mozster

October 9, 2012, 5:25 pm

'demanding displays need a source that can deliver the cleanest, sharpest video signals'

if it's connected via hdmi, surely it's just delivering a bitstream read off the disc? In which case, a cheap jobbie would be just as good?

Jmac

October 10, 2012, 11:25 am

I raise this point every single time TR talks about the sharpness and quality of one blu-ray player vs another, yet they (and many other reviewers) still peddle this snake oil every time. Unless you are doing some processing on the image (which I would argue should RARELY be needed on a decently mastered source and should NEVER happen anywhere other than the monitor), an expensive blu-ray deck and a cheap one read the same compressed bitstream from the disc, apply the same known decoding algorithm, and output an identical uncompressed digital signal to the TV. Unless you're using analogue connections, therefore (and why the heck would you?!), logically the only benefits of an expensive deck over a cheap one are in build quality, features, aesthetics, perhaps noise level, and brand snobbery.

comments powered by Disqus