Blue Ray Folks Help Me Out!

[Trip]

Originally Posted by marko138

You could step up your game, thats all I'm saying.

That's why I said rear entry. Nothing says I love you like going to browntown.

Wear this when you give it to him:


And sing this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbGkxcY7YFU

[Gas Man]

Originally Posted by goof2

When the PS3 and Wii were introduced stand alone blu-ray players were over $300 on their own. Integrating the technology at that time was expensive and Nintendo didn't want to price themselves out of the market. The PS3, when launched, cost twice as much as a Wii and it is estimated that Sony was still loosing around $250 per PS3 at that price. Nintendo created a basic game machine and focused all their efforts on the user interface. Sony carried their user interface over but created a complete home entertainment machine.

There are no DVD players that will outperform a fully capable Blu-ray player, at any cost. Regardless of how much is spent on the player the DVD itself is limited to a native resolution of around 720x480. That signal can be upconverted, upscaled, or whatever else they want to call it but that is just filling in resolution "holes" with data that doesn't exist on the disk. DVD is also limited to 5.1 channel compressed audio. Blu-ray runs up to 7.1 channels and also uses no compression for the audio signal.

Originally Posted by goof2

Look in one of the recent TIGGER threads for a discussion of cables. If it is a digital signal we are talking about (HDMI) there is no difference between the $5 cable and the $100 cable as long as they are both producing picture and sound. Digital being what it is, if the signal is getting from one end of the cable to the other it will be exactly the same no matter how much the cable cost.

I simply don't know enough about it to debate it with you. I go by what people who do know.

[fasternyou929]

Originally Posted by goof2

Look in one of the recent TIGGER threads for a discussion of cables. If it is a digital signal we are talking about (HDMI) there is no difference between the $5 cable and the $100 cable as long as they are both producing picture and sound. Digital being what it is, if the signal is getting from one end of the cable to the other it will be exactly the same no matter how much the cable cost.

The only caveat I would add to that is "as long as they are both producing *good* picture and sound". While HDMI signals are digital, a cable will always be an analog medium. If the connections are lossy, the wire's resistance is not matched to the inputs and outputs, or the shielding is not done properly there is still opportunity for data loss and/or reflections.

If your eyes or ears are telling you something isn't working right, it COULD be the $5 HDMI cable.

[goof2]

Originally Posted by fasternyou929

The only caveat I would add to that is "as long as they are both producing *good* picture and sound". While HDMI signals are digital, a cable will always be an analog medium. If the connections are lossy, the wire's resistance is not matched to the inputs and outputs, or the shielding is not done properly there is still opportunity for data loss and/or reflections.

If your eyes or ears are telling you something isn't working right, it COULD be the $5 HDMI cable.

HDMI is different from almost every other "consumer" type A/V cable in that the information over the cable is digital. The other I can think of is TOSLINK, though that is fiber optic. That being the case it is either going to work perfectly, work horrendously, or not work at all.

[fasternyou929]

Originally Posted by goof2

HDMI is different from almost every other "consumer" type A/V cable in that the information over the cable is digital.

Right, the information is digital, but the cable itself is not. There's no such thing as a "digital" wire because a wire will always have resistive, capacitive, and inductive properties. And susceptibility to outside noise, since any wire is also an antenna.

Originally Posted by goof2

That being the case it is either going to work perfectly, work horrendously, or not work at all.

Agreed. Especially since you covered every possible condition.

To clear up what I said above - do I think $100 cables are better than $5 cables? No. (Monster is a joke and I only wish *I* had the idea to market wire for $100/5ft. to the masses) However, it is possible that an HDMI cable (in any price range) could be built poorly and not give you optimal results.

So if you're having A/V issues, don't rule out the HDMI cable just because you're getting part or most of the sound/picture.

[Apoc]

Originally Posted by Gas Man

I still wont say that. There are blue rays that cost thousands.

I mean they make dvd players that will outperform a blue ray. You just have to spend the MAJOR coin. The thing is that if you want the higher def beyond standard DVD. You have 2 choices. Either spend huge huge money on a DVD player and buy cheap dvd discs. OR Spend low money now on a blue ray and pay premo price on blue ray discs.

I'm not argueing that the PS3 isn't a good blue ray. I just wouldn't say its the end all. But yes it is a good one.

How come the other systems like Wii doesn't play blue ray?

The wii doesnt use bluray for many reasons, the first was to keep cost down, and then because Nintendo wanted a game machine, not a home entertainment system. And while the wii is fun, the graphics are shit.

X-box, on the otherhand, was backed by Microsofts HD-DVD, which failed, and MS is not about to start paying Sony to use their format. Not gonna happen, ever.

It is not, however, because dvd is as good as bluray. It is not. Not in ANY price range. Dvd cannot create the picture bluray can. Simply, DVD cant hold the data that bluray can, and the laser for a dvd cant read data at any different wavelength to allow the storage of more data. DVD is not a HD format (except for HD-DVD, which really isnt dvd)

Im not sure where you got your info, but your way off.

[RACER X]

YouTube- 6 Million Dollar, Home Movie Theater

[shmike]

Originally Posted by RACER X

YouTube- 6 Million Dollar, Home Movie Theater

Is that from the 80's?

I've seen far nicer set-up's for under $100k.

[Amber Lamps]

What your husband REALLY wants this Christmas is a HOT, inter-racial porn staring his lovely wife... Hmm, I wonder who we can get to play the black/mixed guy having dirty, gorilla sex with you? Whom do we know that is a big mixed/black guy with low moral standards? Hmm it's a quandary....

[RACER X]

Originally Posted by shmike

Is that from the 80's?

I've seen far nicer set-up's for under $100k.

dunno , i only looked at it for a few min. if you're talking about the vacuum tube amps/receivers, from what i gather in super high end stuff vacuum tubes tend to be the ticket..........dunno really too rich for my blood.

here's a $1mil setup

YouTube- Ultimate Home Theater: 13,000 Watts, 130dB, $1 Million Price