Opinions Needed!!!

[Crankshaft]

I just recently bought the Sony BDP-S1 from a local electronics store, but have heard that the SamsungBD-P1200 is coming out in March. The thing is...I can return the Sony player within 30 days and I am wondering if the Samsung player might be a better player to buy. There are a couple of features on the Samsung that look interesting, such as the HDMI version 1.3 and the quality control chipset. I image the prices of each player should be fairly close so that should not be a factor. I would appreciate all the help I could get in making this decision. Thanks!!!

[Crankshaft]

Sorry guys....Just seen an earlier post on the same subject, but would still appreciate your comments. BTW, I have no interest in the PS3 console. Would like to stick with a stand alone player.

[JTK]

I'd favor Sony over Samsung 9/10 times at least, in most situations.

That being said, what does the Sony player you currently own lack that you think the second gen players will offer you?

What's the sticking point here for you?

Keep in mind: All the big companies will be coming out with second gen players as you would expect, so you can drive yourself nuts with the second guessing and future proofing.

[Sfblups3]

also hdmi 1.3 is great but there isn't a TV that support's hdmi 1.3 yet...

[bruce]

Originally Posted by JTK

I'd favor Sony over Samsung 9/10 times at least, in most situations.

That being said, what does the Sony player you currently own lack that you think the second gen players will offer you?

The ability to decode the full DTS-HD sound codecs, not just the core sound.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Sfblups3

also hdmi 1.3 is great but there isn't a TV that support's hdmi 1.3 yet...

That's right. So all the hyped video promises are years away from ever being realized anyways. That's before we even discuss cost.

Audio side? It's nice to have but it's not a critical essential. If you really decide you need to hit HDMI 1.3 then obviously you're looking at a receiver upgrade at some point. Those HDMI 1.3 receivers aren't going to be starting to show for another couple of months or so.

Originally Posted by bruce

The ability to decode the full DTS-HD sound codecs, not just the core sound.

Then it comes down to: Will you actually hear and appreciate the differences anyways? Probably not, in most cases.

Also, aren't the players supposed to be doing the bulk of the decoding anyways? There's still a lot of murkiness on how all that's going to play out.


https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=42727

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=40504

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?p=38093

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=3870

That last thread in particular may be of some use to you.

HDMI 1:3: Cool and nice, lots of myth and hype, but not critically essential IMO at least.

[theknub]

actually, todays receivers can decode the codecs and then output the multichannel pcm to the receiver via hdmi. hdmi 1.3 is required to pass the new codecs compressed to the receiver and have the receiver decode them. of course, in that scenario, you need a 1.3 capable receiver as well.

[theknub]

right jtk,
given that a lot of extra features are going to have to be muxed in the player to be played, 1.3 may be worthless for a long time.

[JTK]

Originally Posted by theknub

right jtk,
given that a lot of extra features are going to have to be muxed in the player to be played, 1.3 may be worthless for a long time.

I'm not sure it's worthless, but I'll use myself as an example.

Right now I have a 5.1 setup and I have no plans to go past 5.1 for the forseeable future.

My PS3 is technically an HDMI 1.3 device so I guess there's some kind of long term benefit that I'll enjoy several years down the road when new displays come out that can actually handle that.

Nevermind that I still hear talk about HDMI 2.0 making its first mentions in either one or two CES's from now, but that's all unofficial.

Personally, I never feel right about .x increments of anything, but who knows?


My Yamaha 2700 does HDMI 1.2 which means SACD in addition to everything else. Honestly, HDMI 1.1 will do anything anyone really NEEDS on the audio side if you really want to boil it down to brass tax and essentials.

So these are the kinds of issues people have to weigh before throwing down the money.

If someone can hook a PS3 up and go HDMI 1.3 all the way and hear any appreciable differences in their audio vs. the exact same setup with an HDMI 1.2 or 1.1 receiver instead? More power to 'em.

I frankly doubt it.

[Scorxpion]

for everything added by fellows agreed and would like you to have a look on the complete review for BDP-S1 on DVDFILE.com

http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?opt...=5802&Itemid=5

All BD-movies has been reviewed using the Sony Player. Check it and i'm sure you will keep your new player .congratulation

[JTK]

Originally Posted by Scorxpion

for everything added by fellows agreed and would like you to have a look on the complete review for BDP-S1 on DVDFILE.com

http://www.dvdfile.com/index.php?opt...=5802&Itemid=5

All BD-movies has been reviewed using the Sony Player. Check it and i'm sure you will keep your new player .congratulation

Nice bonus: The Sony player does 480i over HDMI does it not?

That ought to make it a new favorite darling for people that want a versatile digital transport, in addition to its other nice features.