Friday, January 21, 2011

Upgrades do it

My blu-ray player died, and I bought a new one. Of course like we know, it's smaller, cheaper, and lighter. But here's what threw me: the picture quality is dramatically better than my old one, which was less than... 18 months old. It was the same disc and the same TV. And yet...

I did not see this coming. I have a simple mind. Who's a geek now? Not me!

Bruce said:
Apparently Blu-ray players are as much computers as they are players. they run Java, and do a significant amount of signal processing of the data they read off the disk, which is then transmitted to the TV. ... 
The quality of what you see on the TV depends on the quality of the signal processing (hardware and software) done in the blu-ray player. I have read some reviews that suggest buying a 3D capable player, even if you don't ever want to go to 3D, because of their superior computer power translates to superior 2D pictures.

Thanks, Bruce. Actually the one I bought happens to be 3D capable, so that may explain some of it.

The one thing that still bugs me about disc boxes is that virtually nobody makes a user-friendly interface for the remote control. You should be able to feel easily where your hand is, and not look at it every time before you press something. And the Stop button should be far from Play and Pause.      :-)

8 comments:

Bruce W. said...

Apparently Blu-ray players are as much computers as they are players. they run Java, and do a significant amount of signal processing of the data they read off the disk, which is then transmitted to the TV.

My new player has a wi-fi link and checks for software updates automatically. It has updated the internal software twice in the last 2 months.

The quality of what you see on the TV depends on the quality of the signal processing (hardware and software) done in the blu-ray player. I have read some reviews that suggest buying a 3D capable player, even if you don't ever want to go to 3D, because of their superior computer power translates to superior 2D pictures.

Not like the old VHS, where what was on the tape was as good as it gets.

eolake said...

Thank you. Post updated.

Dave Nielsen said...

I've yet to convert to Blu Ray because it will mean buying all over again my favorite movies. I usually only buy the ones that I really love, but even so we're looking at several hundred dollars. I can see or donate my old regular DVDs and they may change hands a few more times after that but eventually will thrown out. Same thing that happened VHS and Beta...and in music to CDs, LPs, audio cassettes, 8 Track, etc. Kind of a drag in some ways.

Bruce W. said...

The new player I referred to is Blu-ray, an upgrade from my standard DVD player. I don't think that your old DVDs are obsolete and must be replaced. My standard DVDs look so much better when I play them on the Blu-ray player that they look like new, and I doubt you would feel it necessary to re-buy a disk already in your library.

eolake said...

I agree. A well-produced DVD can look so good on these systems that I can be in doubt if it is DVD or blu-ray.

Dave Nielsen said...

I've just heard from other people that while you can play regular DVDs on a Blu-Ray and it sort of upscales them they won't look quite as good as a true Blu-Ray disc. I've never tried it so I don't know if that's the case.

Michael Burton said...

My player is about two years old. It seems to be working just fine, but now I wonder...

What manufacturer and model was your old player? How about the new one?

eolake said...

I used a PS2.

The new one is a Samsung Samsung BD-C6900. It has 3D capability of some kind, though I have no current plans to use it.