Which is the better choice: A stand-alone Blu-ray player, or a PS3? Why?

[DIY_HD]

You can't beat a PS3 for value. In my case, the decision was dictated by a non-HDMI AVR and the fact that I am all thumbs when it comes to video games. It seems the only thing I can do well is press the reset button!

[CasualKiller]

Originally Posted by lojack1976

There is a large number of reviews that completely contradict that one review you found. The statement about its video capabilities is very suspect. Granted, there are players with slightly better video performance, but they claim that the PS3 puts out a noisy picture which is totally false. I've used my PS3 with a few different LCD's and my plasma...a Panasonic which is known produce more noise than other brands. I know noise when I see it and the PS3 does not produce it.

Can a better player produce a sharper picture? Yes, a higher end player with better video capabilities can give you a slightly sharper picture, but again I've seen no player cheaper than the $400 PS3 do this. The same for DVD upscaling...a higher end player will do it better and give you a slightly sharper image. Again, nothing under $400 that I've seen does it any better than the PS3.

Then there is the statement about the audio...."Decoded HD soundtracks are relatively clear and open, but you get the feeling that the PS3 is only scratching the surface. It also has a tendency to sound quite bright and this lack of solidity and scale can make it sound rather lightweight compared to some of its rivals." I'm sorry but that sounds ridiculous. What other equipment did they compare this to? To me this sounds like there is a negative bias against the PS3 by the reviewer to begin with. Maybe he should try adjusting his EQ. Such a short review with no in-depth testing is totally suspect anyway. This review is greatly lacking in the credibility department.

No offense but I'm pretty sure WhatHiFi uses a little more than Monoprice cables and a 768p television.

[Arcam_or_bust]

Hey lojack76

It would seem that you just dont like it that they disagree with you. That you are well within your realm of rights to have, however you told me you hadnt seen a review as such, that no licenced untrained people would never say it, What Hi-Fi is considered one of the tops in the world. Whether you agree or not, they are proffesionals, they disagree with you...

It seems as though you just want to be right and argue, so thanks for the conversation.

You said "Its mighty funny how this NEVER comes up when professional reviews directly compare the PS3 to high end players. In fact I've yet to read even one that mentions a difference at all in regards to sound."

Well now you have. Peace man.

[lojack1976]

Originally Posted by CasualKiller

No offense but I'm pretty sure WhatHiFi uses a little more than Monoprice cables and a 768p television.

Hold up pal...first off cables don't mean jack. This has been the consensus with pretty much everyone up here. And by the way I do have some Philips cables that I purchased Walmart because I was too impatient to order them at the time. And for your information I purchased I purchased a $70 Monster cable once when I had my first 1080p TV to see if there would be a difference and there was absolutely none so I took it back. Yeah, I had two 1080p TV's and I still own one by the way, so thanks for your indirect dis of my 768p TV.

I've used my PS3 on two different 1080p LCD's so I know fully well what kind of performance it has. I also have a standalone connected to my 1080p set that I still own so I have a very good comparison. The assertion by that reviewer that the PS3 puts out a noisy image is total BS. Did you actually read that review? Can you honestly sit there and call it professional? That's easily one of the shortest most incomplete reviews I've ever seen. Did they list any equipment that they compared it to? NOPE! Did they even mention what test material they used? NOPE! If you want to take stock in that review go ahead, but I personally wouldn't make any decision based on such drivel...except to find a more thorough review. THIS is what a real review should look like. Its a year old, but the point is that they actual reviewed it.

[lojack1976]

Originally Posted by Arcam_or_bust

Hey lojack76

It would seem that you just dont like it that they disagree with you. That you are well within your realm of rights to have, however you told me you hadnt seen a review as such, that no licenced untrained people would never say it, What Hi-Fi is considered one of the tops in the world. Whether you agree or not, they are proffesionals, they disagree with you...

It seems as though you just want to be right and argue, so thanks for the conversation.

You said "Its mighty funny how this NEVER comes up when professional reviews directly compare the PS3 to high end players. In fact I've yet to read even one that mentions a difference at all in regards to sound."

Well now you have. Peace man.

See my above post for my opinion on their professionalism.

[CasualKiller]

I love how everyone brings up "Oh well I owned Monster and they suck". That's no comparison, they do suck. Try some real cables then tell me there's no difference.

And I'm sorry but I've owned those exact Philips cables, they are silver shielded with gold ends, they absolutely suck. Jagged edges and the way they affect contrast and brightness is horrible.

Furthermore, you never claimed to see anything on your 1080p sets you brought up the 768p set.

[lojack1976]

Originally Posted by CasualKiller

I love how everyone brings up "Oh well I owned Monster and they suck". That's no comparison, they do suck. Try some real cables then tell me there's no difference.

And I'm sorry but I've owned those exact Philips cables, they are silver shielded with gold ends, they absolutely suck. Jagged edges and the way they affect contrast and brightness is horrible.

Furthermore, you never claimed to see anything on your 1080p sets you brought up the 768p set.

You obviously have your opinion and I have mine. If buying ultra-priced cables is your thing then that's cool. I've been through many cables generic and name brand and I've yet to see a difference...and not just Monster and Philips by the way. If you do actually see a difference with yours then more power to you. I and I'm sure many others don't feel that way. I did also mention that I've used my PS3 with "a few different LCD's and my plasma" that I've owned in an earlier post. My signature also shows that I have a standalone connected to a 1080p LCD right now.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by lojack1976

Hold up pal...first off cables don't mean jack. This has been the consensus with pretty much everyone up here. And by the way I do have some Philips cables that I purchased Walmart because I was too impatient to order them at the time. And for your information I purchased I purchased a $70 Monster cable once when I had my first 1080p TV to see if there would be a difference and there was absolutely none so I took it back. Yeah, I had two 1080p TV's and I still own one by the way, so thanks for your indirect dis of my 768p TV.

I've used my PS3 on two different 1080p LCD's so I know fully well what kind of performance it has. I also have a standalone connected to my 1080p set that I still own so I have a very good comparison. The assertion by that reviewer that the PS3 puts out a noisy image is total BS. Did you actually read that review? Can you honestly sit there and call it professional? That's easily one of the shortest most incomplete reviews I've ever seen. Did they list any equipment that they compared it to? NOPE! Did they even mention what test material they used? NOPE! If you want to take stock in that review go ahead, but I personally wouldn't make any decision based on such drivel...except to find a more thorough review. THIS is what a real review should look like. Its a year old, but the point is that they actual reviewed it.

Since that review, HT has also said that several other BD players now exceed the PS3 in performance (especially DVD upconversion) and several have now best the PS3 in load times as well (LG300 for one) at one point they had removed the PS3 from their recommended list - but put it back in the next issue. At that time The Panasonic BD-55 was HT Magazine's King (Midrange) followed by the Samsung (entry level) - the PS3 has been added back to the Midrange catagory because of its overall package (i.e. gaming, wifi, ect), but as other standalones gain these features (other than gaming) the PS3 - be it a swiss army knife, utilitarian product, can't beat a Chef's knife doing a chef's job. I posted a while back about the other standalones defeating the PS3 in a barage of test. The PS3 is a great machine but - test have shown (by HT magazine itself) that it does have its deficiencies when place side by side with newer BD players.

[Johnny Vinyl]

Originally Posted by prerich

Since that review, HT has also said that several other BD players now exceed the PS3 in performance (especially DVD upconversion) and several have now best the PS3 in load times as well (LG300 for one) at one point they had removed the PS3 from their recommended list - but put it back in the next issue. At that time The Panasonic BD-55 was HT Magazine's King (Midrange) followed by the Samsung (entry level) - the PS3 has been added back to the Midrange catagory because of its overall package (i.e. gaming, wifi, ect), but as other standalones gain these features (other than gaming) the PS3 - be it a swiss army knife, utilitarian product, can't beat a Chef's knife doing a chef's job. I posted a while back about the other standalones defeating the PS3 in a barage of test. The PS3 is a great machine but - test have shown (by HT magazine itself) that it does have its deficiencies when place side by side with newer BD players.

BA-DA-BING!

[Hammie]

I love lamp...

[ozzman]

Now were into older reviews and HDMI cables
Trust me a year old review is old , Especially when were talking about blu-player.
Its a fast industry right now my friend.

For example A year ago PS3 was the fastest loading blu-ray out there.Not any more.Thats just in a year Do you so my point

[lojack1976]

I guess nobody bothered to read the last line where I said that its a year old but the point was that its a real review and not half baked review like the one that was mentioned earlier. I was just giving an example as to what a true review should look like. Nowhere have I said that there aren't any players that beat the PS3 fellas. My point from the beginning has been that at the $400 and under price range there are few if any performance differences, and I've consistently stated that there are higher end players that can give you better video performance.

Let's not forget that the original debate was about sound differences which again there is no mention of in these reviews. I've looked through a number of the reviews on hometheatermag and they don't talk about there being any sound differences. In the Oppo BDP-83 review they have a nice section discussing audio processing. They mention all of the nice features and yet they never say that there is a better quality of sound from this player. And for the record I didn't bring up HDMI cables. Another user chose to do that.

[ozzman]

Originally Posted by lojack1976

I guess nobody bothered to read the last line where I said that its a year old but the point was that its a real review and not half baked review like the one that was mentioned earlier. I was just giving an example as to what a true review should look like. Nowhere have I said that there aren't any players that beat the PS3 fellas. My point from the beginning has been that at the $400 and under price range there are few if any performance differences, and I've consistently stated that there are higher end players that can give you better video performance.

Let's not forget that the original debate was about sound differences which again there is no mention of in these reviews. I've looked through a number of the reviews on hometheatermag and they don't talk about there being any sound differences. In the Oppo BDP-83 review they have a nice section discussing audio processing. They mention all of the nice features and yet they never say that there is a better quality of sound from this player. And for the record I didn't bring up HDMI cables. Another user chose to do that.

As you put it "here's a real review .

read the "in use" part and the "Video" part

Now if your strictly talking about a blu-ray player what do you think about what this gentleman says when he the Yamaha 2900 gives a better and cleaner picture then the PS3.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/blu-r...w.html?start=3

[lojack1976]

Originally Posted by ozzman

As you put it "here's a real review .

read the "in use" part and the "Video" part

Now if your strictly talking about a blu-ray player what do you think about what this gentleman says when he the Yamaha 2900 gives a better and cleaner picture then the PS3.

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/blu-r...w.html?start=3

With all due respect Ozzman you paid quite a bit of money for that player. I remember when you got it and posted about it. You were on a quest for better video quality and you got it, but for much more than the $400 price range of the PS3. I've said from the start that there are players that offer better video quality but at a higher price.

[Mr.White]

Get a standalone player if you just enjoy movies! Get a PS3 if you like movies AND games! It all depends on your needs!

[ozzman]

Originally Posted by lojack1976

With all due respect Ozzman you paid quite a bit of money for that player. I remember when you got it and posted about it. You were on a quest for better video quality and you got it, but for much more than the $400 price range of the PS3. I've said from the start that there are players that offer better video quality but at a higher price.

You did mention that (over 400 price tag) Your right.

Sorry
Can't say i didn't Try LOL

[lojack1976]

Originally Posted by ozzman

You did mention that (over 400 price tag) Your right.

Sorry
Can't say i didn't Try LOL

No problem. I know you have an affinity for high end gear. I'm actually a bit jealous of your Mirage setup. I remember when you got that awesome center channel and I admit I was drooling a bit. LOL!

[prerich]

Originally Posted by Mr.White

Get a standalone player if you just enjoy movies! Get a PS3 if you like movies AND games! It all depends on your needs!

Well said - it comes down to users choice. Any differences - real or perceived are useful only to the user.

[STARSCREAM]

Well, the PS3 is one of the greatest electronic devices ever made in my opinion. I'd say go that route, atleast to start with especially if you like gaming too.

Also, I am still trying to decide if I want to keep the Pioneer 51fd I picked up awhile back to repace main blu-ray playback or just stick with the PS3. I can tell you that I have tried out about 8 different standalones over the last couple years and always stick with the PS3. The 51fd might have a slight edge pq wise over ps3 after messing with some setting like detail. The PS3 looks identical or even better than alot of the players I've tried out and it's super fast.

About bitstreaming vs PCM.....this is still highly debateable. I have gone back and forth trying them out and to me if you pretty much get the levels to match (bitstreams outputs at higher volume than PCM, sometimes by alot of db's) then they sound identical. When trying a dvd out with the ps3 set to bitstream I tried the opening to episode 3. Could have been a placebo effect but it sounded like I was getting slightly better sound detail and imaging when bitstreaming it but it could be because I don't have a level match reader.

PS3 is a beast of a machine, period. No other way to put it. If you have any inclination to game some then buy it and don't look back.