Blu-Ray Player Feature Requests

[cinelife]

Okay folks, as suggested by other members, this thread is to be used to post any suggestions, desires, demands and comments on K's upcoming BR Player. What capabilities must it have to be competitive considering what is currently available or promised by other BR manufacturers? We may want to consider the direction the A/V industry is headed regarding HD audio, HDMI 1.3+, deep color, higher rate playback, etc, to insure the player is as up to date as possible on release.

Jim

 

[JerryL]

I agree- here are my wishes.

*1080P output
*Multiple frame rate choices so 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 playback
*HDMI 1.3

*pass HD Audio over HDMI

*Decode HD Audio to PCM to send over HDMI

*Analog 7.1 output- high quality DACs for those who want it.

*would be nice to get the 5.1 over 3 SPDIF coax channels but this is of limited use to those of us with the gear for it and also there could be copy protection issues so I think this is the most out there thing I am wishing for. Its a real benefit to me because my Meridian 861 has the digital inputs for this as their 800 player used this method to send digital audio for DVD-A. Meridian encrypyed it using their own scheme...

*current K player abilities to move subtitles, very helpful for those of us with 2.35 setups.

*perhaps video quality controls for those wishing to forgo a video processor

 

[cinelife]

I'll just "ditto" your suggestions Jerry.

Jim

 

[kartono]

Bluray Wishes

I agree- here are my wishes.

*1080P output
*Multiple frame rate choices so 24, 48, 72, 96, 120 playback
*HDMI 1.3

*pass HD Audio over HDMI

*Decode HD Audio to PCM to send over HDMI

*Analog 7.1 output- high quality DACs for those who want it.

*would be nice to get the 5.1 over 3 SPDIF coax channels but this is of limited use to those of us with the gear for it and also there could be copy protection issues so I think this is the most out there thing I am wishing for. Its a real benefit to me because my Meridian 861 has the digital inputs for this as their 800 player used this method to send digital audio for DVD-A. Meridian encrypyed it using their own scheme...

*current K player abilities to move subtitles, very helpful for those of us with 2.35 setups.

*perhaps video quality controls for those wishing to forgo a video processor

My additional wishes:

-Bluray with Profile 2
-Noise Reduction Features by using Teranex Chip rather than using Faroudja
-On/Off capability to upscale or by pass 480i/576i signal from DVD contents
-1080i as well as 1080p output
-Normal & enhanced black level on HDMI output
-Built in Test Patterns
-Fast Access time during loading the Bluray disc ( PS 3 is around 10 second )
-Balance XLR Audio Output

Kartono Ali

 

[JerryL]

I surely can't disagree with any of those. Here are my thoughts really just for fun discussion purposes:

-Bluray with Profile 2

Id love to see the latest profile/ firmware/ software/ standard/ whatever/. Better yet, my request is for the player to be software upgradable via download like how the K servers are now. BR seems to still not be quite in its final form and who knows what new features may get added to it. I think BR is likely to be the last disc based format we will see- so the ability for them to evolve it is a good idea. I hope K will build flexibility into the player so it can evolve along with the format.

-Noise Reduction Features by using Teranex Chip rather than using Faroudja

How much video processing the unit should have is a great discussion point. I was thinking it should have all kinds of features, and then I realized that anyone who is running a serious home theater will have a top video processor for that. But, I do think there is a need for some features because many of us will have a big viewing room/ HT with a video processor, but also other rooms when the benefits of some of these features/ filters would be welcome.

One thing I do like is the current players using the Faroudja DCDi- while I know this is now old technology- it works fine for 480P output and one real nice benefit is the masking of the Chroma Upsampling Error (which is something that really annoys me). In my theater I run 480i over HDMI to a CII processor->1080p/24 output to my projector. In my other rooms I run component 480P to my screens because it was the simplest and most reliable method (some HDMI issues with my other equipment) and Im not taking such a critical eye in those rooms.

-On/Off capability to upscale or by pass 480i/576i signal from DVD contents

-1080i as well as 1080p output

-Normal & enhanced black level on HDMI output

Agree

-Built in Test Patterns
At first I was thinking this is something that should really be in the realm of- its in the better video processors out there- but I think this is a good idea for those of us who want to get their other displays setup better.

-Fast Access time during loading the Bluray disc ( PS 3 is around 10 second )

Can't disagree with this one at all. IMHO, the faster the load, the better

-Balance XLR Audio Output
I think this one is a little more realistic than my wish for 3xCOAX S/PDIF outputs for PCM transmission of the high res soundtracks: nice to have but perhaps not going to be of use to too many people. Though I think it would be a little more useful to the group than my wish.


Good suggestions, keep em coming!!!

 

[Croptop]

Better yet, my request is for the player to be software upgradable via download like how the K servers are now.

FWIW, current K players do this now so I see no reason why the Blu-ray player wouldn't have this capability.

 

[kartono]

I surely can't disagree with any of those. Here are my thoughts really just for fun discussion purposes:

-Bluray with Profile 2

Id love to see the latest profile/ firmware/ software/ standard/ whatever/. Better yet, my request is for the player to be software upgradable via download like how the K servers are now. BR seems to still not be quite in its final form and who knows what new features may get added to it. I think BR is likely to be the last disc based format we will see- so the ability for them to evolve it is a good idea. I hope K will build flexibility into the player so it can evolve along with the format.

-Noise Reduction Features by using Teranex Chip rather than using Faroudja

How much video processing the unit should have is a great discussion point. I was thinking it should have all kinds of features, and then I realized that anyone who is running a serious home theater will have a top video processor for that. But, I do think there is a need for some features because many of us will have a big viewing room/ HT with a video processor, but also other rooms when the benefits of some of these features/ filters would be welcome.

One thing I do like is the current players using the Faroudja DCDi- while I know this is now old technology- it works fine for 480P output and one real nice benefit is the masking of the Chroma Upsampling Error (which is something that really annoys me). In my theater I run 480i over HDMI to a CII processor->1080p/24 output to my projector. In my other rooms I run component 480P to my screens because it was the simplest and most reliable method (some HDMI issues with my other equipment) and Im not taking such a critical eye in those rooms.

-On/Off capability to upscale or by pass 480i/576i signal from DVD contents

-1080i as well as 1080p output

-Normal & enhanced black level on HDMI output

Agree

-Built in Test Patterns
At first I was thinking this is something that should really be in the realm of- its in the better video processors out there- but I think this is a good idea for those of us who want to get their other displays setup better.

-Fast Access time during loading the Bluray disc ( PS 3 is around 10 second )

Can't disagree with this one at all. IMHO, the faster the load, the better

-Balance XLR Audio Output
I think this one is a little more realistic than my wish for 3xCOAX S/PDIF outputs for PCM transmission of the high res soundtracks: nice to have but perhaps not going to be of use to too many people. Though I think it would be a little more useful to the group than my wish.


Good suggestions, keep em coming!!!

Here are my other wishes:

-Dual HDMI outputs
The first one is for carrying video signal to the display device such as
projector or video processor/scaler & another one for carrying audio or video
signals to surround processor/receiver.

-The player should be able to play Bluray,DVD & CD disc.
So it becomes all in one player.

-THX & ISF CCC certified if possible.

Kartono

 

[cinelife]

Here are my other wishes:

-Dual HDMI outputs
The first one is for carrying video signal to the display device such as
projector or video processor/scaler & another one for carrying audio or video
signals to surround processor/receiver.

-The player should be able to play Bluray,DVD & CD disc.
So it becomes all in one player.

-THX & ISF CCC certified if possible.

Kartono

Agree with the dual HDMI outputs, for the reasons stated. I always prefer a "direct" connection between the player and display, as opposed to using switches (even though there shouldn't be any affect on video through a switch).

It has already been stated by K that the BR player (K refers to it as the Blue Laser Player) will play BR, DVD and CD's, as well as "other" content. (This info is in the FAQ as well.)

Jim

 

[JerryL]

Great idea on the dual HDMI outs.

 

[sshearer]

Great idea on the dual HDMI outs.

While I like the idea of dual HDMI outputs, my understanding is that if you have displays hooked up to both outputs, the resolution of the output signal will be the lower of the resolution of the two displays. In other words, if you have a 720p display and a 1080p display both hooked up, both displays will receive a 720p signal. Whether that is a requirement of the HDMI specs or simply the way it has been implemented to date, I am not sure. I am not sure what happens if one output is connected to a display and the other to an A/V receiver. While the concept of a single wire output (HDMI) is great in theory, when you start hooking up multiple outputs with a single input, things become much more difficult.

Scott

 

[Byron]

External source recording

How about the ability to record a composite, S-video, or component video source with digital or analogue audio. I would love to ditch DVR's all together!

Perhaps a seperate box even or the ability to transfer from a DVR to your Kaleidescape system using some compatible file format. (Like that would be easy!)

I am guessing this would create a whole new issue regarding copyright etc but it would be nice to have one system repsonsible for all your video and audio collection...

 

[JerryL]

I like that idea Bryon, but I think the idea of "recording" might scare some of the licencing types.

Scott, I am sure you are right but I think the idea behind the 2 HDMIs is one goes right to your audio box (surround processor, receiver) and the other goes to your display/ video processor and therefore you don't have to worry about any signal degradation from either the display or the audio side. I wonder how much degradation we'd get here? Probably none since its all digital- but perhaps we might see handshake issues that could be avoided with the 2x connections?

 

[cinelife]

......but perhaps we might see handshake issues that could be avoided with the 2x connections?

This is my reasoning for "direct" links, especially for the display.

Jim

 

[sshearer]

Scott, I am sure you are right but I think the idea behind the 2 HDMIs is one goes right to your audio box (surround processor, receiver) and the other goes to your display/ video processor and therefore you don't have to worry about any signal degradation from either the display or the audio side. I wonder how much degradation we'd get here? Probably none since its all digital- but perhaps we might see handshake issues that could be avoided with the 2x connections?

I gave this some more thought and did an experiment this morning that leads me to the conclusion that this would not work. The reason is our "friend" HDCP. The experiment I tried this morning was that I played a HD-DVD on my system. I have the HDMI output from the HD-DVD player going to the A/V Receiver (which decodes the audio and plays it over separate speakers) and then the HDMI output from the A/V Receiver to the TV (the A/V Receiver does no processing of the video portion of the HDMI input). Everything played fine with the TV and A/V Receiver both turned on. I then turned the TV off (leaving the A/V Receiver on) and immediately lost the audio also. I believe the reason for this is that the HDMI signal no longer saw a valid display device hooked up and that caused the source component (HD-DVD player) to immediately stop sending any signal out of its HDMI output. This would be an easy experiment for others to try and see if they receive the same result. I don't think there would be a different result even if a display device is hooked up to a second HDMI output. I do have a 1-in 2-0ut HDMI switch at home which I could use as an experiment with hooking one output up to the A/V Receiver and the other to the display and see what happens. Probably won't get a chance to do this for a couple days however.

I hope someone can prove me wrong.

One other experiment I do want to try is with another A/V Receiver I have (Anthem D2). That receiver has a feature that allows it to turn off its HDMI repeater function (which I understand basically then tells the source device that it is a compatible HDMI display device capable of displaying all video resolutions). Even if that works, I believe the Anthem is fairly unique in this capability and I am not aware of any other A/V Receiver that has this same capability.

If anyone has any other thoughts on this issue and can try their own experiments, that would be very helpful.

Scott

 

[Croptop]

After reading this article:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/03/03/audiophiles-cant-tell-the-difference-between-monster-cable-and

I've decided that I'm going to start pestering the AV group to add a coat hook to the back of the new player.

 

[cinelife]

After reading this article:

http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/03/03/audiophiles-cant-tell-the-difference-between-monster-cable-and

I've decided that I'm going to start pestering the AV group to add a coat hook to the back of the new player.

I'm certainly not defending high-priced cables here, but I would have to know more about the testing conditions (Speakers/Amps/Distance, etc.) and people involved before believing that article (not saying it isn't true). These A-B comparisons show up regularly in blogs and are usually posted by some Monster hater who never provides anymore details.

Having said that, most of the cables I own (don't own or sell monster cable) and use are from low priced online providers and I've never had a problem with any cable. I've also tested (subjective listening only) some VERY expensive cables ($12,000 for a pair of 3 meter cables) against some of my $25 speaker cable of the same length and personally could not hear a difference.

So "perhaps" there is merit to your coat hanger request.

Jim

 

[JerryL]

Scott- you are correct about HDCP. I have this issue now with my HDDVD->VP->PJ. But once its all OK and I turn my PJ off, Im still fine- I just have to get it right once. Its when I turn the HDDVD machine off that the problems start. I have to make sure the PJ is on before starting the HDDVD to get the handshakes right. I would think most people would keep their K players on. But yes, no doubt there will be some fun trouble shooting issues, like we have with all new gear.

On the cables- I saw this test years ago- and I can't say Im that surprised. I'm not a big "believer" in the high priced cables. A long time ago I bought some of these, and then I decided that maybe I should see how the system sounded with some "home theater" cables from Radio Shack and you know what- it sounded the same to me. I think in the end, its the basics: good connectors, good insulation, proper electrical characteristics to the cable and terminators.... If someone is really into high end cables, its not worth it to argue, if they get enjoyment from it. Its just not for me.

 

[Byron]

I'm certainly not defending high-priced cables here, but I would have to know more about the testing conditions (Speakers/Amps/Distance, etc.) and people involved before believing that article (not saying it isn't true). These A-B comparisons show up regularly in blogs and are usually posted by some Monster hater who never provides anymore details.

Having said that, most of the cables I own (don't own or sell monster cable) and use are from low priced online providers and I've never had a problem with any cable. I've also tested (subjective listening only) some VERY expensive cables ($12,000 for a pair of 3 meter cables) against some of my $25 speaker cable of the same length and personally could not hear a difference.

So "perhaps" there is merit to your coat hanger request.

Jim

I have always liked this article

http://www.audioholics.com/educatio...reak-in-science-or-psychological/?searchterm=

I'm just thinking how many players and drives you could add to a Kaleidescape system for 30,000 sterling........

 

[JerryL]

Great article!

 

[JerryL]

Another thought is many BR discs have 1080p/i and 480p/i content on them so there should be options for dealing with such content for example, you might want 1080p/24 for film based content but not for live concert footage that might be encoded as 1080p- youd want 1080p/60 for that. And perhaps youd like 480 to be outputted as 480 instead of scaled to 1080 if your processor does a better job of scaling. And of course this would be relevant to the legacy DVD content on our systems. Just some other thoughts which I am sure have crossed the minds of the engineers at Kaleidescape.