ps3 slim. Worth it?

[STARSCREAM]

Originally Posted by PBR

I gotta agree. I have 3 other PS3's (40,60,80) and I also got a new Slim for the bitstreaming. I now hear stuff I never heard before. I also think the picture quality might be a little better. More depth and range, but that might be wishful thinking
Recomended!

I'm seeing people on AVS who think the pq is improved as well. I wonder what or if they really did do something to make it better? Some think they upped the ANSI on the slim to give the pq more pop.

[SirMontyPython]

I'll wait for news of something breaking from the PS3 slim...I'm sticking with my 160 gb PS3!!

[tilapiah6]

Originally Posted by PBR

I gotta agree. I have 3 other PS3's (40,60,80) and I also got a new Slim for the bitstreaming. I now hear stuff I never heard before. I also think the picture quality might be a little better. More depth and range, but that might be wishful thinking
Recomended!

Just when I thought zeros and ones couldn't get any sharper....

[kknight]

Originally Posted by Blu2U

The only benefit I see is it uses less power.

Bitstream; does not sound better.
Lighter; do you carry it often?
Smaller; did you have a space problem?
The newer "Fats" are quiet
And unless you are new to Blu-ray and you need a player that is also a great gaming system, then get one by all means. But if you think replacing your older PS3 is the way to go, I am going to have to disagree.

In the long run, you'll save on electricity bills since it uses less energy! I do enjoy seeing what my receiver is actually decoding now instead of always showing PCM@48kHz. I haven't fully tested the sound quality yet, so I don't know if it's better or the same. It is quieter then my old PS3.

[J0NESI]

did anyone get theirs from ebgames or gamestop. cause i reserved one when they announced it and have not heard if they are selling them. just heard that best buy was selling them.

[Icemage]

Really the main difference between the older PS3s and the PS3 slim is heat and noise. If you have problems controlling the temperature environment around your PS3, the Slim makes good sense. If you use your PS3 as a Blu-ray player in your home theater and it makes more noise than you like when watching movies, again, the Slim makes sense.

Otherwise there's no practical benefits (aside from possibly seeing the pretty DTS-MA or DTHD displays on your receiver, which you may or may not feel is worth $300).

[kevinbr100]

ill probably get one and move the old one to the bedroom

[School]

i dont understand why people complain about the ps3 being loud and then complain about audio sound quality... If you are watching movies and playing games the way they should be played you should never hear your ps3..

[kingofgrills]

Originally Posted by PBR

I gotta agree. I have 3 other PS3's (40,60,80) and I also got a new Slim for the bitstreaming. I now hear stuff I never heard before. I also think the picture quality might be a little better. More depth and range, but that might be wishful thinking
Recomended!

Sorry, but that really sounds like you're getting the placebo effect.

[SumSuperman]

Originally Posted by School

i dont understand why people complain about the ps3 being loud and then complain about audio sound quality... If you are watching movies and playing games the way they should be played you should never hear your ps3..

I don't think that's completely true. During quiet scenes in movies I often noticed the fans of my PS3. It was rather annoying. With the new Slim, it is much more enjoyable. I don't even notice it's on.

[Propellarhead9]

I am definitely going to be getting on after I move. It will probably be the one that gets put into my theater

[red_5ive]

I think that any relative difference between bistreaming and decoding is largely dependent on the AVR/pre-pro doing the decoding, not because either method has an advantage over another. It's bit-for-bit the same in the end, so technically there shouldn't be any difference. Thus, perhaps the AVR/pre-pro is adding some additional post-processing or perhaps the pre-pro section is just better at decoding than the player in general. Note that I have no way to substantiate such a claim, it's merely an observation.

Personally I prefer to have the audio bitstreamed - not because I think it's better audibly - but because I'm sick of titles that default to Dolby Digital (and I'm not gonna say any names... WARNER) and I forget to set it to DTHD, then 10 min. later I'm wondering why everything sounds thin? I want to see it on the display up front so that I know what I'm getting without having to remember to hit the display button on the remote. I mean really, after years of seeing Dolby Digital and DTS light up on my system, I also want to see it for the HD codecs.

edit: Back to the OPs question, I think you could spend you money elsewhere if your only goal is to try to improve the audio via bitstreaming.

[highdef monster]

It does not make any sense not to add backward compatiblity on new slim model.
I just don't get it?
So i will keep my 60G launch date model

[Elandyll]

Has engadget or any other site that "exploded" the PS3 verified the GPU and checked if it was exactly the same in the new slim?

If it's an updated version of the RSX (I know the new one is 45nm normally, but I didn't tink it would go farther than heat reduction), it is "possible" that the graphics might be slightly improved I guess.

[Grim Reaper]

Originally Posted by aod38

I already have a ps3 60gig and I'm debating getting the slim, just to take advantage of the bitstreaming dts hd and true hd. Now my question is, will my amplifier do such a better job at decoding the audio than my ps3? or is there not much of a difference? what do you guys think?

yes, the ps3 slim is worth it. just keep your 60gb ps3.

[alansaysstop]

Originally Posted by kevinbr100

ill probably get one and move the old one to the bedroom

+1

Plus I like the matte finish of the slim. Piano Black looks amazing but its a pain to keep free of dust and finger prints.

[Blu-Generation]

Originally Posted by highdef monster

It does not make any sense not to add backward compatiblity on new slim model.

To Sony, it just doesn't make sense why people won't buy the 99 bucks PS2. Or why people complain at the previous high price console when it did had BC. The all-built-in one machine was too much.

Consumers and the economy demanded cheap, so cheap is as cheap can get.

[saprano]

Originally Posted by Blu-Generation

To Sony, it just doesn't make sense why people won't buy the 99 bucks PS2. Or why they complain at the previous high price console when it did had BC.

Consumers demanded cheap, so cheap is as cheap can get.

This is what i dont undertand about people still complaining about PS3. like are you serious? you want a cheap console so you got one.

I just laugh when people say

"it looks cheap"
"they took to many features out"
"it still doesn't have BC"

Like WTF??? like you said BG, they were complaing about the price being to high when the PS3 did have all that shit. sony removed them to lower the price that they asked for and people still complain.

And now some are even complaing about the new slogan "it only does everything". people will never be happy with anything sony does. xbox is $199, bye.

[Blu-Generation]

It make sense that some people don't want to have too many system up in their living room space. But that's why with the PS3, "It only does everything". You have BD/DVD player, web browser, etc all in one.

Beside, who wants to play PS2 games on HDTV anyway? When one feel the need for classic gaming, just rush into a room and turn on the PS2 and old standard tv set. That should do.

Keep the living room for next-gen stuff makes more sense. IMO

[BirdManJr]

I purchased the slim 2 days ago. Have to say out of the box it doesnt look cheap by any means. I like the "shiny chrome" piece on the front again

And while i havent had much time to enjoy it..I was setting it up and never heard any fan noise at all. Seems to be another nice product by the good people at sony