Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
My mate reckons that Blu-Ray has much better sound and video quality than DVD.
One thing that puts me off it though (and I don't know if his Blu-Ray player is duff) but he says it takes at least 3 minutes to load up a movie - is this true? 
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
Not true from my experiences. Some BR players connect to the internet, which can cause it to drag. I tried accessing some BR disc features using my PS3 once, and it took a while. But playing normal BR films isn't an issue.
[Edited on 21-07-2010 by Nath]
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
So how long should it "normally" take, Nath? Is it the same loading time as a DVD?
I'm not sure if his connects to the Internet, all I know is that it's a Sony player.
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
Yeah pretty much. It's never struck me as taking any longer thats for sure.
|
blebo
Member
Registered: 18th Apr 02
User status: Offline
|
I have a sony player and mines used to be slow when I first got it....Pirates of the Caribean 3 took 5 minutes to load the main menu... I upgraded the firmware form the sony site and it now works fine...was something to do with the change in flash format used by the disc or something
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Ah right cool, thanks guys. 
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Video quality is massivley better as long as you have an HD TV, sound you need fancier (newer) equipment to take advantage of but it is better yes.
|
ssj_kakarot
Member
Registered: 29th Apr 03
Location: hartlepool
User status: Offline
|
it depends on the blu-ray player, my ps3 is quite fast loading movies.
Also like previously stated the picture is loads better but you need a hdmi connection and a 1080p set to really notice it.
as for the sound yeah its great but you need a fairly decent amp with a hdmi input that accepts the newer codecs such as Dolby-HD and DTS-HD master and a nice set of speakers.
if your just running sound through your tv you wont notice any difference as it will just be using the dolby or DTS tracks.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
We've got a HD telly (replaced my old Samsung 32" widescreen CRT monster which weighed about a ton!) and 5.1 surround sound system, but if I (or should I say, we, if I can get my wife to agree to it LOL) go for a Blu-Ray system I'll be looking to get a better hi-fi/sound set up with decent amp and all that jazz.
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
Dont notice any difference in load times between a DVD or a Blu-ray on my PS3 or my laptop.
|
noshua
Member
Registered: 19th Nov 08
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by ssj_kakarot
it depends on the blu-ray player, my ps3 is quite fast loading movies.
Also like previously stated the picture is loads better but you need a hdmi connection and a 1080p set to really notice it.
as for the sound yeah its great but you need a fairly decent amp with a hdmi input that accepts the newer codecs such as Dolby-HD and DTS-HD master and a nice set of speakers.
if your just running sound through your tv you wont notice any difference as it will just be using the dolby or DTS tracks.
Even with a cheap shit 720p set there would be a massive difference in picture quality
|
whitter45
Member
Registered: 15th Nov 02
Location: Norton
User status: Offline
|
the sound is better providing the BR player can process the signal ie Dolby HD
I use PCI Downmix and let my receiver do the processing
|
IvIarkgraham
Premium Member
Registered: 27th Mar 04
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
i am selling my blu ray player if you are after one
some machines are better than others
ps3 being one of the best
|
Leighton
Member
Registered: 21st Feb 01
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
How can the sound be better !
The only thing that will make sound better is the speakers that is is comming from.
And if any one dares to say its "HD" i will ban you 
|
IvIarkgraham
Premium Member
Registered: 27th Mar 04
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
its hd mate
its a digital sound thingy majig
dunno what exactly but its supposed to be better
|
Leighton
Member
Registered: 21st Feb 01
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
The Audio cannot be any diferent, putting a HD signal into a standard TV will not make what you are seeing HD.
So even if you are putting in the best Audio signal ever produced its still coming out of your £100 surround sound system and is therefor no better than a DVD comming out the same speakers.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
It's uncompressed and has more channels, so even if you still have the same speakers, if the rest of the equipment can handle it as an input you get better sound out the other end.
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
Avatar took about 1min to load on my bd player but other than that I've noticed no other difference.
Picture is light years ahead of DVD and the sound is better with a proper hd setup but as my current setup is suite I've not benefited as I have a machine that does t accept Sts as a codec so I'm using virtual surround which is piss poor
|
ssj_kakarot
Member
Registered: 29th Apr 03
Location: hartlepool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Leighton
The Audio cannot be any diferent, putting a HD signal into a standard TV will not make what you are seeing HD.
So even if you are putting in the best Audio signal ever produced its still coming out of your £100 surround sound system and is therefor no better than a DVD comming out the same speakers.
well yes but if your running something though a £100 surround setup you wouldnt be getting the HD audio codecs any way you would be getting standard dolby or DTS
as it has already been mentioned you need a newer amp which accepts uncompressed HD audio before you will get the full benifit.
and if you spend £500 + on an amp your not going to use cheap speakers, but like someone else said it would still be more channels
[Edited on 22-07-2010 by ssj_kakarot]
|
LeeM
Member
Registered: 26th Sep 05
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
My ps3 is fine, about the same as a DVD.
I've got a surround sound that suports Dolby HD and it sounds immense
|
Graham88
Member
Registered: 16th Apr 07
Location: South East Kent Drives: E46 M3
User status: Offline
|
I don't notice any difference through my PS3
|
Kyle T
Premium Member
Registered: 11th Sep 04
Location: Selby, North Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Leighton
How can the sound be better !
The only thing that will make sound better is the speakers that is is comming from.
And if any one dares to say its "HD" i will ban you
 moron
I'll be honest, with alot of my BD films I actually appreciate the improved sound more than the improved image.
Maybe it's the red DTS-MA logo lighting up on my amp just having a psychological effect though
Lotus Elise 111R
Impreza WRX STi
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Online
|
Can someone with some technical grounding in the details give me an idea as to why the sound is better?
If it's not compressed then the only two variable factors are the sample rate and the number of bits used to describe the wave.
So you have CD quality which is known as Red Book, 16 bit 44.1KHz
DVD which according to Wikipedia will support 24 bit sampling at 192Khz - admittedly only two channels at those rates. Full surround is limited to 96Khz.
Blu-ray will do 6 channels at 192Khz which is more information but not actually better quality per se.
Perhaps you think it's better because there's more going on, or perhaps it could be perceived as better because you are actually describing more audible events with that degree of data but like for like, ie a stereo music track, I can't see much difference in the technical specs.
Of course, we're not comparing like for like.
[Edited on 22-07-2010 by Ian]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Are you getting mixed up with DVD-Audio Ian?
You aren't getting mixed up, I see in your post you say multi-channel is less, which is what we're talking about.
The highest I can find for DVD-Video is 96KHz.
The bitrate for Blu-ray is also 10x as much, coupled with being lossless, quite a difference.
[Edited on 22-07-2010 by John]
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Online
|
Is DVD audio compressed? If its a lossy codec then yes, that would represent a difference. I'm not really well up on all the formats, just wanted to bring some facts to the discussion. Most of which is academic btw, I would guess that the differences we're talking about here in bit depth and rate are virtually indistinguishable on anything other than very high-end systems.
|
