Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by flyry

Im sure people like you will keep their name going by having to mention in every disc thread "on my oppo" as you did in jest after this post.

Oppo owners, like OLED owners and Vegans always have to let us know

Oppo built superb players with unparalleled customer service. The personalized service they provided was unlike anything I have ever experienced from any electronics company. I am sad to see them exit the market. I am sadder still for all the people who are likely unemployed as a result.

I did not see $550 as being terribly expensive, either. They were not priced like a Mark Levinson amplifier by any means. Compared to the money I have poured into my collection, a quality player just made a lot of sense to me. Sure, I promoted them, but it was because of how impressed I am with them. When you love a product, you can't help but talk about it.

I never meant to be a snob about it, but you can never be sure of how your comments are being received. I have often felt that Apple owners were beyond snobbery, more like fanatical cultists, but perhaps they just really like the products they own and they, too, can't resist talking about them?

[WestMan]

As somebody who prefers discs to streaming overall....

Most people, including myself, can't notice the difference between a $200 and a $500 disc player. Hence why selling expensive disc players put Oppo out of business.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by WestMan

As somebody who prefers discs to streaming overall....

Most people, including myself, can't notice the difference between a $200 and a $500 disc player. Hence why selling expensive disc players put Oppo out of business.

Most people on here can’t tell the difference between Blu-ray and Digital HD, doesn’t mean one isn’t vastly superior to the other. I swear by Oppos as they were just tanks, built to last. They never had problems with discs.

[IronSoldier]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I swear by Oppos as they were just tanks, built to last. They never had problems with discs.

And this is why they aren't making any new products. 4k Disc is the physical format we are stuck with for what the next few years at least. Their players support all the various formats, technologies and outputs you'd need right now plus have hardware which should handle future options via firmware updates (HDR10+ perhaps). They don't have issues playing discs for the most part so what's the point of burning cash the make new products which are essentially the same as the last. Dyson did the same recently dropping corded vacuums from future releases. It had peaked in size, power and weight and now they want to focus on something else where technology can move forward.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by IronSoldier

And this is why they aren't making any new products. 4k Disc is the physical format we are stuck with for what the next few years at least. Their players support all the various formats, technologies and outputs you'd need right now plus have hardware which should handle future options via firmware updates (HDR10+ perhaps). They don't have issues playing discs for the most part so what's the point of burning cash the make new products which are essentially the same as the last. Dyson did the same recently dropping corded vacuums from future releases. It had peaked in size, power and weight and now they want to focus on something else where technology can move forward.

I would rather buy something that lasts though and pay that bit extra. Honestly the best player I ever had was a Sony S735D DVD player. I paid £450 and it’s still working now 18 years later. In that time, I could have been through three or four lesser players. It has a brushed metal finish, The smoothest loading mechanism I have ever used (or heard) a jog shuttle remote that could move back or forward by frame and all the audio options you could want. It was a beast and worth every penny. My sister bought a Philips DVD player for £200 and it lasted two years. She has my Sony now and still enjoys using it from time to time although thankfully she has moved onto Blu-ray.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by WestMan

As somebody who prefers discs to streaming overall....

Most people, including myself, can't notice the difference between a $200 and a $500 disc player. Hence why selling expensive disc players put Oppo out of business.

Oppo is not out of business; they are the 4th largest manufacturer of smartphones in the world (they are not in the U.S. market). Just the Oppo Digital division that manufactures disc players and a few more items is shuttering. They will continue to offer firmware updates and to honor warranty commitments.

Other high end disc players remain, such as Cambridge, which, ironically, uses Oppo components at its heart. I don't know how this news will affect them. Panasonic offers a higher end player, also. There remains a market for premium quality disc players, but Oppo has decided that the market for them is not profitable enough.

I am finished eulogizing Oppo, but I will close by saying that I am very glad I bought one while I could. They are the best performing, best built, best serviced players I have ever owned. Hell, I even thought about buying another while supplies remain, but I am so confident in the one that I have that I will resist the temptation.

[peep6543]

To those against digital because it doesn't give 'true ownership' of the content, do you also still buy cd's? Do you not use any e-books or reading on tablets?

I'm not trying to argue at all, just understand a bit better where the paranoia is for digital content. I understand certain aspects of quality and redemption across different platforms may suffer. But I have yet to understand the fear of losing the digital content somehow in the future, that's all.

I have started to lean heavily on digital. I find it to be cheaper and much more convenient.

[Ender14]

Originally Posted by peep6543

To those against digital because it doesn't give 'true ownership' of the content, do you also still buy cd's? Do you not use any e-books or reading on tablets?

I'm not trying to argue at all, just understand a bit better where the paranoia is for digital content. I understand certain aspects of quality and redemption across different platforms may suffer. But I have yet to understand the fear of losing the digital content somehow in the future, that's all.

I have started to lean heavily on digital. I find it to be cheaper and much more convenient.

I use Spotify Pro when I work out, but still buy CD's for my favorite artists. As with video streaming, Spotify audio is really crappy even if you download the highest quality version. I only use it at the gym for convenience but still buy physical CD's for the albums I want.

I do have a Kindle and will buy eBooks occasionally, but again, if it is a book I care about I will buy a physical copy for my collection.

I do also like to own what I buy. With Spotify I'm merely renting what I listen to for a monthly fee and understand that. But if I had to buy individual albums I would never do it through a streaming service. Same with movies. With that being said, it's not so much fear of losing content but wanting the best version of what's available. Streaming is convenient but I didn't spend $1600 on a TV to view a compressed stream. And I know the price I paid is on the low end of quality 4K sets. Watching streaming movies after spending even more on an OLED or high-end screen makes even less sense to me. But to each his own.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by peep6543

To those against digital because it doesn't give 'true ownership' of the content, do you also still buy cd's? Do you not use any e-books or reading on tablets?

I'm not trying to argue at all, just understand a bit better where the paranoia is for digital content. I understand certain aspects of quality and redemption across different platforms may suffer. But I have yet to understand the fear of losing the digital content somehow in the future, that's all.

I have started to lean heavily on digital. I find it to be cheaper and much more convenient.

I am very pro-physical media with movies and video games (the latter being more complicated these days, though). On the digital die of things, both of these are rather locked down by DRM. I understand why - since if they weren't, it would be extremely easy for people to just copy files and give them to friends/family. But at the same time, in terms of backing up and preserving a collection, there are long terms issues with it.

When a device needs to first be connected/authenticated to a service in order to watch purchased movies (even if afterwards any downloaded movies can be watched offline), should that service ever go under, and the previous authenticated device stop working, even if you still have the movie files downloaded and backed up, you won't really be able to use them if you don't have a device set up to use them.

The same is true of video games. And the issue there is that a lot of games these days, even when bought physically, have updated patches, add-on content, etc. that have to be separately downloaded. Some games do get updated releases later on with previous download content included on the disc, but not all. There are long term concerns there that bother me as a gamer. I still have every console that I've ever owned, going back to the Atari 2600, NES, etc. I am able to play those just fine, and if a component stops working (be is the system itself or a peripheral), I can either get it repaired or search for a working replacement on ebay or whatever... but I'm not reliant upon the original companies to continue to support these things in order for me to use them today.




Buying music digitally doesn't bother me quite as much for a few reasons. For one, there are plenty of options to buy and download it DRM-free. Since individual songs usually go for roughly $1 each, they can sell them DRM-free with less concern than a $20 movie or $60 video game.

So I am able to back them up, use them on other devices, etc. without ever having to use or reply on the original service that they were purchased from ever again should they go under.

And while I don't necessarily let costs be the end all/be all decision making factor in terms of physical vs. digital (I will still buy a movie on physical media over digital even if the digital equivalent it cheaper), with music the problem was that more often than not, if I were buying a CD, I was likely buying it for 1 or 2 songs out of the 12-20 on it. Sometimes when checking out the rest of the disc I would find something that I would also like, but more often than not there wouldn't be much else. I generally had better luck with greatest hits compilations for an artist or movie soundtracks that contained several songs that I liked. But otherwise for the average album, I usually didn't care for at least 3/4ths of it.

So spending $1 per song on a couple/few songs is much better IMO than spending $10 - $20 on a CD full of songs that I wouldn't want.

I know occasionally some movies might only be sold in a series set (i.e. the Back to the Future movies in the US on Blu-Ray), but at least that's a related series... and it has dropped in price enough at times that even if someone just wants one movie, if they grab it when on sale, it's still not a bad deal.

With music, though, I would have to often buy an album full of songs that the only connecting factor were that they were by the same artist. I know some people are into that, which is fine. But to me that would be like the only way to buy a particular movie would be as part of a bundle of 10 movies that all star the same actor, but are otherwise not in any way connected (they aren't sequels, spin-offs, etc.), I have no interest in the other 9 movies, and this hypothetical set costs between $100 and $200 to purchase.

So relatively speaking, a CD costing between $10 and $20 that I only want one or two songs on (which last roughly an average of 3 or 4 minutes each) is kind of the same thing.

I always found buying music to be something of a rip-off in this regard, even before digitally downloading music (be it legally or illegally) was even "a thing."

So the cost savings combined with the control makes digital music something that I can accept.

I very rarely buy CDs anymore. The exceptions are some speciality limited edition soundtracks every now and then, the rare occasion of there being an album that I actually want most of the songs on, and buys used CDs cheap (often for like $2 or $3) from second hand stores.

[peep6543]

Interesting. I certainly do NOT have all consoles I have owned, I only have the latest in fact. I rarely play a game over once I have beaten it so I do not keep them, unlike many movies. I do enjoy watching them over.

To go back to your concern over a service going under, that is where my curiosity really lies. Is that a realistic fear of yours and others? Do you think Vudu, MA, iTunes etc. will just fold and the content will vanish? It seems they are churning so hard right that I cannot see that happening.

As far as cost savings, $2 a piece for D2D allows me to compete with Redbox pricing for thousands of titles. New releases at $5-10 each over $25-35 at Best Buy is a huge savings to me. As you said with certain titles that aren't available on digital then I dive into disc ownership.

Thanks for your valuable opinions, I think this is a really interesting conversation.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by peep6543

Interesting. I certainly do NOT have all consoles I have owned, I only have the latest in fact. I rarely play a game over once I have beaten it so I do not keep them, unlike many movies. I do enjoy watching them over.

To go back to your concern over a service going under, that is where my curiosity really lies. Is that a realistic fear of yours and others? Do you think Vudu, MA, iTunes etc. will just fold and the content will vanish? It seems they are churning so hard right that I cannot see that happening.

As far as cost savings, $2 a piece for D2D allows me to compete with Redbox pricing for thousands of titles. New releases at $5-10 each over $25-35 at Best Buy is a huge savings to me. As you said with certain titles that aren't available on digital then I dive into disc ownership.

Thanks for your valuable opinions, I think this is a really interesting conversation.

Movies Anywhere is a few years too late now. I see Digital HD as a no mans land, a little like ITunes MP3 downloads of old. A temporary format that is acting as a stepping stone for streaming subscription. As a collector I value quality above all else. Like someone said, I don’t want to feed a projector and a tv compressed crap.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by peep6543

To go back to your concern over a service going under, that is where my curiosity really lies. Is that a realistic fear of yours and others? Do you think Vudu, MA, iTunes etc. will just fold and the content will vanish? It seems they are churning so hard right that I cannot see that happening.

Blockbuster Video was churning really hard back in the 90s. How are they doing now?

Toys R Us was the go-to toy place for generations of kids. The idea of them going under seemed unfathomable at one point. How are they doing now?

What is huge today may not be tomorrow. While I certainly don't expect digital distribution to go away, it could change, evolve, and the main competitors/providers could change in time. And if that results in others going under, it could impact content purchased through them.

By contrast, I still have DVDs and Blu-Rays in my collection that I bought at now-defunct places like Blockbuster and Circuit City. I don't need those store fronts to still exist to use the physical products previously purchased from them.

There are too many potential variables and things that could go wrong with digital distribution when your content is perpetually connected to the service provider by an umbilical cord that needs to remain connected in order for you to keep using that content, but the terms of service clearly state that the service provider has the right to severe that umbilical cord at any time for any reason. Even if it is unlikely that they would arbitrarily exercise that right for no major reason, it doesn't mean that a reason on their end will never arise under any circumstance.

[stonesfan129]

Originally Posted by peep6543

To those against digital because it doesn't give 'true ownership' of the content, do you also still buy cd's? Do you not use any e-books or reading on tablets?

I'm not trying to argue at all, just understand a bit better where the paranoia is for digital content. I understand certain aspects of quality and redemption across different platforms may suffer. But I have yet to understand the fear of losing the digital content somehow in the future, that's all.

I have started to lean heavily on digital. I find it to be cheaper and much more convenient.

I still buy music on a CD. Yes it is getting to the point of obsolescence considering how many tracks are available as FLAC now. But the difference is no DRM. When you buy it, you can download it and use it the way you want. You are not tied into a particular system like you would be with streaming.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Movies Anywhere is a few years too late now. I see Digital HD as a no mans land, a little like ITunes MP3 downloads of old. A temporary format that is acting as a stepping stone for streaming subscription. As a collector I value quality above all else. Like someone said, I don’t want to feed a projector and a tv compressed crap.

I still don't ever see the 5 major storefronts going subscription for new movies. I think it will always be movies or purchasing separately. Like Apple does with Apple Music and ITunes.

[peep6543]

In reference to toys r us no longer being the go-to for kids, I wonder what the trend will be with the future generations of kids wanting to watch movies. I know my 3 year old niece and nephew know how to use the Roku remote but don't have a clue how to insert a disc. That's certainly not to say they won't learn, but kids across the world today are learn to see things on a phone and iPad first. I don't disagree with any of the points made above, but I wonder if the digital ownership is a trend or the beginning of the next era.

[Destinys Memory]

What is with this awful (new?) trend of charging $19.99 for digital copies?

The Post? $19.99.

Jumanji 2017? $19.99. Same price as the 4K physical version for a digital version in HD. What, Sony wasn't satisfied with a BILLION for Jumanji? Gotta get an extra fiver outta everybody?

Here is how this is supposed to work, studios: Digital version, $14.99, released 2 weeks to a month before physical.

Physical version, $5 to $8 more than digital, releases significantly later than digital.

You are not Disney. I'm not shelling out $20 for a digital version of Jumanji / The Post / Nearly any non-Disney title. Your movie isn't that important. Stop it.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Destinys Memory

What is with this awful (new?) trend of charging $19.99 for digital copies?

The Post? $19.99.

Jumanji 2017? $19.99. Same price as the 4K physical version for a digital version in HD. What, Sony wasn't satisfied with a BILLION for Jumanji? Gotta get an extra fiver outta everybody?

Here is how this is supposed to work, studios: Digital version, $14.99, released 2 weeks to a month before physical.

Physical version, $5 to $8 more than digital, releases significantly later than digital.

You are not Disney. I'm not shelling out $20 for a digital version of Jumanji / The Post / Nearly any non-Disney title. Your movie isn't that important. Stop it.

I like the sound of the new way they are doing it better. Hopefully more studios follow suit.

Now just get rid of that time delay for the physical release, and things will be even better!

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Vilya

This has little to do with anything, but I am sad to have learned that Oppo is going belly-up.

They made the best players I have ever owned, but the public seems to prefer cheap every time.

Originally Posted by WestMan

As somebody who prefers discs to streaming overall....

Most people, including myself, can't notice the difference between a $200 and a $500 disc player. Hence why selling expensive disc players put Oppo out of business.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Most people on here can’t tell the difference between Blu-ray and Digital HD, doesn’t mean one isn’t vastly superior to the other. I swear by Oppos as they were just tanks, built to last. They never had problems with discs.

Oppo having to stop selling their Players is a big surprise to me, I ranked them up there with Panasonic Players. You Disc people have to start to wonder the future of Discs. I think this is a big blow to their longevity. We discussed on this Thread Disc Quality in Streaming has been equaled, and the only remaining goal was UHD 4K. The max Bitrate Disc Quality for Blu-ray was a mere 40Mbps and UHD 4K came in at 128Mbps. You're right people are always looking for the best deals, but also the best product money can buy.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Oppo having to stop selling their Players is a big surprise to me, I ranked them up there with Panasonic Players. You Disc people have to start to wonder the future of Discs. I think this is a big blow to their longevity. We discussed on this Thread Disc Quality in Streaming has been equaled, and the only remaining goal was UHD 4K. The max Bitrate Disc Quality for Blu-ray was a mere 40Mbps and UHD 4K came in at 128Mbps. You're right people are always looking for the best deals, but also the best product money can buy.

Oppo shutting down its Audio/Video business will have no impact on the 4K UHD format. They offered a premium product that many people were not even aware existed and at a price most would never pay for a player. Oppo never did any advertising which only compounded their obscurity. Oppo never had the market share to affect the 4K UHD disc format in any significant way. Oppo decided to focus on its core cell phone business.

Other premium players remain available, the Cambridge CXUHD and the up coming Panasonic UB 9000, both of which cost considerably more than the Oppo 203. The market for premium players, above $500, is a very small one.

Streaming quality has not "equaled" disc, but I have conceded that it has come very close on the video side; certainly close enough for most audiences. Audio still needs considerable improvement.

Few people are looking for "the best product that money can buy." If they were, they would all have displays that cost over $5000, such as the LG G8 77" TV for a modest $5,999. Their disc player would be the $1,299 Oppo 205. Audiophile equipment would cost them far, far more than both TV and player combined. And they would truly own a library of 4K UHD discs and blu-ray discs wherever possible. . You had to know I was going to say that.

They instead are more likely to buy $1000 TVs, or less, and $150 disc players, or less, connected to soundbars that cost less than $500. They would then watch DVDs with their player and stream Netflix. They are looking for an acceptable level of perceived quality that fits their budget. They are not seeking the best; few can afford such gear. They often just settle for good enough and for many 480p meets that criteria.

[bessetmath]

The most difficult thing about digital hd is how to redeem a code. You don't use the good way you lose the udh right. I think if the studios really want people to go digital, do it simple. Free upgrade for every 4k hdr titles available. ( for vudu, itunes, google play etc.)