Sony Blu-Ray Player

Burned_Alive · 17 May 2007 at 19:32

james.miller said:
you missed that then huh? i didnt say it was a bluray player that played games, i said it was both. just as sony market it. like that or lump it mate. im not prepared to argue with you about it.

both. not just about games, is it?

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/About

I think you'e the one thats missing parts mate.

Burned_Alive said:
The majority of PS3s will be bought for gaming which makes it primarily a games console.

And thats pretty much all there is to it.

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 20:09

it does both, and thats all there is too it. look on avforums, well anywhere really. lots of people buying it for bluray alone and why not? it was (still is?) cheaper than a dedicated unit. whatever you think its main purpose is besides the point. The fact is that is does both very well indeed - enough to make people buy it for uses other than playing games

I have to agree, I think it needs basics like 5.1 analogue out, 720p playback, dts-hd support and 1080p over analogue to qualify as a stand alone player.

not supporting 720p bd playback is just sill but your other points? thats like saying a next generation console isnt a next generation console unless it has a hard drive and wifi built in. not really - those are things that some people may want but dont necessarily need. if i can play my blurays in wonderful 1080p without the need for component outputs or analogue 5.1 than that makes it a perfect player for me. As im sure many 360 owners will argue that they dont need built in wifi

Joebob · 17 May 2007 at 20:13

Burned_Alive said:
So because you bought yours as a blu-ray player, then that makes every ps3 ever made primarily a blu-ray player? No. The majority of PS3s will be bought for gaming which makes it primarily a games console.

So by that logic the internet is primarily a porn conduit?

Burned_Alive · 17 May 2007 at 20:20

james.miller said:
it does both, and thats all there is too it. look on avforums, well anywhere really. lots of people buying it for bluray alone and why not? it was (still is?) cheaper than a dedicated unit. whatever you think its main purpose is besides the point. The fact is that is does both very well indeed - enough to make people buy it for uses other than playing games

Actually i think you'll find the point was exactly that, most people buy it for gaming, which makes it primarily a games console. But yes, it does do both, obviously.

Joebob said:
So by that logic the internet is primarily a porn conduit?

Why? Do most people get the internet primarily for porn?

Energize · 17 May 2007 at 20:25

james.miller said:
not supporting 720p bd playback is just sill but your other points? thats like saying a next generation console isnt a next generation console unless it has a hard drive and wifi built in. not really - those are things that some people may want but dont necessarily need. if i can play my blurays in wonderful 1080p without the need for component outputs or analogue 5.1 than that makes it a perfect player for me. As im sure many 360 owners will argue that they dont need built in wifi

When pretty much every other standalone players have the features, it is not the same as saying the 360 is not next gen because it doesn't have wifi.

Most amps don't have hdmi, hence the need for analogue outputs, loads of tv's only have 1 hdmi, so if thats being used by sky hd or a pc or hd-dvd player, then they can't get 1080p without spending even more on a switcher, and if you are trying to get 1080p on a monitor, then you have no chance.

McManicMan · 17 May 2007 at 20:42

Jihad said:
You really are an idiot.

Trying to wind people up? It's a humourous advertisement.

I'd say the same if it was Microsoft or Nintendo related but alas, it's not.

You're always quick to "attack" me aren't you.

Grow up you tool.

lol, you can speak, if anyone posts anything anti MS you and Mr Men are the 1st to reply defending it to the hilt, and yes i am always quick to attack you when you post rubbish like this on here just to sit back and await the mischief that you so intended to cause.

then

1st it was "fall down the stairs" and "now grow up you tool" these to me seem your the one attacking me in a childish manner, lol

but you carry on becasue you obiviously need to get it out of your system

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 20:43

i dont have a hdmi amp and not having analogue outputs doesnt stop me watching blueray? and the soudn is still improved over sd dvd's. with a hdmi amp, its only going to get better still.

Most amps don't have hdmi, hence the need for analogue outputs, loads of tv's only have 1 hdmi, so if thats being used by sky hd or a pc or hd-dvd player, then they can't get 1080p without spending even more on a switcher, and if you are trying to get 1080p on a monitor, then you have no chance.

people who want to get on the net but dont have a wired access point wherever their 360 is will HAVE to buy a wifi adaptor. whats the difference?

Energize · 17 May 2007 at 20:46

james.miller said:
i dont have a hdmi amp and not having analogue outputs doesnt stop me watching blueray? and the soudn is still improved over sd dvd's. with a hdmi amp, its only going to get better still.

people without a wired access point wherever their 360 is will HAVE to buy a wifi adaptor. whats the difference?

If your amp doesn't have hdmi the sound quality is the same as dvds. You need a hdmi amp or be able to use the 5.1 analogue inputs to get hd sound, however the ps3 doesn't have analogue outputs.

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 20:49

Energize said:
If your amp doesn't have hdmi the sound quality is the same as dvds. You need a hdmi amp or be able to use the 5.1 analogue inputs to get hd sound, however the ps3 doesn't have analogue outputs.

no it isnt the same. soundtracks are downsampled to 640k dd (ddplus), or dts where its supported. it isnt the same, you only have to look around at the various comparisons between the two to see that.

Energize · 17 May 2007 at 20:55

They can be upto 1.5Mb/s.

Anyway like I said, no hdmi means no hd sound.

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 20:57

Energize said:
They can be upto 1.5Mb/s.

Anyway like I said, no hdmi means no hd sound.

correction. they will be 640kDD (which is the max, dont try to be pessimistic) or 1.5mb/sec dts where supported.

the maximum bitrate for DD on an sd dvd is 448kbps. you do the math - 640k != 448k

Margaret · 17 May 2007 at 20:57

McManicMan said:
lol, you can speak, if anyone posts anything anti MS you and Mr Men are the 1st to reply defending it to the hilt, and yes i am always quick to attack you when you post rubbish like this on here just to sit back and await the mischief that you so intended to cause.

If you say so.

Energize · 17 May 2007 at 20:58

james.miller said:
correction. they will be 640kDD (which is the max, dont try to be pessimistic) or 1.5mb/sec dts.

Yeah like I said 1.5Mb/s. I haven't ever had any dvds that didn't use dts.

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 21:01

yes, 1.5mb dts which is downsampled from the hd soundtrack. again, being better than its equivalent sd dvd, unless something went horribly wrong of course.

Energize · 17 May 2007 at 21:05

james.miller said:
yes, 1.5mb dts which is downsampled from the hd soundtrack. again, being better than its equivalent sd dvd, unless something went horribly wrong of course.

So if a standard dvd uses dts 1.5Mb/s and the blu-ray disk also uses dts 1.5Mb/s how do you work out there going to be any difference?

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 21:12

Energize said:
So if a standard dvd uses dts 1.5Mb/s and the blu-ray disk also uses dts 1.5Mb/s how do you work out there going to be any difference?

how do you work out they are going to be the same? hd-dvd/bluray and sd dvd sound tracks arent, for the most part, mastered from the same original. you can sit there and argue if you wish, but compare the same disk on both formats - the sound tracks clearly arent the same.

besides, how many full bitrate dts dvd's do you know? most of them arent full bitrate, but rather 768k

Energize · 17 May 2007 at 21:14

james.miller said:
how do you work out they are going to be the same? hd-dvd/bluray and sd dvd sound tracks arent, for the most part, mastered from the same original. you can sit there and argue if you wish, but compare the same disk on both formats - the sound tracks clearly arent the same.

besides, how many full bitrate dts dvd's do you know? most of them arent full bitrate, but rather 768k

If you say so, I can't personally see how they would be any different when at the same frequency, sampling rate and bitrate.

Doesn't change the fact that no hdmi means no hd audio when using the ps3.

james.miller · 17 May 2007 at 21:17

Doesn't change the fact that i can still watch blueray in 1080p with amazing sound....that will only get better when i get my new amp. Ill quote myself here:

i dont have a hdmi amp and not having analogue outputs doesnt stop me watching blueray? and the soudn is still improved over sd dvd's. with a hdmi amp, its only going to get better still.

which is really the only point i made regarding bd playback

you implied that analogue outputs were needed to watch the movies: that isnt true

Mr Latte · 18 May 2007 at 10:09

Energize said:
If you say so, I can't personally see how they would be any different when at the same frequency, sampling rate and bitrate.

Doesn't change the fact that no hdmi means no hd audio when using the ps3.

Sorry Energize but PCM audio is definately better with the PS3, even the games seem to have more dynamic audio over the X360 optical output. Ok i havnt been able to do a 1:1 comparison with the same game but from what ive played PCM is better.

Can i point out though i may be slighly off on this one but BD uses 24bit and DVD will be 16bit audio, though feel free correct me if im wrong.

Also HDMI will only increase in popularity, multichannel is awkward for the general consumer and also untidy. Fair enough it allows external decoding and maintain maximium quality but thats more likely to be a feature on high end models.

Sonys poor issues with PS3
No included HDMI cable
No 720p scaling
No Remote included

All things i think should have been included.

JudgeC · 18 May 2007 at 10:25

Although I am only connected via Optical, I can say thats both DD & DTS soundtracks sound much more dynamic on BD. I have a few films, including Black Hawk Down, on both formats and the channel separation & clarity of sound is way better on the BD version.
Makes me wonder what delights await when I get around to purchasing an HDMI equiped Amp.