Is there an advantage for expensive Bluray players?

[HDFan]

think the bigger question you need to ask is whether disc media is going to be around for much longer.

Vinyl was supposed to have gone away but now it's back. It is true that fewer titles are released on optical media than in the past. My Netflix queue used to have just a few saved titles with "unknown" release date. Now I have 83. There will probably always be a market, small though it might be.

The problem with reviews is that there is no one to trust.

Check out AVS Forums.

Sound and Vision magazine has been doing reviews and lab tests for almost 70 years, starting out as Stereo Review. I have bought all my audio/video products based upon their reviews (including my Oppo players) and have never been disappointed. The magazine is included in Apple News+ and you can search reviews on their website. Generally they don't review poor performing products.

The problem with physical media is the price. You pay easily for a new release $20 ,

In the U.S. my price point is $15. I set up a Camelcamel price watch for the ones I want and just wait for the price to drop. They always do, although Disney titles often never go under $17. It just depends upon how long you are willing to wait. I do most of my purchasing during the Black Friday-Christmas period where titles can drop below $10.

The quality via a BR player might be a bit better in some cases, but not that noticeable to me.

Assuming you have a high quality TV streaming video quality differences might not mean much. If you are about audio, however, it is a huge difference. Paramount Plus runs I think at about 256 kbps, Netflix ~770. A Blu-Ray DTS-HD can go over 3183 kbps just for the audio. If you have a quality audio system you can really hear the difference.

Most people shouldn't bother with the highest price systems unless they have a good audio system and video playback (monitor/project etc.).

Your audio/video systems is a doorway. No use buying a sofa (blu-ray player) that won't fit through the door.

I assume Oppo is a cheaper chinese electronic manufacturer.

I was picking up an Oppo at their factory and mistakenly went to the other Oppo (phone) office. Was a bit confusing for a bit until they told me that they were two completely different companies, under the same parent company.

I never heard of the name Oppo in the a/v space and their website does not seem to have any A/V products to sell at all

Yep, the Oppo av company closed down. The cost of production/sales income ratio was too unfavorable.

I'm surprised at the lack of discussion of things like HDR

HDR is, indeed, possibly more significant than a 1080p to 4K upgrade.

One must question, if they were so good at a/v why not continue in that path?

As above.

 

[Aggedor]

HDR is, indeed, possibly more significant than a 1080p to 4K upgrade.

Agreed. For my own 4K setup, I needed a player that could do Dolby Vision, HLG, and HDR10/10+, as well as Dolby Atmos sound, because I have an LG OLED TV that supports those HDR codecs, and a Dolby Atmos sound system. A cheap player doesn't offer those, so I have a mid-range Panasonic (about $700-worth when it was new).

But as I said, it depends on your home theatre setup.

 

[aliasfox]

LG. Their OLED televisions are still class-leading.

I'd caveat that. For picture quality, LG OLED is at (or very near) the top of the pile. Sony OLED might edge out LG for motion processing (depends on who you ask), but at the end of the day, Sony doesn't manufacture its own OLED panel - it uses the same panel as LG's TV, which LG manufacturers.

For longevity, I think it's a crapshoot. All OLED can get burn-in from static images, Samsung's has a history of QC issues (though everyone has, to an extent), and anecdotally, other brands like Sony "aren't what they used to be."

 

[aliasfox]

Pioneer Electronics very recently was almost insolvent. They were sold to Onkyo awhile back. They had some factories shut down for awhile during the pandemic. About the only thing selling of their is some low end AVRs nothing else. Gone are lots of their expensive AVR and components. Onkyo is in sad shape too. So there you have three brands that there isn't that much left of them.

Don't forget Sharp essentially left the market, too - their Aquos line was pretty common and reasonably well regarded a decade ago.

Against a backdrop like this, it's not difficult to understand why Oppo left the blu-ray player market. If larger brands, with well established distribution channels, can't compete in the race to the bottom, what hope does a small company like Oppo have? I'm pretty sure they'd rather sell a million cell phones at $200/profit each vs selling 10k BDP-203s for $100 profit.

 

[Aggedor]

I'd caveat that. For picture quality, LG OLED is at (or very near) the top of the pile. Sony OLED might edge out LG for motion processing (depends on who you ask), but at the end of the day, Sony doesn't manufacture its own OLED panel - it uses the same panel as LG's TV, which LG manufacturers.

For longevity, I think it's a crapshoot. All OLED can get burn-in from static images, Samsung's has a history of QC issues (though everyone has, to an extent), and anecdotally, other brands like Sony "aren't what they used to be."

OLED longevity may be an issue, but all OLED panels have various means of mitigation - there's pixel-shifting, and various forms of pixel refresher (I believe my LG panel does a short refresh after X number of hours, once it is turned off, and then every 12 months it does a "big" refresh, which takes a while and the TV presents a warning before it is going to start).

I've had mine for nearly 4 years, and I watch a lot of sport (lots of static graphics) and also vintage TV and movies (so, 4:3 ratio with black bars on the left and right), and have never had an issue with any burn-in.

I did have an issue with sunlight, though - a large patch on the screen became "bruised", and then I noticed the pattern on the bruise matched the crossbars of the living room window frame. A manual activation of the "big" refresh fixed it, and now I have a cover on the TV during the day

 

[aliasfox]

OLED longevity may be an issue, but all OLED panels have various means of mitigation - there's pixel-shifting, and various forms of pixel refresher (I believe my LG panel does a short refresh after X number of hours, once it is turned off, and then every 12 months it does a "big" refresh, which takes a while and the TV presents a warning before it is going to start).

I've had mine for nearly 4 years, and I watch a lot of sport (lots of static graphics) and also vintage TV and movies (so, 4:3 ratio with black bars on the left and right), and have never had an issue with any burn-in.

I did have an issue with sunlight, though - a large patch on the screen became "bruised", and then I noticed the pattern on the bruise matched the crossbars of the living room window frame. A manual activation of the "big" refresh fixed it, and now I have a cover on the TV during the day

I've had my LG B7 for just over four years, and I haven't had any issues - but I do my best not to keep things on screen for too long. The image quality is definitely a night and day difference compared to the entry-level LG LCD (7000 series) that we also have, to the point where my wife will tell me that she'd rather watch anything Dolby Vision or HDR on the OLED.

Good to know that sunlight's no good! I'll keep that in mind if we decide to move it to a different spot.

 

[priitv8]

... Sony doesn't manufacture its own OLED panel - it uses the same panel as LG's TV, which LG manufacturers.

MY2022 saw them to replace LG's RGBW panels with Quantum-Dot OLEDs from Samsung.

 

[aliasfox]

MY2022 saw them to replace LG's RGBW panels with Quantum-Dot OLEDs from Samsung.

Ah, thanks. I haven't been following for a little bit. I was just amused that my entry-level B7 OLED used the same basic panel as the 3x as expensive top end Sony and LG back in 2017/2018.

 

[phrehdd]

I know people have been posting links here, but I'm surprised at the lack of discussion of things like HDR and audio codecs that expensive players support, versus cheaper players. There are also other things, like support for multiple frame rate outputs, and chroma settings, dynamic range, and high-quality, high-bit DACs.

Not all of that is important if you don't have a matching high-quality TV or projector. Like buying an expensive MacBook Pro, if you don't know what the M1 Pro or M1 Max are for, you don't need them.

I gather you and I could have a discussion (and some others) but many are not overly well versed in the various facets of what makes for a good player or, if one is keen on audiophile level output etc. It is possible to get a good player and not know all that goes into it and some will never miss features if they have never experienced the feature. Some people simply want the output of the device to be their main concern and not the ins and outs of technology.

 

[Aggedor]

I gather you and I could have a discussion (and some others) but many are not overly well versed in the various facets of what makes for a good player or, if one is keen on audiophile level output etc. It is possible to get a good player and not know all that goes into it and some will never miss features if they have never experienced the feature. Some people simply want the output of the device to be their main concern and not the ins and outs of technology.

Yep, totally agree!

 

[MacBH928]

I noticed on my player that the bluray is streaming at 16-18 Mbps (1080p). Using science , current internet speeds easily reaches 50Mbps with some going all the way up to 1Gbps. In this case doesn't this make a digital copy a better option? Digital can be transferred and backed up , easier to distribute, and you won't need special players for it which is a problem with older physical media.

You can't drop on any store today and buy VideoCD, LaserDisc, betamax, VHS, or casette tape player. Even BD players are getting lesser selection as time goes on!

LG. Their OLED televisions are still class-leading.

I am skeptical of LG. I just do not feel good about that company, just personal preference.

I have been watching HDTest on YouTube and he claimed a Panasonic as best tv for last year and Sony for this year.

Vinyl was supposed to have gone away but now it's back. It is true that fewer titles are released on optical media than in the past. My Netflix queue used to have just a few saved titles with "unknown" release date. Now I have 83. There will probably always be a market, small though it might be.

Sound and Vision magazine has been doing reviews and lab tests for almost 70 years, starting out as Stereo Review. I have bought all my audio/video products based upon their reviews (including my Oppo players) and have never been disappointed. The magazine is included in Apple News+ and you can search reviews on their website. Generally they don't review poor performing products.



In the U.S. my price point is $15. I set up a Camelcamel price watch for the ones I want and just wait for the price to drop. They always do, although Disney titles often never go under $17. It just depends upon how long you are willing to wait. I do most of my purchasing during the Black Friday-Christmas period where titles can drop below $10.

View attachment 1966997

Vinyl is different. I am assuming a huge amount of music is not released on Vinyl, and I think reproducing the player is easy is its all simple mechanical equipment. Vinyl is more on the hobbyists side of things, think of things like stamp albums.

I'd caveat that. For picture quality, LG OLED is at (or very near) the top of the pile. Sony OLED might edge out LG for motion processing (depends on who you ask), but at the end of the day, Sony doesn't manufacture its own OLED panel - it uses the same panel as LG's TV, which LG manufacturers.

For longevity, I think it's a crapshoot. All OLED can get burn-in from static images, Samsung's has a history of QC issues (though everyone has, to an extent), and anecdotally, other brands like Sony "aren't what they used to be."

Which TV would you consider high quality I am in the market for one. LG Sony Samsung are the best but seem not to think highly of them.

Also I thought OLED burn in issues are long gone. This is a huge problem for video games that have constant graphical elements on the screen like life bars.

I gather you and I could have a discussion (and some others) but many are not overly well versed in the various facets of what makes for a good player or, if one is keen on audiophile level output etc. It is possible to get a good player and not know all that goes into it and some will never miss features if they have never experienced the feature. Some people simply want the output of the device to be their main concern and not the ins and outs of technology.

I think near 99% of people care about the output and not is what is going on inside the device. When buying tv, i really do not think people care if its Plasma, LCD, or OLED. They want the best picture and that is the bottom line for them.

 

[aliasfox]

As I’ve said, it depends on what you mean by quality. If you‘re talking image quality, nothing will beat an OLED in today’s marketplace. However, if you have static graphical elements on screen, there will still be a risk of burn in, regardless of mitigation factors. If you’re ok with that risk, go OLED. If not, then I’ve heard that people like quantum dot LCDs, but I’ve never looked at them.

If you’re talking longevity, then no one really knows. You only know if a certain brand/product lasts long after it’s actually been working for a while. I’ve had good experiences with Sony tube TVs in the past. My dad didn’t understand why he had to get rid of his 15yr old 32” tube back in 2009 - it worked fine, just couldn’t receive signal. Or connect to a new disc player… etc. I’ve also had bad experiences with Samsung LCDs - the Samsung that replaced the Sony tube died in about 5 years. You spend your money, you take your chances.

 

[MacBH928]

As I’ve said, it depends on what you mean by quality. If you‘re talking image quality, nothing will beat an OLED in today’s marketplace. However, if you have static graphical elements on screen, there will still be a risk of burn in, regardless of mitigation factors. If you’re ok with that risk, go OLED. If not, then I’ve heard that people like quantum dot LCDs, but I’ve never looked at them.

If you’re talking longevity, then no one really knows. You only know if a certain brand/product lasts long after it’s actually been working for a while. I’ve had good experiences with Sony tube TVs in the past. My dad didn’t understand why he had to get rid of his 15yr old 32” tube back in 2009 - it worked fine, just couldn’t receive signal. Or connect to a new disc player… etc. I’ve also had bad experiences with Samsung LCDs - the Samsung that replaced the Sony tube died in about 5 years. You spend your money, you take your chances.

Sad thing is that there was a time where you did not have to risk it. I remember in the 90s you always had the reliable brand names and the cheaper ones. Now everything is cheap and made to be broken.

To be fair, products used to cost more, dvd players would be easily $300-400 now you get $60 BD player. Surely somewhere the quality dropped. This is something I am critical of when it comes to capitalism, the cheaper products wins, higher quality dies out.

 

[HDFan]

In this case doesn't this make a digital copy a better option?

My understanding is that digital copies on iTunes or Movies Anywhere peak at 30 mbps, as opposed to a possible >100 Mbps on an original 4k Blu-ray. Audio is similarly crippled.

Even BD players are getting lesser selection as time goes on!

True.

Vinyl is different. I am assuming a huge amount of music is not released on Vinyl, and I think reproducing the player is easy is its all simple mechanical equipment. Vinyl is more on the hobbyists side of things, think of things like stamp albums.

Don't follow. It is becoming the same thing with Blu-ray, only certain select titles are released, such as the Criterion releases of movies never released on optical media or on Blu-ray. If you would call viny listeners hobbyists then eventually I suppose we will have Blu-ray hobbyists supporting a small, but significant, market. Viny was a 1 billion dollar business in 2021. Sales have been increasing every year for 15 years. Even if Blu-ray sales fall from the current 2.5 billion to the the 1 billion viny number there will be companies wanting to get that cash.

When buying tv, i really do not think people care if its Plasma, LCD, or OLED. They want the best picture and that is the bottom line for them.

You need to know the 3, now 2 formats, in order to know how to get the best picture.

 

[Gasu E.]

Recommended reading.
4K Blu-ray Player Buying Guide: How to Choose a 4K Blu-ray Player - Wondershare Filmora 1/14/2022

Mysterious article. The English is so awkward that it looks as though it was written by a non-native English speaker or machine-translated. Yet, if you click on the author's bio, not only has he lived his entire life in English-speaking countries, he was an English major in college; and his bio is perfectly written. It's very strange.

 

[MacBH928]

Mysterious article. The English is so awkward that it looks as though it was written by a non-native English speaker or machine-translated. Yet, if you click on the author's bio, not only has he lived his entire life in English-speaking countries, he was an English major in college; and his bio is perfectly written. It's very strange.

it is also saying to look for BD-Live which I think was abandoned?!

 

[MPclk2006]

I am confused by Bluray prices. They are as low as $60 and some models are as expensive as $1000+ .

Any one can shed some light on whats going on here and why would I want to pay $940 extra for a device that does the same thing?

I don’t know, I mainly use my xbox to watch discs. But, recently I bought a 4K player at thrift store for $4, added. $10 power cable nd boom it works! Now I just need a $10 replacement remote and it’s a $24 investment for a $150 player.

 

[MPclk2006]

I think the bigger question you need to ask is whether disc media is going to be around for much longer. With everything going to streaming these days, the physical discs are disappearing at a rapid rate.

Used to be you could see an entire section of a store devoted to disc media. Now you're lucky if they have a bargain bin near a checkout aisle. Sure you can still find them online... but based on past precedence, the moment the stores stop stocking them is the moment they are about to disappear entirely.

Streaming has basically become the defacto media format. If you consider most people just rip the discs to their hard drive anyway, it's a no-brainer that the need for physical discs has come to an end.

I don’t know if discs are dead. While my digital library has grown in recent times, I find that the quality is better on disc than streaming, also some features are not available for digital version versus the disc version of same movie.

 

[aliasfox]

Sad thing is that there was a time where you did not have to risk it. I remember in the 90s you always had the reliable brand names and the cheaper ones. Now everything is cheap and made to be broken.

To be fair, products used to cost more, dvd players would be easily $300-400 now you get $60 BD player. Surely somewhere the quality dropped. This is something I am critical of when it comes to capitalism, the cheaper products wins, higher quality dies out.

My parents’ 32” Sony tube cost $1300 in 1996 IIRC. My LG 60” LCD went for about 1/3 that in 2021. Of course it‘s more cheaply made. It’s that cheap because people can’t tell the difference between a cheap device (such as a $60 Blu-ray player) and a mid range device ($300-500). If you ignore the differences, of course nobody’s going to bother building better.

 

[Herdfan]

While I rarely play DVD's or BR's anymore, when I did, I used a $1000 Oppo. And the reason was back then it had superior up-scaling of DVD's. It would almost make a regular DVD look like a BR, even on a 110" screen. It also had analog audio outs, so there was no compression of the sound. A movie would sound almost like it did in a theater.

Of course, that was then. Now I haven't bought a BR in years and if I want to watch a movie, I find it streaming in 4K. I probably sacrifice a little on the sound quality, but at this point I don't care.

I still have the Oppo and see no reason to get rid of it, but like I said, I rarely use physical media anymore.

 

[phrehdd]

While I rarely play DVD's or BR's anymore, when I did, I used a $1000 Oppo. And the reason was back then it had superior up-scaling of DVD's. It would almost make a regular DVD look like a BR, even on a 110" screen. It also had analog audio outs, so there was no compression of the sound. A movie would sound almost like it did in a theater.

Of course, that was then. Now I haven't bought a BR in years and if I want to watch a movie, I find it streaming in 4K. I probably sacrifice a little on the sound quality, but at this point I don't care.

I still have the Oppo and see no reason to get rid of it, but like I said, I rarely use physical media anymore.

You didn't mention which Oppo model. I find that they make excellent audio players as well for music and if you have yours on a network, it makes things really easy.

 

[MacBH928]

My parents’ 32” Sony tube cost $1300 in 1996 IIRC. My LG 60” LCD went for about 1/3 that in 2021. Of course it‘s more cheaply made. It’s that cheap because people can’t tell the difference between a cheap device (such as a $60 Blu-ray player) and a mid range device ($300-500). If you ignore the differences, of course nobody’s going to bother building better.

Well of course we can tell. Back then you bought something and it lived for decades. Now its broken out of the box, disposable appliances.

Personally I can not tell the quality difference on most items, they all do the same thing. I cant see 2 bluray players and say "Yup, this is the $1K one" . But where it gets you is the durability of the product. The cheap one will start throwing around errors soon and die in 2-4 years maybe.

I blame the people who look at 2 products and always opt for the cheaper one thinking they are saving money. In the long run factories just quit building the quality products because no one is buying them. Now the consumer is hurt. Each new product you buy is basically a "loot box" you open it and you get a varying degrees of quality no matter what the brand.

While I rarely play DVD's or BR's anymore, when I did, I used a $1000 Oppo. And the reason was back then it had superior up-scaling of DVD's. It would almost make a regular DVD look like a BR, even on a 110" screen. It also had analog audio outs, so there was no compression of the sound. A movie would sound almost like it did in a theater.

Of course, that was then. Now I haven't bought a BR in years and if I want to watch a movie, I find it streaming in 4K. I probably sacrifice a little on the sound quality, but at this point I don't care.

I still have the Oppo and see no reason to get rid of it, but like I said, I rarely use physical media anymore.

Ok i do not know too much, but if analog audio is better why is analog video not better? Isn't the audio files on the disc stored digitally? I feel I am missing something here.

 

[HDFan]

but if analog audio is better why is analog video not better?

Do you mean analog as in vinyl vs digital on optical media? That's a matter of opinion and contention. Some might say that SACD audio is the best you can get.

Analogue video - not sure what you mean.

 

[priitv8]

Analogue video - not sure what you mean.

Could be 8mm film or VHS/Beta/Hi8 video.
Actually, even LaserDisc video was analog.

 

[HDFan]

Could be 8mm film or VHS/Beta/Hi8 video.
Actually, even LaserDisc video was analog.

None of which is even close to the quality of 4K UHD releases.