Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Blu-Ray Players - What's the fav this holiday seas

Hi casey and all,

I did see a review awhile back that commented on the lack of this feature in Blu-ray playback because I recall thinking at the time, "How annoying. ."

However, I expect this capability will appear as the format matures. To put this in context, when CDs first appeared in the early 1980s, many classical CDs didn't have digital markers so you could advance or cue up different movements in a symphony or the like. I own several classical CDs that I bought in Germany during a press trip around 1982 (CDs hadn't yet launched in Canada) that have no markers. It wreaks havoc with shuffle playback in a CD changer because if the changer loads it, the disc plays in its entirety--all 78 minutes. I'm not always in the mood to hear the entire "Daphnis et Chloe" should my changer select that disc at random.

Alan

No resume or bookmarks? Just one more reason to wait till they get it right.

The features are there and many studios are using them. But it is still considered "part of the disk". With DVDs, at some point they removed the feature and allowed players to do whatever they wanted with play/resume.

Whether it be the studios or the design of Blu Ray, makes no matter, until they can be played back with all the same features you can get with a standard dvd, people will still shy away.

Funny, that reminds me of when I wanted a Jetta. I was willing to pay a premium for the looks at the time, but not the premium they were asking. At one point the sales guy countered, "But its a Jetta". I answered, but its not worth 8 grand more and walked out.

I can only imagine all those Sony execs telling themselves, "But it Bluray".

I have the 350 and it has some appealing pros at the moment: relatively cheap at $224 on Amazon (or it was yesterday, today it's $229 through an Amazon reseller), fast load times, quiet play, small footprint, it does hold your place when you want to resume play, provides very good dvd upconversion, to my eye and according to recent CNET review in comparison to other upconverting units such as OPPO (research this last one if it's important, I'm not an expert). Cons are it doesn't decode all of the new HD Audio codecs internally and doesn't have 7 analog outs.

Sort of a sweet spot for a particular market if it isn't missing features you happen to need. You can always rent blu ray discs or buy one or two for the fun of it without going too deeply into excessive consumer spending mode.

Yea, the 350 is a great player from what I hear. I jumped on the new big brother, the 550, for the 2 items that you said were missing on the 350 (all HD-audio decoding, and analog 7.1 outputs that can send all of the HD-audio).

I'm going to jump in here rather than starting a new thread....

I also bought the Toshiba HD-DVD player at the Wal-Mart special last year. I hadn't really followed Blu-Ray partly because I already had the Toshiba (and maybe 12 discs) and because I was waiting till Blu-Ray matured.

Well, now it seems as though it HAS mostly matured. As I start looking into options, I keep getting the feeling that I'm going to hit a brick wall with my current Denon 3805 receiver....(no HDMI inputs).

True or False miscellaneous ramblings, numbered for ease-of-answering...

1- Am I correct that all the new, uncompressed sound formats can ONLY be passed to the receiver through HDMI if they are not decoded within the player? And ONLY v1.3? (Won't work for me as my receiver doesn't have HDMI of any flavor).

2- If you buy a player that decodes on-board AND has analog "outs", you gain the ability to send the already-decoded signal to the receiver via the receivers' analog "ins"? (Won't work for me as I already use the receiver's analog ins for SACD/DVD-A playback).

3- Am I correct in reading that some Blu-Ray players decode SOME of the new sound formats on-board, but not others?

4- Are there players that decode on-board, but send the now-decoded signal to the receiver via digital coax or optical Toslink?

5- If the answer to #4 is "no", I guess my only option would be to not have access to the uncompressed audio tracks on the discs I play. So what DO I get....Dolby Digital? And, I assume THAT is sent via optical or digital coax?

6- Is the PS3 frequently recommended simply as a good value, or is there also some flexibility it terms of decoding or outputs that would help someone in my situation?

I guess what I'm trying to determine is whether or not getting a Blu-Ray player is even feasible with my old receiver. Obviously, I could enjoy the good-looking content of Blu-Ray, but if I don't have any way of enjoying the better sound as well, I might just wait....

I feel like a NOOB because I hadn't really followed Blu-Ray. But lately I've been "tempted", have a bit of extra cash and knowing that there might be some excellent deals on players and discs coming in the next few weeks, I need a crash course....

Mark,
1- Yes, only need HDMI 1.1
2- Yes
3- Yes
4- No (HDCP is mandatory for copy protection, or else it has to be sent analog; same thing here as SACD)
5- Some disks already do not offer regular DD or DTS for the main tracks so you will hit a wall fast, I think, or start learning Spanish or French
6- No additional help from PS3 (doesn't mean it not good, but the problems you face are more from the legal department than technical)

You might be able to get a "collapsed" and reduced stereo image through regular digital connections and use PLII and other to rebuild the surround.

Sounds like you either need a new receiver or some switch boxes to share the analog inputs between SACD and Blu-ray. Pretty those exists (you can't possibly be the first one to ever have two devices with multi-channel analog needs!).

If you go analog, I would recommend the new Panasonic 55 (pretty sure it has analog outputs). I have the BD-30 and really, really like despite it is only and "profile 1.1" (I also have a PS3 in case I really need the additional thingies with 2.0).

Change "uncompressed" to "losslessly compressed." Uncompressed would be PCM, and then you only need 1.1, I believe. Yes, you're correct that they would have to be decoded in the player otherwise.



That's right.



Correct.



No such luck.



I haven't really read thoroughly on this, but I would assume either Dolby Digital or DTS depending on which variation of lossless codec is used. But yeah, I'm sure you can get some form of downgraded audio through optical or digital coax.



There's no real flexibility. You'd need HDMI, and it only ouputs the new formats as already-decoded multichannel LPCM.