cambridge audio or pioneer blu ray player ?

pashun4art

Standard Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
48
Reaction score
4
Points
13
Hi everyone.

I have cause to upgrade my current blu ray player , a panasonic dmp-bd30 , about 2 years old I think.

I have read up on the C.A. 650 and its within my budget of £500ish. But just found out I can get a pioneer BDP-LX52 for £270 ! ( they were originally £550 ).

Has anyone got any advice here !? I am only interested in playing 2-D blu-ray to a 42 inch panasonic plasma and audio decoding will be done on an onkyo608 so no need for knobs-n-whistles... just want the best picture I can get for the money..

thanks in advance !
 
Sony S760 - £150.
 
If you think the CA650 has the best picture quality below £1000 then you should get that old boy, idea of BD players having better PQ than others below £1000 is a tad subjective and highly contentious one though. The S760 has the same {edit} scaler and video internals as the BDP-S5000ES £1000.
 
Last edited:
hi , no I don't think that , I just saw the CA player in richer sounds on a 42 Panasonic plasma and it is better than my current play by a mile ! If the sony has as good a picture as the CA player then yes , of course for that price I would go for it , like I say , its only the picture I am interested in , not the functions.
 
The S760 has the same ABT scaler and video internals as the BDP-S5000ES £1000.

Neither the S760 of S5000ES use an Anchor Bay Technologies (ABT) solution. The S5000ES uses QDEO tech under license from Marvell but this isn't openly acknowledged by Sony. Some of these features have tickled down into the S760.

Avi
 
Neither the S760 of S5000ES use an Anchor Bay Technologies (ABT) solution. The S5000ES uses QDEO tech under license from Marvell but this isn't openly acknowledged by Sony. Some of these features have tickled down into the S760.

Avi

My mistake, pretty sure I read that here a while ago getting mixed up with the Oppo, so it now only has some of the features of the S5000ES video wise?

Official press release I can find with reference to the ES range:

The BDP-S760 incoporates the most cutting edge technology Sony has ever included in its Blu-ray players. Incorporating aspects of our ES (Elevated Standard) advancements, the BDP-S760 comes equipped with an HD Reality Enhancer, which smoothes the image tone, and reduces picture noise to create a highly realistic display. This is complemented by Super Bit Mapping for video, which ensures incredibly natural colour reproduction. All of this adds up to a stunningly smooth and pristine Full HD picture.

http://www.avforums.com/reviews/Sony-BDP-S760-Blu-ray-Disc-Player-Review.html
 
Last edited:
Official press release I can find with reference to the ES range:

Sony has applied its "own labels" to some of the QDEO feature set but the tech is from Marvell but Sony appears to want to us believe these features are "unique" to them.

Here the Marvell press release - Marvell: Press and Investor News

Avi
 
AVI what are the differences in PQ processing/tech from the S5000ES to the S760? Reading the Dave Mack review above, it seems that the S760s improves on the S5000ES.

Unlike Sony's high-end BDP-S5000ES player, the S760 keeps 1080p/24 content as 1080p/24 all the way through the signal path. The high-end player appeared to use a 1080i/60 centric design, which meant that even pure 1080p content ran the risk of combing (and I witnessed it doing just that a couple of times during the review). This was one reason why my opinion of Sony's high-end player was so lukewarm. The cheaper BDP-S760 keeps 1080p content in the 1080p domain at all times, which is the way it should be.

Or am I reading it wrongly (a possibility!)
 
AVI what are the differences in PQ processing/tech from the S5000ES to the S760? Reading the Dave Mack review above, it seems that the S760s improves on the S5000ES.

I haven't compared in any detail so can't comment on Sony's player design/video implementation difference. :)

You're probably better asking David re his review findings.

Avi
 
Avi - whether these differences are readily apparent on screen sizes below 50" around the UK is still quentionable, even though they are there. Think we discussed that with the review or findings on the BD390.
 
Avi - whether these differences are readily apparent on screen sizes below 50" around the UK is still quentionable, even though they are there. Think we discussed that with the review or findings on the BD390.

I think it very much depends on the individual and particular setup. This may be of the case for you but other may reach difference conclusions.

As a general guide a smaller image relative to the same viewing distance tends to mask some types of artefact but also there's potentially less visible detail i.e. limited benefit to higher resolution. This is one of the reasons people may often "see" little difference between DVD and Blu-ray on smaller screens at typcial viewing distance.

Personally I think there's limited video benefit from Blu-ray on smaller screen sizes at typical viewing distances. In these circumstances proper setup and calibration may yield a more noticeable video difference than the difference between DVD and Blu-ray let alone Blu-ray and Blu-ray. :)

Avi
 
I think it very much depends on the individual and particular setup. This may be of the case for you but other may reach difference conclusions.

Could not agree more.

As a general guide a smaller image relative to the same viewing distance tends to mask some types of artefact but also there's potentially less visible detail i.e. limited benefit to higher resolution. This is one of the reasons people may often "see" little difference between DVD and Blu-ray on smaller screens at typcial viewing distance.

Personally I think there's limited video benefit from Blu-ray on smaller screen sizes at typical viewing distances. In these circumstances proper setup and calibration may yield a more noticeable video difference than the difference between DVD and Blu-ray let alone Blu-ray and Blu-ray. :)

Well I must be lucky as I see a definite gap between BD & SD, not huge but enough to warrant BD purchase, audio wise quantum jump to my ears and that is just DTS core @ 1.5mbps from BD HD audio. Anyway it is a weird world when we are considering 40" or 42" as smaller screens but that is the way of the world. I recall fondly going from 25", to 26", to 28", 32"...36" all quantum leaps in scale!
 
Anyway it is a weird world when we are considering 40" or 42" as smaller screens but that is the way of the world. I recall fondly going from 25", to 26", to 28", 32"...36" all quantum leaps in scale!

Not really weird we just reach the human eyes resolving limits. A fixed resolution larger display size has bigger physical pixels and the pixel size relative to viewing distance ratio makes a difference to how much resolution we can resolve.

I'm sure that won't prevent manufacturers developing and promoting new 4K 40" panels because they need another reason "sell" a new must have tech. ;)

Avi
 
Last edited:
Wow...my heads spinning now :laugh:

And the recommendation to poor old pashun4art's question is.................
 
Wow...my heads spinning now :laugh:

And the recommendation to poor old pashun4art's question is.................

If it's just "1080p/24" Blu-ray playback and bitstream audio both over HDMI then I'd look at operational performance i.e. power up time, disc loading time etc as the primary differentiators.

There's no need to spend £500 unless there's a specific feature/performance requirement. With both players mentioned there will be features that cost money but offer no benefit based on the OP's requirement unless the OP has requirements not mentioned. Something like Sony S760 may be a better value as these have been on offer recently for £99 but I suspect they have sold out.

I'd also suggest proper setup and calibration as this can make a significant different as can comparing a player on a different display model etc.

Avi
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

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