I know about the "look" of Blue-Ray but, what of the "sound"?

[GilaMinumBeer]

I just pulled the trigger on a blue-ray player. Until now I have been satisfied with a basic DVD with upscaling. I know about the video improvements with Blue-Ray but how does it sound?

My receiver is not HDMI capable and nor does it have on-board processors for the latest audio coding. Namely, DD Plus, DTS MA, and some others, etc...... The player does, however, this means I have to connect via the analogue multi-channel inputs rather than the digital input as the player downconverts to legacy DTS, DD channeling.

I guess my real question is this. Do many of the Blue-Ray disc support these new DD and DTS formats and, are they worth the extra cabling?

 

[bsruther]

My old receiver isn't HDMI but, it sounds good enough for me. I'm not that particular when it comes to the sound though. If you want to watch something really spectacular on Blu-ray, get the "Planet Earth" documentary.
For info on Blu-ray and everything else HD, go here: High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource
The folks on HD forum are more obsessed with watching TV than people here are with making Beer.

 

[pen25]

let me just say when you upgrade you will be very impressed and happy. i just use my ps3 and i was impressed and happy. BTW dont waste your time paying for a 7.1 reciver if your buying one and if it costs mnore then a 5.1 unless you have a very large room.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

That is just it!

I already own a "legacy" flagship THX Ultra 9.2 receiver but, to date, there hasn't been softwares or processors capable of 9 discrete channels. And there is my curiousity.

If I go the digial route and use dig coaxial or optical the BR players processors downmix the codec to 5.1 channels and the receivers processor will matrix out the sound to the remaining channels. If I use the analogue multi-channel inputs the players processors can directly and discretely control up to 7.1 channels but, there will be DA conversions

Does it make that big a difference?

And are there that many discs that employ the higher level codecs (DTS-HD, DTS-MA, DD Plus, DD HD)?

As for the A/V forums. No thanks. I am no longer THAT into the technology but, I do like to watch.

 

[dontman]

I just wanted to chime in that I am BluRay equipped as well. (Planet Earth was the first thing I watched and it was awesome! I also loved the BD version of DMB Live in Central Park.)

Don't know about those fancy audio terms you guys are throwing about though. I just connected to my old 5.1 receiver with some nice cables and it si good enough for me. I used to care about audio. A lot! I collected a beautiful H-K and Denon system back in college. Since then it is not such a priority since I don't think my ears are sensitive enough to pick up much difference between $5k and $500 these days. (What with my being a 45 year OLD man.)

 

[dontman]

As for the A/V forums. No thanks. I am no longer THAT into the technology but, I do like to watch.

LOL! That's kind of what I was referring to. You mean you don't want to spend $1K per foot on cable?

Back in my twenties I probably would have been one of those A/V geeks if the forums had existed.

 

[avaserfi]

Depending on the audio mixing/video mastering Blu-ray (no e) can be superior in both regards. If you want to take advantage of the increased quality on the cheap end use monoprice.com. Their HDMI cables have been measured to perform bit for bit as well as the very high priced BS marketed at hundreds of dollars per meter.

Since your processor does not work with the newer formats you might be able to get away with analog cables for audio (depending on if your receiver works with such pass through). If this is the case, just pull apart some red/yellow/white analog cables that came with your old dvd/vhs player and they will work fine.

If you didn't know, my primary hobby is audio/video . Primarily construction of high end speakers.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Gotcha AVASERFI.

I too used to be in the biz. Custom Home Theater here. But, that was well before Blu-Ray was released.

My A/V controller does pass through. In fact, I think it shuts down all other circuitry when the analogue multi-channel source is selected. Just wasn't sure if the added 2 channels were discretely coded in the software or are simply matrixed off the surrounds. If the former then it does make sense to cable discretely but if the latter, we'll then that is no different than how I am already running.

The player I bought is the Pioneer BDP-51FD. Sure, it's last years models but the price is right. That is, HALF of what a comparable current player is running and the features are nearly identical (the newer player offers more direct connect capabilities within manufacturer line).

 

[nibiyabi]

The audio upgrade is worth it. I also recommend getting a 2.0 or 2.1 setup as opposed to 7.1 or 9.1 or whatever crazy stuff they're trying to sell you these days. When you drop two grand on a 9.1 setup, you're getting cheap speakers that will probably sound rather tinny and lifeless. You're much better off spending that same amount of money on a 2.0 (which I have) or 2.1 (if you really need earth-shaking bass) system to get the best speakers for your dollar. Oh, and avoid Bose. Overpriced plastic garbage.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Yeah. You can easily do that.

I dropped $5k on the receiver nearly 10 years ago and did go with cheap RCA sattelites. There was a time when I considered replacing them with something more blingworthy. Until.

I compared the performance of my $15 RCA bookshelf speakers with a pair of B&W DM605 Series 2's using a Real Time Analyzer and digital signal generator. I found that across equal octaves the bookshelves actually had a flatter response than did the high priced B&W's. To this day I still use the cheap RCA's and wish I could locate some more of them.

Yeah. In another life I used to be THAT into Audio. One of these days I will go back to school to finish my physics degree for Sound Engineering. As for now, being a lowly code monkey pays the mortgage and keeps the babes in diapers.

After reading here, and much internal consideration, I have decided I will go ahead and make the cables for the 7.1 Analogue pass through (Multi-Channel Input). Although I am still uncertain as to how the Pioneer handles the higher order DD and DTS tracks. I know it converts to Linear PCM but don't really remember what that means. I'll assume this is just an analogue facsimilie of the native discrete signal channeling and not just a downmix to a 5.1 matrixed soundfield.
Thanks for the Cit Chat fellas.

 

[GregR]

man I really need to get a blu-ray player and a nice big TV again. (old TV was stolen)

this thread makes me sad looking at all my HT equipment that is just sitting around unused.

 

[no1likesme]

The audio improvements are the only reason I would consider upgrading to a blu-ray setup. I have an astigmatism and being that I am too lazy to wear glasses most of the time, i cannot easily differentiate between standard and high def. :/

 

[avaserfi]

I compared the performance of my $15 RCA bookshelf speakers with a pair of B&W DM605 Series 2's using a Real Time Analyzer and digital signal generator. I found that across equal octaves the bookshelves actually had a flatter response than did the high priced B&W's. To this day I still use the cheap RCA's and wish I could locate some more of them.

Don't make the assumption that a completely flat frequency response is ideal, rather it has been shown (through peer reviewed double blinded studies) that a gradual roll off of the high end is perceived to be far more realistic than a flat FR. Additionally, there are many other measurable aspects of sound quality that relate directly to listener preference aside from flat fr including off axis response, driver/cabinet resonance, room acoustics, distortion etc...

As far as an incredibly low cost high end speaker goes I recommend the Behringer 2030p monitors. At about $140 a pair there are few speakers at even 5 times the cost which are measurably superior. If full standing speakers are your thing the Infinity Primus 362 can be had from Frys on sale very often for about $200 a pair. For the money both sets of speakers are superb, but with further modifications they can be made world class.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

True, True but, a flat response is a good measure of how acurately the speaker reproduces the signal.

 

[GregR]

I'm a fan of Paradigm myself. reasonably affordable and (to my ears) sound fantastic.

My HT set up consists of the following speakers.

L&R: Paradigm monitor 7's
center: cc-190
surrounds: atom monitors
sub: PDR-10

I got them all for a very reasonable price and couldn't be happier with their performance. the only thing about my HT that I don't particularly like is the noticeable audio lag on HD channels from my receiver. . . it can be fixed but it takes a lot of tinkering and time to get it just right.

 

[avaserfi]

True, True but, a flat response is a good measure of how acurately the speaker reproduces the signal.

A simple measure of on-axis frequency response, alone, is virtually useless at displaying accuracy of reproduction. What about resonance, distortion, off-axis response and room interaction/decay? All these variables drastically effect reproduction capabilities and require further analysis.

 

[pen25]

That is just it!

I already own a "legacy" flagship THX Ultra 9.2 receiver but, to date, there hasn't been softwares or processors capable of 9 discrete channels. And there is my curiousity.

If I go the digial route and use dig coaxial or optical the BR players processors downmix the codec to 5.1 channels and the receivers processor will matrix out the sound to the remaining channels. If I use the analogue multi-channel inputs the players processors can directly and discretely control up to 7.1 channels but, there will be DA conversions

Does it make that big a difference?

And are there that many discs that employ the higher level codecs (DTS-HD, DTS-MA, DD Plus, DD HD)?

As for the A/V forums. No thanks. I am no longer THAT into the technology but, I do like to watch.

unless you are using precision equipment your ears wont hear any difference in the conversions.

 

[pen25]

Depending on the audio mixing/video mastering Blu-ray (no e) can be superior in both regards. If you want to take advantage of the increased quality on the cheap end use monoprice.com. Their HDMI cables have been measured to perform bit for bit as well as the very high priced BS marketed at hundreds of dollars per meter.

Since your processor does not work with the newer formats you might be able to get away with analog cables for audio (depending on if your receiver works with such pass through). If this is the case, just pull apart some red/yellow/white analog cables that came with your old dvd/vhs player and they will work fine.

If you didn't know, my primary hobby is audio/video . Primarily construction of high end speakers.

funny thing about hdmi cables. they work or they dont. dont need to spend the 1k a foot for a cable. nor do you need to spend 30 bucks. i am have dont the comparison using 2 identical br players my 22" monitors a friends monster cable and a cheap 10 buck cable and set this all up in the office. had him tell me which was better. he consistantly didnt pick the right one. moved it to my 42" 1080p monitor and he couldnt tell again. this is also the same thing the amazing randi has found when doing blind checks with those 20k cables

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Yeah. I never did fall for all the hype about cable tech. Resistance, Inductance, sheilding, bandwidth, and heat dissipation. Those are the keys to proper cables, IMO.

I once saw a guy drop $3k for 2 pair of 3 foot speaker cables, Cardas I think. He got raped at the cash register.

 

[pen25]

Yeah. I never did fall for all the hype about cable tech. Resistance, Inductance, sheilding, bandwidth, and heat dissipation. Those are the keys to proper cables, IMO.

I once saw a guy drop $3k for 2 pair of 3 foot speaker cables, Cardas I think. He got raped at the cash register.

you cant rape the willing. analoge its different. but digitial its all 1's and zeros

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Welp. Got my Pioneer BDP-51FD. Installed it. Went to go grab a DVD and realized that BlockBuster sent SD-DVD instead of the Blu-Ray I requested. Not sure why.

Fast Forward to the next weekend.......

Decided to go to a store and exchange rather than wait for something decent in my queue (?) to ship. Ended up with Australia and Happening. The wife won the vote and we watched Australia in 1080p at 24fps.

Gorgeous!

 

[JVD_X]

That is just it!

I already own a "legacy" flagship THX Ultra 9.2 receiver but, to date, there hasn't been softwares or processors capable of 9 discrete channels. And there is my curiousity.

If I go the digial route and use dig coaxial or optical the BR players processors downmix the codec to 5.1 channels and the receivers processor will matrix out the sound to the remaining channels. If I use the analogue multi-channel inputs the players processors can directly and discretely control up to 7.1 channels but, there will be DA conversions

Does it make that big a difference?

And are there that many discs that employ the higher level codecs (DTS-HD, DTS-MA, DD Plus, DD HD)?

As for the A/V forums. No thanks. I am no longer THAT into the technology but, I do like to watch.

There are quite a few titles that offer discrete 7.1 and you don't have to spend a lot of money for a receiver that supports it. I think I paid about $500 for my sony and it sounds excellent.

However - the previous poster is correct... you really need a larger room to enjoy it fully. On the other hand, the extra two channels can support multi-room sound.

 

[GilaMinumBeer]

Yeah. As old as it is, this Yamaha will do 7.2 in the main room and 2 more channels in another if I choose to. Or, all 9.2 in the main room.