All Blu-ray players produce the same quality output - Samsung

ste66 · 16-02-2009, 5:41 PM

According to the latest edition of Computer Shopper, Samsung have admitted that all Blu-Ray players using HDMI have identical output (video and audio), when using the same codec/video format. I have seen this mentioned elsewhere recently. I can't link to it yet, its only in the print edition so far. But its pretty interesting, and makes sense when they explain its a digital signal which does not get converted, only decoded, and then carried as a digital signal by the HDMI cable.

Is this really correct?

And if it is, where does that leave the overpriced premium blu-ray players?

Samsung state the only reason not to buy a budget Blu-ray will be for added features like 7.1 analog outs or Yahoo Widgets. But I can't imagine too many people will be happy to shell out £££'s extra for things like that.
(and it would mean there is an awful lot of cognitive dissonance going on as people convince themselves that the more expensive players are producing better pictures - e.g. £1600 for the pioneer BDP-LX91, ouch).

kempez · 16-02-2009, 5:49 PM

They don't say anything about sound though do they? Or SD picture quality?

Jase Winter · 16-02-2009, 5:49 PM

some people here who definately disagree with that:

Blu-ray Player Shootout at TLC Broadcast

WillieCocker · 16-02-2009, 5:51 PM

Thanks Samsung.

**Bald Monkey** · 16-02-2009, 5:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillieCocker

Thanks Samsung.

alpha10 · 16-02-2009, 5:55 PM

This thread will light another fire under the thorny topic I should think.

For my 2Ps, on a 92" screen there is considerable difference between my two BD players the Samsung 1400 and the Pioneer 51

**Bald Monkey** · 16-02-2009, 5:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha10

For my 2Ps, on a 92" screen there is considerable difference between my two BD players the Samsung 1400 and the Pioneer 51

HDMI output is only one facet of the player there are a lot of other factors that make a higher end model 'better' but I wonder if we'll ever get a definative answer to this..

alpha10 · 16-02-2009, 6:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bald Monkey

HDMI output is only one facet of the player there are a lot of other factors that make a higher end model 'better' but I wonder if we'll ever get a definative answer to this..

no never a definitive answer, it would be one of those debates like HDMI cable quality that people will not listen to a reasoned argument or proof in front of them.

I really believe people should just make their own minds up and be happy with what they have and what others have chosen for themselves

WillieCocker · 16-02-2009, 6:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bald Monkey

but I wonder if we'll ever get a definative answer to this..

The answer is.....stay well away from Samsung Blu Ray players.

kingfats · 16-02-2009, 6:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ste66

Is this really correct?

And if it is, where does that leave the overpriced premium blu-ray players?

Samsung state the only reason not to buy a budget Blu-ray will be for added features like 7.1 analog outs or Yahoo Widgets. But I can't imagine too many people will be happy to shell out £££'s extra for things like that.
(and it would mean there is an awful lot of cognitive dissonance going on as people convince themselves that the more expensive players are producing better pictures - e.g. £1600 for the pioneer BDP-LX91, ouch).

Hi ste66.

There is differences albiet small to massive

depending on your perspective on things

extra picture adjustments and fancy processing some might like?

Looks,build quality,analogues and of course Yahoo Widgets come into play as well.
Soon be Spring.

**Bald Monkey** · 16-02-2009, 6:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillieCocker

The answer is.....stay well away from Samsung Blu Ray players.

Why I like 'em, (Not seen the statement myself BTW) they seem to enjoy stiring things up a little but I presume if they made such a statement it would have been carefully considered. So what's the reason for it?

HD Elvis · 16-02-2009, 6:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bald Monkey

HDMI output is only one facet of the player there are a lot of other factors that make a higher end model 'better' but I wonder if we'll ever get a definative answer to this..

Even if there is concrete proof either way you would still get people who would argue.

WillieCocker · 16-02-2009, 6:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bald Monkey

So what's the reason for it?

The recession.......

alpha10 · 16-02-2009, 6:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillieCocker

The recession.......

Are the higher end decks eating into their market? I wouldn't have thought so

**Bald Monkey** · 16-02-2009, 6:19 PM

I thought the 'Credit Crunch' was the source of all evil.. What's a recession?

Even if all players can be calibrated to have identical outputs, how many will do any calibration? According to a recent survey on here, not the vast majority that's for sure. So different players will look different for most on the same screen. So it's a pretty irrelevant issue in some ways.

alpha10 · 16-02-2009, 6:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bald Monkey

I thought the 'Credit Crunch' was the source of all evil.. What's a recession?

Even if all players can be calibrated to have identical outputs, how many will do any calibration? According to a recent survey on here, not the vast majority that's for sure. So different players will look different for most on the same screen. So it's a pretty irrelevant issue in some ways.

especially when the screen is 27" and viewed from 5m

kingfats · 16-02-2009, 6:26 PM

Seriously though

they all seem to be very close with 1080p Blu-ray playback,it's not like DVD.....times have changed.

WillieCocker · 16-02-2009, 6:27 PM

Blu-ray has 'five years left' says Samsung - Joystiq

I must call Samsung and find out how long the iPhone will last.

m99 · 16-02-2009, 6:27 PM

Bravo (verb) Samsung

alpha10 · 16-02-2009, 6:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillieCocker

Blu-ray has 'five years left' says Samsung - Joystiq

I must call Samsung and find out how long the iPhone will last.

Didn't the second in command at Sony say something similar recently?

Has a Ratners feel to it

ste66 · 16-02-2009, 7:11 PM

Its something I have wondered about as we move into a purely digital domain, but I have been agnostic about up to now. But if they are not the same, what happens in-between taking (for example) an encoded AVC 1080p/24 picture off a disc, decoding it, and sending the decoded 1080p/24 information as a digital signal to the display? Why would one player produce a different signal to another? The only explanation I could think of is that one player has a different decoding algorithm to another. But why would that be the case? That's saying one player decodes it more correctly than another, or ..?
If you were doing it on a PC, that would make no sense, its not like a multiple choice question. You encode, and you decode, using a set of rules - you wouldn't be very likely to get a different answer if you did it on your friends PC.
I think there is a bag minus a cat here.

kingfats · 16-02-2009, 7:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ste66

The only explanation I could think of is that one player has a different decoding algorithm to another. .

They do use different solutions chip etc

plus some add post processing as well.
Cheers.

alpha10 · 16-02-2009, 7:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ste66

Its something I have wondered about as we move into a purely digital domain, but I have been agnostic about up to now. But if they are not the same, what happens in-between taking (for example) an encoded AVC 1080p/24 picture off a disc, decoding it, and sending the decoded 1080p/24 information as a digital signal to the display? Why would one player produce a different signal to another? The only explanation I could think of is that one player has a different decoding algorithm to another. But why would that be the case? That's saying one player decodes it more correctly than another, or ..?
If you were doing it on a PC, that would make no sense, its not like a multiple choice question. You encode, and you decode, using a set of rules - you wouldn't be very likely to get a different answer if you did it on your friends PC.
I think there is a bag minus a cat here.

How is this any differnt from SD-DVD, and we all accept that different DVD players produce different images?

ste66 · 16-02-2009, 7:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alpha10

How is this any differnt from SD-DVD, and we all accept that different DVD players produce different images?

That's not quite the same, its taking the DVD data and processing it (scaling, whatever) so its not the same as the original. Differnet player, different algorithm.

But as I see it, a Blu-ray signal should not need to be amended, its just digitally decoded, and (in theory) transmitted as a 1:1 representation of the original encoding (assuming you keep the original format e.g. 1080p/24). In which case all players will produce the same output. Unless they deliberably apply post-processing and artifically change the originally encoded picture. And why would you want that, that's not better, at best its just different.

HD Elvis · 16-02-2009, 7:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillieCocker

Blu-ray has 'five years left' says Samsung - Joystiq

I must call Samsung and find out how long the iPhone will last.

Maybe if I save I'll be able to afford an lx91 as the format is about to die out!

Mr_Sukebe · 16-02-2009, 7:50 PM

And of course the fact that this means that Samsung doesn't have to spend millions developing higher spec players probably never comes into it.

I wonder what they'd say if we suggested we should all buy Logik or Bush players?

VinnyP! · 16-02-2009, 7:52 PM

If they output a perfectly decoded signal with no loss or intereference then they would all be equal but with any digital signal some creeps in. I suspect the high end players get closest to a straight lift of disk to display as well as allowing adjustments.

kingfats · 16-02-2009, 8:05 PM

What about bitstream HD audio? quite a few say there's "big" differences between players...so something nust be going on.
I always thought the audio is "packetized" or whatever sent to the amp where the timing/decoding happens...so how does the "player" affect the quality of bitstream output?
Cheers.

RODCULL · 16-02-2009, 8:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ste66

But as I see it, a Blu-ray signal should not need to be amended, its just digitally decoded, and (in theory) transmitted as a 1:1 representation of the original encoding (assuming you keep the original format e.g. 1080p/24). In which case all players will produce the same output. Unless they deliberably apply post-processing and artifically change the originally encoded picture. And why would you want that, that's not better, at best its just different.

As I understand it, if the original picture is simply encoded and decoded, the end result will be different from the original as the codecs are lossy. In other words, the original picture has already been artificially changed before even making it's way onto the disc. Perhaps the more expensive players attempt to 'correct' this by recognising certain traits of the encoding/decoding algorithm.

Nic Rhodes · 16-02-2009, 8:40 PM

codecs like VC1 and AVC should be bit for bit identical on each different chip set. MPEG2 is all over the place in comparison hence SD differences.