Blu-ray Player Shootout at TLC Broadcast!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Vipers

Prominent Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
4,117
Reaction score
638
Points
756
Location
Stevenage
This discussion is running in the Denon 2500 and 3800 so I thought it may be worth starting a new thread for people who maybe interested but are not following the Denon thread. These were my findings as reported in the Denon thread :-


Morning Guys,

Sitting here bleary eyed after getting to bed at 1am after the shootout and up again at 5am for work, the things we do for our love of AV

First of I'd like to say it was great to meet Ian and Phil, be gentle with the editing please phil, I'm sitting here now not so tired as last night thinking what I should have said instead of what came out. Also a big thanks to Tony and Steve at TLC for giving up their time and letting us loose with so many players, I don't think there are too many places were you could get this opportunity and like Ian mentioned, great hospitality.

So on with the shootout, I'd like to say that I went into this shootout as a consumer with no real technical knowledge, I judged my findings on quite simply what I was seeing, I'm in the market for a standalone player after retiring my PS3 afew months back once reports starting surfacing that it wasn't the pinnacle in picture quality. Basically the shoot out consisted of testing the 8 players with scenes 2 and 3 from I Robot, listening through the Pioneer Susano and viewing on a Pioneer KRP-600M ISF Calibrated, so in theory the differences we'd see would be due to the players solely.

I wrote loads of notes but I've left them at home so this is written from memory but we started of with the Bush and initially we were very impressed, considering this is only around £100 it's amazing value and probably what the Blu Ray market needs to help make it mass market, It produced really good fine detail but seemed to lack shadow detail and any real depth to the overall picture, This really showed up as we were viewing it on a 60" but if used on a smaller screen I think most people would be very impressed.

Next up was the Sony 350, With this we all found that the picture just seemed really soft, it just seemed to lack detail and a certain sharpness to the image that you'd expect from Blu Ray, we didn't have time to test Standard Def but it would have been interesting to see how my Oppo would have compared on the same scenes in SD. Again for the money it does a reasonable job and with the offers flying around at the moment its hard to not recommend to people who are not chasing the ultimate picture.

Now the infamous PS3, this I was really looking forward too, was it just average at Blu Ray has had been reported lately, well from what I saw I have to say yes, very much so. There is no denying as a one box hub, ie BD palyer, Games console, Media server etc its an amazing piece of kit, but last night we were looking solely at picture quality and from what I saw I was quite suprised, it really lacked the fine detail, to quite a shocking extent and compared to the Denons it really lacked any depth, it seemed to have no real dynamic range with shadow detail also suffering. Also on the PS3 we noticed a real difference on the audio side, I found that it lacked any real punch or depth, whether it was right or wrong I'm not qualified to say but it was definately different and I found it not as pleasing.

Next we tried the denon 1800, straight away it was plain to see that we were entering a totally different league, which you would hope when jumping up in price that much, there was excellent fine and shadow detail, real depth to the picture, smooth motion and it produced excellent sound, the 1800 is an excellent performer.

Then onto the 2500, at first we struggled to see much difference to the 1800 but after looking very hard you could see slightly more detail, whether at normal viewing distance this would be apparent I don't know but it was there and for me as I have a LX81 amp then the 2500 would be fine as I could bitstream straight to the amp, again another star performer.

Next up was the 3800, we were all looking forward to seeing this as at around £1500 it's a significant price hike to anything else we'd seen and personally I was interested to see if the Realta HQV processing would alter things significantly. As soon as the 20th Century Fox logo appeared it was obvious that there was a 3d effect we hadn't seen before and the audio again seemed a step up, which personally I don't understand as other than the PS3 all the players were bitstreaming to the Susano and letting the amp do the work, I'm sure someone who is more technical than me can describe why this was the case. Anyway the 3800 really did offer a superb picture, there was amazing depth and clarity to the image which we hadn't seen before, excellent fine detail retrieval and brilliant detail from the dark areas, on the cheaper players the shadows were blocks of black with no detail but when going up the price range you could see more and more detail becomming apparent which I guess all add to help create the pop to the image, whether this overall increase in picture and sound quality to the 2500 is worth twice the price each individual would have to decide after a demo but the differences are definately there.

Finally after hours of watching will Smith wake up we tried the Pioneer LX51 and 71, Basically we couldn't see any real difference between these 2 players which begs the question were does your extra money go on the 71, maybe it will be in the upscaling of SD, maybe the audio components are of a better quality, obviously you get more bling on the 71 with gold plated connectors and silver trim but on picture quality alone they look identical, so how did they compare to the Denons, Well I'm a bit of a Pioneer fan but I have to say I definately prefer the image the Denon produces, even on the 1800 which I guess is their nearest competitor, at first we thought the Pioneers were producing better shadow detail but when going onto view further scenes I noticed the image looked brighter, slightly bleeched as if the contrast had been whacked up, Phil explained to me that he thought the Gamma looked slightly out, either way there is definately a difference and I found the Denons produced a more natural looking picture, Saying that the Pioneers were still in a different class to the budget players in detail levels and again offered that 3d image that the budgets couldn't produce, also the Pioneers could quite match the punchy sound of the Denons, well the 3800 at least.

So to sum up I think it went as I thought it would, you do get what you pay for but that there now is a player for everyones budget which has got to be great for Blu Ray as a product. I think the biggest shock was just how good the Bush was as none of us expected much and personally just how bad the PS3 was at fine detail. For me I'll be checking out the Pioneer LX91 hopefully over the weeekend which I really want to be amazing as it will intergrate into my setup perfectly, but after last night it really has got a lot to prove to knock off the 3800 from the top of the Blu Ray hill.

Hope I haven't rambled on too long, thanks again to everyone involved last night for giving me the oppotunity to see for myself that not all Blu Ray players are the same, I don't know how they do it but there really is significant differences between all the players on both the picture and audio front, I guess the only way to know what is right for you is to audition the different players for yourself and make your own mind up, but at the moment a 3800 will be joining my setup.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
Thought I'd better list the players we were testing with model numbers :-

Bush BD01
Sony S350
Sony PS3
Pioneer 51FD
Denon 1800BD
Pioneer LX71
Denon 2500BT
Denon 3800BD
 
Thought I'd better list the players we were testing with model numbers :-

Bush BD01
Sony S350
Sony PS3
Pioneer 51FD
Denon 1800BD
Pioneer LX71
Denon 2500BT
Denon 3800BD

Hi Vipers

Can you provide some background on the evaluation and calibration process for each player ?

Is it correct to assume Phil(?) took measurements before/after display chain calibration for each player and will publish the results ? The comment "Phil explained to me that he thought the Gamma looked slightly out" on one of the players should show on these prior to display chain calibration.

Thanks

AVI
 
Last edited:
I have just added a Sony350 after using a Samsung BD P1400 & whilst I love the functionality of the Sony the PQ appeared very poor compared to the Samsung; Softer washed out & lacked depth, however after altering the RGB levels (thanks Kingfats) initially to > 16. Video & later to 0> 255 PC level the PQ is now very close to the Samsung & now has depth & vibrance. :)
 
bumptious announced 48 hours ago that my pre-ordered 91 is with him (though apart from reading about it on this forum I wouldn't know) and if I had known about this 'shoot-out' I could have authorised him to open the box. Then we may have known where we stood re-the 91 rather better. :thumbsup:

Big risk for ******** I suppose, I may have ended up buying the Bush instead.

To be fair, I've not chased TLC about the 91 as I don't regard delivery as urgent as some evidently do, but I'll try to get hold of him later today.
 
Hi Vipers

Can you provide some background on the evaluation and calibration process for each player ?

I would like to know this also.
It stands to reason that each player would produce different results 'out-of-the-box', so hopefully the display was calibrated on a 'per source' basis....?
 
Shame you couldn't get a Panasonic model in there really, but thanks for the useful info anyway!
 
just to throw some questions into the pot...


why the big differences? Assuming all were connected via HDMI, then aren't all the players just unzipping the video and sending the same info down the wires? They aren't really recreating the video in any analogue sense, so surely there should be little difference between them?
 
Nice report, but I really wish they had done a 'double blind' test of these players. There is a huge placebo effect when you know which player you are testing. ( See recent New Scientist articles. )
A blind testing may have revealed even more surprises !
 
Nice report, but I really wish they had done a 'double blind' test of these players. There is a huge placebo effect when you know which player you are testing. ( See recent New Scientist articles. )
A blind testing may have revealed even more surprises !

100% Spot on :thumbsup:
 
Shame you couldn't get a Panasonic model in there really

+1
IMHO, the Panasonic is a player you cannot ignore in a test like this.
 
just to throw some questions into the pot...


why the big differences? Assuming all were connected via HDMI, then aren't all the players just unzipping the video and sending the same info down the wires? They aren't really recreating the video in any analogue sense, so surely there should be little difference between them?

An interesting question.

I would like to understand how much of the "extra detail" is due to post processing enhancement versus data from the Blu-ray disc. I guess similar to what Toshiba attempt with SD DVD and their XDE technology.

I think it was Keith Jack of Simga Designs that suggested some manufacturers used greater default post processing as a product differentiator. The result is a less processed image may appear softer but be a more accurate representation of the disc data by comparison.

AVI
 
I still think these differences come down to 2 things

1) Picture manipulation - The Sony has its own idea of what contrast/brightness/colour/gamma should be....Denon has another etc. I actually think this is unwanted and I wish the manfucturers would just do a straight translation for VC-1 or MPEG disc content to HDMI colour space with no influences.

2) Post processing - Looks like the Denon may be doing this more than the others. The great thing is that this is a technology that has moved on leaps and bounds in recent years and pictures can be enhanced without damaging the image (side effects).



I know Steve didn't agree with me on this. But I felt that each player should be calibrated to be as close to reference as possible, by utilising the built-in adjustment features so that they would all output an image as similar in possible in terms of of accuracy.

The fact that one poster noted the Sony as poorer compared to the Samsung but manipulated it to look the same is evidence of this aspect.


What is clear though is the Denon has some excellent processing in it, which I don't think they have really publicised. The Sony we know boasts their Super Bit Mapping and Reality Enhancer technologies. The Pioneer LX91, we believe is boasting Marvell Qdeo technology. How they are using it, is a mystery for now..but I look forward to an evalaution/comparison.
 
Even after these tests, you guys still dont get it, it has nothing to do with placebo efect, it has nothing to do with settings, it has everything to do with the players ability to get what is on the disk into a picture that you can watch.

Settings can not bring out the type of detail we are talking about here.

We adjusted settings, and you cant bring out shadow detail and the fine detail by edge enhancing a lifeless picture.

We are talking low frequency and high frequency roll off which is down to the electronics inability to extract the detail and translate it ito the picture we see.
 
The great thing is that this is a technology that has moved on leaps and bounds in recent years and pictures can be enhanced without damaging the image (side effects).



.

Yep :smashin: definitely agree there. :)
 
Yep :smashin: definitely agree there. :)

I think anyone that uses a good off board video processor may agree that it's really interesting to see what can be done in terms of post processing enhancement. :)

AVI
 
Very interesting review wish I knew the event was on I wold have gone along, assuming it was an open invite.

I am looking for a BR player but can't decide to wait for the Oppo, buy something cheap (perhaps not know) or chase a big gun like the Denon/Pioneer ..................
 
We are talking low frequency and high frequency roll off which is down to the electronics inability to extract the detail and translate it ito the picture we see.

I wasn't disagreeing with anything you said until you made this statement. In the digital domain there is no high or low frequency roll off to happen. If black is 00000000 and one shade up is 00000001 then in the digital domain, there is nothing hard about ensuring that they are still the same values at the other end of the HDMI cable.

What makes the differences are the display (which was constant for all the tests), and the picture settings in the player, and the post processing in the player.

I don't doubt Vipers observations for the picture. And it is good he didn't have a technical bias to influence him...so what you saw is a true observation. However, there must and is a scientific reason for the differences, and these need to be understood. And considering we are working 100% within the digital domain, the differences will come down to processing.

I would also say, that all of these processing technologies may be partially making visible detail we were not supposed to see..but because we can see more, we assume it must be correct or better.

The human eye itself has a specific contrast ratio, just like a TV. It is a dynamic contrast ratio though, just like some TVs and is affected by the iris contracting and expanding. This is why when you go from a bright room to a dark one, you need a few seconds to adjust the contrast range your eye observes. Now what film producers/directors sometimes do, with scenes where a bright window is present but there are dark details they want the viewer to see, is compress the contrast for that scene....i.e. bring whites down and blacks up. Some post processing does the same thing...that actually is not accurate and may not be what the director/producer intended. It is pushing the greys up slightly, making them more visible. I am sure you have seen a gamma test that varies depending on the amount of white in the scene at the time.
 
Last edited:
just to throw some questions into the pot...


why the big differences? Assuming all were connected via HDMI, then aren't all the players just unzipping the video and sending the same info down the wires? They aren't really recreating the video in any analogue sense, so surely there should be little difference between them?
I'm sufficiently long in the tooth to have followed (and owned) the digital tape equipment that first appeared in the late 1970s and digital disc from late 1982. People were saying the same then. "If it's digital all the playback machines should sound the same." But they didn't and it was all too obvious. Build quality, jitter, error correction algorithms, oversampling levels, DACs all played their part. In 1983 you had a choice of only Sony or Philips (and derivatives) CD players and any fool could tell the difference blind or not.

I still use my first near 25 year old CD player; believe it or or not the mechanism is bolted to a block of marble and the disc tray machined from a solid block of aluminium. Every little thing helped, though sometimes I think it sounds crap compared to my DTS HD Master Audio. :D

I bet it's all far more complicated now.
 
Many thanks to Vipers and Bumptious and all concerned for taking the time and effort to compare Blu-Ray PQ on 8 different players.:clap:

In order to achieve a greater understanding each player I would like to see an in-depth comparison that looks at several other aspects of each player, one that takes account of price brackets and also, is conducted by independent people.

For instance, DVD image quality; Analogue CD quality; Digital CD quality; as well of course, BD quality; Codecs decoded internally/externally and sound quality; speed (start up; Load up of specific BDs, DVDs and CDs) and speed of menu operation generally. Of course I could go on.

There are enough players at seemingly different levels now to bracket them according to price, as it is done with HiFi reviews. I see little point in conducting a serious review using players from opposite ends of the financial spectrum. More valuable would be players like Sony 350/Sony PS3/Bush. Another would be Denon 3800/Sony 5000ES/ Pio 91.

It would be most valuable if conducted by enthusiasts with a mixture of knowledge, rather than a dealer who may have a vested interest (no offence meant) but people who are completely independent will always win over those who happen to have 6 3800s in stock for sale with a couple of shopping days left till Christmas, at the beginning of the worst recession since records begun:D

Like I said, I dont mean any offence, simply a fair and level, indepth review of competing products would be worth a great deal to many of us.

I would certainly be willing to contribute

Any takers?
 
I am looking for a BR player but can't decide to wait for the Oppo, buy something cheap (perhaps not know) or chase a big gun like the Denon/Pioneer ..................

Hi IWC Dopplel. :)
A lot on here are waiting for the Oppo :smashin: mainly for it's DVD playback :cool: hopefully the wait won't be too long.
Cheers.
 
I'm sufficiently long in the tooth to have followed (and owned) the digital tape equipment that first appeared in the late 1970s and digital disc from late 1982. People were saying the same then. "If it's digital all the playback machines should sound the same." But they didn't and it was all too obvious. Build quality, jitter, error correction algorithms, oversampling levels, DACs all played their part. In 1983 you had a choice of only Sony or Philips (and derivatives) CD players and any fool could tell the difference blind or not.

I still use my first near 25 year old CD player; believe it or or not the mechanism is bolted to a block of marble and the disc tray machined from a solid block of aluminium. Every little thing helped, though sometimes I think it sounds crap compared to my DTS HD Master Audio. :D

I bet it's all far more complicated now.

Actually in some ways very much more complicated and in others, less.

With Blu-ray and VC-1 and MPEG encoding, you either read it perfectly or not at all. There is error correction, but it either succeeds, in which you case lose nothing or it fails completely in which case you get a catastrophic failure (i.e. very very obvious).

You mentioned DACs and over-sampling. DACs are for analogue output at the end of the chain...which no longer happens. Over-sampling is actually a form of post processing!

Jitter could be an issue for sound but not for video. In CD days, the interface between the player and the amplifier could affect the sound due to jitter introduction. Toslink was worse for this in the early days.

There is jitter on HDMI for sound, but as I say, it will not affect video.
 
people who are completely independent will always win over those who happen to have 6 3800s in stock for sale with a couple of shopping days left till Christmas, at the beginning of the worst recession since records begun:D
Not sure that applies to TLC Broadcast. My 91 has been sitting on bumptious' desk for two days now and I still can't get a line to him to arrange payment of balance 'cos he seems to be selling his wares like the proverbial hot cakes with no need for help from me. ;)
 
It would be most valuable if conducted by enthusiasts with a mixture of knowledge, rather than a dealer who may have a vested interest (no offence meant) but people who are completely independent will always win over those who happen to have 6 3800s in stock for sale with a couple of shopping days left till Christmas, at the beginning of the worst recession since records begun:D

Phil Hinton is planning to run a series of hands on calibration education sessions for forum members in the new year. This could be a good opportunity to choose a small selection of products prior to the event (maybe owned by forum members) that could be compared once calibrated.

Just a thought.:)

AVI
 
In CD days, the interface between the player and the amplifier could affect the sound due to jitter introduction. Toslink was worse for this in the early days.
Thanks for that. I use the SPDIF/Toslink which is so old that the player's manual says it is a Sony proprietary system which cannot be guaranteed to work to any other make or in the future. Fortunately it does but maybe it is responsible for the crappiness compared to the DTS HD etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom