when video compression falls short, it’s usually when there’s lots of motion and not so much detail or contrast. Then you can see noise and blocking, especially in shadows and areas with uniform colour and brightness. You can see it in most films, but it looks like NJ isn’t the sort of material to show it up.

Moreover, these artefacts are mostly visible with video, not stills. Subject detail seems to be retained at the expense of backgrounds with most codecs, and with these screenshots, we are generally looking for details. I think that’s probably the wrong place to look to find differences.

The other thing that may affect the value of using NJ is that it’s interlaced video, rather than progressive. There are more and more players that can handle 1080p24 without having any unnecessary video processing stages, like scaling, frame rate conversion and especially de-interlacing. These all tend to degrade the PQ in one way or another, and none more so than de-interlacing. Although many dispalys and processors can handle 1080p24, or perform 3:2 pull-down on 1080i60, that is no use for NJ because it was interlaced at source rather than interlaced for distribution. That means you need really good motion-adaptive video processing to show it to maximum effect. Many displays and processors don’t have that, and will consequently lose half the potential resolution, as they do with HDTV. That may explain why some people have said NJ looks soft. I haven’t seen it yet, and I’m sure it’s NOT soft, but if that’s what people see, then they will never see any benefit from higher bit-rates.

I suspect that the best way to make differences clear is to play two simultaneous videos. Beg, steal or borrow a second player and hook both up a top notch projector and judge it by the seat of your pants.

Nick

greg_mitch · Joined: 03 May 2006 Posts: 5320

OT: sorry

Kai,

which of those ATI cards is the best?

Most likely be editing HDV footage as well.

kschmit2 · Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:22 pm Post subject:

get the fastest one (PCI-E 2600XT GDDR4 - the Sapphire card is runs its fans at minimum speed all the time - very quiet)

oliverg · Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:38 pm Post subject:

Saying "bitrate doesn't matter" is only true to a point. EG cable TV, the lower the bitrate, the lower the PQ. Some of the less watched cable programs have awful PQ but the more watched channels have much higher density bitstreams and the PQ improvement is substantial.

Its like MP3s - 64k sounds noticeably different to MP3s encoded at 320K. However 320K has been shown to be good enough that most people can't tell th difference between CDs and MDs

There will be a point where the bitrate of a 1080P (lets assume codecs are the same) movie will make a difference and after that not so much. It would be interesting to manually dial down the bitstream density and see where the human eye notices differences with highest and lowest..

Kind regards

**AnalogRocks** · Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:55 pm Post subject: