Panasonic BD35 Vs PS3?

[oli collett]

I would always advise you spend the most money on the components that make the most difference to the picture quality. For example I would put as much money into teh screen as possible and get a Kuro, then a cheapy blu-ray player like the goodmans reviewed by the guys at that demo in Borehamwood, rather than spending less on something like a commercial panasonic screen and a much more expensive blu-ray player.

The same thing goes for Hi-fi, it's better to put as much money as possible into speakers (weakest link), but also make sure you can get the best amp to drive them properly. Then invest the rest left over in a source. My stereo front end at RRP is about £3k, well a few years ago, and the lyngdorf amps are now towards £2k (I did pay a lot less though ), and my cd player is an old marantz cd-63 with a few £100 worth of mods. Much better sound than if I spent £1k+ on a CDP and compromised on speakers and the amp. Not even going to bother talking about the effects of a room, just kept it simple

Indeed - if you have a look at frequency response curves of a good room you'll realise that spending countless amounts on improving some of the other components is a bit silly.

Another thing that the "GIGO" philosophy misses is when people talk about money spent on a system. If you spend £1000 on a CD player instead of £200, will it offer the same level of improvement that a £1000 pair of speakers would over a £200 pair? To the more extreme end, I don't know how the supposed uber CD players can make a massive difference because something like a Benchmark DAC is basically perfect. Then again we could start talking about these immeasureable differences that certain hi-fi types like to talk about in the high end world yet fail to explain with any kind of logic or reason.

 

[Dangerous Dave]

Hi

Has anyone happened to compared the Panasonic's BD35 Blu-Ray player against the PS3's Blu-Ray drive, if so which player
produces the very best high definition PQ with Blu-Ray disc's?

I apologise if this question has been asked before, as im a newcomer when it comes to Blu-Ray.

Thanks

All depends what screen you are going to use it with if you see a difference or not, I have compared both on good screens and the BD35 will offer a slightly better picture over a PS3 not by much though. If you go up the range to say a Denon 3800BD you will get a even better picture, I have seen this with my own eyes. The question you have to ask is is the price difference worth it for the better picture.

There is also a lot of debate going on about the difference in bitstreaming HD audio from various players where technically it should all be identical however people claim this is not the case. I have never tried this myself but hoping to try this soon once a couple more quality HD preamp/processors are released.

As is always the case you should demo the equipment you are looking to buy and decide from this what you want.

 

[9designs2]

Indeed - if you have a look at frequency response curves of a good room you'll realise that spending countless amounts on improving some of the other components is a bit silly.

Another thing that the "GIGO" philosophy misses is when people talk about money spent on a system. If you spend £1000 on a CD player instead of £200, will it offer the same level of improvement that a £1000 pair of speakers would over a £200 pair? To the more extreme end, I don't know how the supposed uber CD players can make a massive difference because something like a Benchmark DAC is basically perfect. Then again we could start talking about these immeasureable differences that certain hi-fi types like to talk about in the high end world yet fail to explain with any kind of logic or reason.

Because of room acoustics is why it is crazy to spend all the money on speakers!!!.... They can't change the room sound...... So finding speakers that work best in the room is the action to take, that is not related to cost.
Or buying big floor standers as most recommend....
Where as better electronics will always feed a better signal to what ever speakers are used in what ever room. Hence better VFM.

Match the speakers to the room acoustics, buy best front end and amp as you can afford.

Your forgetting that a DAC converts to analogue ???? Hence not all dacs are the same, people get hung up on this It's digital thing...... no, somewhere it goes analogue, and this where the quality is heard.

 

[oli collett]

Because of room acoustics is why it is crazy to spend all the money on speakers!!!.... They can't change the room sound...... So finding speakers that work best in the room is the action to take, that is not related to cost.
Or buying big floor standers as most recommend....
Where as better electronics will always feed a better signal to what ever speakers are used in what ever room. Hence better VFM.

Match the speakers to the room acoustics, buy best front end and amp as you can afford.

Your forgetting that a DAC converts to analogue ???? Hence not all dacs are the same, people get hung up on this It's digital thing...... no, somewhere it goes analogue, and this where the quality is heard.

I wholeheartedly agree that you should match the speakers to the room, but with the amount of speakers out there you shouldn't struggle to find speakers that match your room and also fit in the budget.

I'm not forgetting that the DAC converts to analogue at all - my point is that the point of a DAC is to provide a transparent output of it's input. The Benchmark DAC produces is so transparent that I cannot see how spending a small fortune on an even more expensive CD player/DAC is worth it?

 

[9designs2]

I'm not forgetting that the DAC converts to analogue at all - my point is that the point of a DAC is to provide a transparent output of it's input. The Benchmark DAC produces is so transparent that I cannot see how spending a small fortune on an even more expensive CD player/DAC is worth it?

DAC's are far from transparent, or the same, and big difference can be had... the job transferring the digital feed to analogue can be done by many methods and designers employ a whole host of techniques to do it, in the pursuit of the performance they want or can afford. Where this is done in a CD player, a DAC or a media stream, or AV amp, it has a big influence on the performance and musicality of the final sound..... Go listen...A good dac/front end is worth the investment in IMO..... I moved from a Universal player to a Media streaming DAC, which basically gave me a better DAC design.... and was a good upgrade in sound.
Not saying the Benchmark DAC is not good or nice, not tried it myself, but it's not going to be the last word in Digital/Analogue audio sound quality !

 

[photoshop]

This thread reminds me of other threads that go like "£10 HDMI Cable or £100 HDMI Cable".......

Anyway, i'll add my 2 pence worth.

My friend has the BD35 player. He got it bundled in with his Panny Plasma. He also has an Onkyo 606.

I have a PS3 and a Sony DSG820.

I've viewed 1080p material on his setup and then compared with mine. I can not see any difference.

 

[FrankJH]

This thread reminds me of other threads that go like "£10 HDMI Cable or £100 HDMI Cable".......

Anyway, i'll add my 2 pence worth.

My friend has the BD35 player. He got it bundled in with his Panny Plasma. He also has an Onkyo 606.

I have a PS3 and a Sony DSG820.

I've viewed 1080p material on his setup and then compared with mine. I can not see any difference.

What screen do you have - out of interest?

 

[oli collett]

DAC's are far from transparent, or the same, and big difference can be had... the job transferring the digital feed to analogue can be done by many methods and designers employ a whole host of techniques to do it, in the pursuit of the performance they want or can afford. Where this is done in a CD player, a DAC or a media stream, or AV amp, it has a big influence on the performance and musicality of the final sound..... Go listen...A good dac/front end is worth the investment in IMO..... I moved from a Universal player to a Media streaming DAC, which basically gave me a better DAC design.... and was a good upgrade in sound.
Not saying the Benchmark DAC is not good or nice, not tried it myself, but it's not going to be the last word in Digital/Analogue audio sound quality !

So, you are saying that it is impossible for one DAC to be indistinguishable from another? That nothing in hi-fi could ever be perfectly transparent?

 

[Kamakazie!]

There's not much proof that a lot of AV kit makes a difference, either perceived or otherwise. In the digital age people are finding it easier to convince people that a certain thing can not make a difference and with the likes of blu-ray players it's relatively easy to do simple side by side tests.

Just because the majority of people can't tell the difference, it doesn't mean that there isn't one.

These arguments about differing quality of digital streams has gone on for years. Since the inception of HDMI it has just gotten more prevalent.
The fact is that there are cases where equipment will make a difference even when streaming over HDMI.
Just because something is digital, it doesn't prevent there being errors. You get degradation of signal in all types of transmission, even optical. In terms of audio, there can apparently be timing issues when players are pushing the data out to a receiver etc. which can result in lower quality.
If digital transmits perfectly then why do you have error correction in packets sent over networks? Bit flips occur regularly for example.

I've no experience with any BD player other than my media centre and there might be little (if any difference) between the ones you are talking about but to say there is no reason for the equipment to make any difference simply makes no sense to me.

lunarwolf i don't get what you are trying to say. What makes a BD player any different than a non-upscaling HDMI DVD player other than the resolution of the image output? DVD is all digital just as BD is. Different players make a difference with DVD just as they most likely do with BD. The higher res just makes those difference less distinguishable.
Many people with media PCs seem to think that different codecs make a difference to the PQ on their films and this should then also be the case for different players.

 

[photoshop]

What screen do you have - out of interest?

50" PZ80

 

[9designs2]

So, you are saying that it is impossible for one DAC to be indistinguishable from another? That nothing in hi-fi could ever be perfectly transparent?

Many DAC's use a standard chipset, and same installation, Mr average DAC, so do it better !!!..... Nothing is perfect, and digital doesn't make it so.

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

Looks like some more fun has been had. I would comment, but Oli is one of two people (in total) on my ignore list, so I guess I won't bother.

 

[lunarwolf]

Just because the majority of people can't tell the difference, it doesn't mean that there isn't one.

These arguments about differing quality of digital streams has gone on for years. Since the inception of HDMI it has just gotten more prevalent.
The fact is that there are cases where equipment will make a difference even when streaming over HDMI.
Just because something is digital, it doesn't prevent there being errors. You get degradation of signal in all types of transmission, even optical. In terms of audio, there can apparently be timing issues when players are pushing the data out to a receiver etc. which can result in lower quality.
If digital transmits perfectly then why do you have error correction in packets sent over networks? Bit flips occur regularly for example.

I've no experience with any BD player other than my media centre and there might be little (if any difference) between the ones you are talking about but to say there is no reason for the equipment to make any difference simply makes no sense to me.

lunarwolf i don't get what you are trying to say. What makes a BD player any different than a non-upscaling HDMI DVD player other than the resolution of the image output? DVD is all digital just as BD is. Different players make a difference with DVD just as they most likely do with BD. The higher res just makes those difference less distinguishable.
Many people with media PCs seem to think that different codecs make a difference to the PQ on their films and this should then also be the case for different players.

digital = 0s and 1s, so either it gets through and works or it doesnt. there is no loss scenario or inferior signal in HDMI, that is a fallacy. FYI there is a very intersting video interview on Avforums if you want to know more http://www.avforums.com/forums/hdmi-cables-switches/900577-hdmi-event-avforums-tv.html

there are differences in BDP when it comes to SACD, upscaling DVD, the amount of calibration you can do, remote control, build quality, noise of operation, loading times etc.... again if you want to know more there is tons of info on AVforums from people who are very knowledgeable. Personally I have tested several BDP players at home and could noy see any difference in Blu Ray playback. I suggest you read up and it will make more sense if you still don't understand, better yet test it for yourself. As I said before if you want your PQ and audio to improve it is best to invest in a proper display and amp/speaker set-up rather than a BDP.

 

[DigitalReaper]

digital = 0s and 1s, so either it gets through and works or it doesnt.

Just like audio CDs, no need for any error correction at all and there's never any problems getting the data from the disc to the DAC... </sarcasm>

Back in reality however errors do happen, most of the time these are either corrected (using partity data or the like) or if unable to be properly corrected the correct value of the bits can be guessed. For example, CD players make up sound to fill in corrupt data in such a way that even though it's most likely not correct it's unnoticeable to the human ear.

If the data loss is very bad you'll get nothing but random noise though.

 

[9designs2]

So we concluded here, re OP, that BD35 for movies only and PS3 if you want to game as well, and forget all the Internet hype about the difference, as you will never notice anyway !......... In my case I'm thinking Sony 550, as I need the 5.1 analogue out connections..... That's when I give using the PC and PowerDVD to the PJ, and s/pdif out to amp..... oh dear I am so old school ....

 

[-Ad-]

Meh I started something and pushed this over to Hi-fi

It's a whole new debate, but il stick with a relatively good source and the most revealing speakers you can find, but then that would descend into what types of presentation people prefer.

Ah the joys of AV

 

[9designs2]

Meh I started something and pushed this over to Hi-fi

It's a whole new debate, but il stick with a relatively good source and the most revealing speakers you can find, but then that would descend into what types of presentation people prefer.

Ah the joys of AV

LOL...... your "most revealing speakers" will be excellent at telling you every time you switch on that you only have a "relatively good source" and hence a relatively good sound, that is only does a relatively good job at entertaining you.......... enjoy

 

[Reality Bites]

What i can't understand is that those in this thread who have stated that all BD players output the same quality sound and vision are recommending to people to try different players in their budget in other threads.

If they are all the same, why not just say to people pick the one with the connections you require and buy it as cheap as possible?

 

[lunarwolf]

the Sammy BDP is region locked afaik, the Sony and Pana aren't.

 

[FrankJH]

the Sammy BDP is region locked afaik, the Sony and Pana aren't.

I think you may find all of them locked or unlocked for dvd depending on where you look

For BD it makes no difference anyway as all will be Region 2/B (Europe) anyway unless you import - inwhich case the model number changes I think and all will play the region free BD's available and refuse those discs that are from a different region