Blu ray player picture differences

ArchAnGeL

ArchAnGeL

ArchAnGeL

Associate
Joined
4 Apr 2003
Posts
1,821
Location
Manchester
Does the picture quality differ between different blu ray players?

I am expecting it does after reding different player reviews but I can't get my head around why it should. The player takes a digital signal from the disc and delivers a digital signal to the tv do how is the information changed. Is it codec related with less powerful chipsets using more efficient but less precise codecs (I'm thinking core avc vs libra etc)

Sorry this sounds like a really noob question, it is early.

Also how do standalone players compare to blue ray dives in an htpc? Surely the drive itself has no impact on picture quality so it just depends how it is processed. Will my htpc be able to match a standalone player? Am I missing out on anything by playing an uncompressed blue ray iso compared to a standalone and a disc?


For reference I am viewing on a 3 yr old 50" Panasonic plasma. It is 1080 but was a budget model (can't remember the model no)
 
I suppose in theory it shouldn't as using hdmi as a digital pass through it would be acting solely as a transport. Jitter and other things aside it should be the tv that makes the majority of difference. The major differences in real world price players are things like loading times, extra interactive features from the web and noise when in operation.
 
My understanding is that a good number of the upper region BD players add video processing enhancements. Noise reduction, smoothing or sharpening being examples of the type of things they can do. Whether you like/want those "enhancements" is another thing altogether.
So I wouldn't expect all BD players to look exactly the same on screen.

I guess a good analogy would be how many TVs are displayed in shops, i.e. with a default value in settings of "make your eyes bleed with oversaturation". Personally I hate it.
 
Blu-ray players certainly do look different.When you move up to products such as the Oppo range and higher then they do a far better job of presenting a picture with extra shadow detail and depth. The most impressive I have seen and installed so far is the Arcam BDP100.
 
I thought it was the display that affects picture quality when the blu ray player is just acting as a transport ? ..... like Mr Subkebe says, the only time you'll see a difference is if the blu ray player is altering the data to add video processing .....

I prefer to make adjustments to the picture through the display settings if they are required ..... it keeps it simple if you get problems. I'd rather have my player just send the data without adding / subtracting anything tbh ....
 
Scougar said:
"Adding shadow" to a 2D picture????
Click to expand...
No, shadow detail.

Google "Gamma Curve". You'll see there's a relationship between the brightness level and the colour of grey (grey scale - the image brightness from black to white) that governs how well or poorly a source or display device represents detail in the shadow areas that was meant to be seen.

The average DVD player, Blu-ray player, games console, TV etc has a Gamma Curve biased towards making the picture look contrasty. Shadow detail is hidden (crushed out) in favour of making the blacks look blacker. Increasing the gamma on those devices makes the shadow detail better but makes the blacks look washed out too.

Better quality sources and displays can maintain convincing blacks while also rendering the shadow detail correctly. It's a sign of quality video processing and flexible set-up circuitry. When you remember that a video device has a dynamic range of less than 210 shades of grey, and yet we are trying to represent the much larger range of a cine-film or commercial digi-cine camera can capture then it starts to become apparent that we are trying to fit a quart in a pint pot. Those higher quality Blu-ray players show that the source format is less of a limitation than one would expect once the budget is there to process the data stream sympathetically. :)
 
OP, yes there can be a massive difference, just like dvd. get a £30 bush dvd player from tesco and compare to a high end one.

dont better ones have a better DAC too so they can do better colour spectrum? deep colour etc.
 
realBabelfish said:
OP, yes there can be a massive difference, just like dvd. get a £30 bush dvd player from tesco and compare to a high end one.

dont better ones have a better DAC too so they can do better colour spectrum? deep colour etc.
Click to expand...

I can vouch for that,having owned a Pioneer player which cost around £150 a couple of years ago.I thought it was a good player until I auditioned a Marantz UD7006 last year,which weighed in at £700.The difference between the two in terms of picture quality was immediately noticeable,the Marantz revealing more detail,sharper imaging with an almost holographic picture quality,making the Pioneer seem flat in comparison.
Sound quality is also superb,giving more authority and slam to movie soundtracks and absolutely blitzing the Pioneer when it comes to music,not to mention a far faster bluray load time and the abillity to play super audio cd's as well.
Both these players were set up in my own home theatre using my 60" Pioneer Kuro plasma panel,Marantz pre/power amplifiers along with a Kef TDM reference speaker system,allowing for direct A/B comparisons between the two players.
I ended up buying the Marantz,I was that impressed by it:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom