Why do modern player still do a poor layer change

Discussion in 'Blu-ray & DVD Players & Recorders' started by Jon Weaver, Oct 25, 2001.

  1. Jon Weaver

    Jon Weaver
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2000
    Messages:
    6,039
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Born in Bristol but now in Newport, (for my sins)
    Ratings:
    +656
    I have had a Samsung 709 for years and been happy. The layer change was noticable and a little distracting, but not a major problem.

    However, I just upgraded to a Pioneer 545 and was surprised to find that for a '5th generation' player, the layer change is actually worse than my 709.

    Its not a huge problem, but I would have expected by now they, they would have been able to do something to make a layer change less of a problem

    AFter all, they can do 'seamless-branching' without any problems.

    All it would take is a bit of memory acting like a buffer!
     
  2. Ian J

    Ian J
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    Messages:
    25,528
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,906
    Jon,

    I hope that the slow layer change is all that is wrong with it as after you confirmed that the second scart was RGB pass through yesterday I picked up the telephone and ordered one.

    Ian
     
  3. GarethH

    GarethH
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Messages:
    325
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +2
    We should not have to put up with a layer change at all. Its stupid, they can easily fix it.

    A couple of years ago I had a PC-DVD Drive and a decoder card, in which i outputted it to the TV. I never had ANY noticable layer change on that, it worked perfectly. It was only until i got my Pioneer 626A Stand alone player that i actually found out you were meant to see layer changes.

    All it takes is a larger buffer in which more data is read ahead so you notice no layer change.
     
  4. Jon Weaver

    Jon Weaver
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2000
    Messages:
    6,039
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Born in Bristol but now in Newport, (for my sins)
    Ratings:
    +656
    ivy,

    You won't have any issues with the 545.. You will love it... I wouldn't even go as far to say that the layer change is 'slow'.. Its certainly slower (Actually different) to my 709, but better than a lot of players I have heard of.

    With the 709, you didn't see any pause, it would just skip a bit of the video.

    With the 545 the movie actually stops for a second and then carries on, but nothing is missing.

    I prefer the way that the 709 did it but you do end up missing several seconds of the film.

    But the 545 isn't really that bad.

    But I am amazed that they havn't addressed the problem.. How hard can it be?
     
  5. Reiner

    Reiner
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2000
    Messages:
    3,315
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +13
    The reason is simple: cost. Adding a memory buffer costs money, but the manufactures try to save whereever they can.
    IMHO only one of the Denon (1000 or 1500?) players does have this buffer and perhaps some more expensive models.
     
  6. Arthur.S

    Arthur.S
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    But Reiner, my £80 (3 year old) DVD-ROM drive sails through even the worst layer change seamlessly - I'd challenge anyone to spot it. But my £500 Sony doesn't. Where's the sense in that?
     
  7. GarethH

    GarethH
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Messages:
    325
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +2
    Yes its very Stupid. A higher buffer would only cost them £5-10 extra, maybe more, probably less. I would'nt not mind paying an extra tenner to get rid of the layer pause.

    In fact, they could actually advertise their players with no layer change pause. They could call it "Seamless Layer Change Technology" and stick a fancy little logo on the box, Player cover and the spec sheet itself. I bet it would be a good selling point and they'd sell loads more.

    Hey, i should work in marketing :)

    LOL
     
  8. Reiner

    Reiner
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2000
    Messages:
    3,315
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    61
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +13
    Arthur, I assume the data from the DVD-ROM is buffered in the memory (RAM) of the PC, so that way the layer change is avoided.
    I doubt that the drive itself has a buffer as it requires about 4Mbyte.
    However note that I am no expert on PCs so I might be wrong ...
     
  9. Arthur.S

    Arthur.S
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    You're probably right Reiner (I'm no expert either) But the point is the technology to defeat the layer change 'glitch' has been around for a long time, & would be very cheap to implement. 128meg of PC133 RAM costs around £15 these days. To someone like Sony, Panasonic etc etc, it could well be only pence. I know that PC RAM wouldn't used in a stand-alone player, but it's a good illustration of how cheap memory is these days.
     
  10. 9004

    9004
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Denon DVD1500 certainly does have a memory buffer that offers a seamless layer change. Anybody interested in one had better move fast though as they are discontinued! Don't know about the new models though.
     
  11. Paden

    Paden
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2000
    Messages:
    554
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Ratings:
    +13
    Hello all!
    I read in a review of one of the new "super bit" DVD's that they used a "seamless layer change" (much like seamless branching I understood), has anyone experience of this?
    A software fix would be a lot easier for everyone (unlikely to happen then I guess!)
    Cheers, Paul.
     
  12. Ian J

    Ian J
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    Messages:
    25,528
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Ratings:
    +4,906
    Jon,

    You are right. I have had my 545 for a couple of weeks and think that it is a great machine.

    The layer change takes about half a second which is half of what it was on my old Pioneer 606 which I take to be an improvement.

    Current DVD's seem to be better mastered as well. Three years ago the layer change used to take place anywhere but they seem to be a little more careful where they place it nowadays and it seems to be a little less conspicuous.

    Or else it is my imagination

    Ian
     
  13. Jon Weaver

    Jon Weaver
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2000
    Messages:
    6,039
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Born in Bristol but now in Newport, (for my sins)
    Ratings:
    +656
    Whats p**sed me off is that I just bought the Alan Partridge DVD (Which is brilliant and gets better every time you watch it)

    Is made up of 6x30min episodes. Each one gets to the end and stops.

    But right in the middle of episode 4 (When he walkes to the BP garage to buy some screen watch) there is a layer change.. No thought went into it.. It wasn't between scenes, it was just there.

    Why oh why couldn't they master the disk so that some episodes were on 1 layer and the others on the 2nd.

    Why put a layer change right in the middle?
     
  14. Duncan Harvey

    Duncan Harvey
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Dont know if its the same authoring house, but the two most recent Doctor Who discs have also suffered from poorly chosen layer changes.

    There seems to be an attitude of take the max capacity, take into account the amount of free space that the BBC decree should be left on the disc, and fill in the gaps...
     
  15. bonzobanana

    bonzobanana
    Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2001
    Messages:
    3,446
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Yeovil
    Ratings:
    +219
    Well I would say a modern standard standalone DVD player has probably only got a 1x DVD drive which is all it needs but a PC DVD drive could be many times faster so it can look ahead and buffer and cache much more effectively which is probably very important using a PC software DVD player.
     
  16. johnson

    johnson
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Messages:
    550
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Essex
    Ratings:
    +6
    Apparently the layer-change pause has to some extent been designed into(albeit not entirely on purpose) the format by the dvd forum.

    The new superbit dvd's have no layer change pause at all.

    Regards
     

Share This Page

Loading...