NEWS: Two New Kaleidescape Players announced!

[JerryL]

Great thread. I agree that to get BR playback you will need BR decoding in the player and the new players do not do that. What is concerning is that BR was originally set for "early" 2009 and now its set for "late" 2009. That can easily slide to "early" 2010. And the most concerning is the "rivaling Blu Ray" language. I take this as marketing speak for "we think its good enough for now". I don't care how good your processing is- you can't create more resolution. I am sure to the average viewer on a 50" plasma at 10' distance they will have more difficulty discerning the difference between the two, but true HD is not just resolution, its also color depth and fidelity and DVD is a fine format but its not even close to HD.

While I understand there have got to be nods to business realities, and I still have the highest regard for Kaleidescape, I am a little disappointed by this. Its also a shame the players do not support 24/48/72 hz playback. If you are using a good external scaler, it might be nice to get high res menu graphics but beyond that you would likely be still better off using your scaler.

Btw- I should add that I think the Mini player is a great idea!

 

[jmdls]

Having talked to the powers that be at K-scape, I don't think that this new player is in any way putting off their development of Blu-ray, but rather a continued evolution and development of their product. The marketplace is demanding 1080p now, whether people can see a difference or not. And when you are selling players for $4000, they need to offer performance that exceeds a standalone $1000 player, let alone $300 ones! For that reason, I think an upgrade to Movie Player2 was needed. And the Gennum processing is definitely "worth" a $300 price premium over the old player.

Regarding Jerry's comments about being "better off using your scaler," I think that is one of the most misunderstood things in the A/V industry right now. The scaling is going to happen somewhere...the player, the receiver, the TV, etc. Whichever device does the best job of it is the one that should handle the job. I tested the new player on an Elite 1080p plasma (known for having good scaling) and the I watched clips from the player running 1080i and 1080p and the scaling in the 1080p player was better. Mainly sharper imaging on fine detail. So, for the majority of people, the scaling in the Kplayer is going to provide a better image than what they would get otherwise.

Also, it will be interesting to see how far Kaleidescape takes the "content aware" processing. In theory, this could be an incredibly powerful tool. Since the server "knows" what is being played, it could send flags to the player to engage specific processing for that title, fine-tuning it on a per title basis. This would be a huge undertaking and probably isn't realistic, but it is something that you wouldn't get from an external scaler. What is more realistic is that they could send "tweaks" for video based titles and film based titles, adjusting the scaling on the fly.

John Sciacca

 

[josh]

Great points John, and very glad to have you here on the forums. I've been a beta tester for the 1080p player for a few months and let me say first that my setup is NOT one that can really appreciate the better scaler in this player since I'm driving a Fujitsu 63" plasma that can't handle 1080p.

So while I've noticed some marginal performance improvements with my setup, I have been a bit tempered in my enthusiasm because I felt it odd to introduce a new player now that doesn't handle the BluRay format. From a marketing standpoint, it seems that anyone who would be in the marketplace for this type of player will also be one who would quickly upgrade to the BluRay player as well when it is released, so it seemed a very short product cycle, assuming BluRay devices are on track at Kaleidescape.

It's a quality product and certainly meets a need of this high end market today, but it would seem that many who would buy it would now have had to buy THREE different (replacement) players from Kaleidescape in the span of 2 or 3 years. (Movieplayer 1 or 2 --> 1080p player --> BR-capable player)

--josh

 

[JerryL]

John,
Right, but some of us have very elaborate setups that have really terrific scaling. 1080P is my point about giving a nod to business realities. Btw, the 480i into the CII processor I am running produces a really great image considering its origins are 480i. Its a shame the gennum chipset has a problem with keeping the proper cadence when outputting 24/48/72 hz. At least thats what Pixel Magic says and I've heard that elsewhere. That could be a reason why the new players don't do this. Also I suspect most people have no idea about frame rate and don't really care in any event.

I have confidence that Kaleidescape will deliver on their BR promise, I'm just a bit disappointed that the new players really don't do that much over the old. The mini is a great idea. The improved scaling, while nice, especially for the critical eyes out there, lets face it, for most people, they won't see much difference, or care very much. Its just needed for marketing reasons.

Josh,
I don't think many of us will feel shorted in the sense that we have to go from the K Player 1/2 to the 1080P to the BR because at least in my case, my plasmas can't take 1080P and I find 480P works fine for these sets and in my theater I use my scaler so its 480i out there. However, where the mini player is interesting is a place like my pool house where we will put a plasma set, and have less room for "black boxes" as my wife puts it. Instead of adding a new K Player I can add the mini player.

The inevitable, unavoidable bummer is likely to be that if you import blu ray content to the system and want to run the old players in some rooms, those older players won't be able to playback the blu ray content because its not about resolution, its about the fact that the older players don't know how to process the BR disc authoring format as well as the new video formats of H.264 and VC1. Its just how it is, I accept that, but it means either you will keep 2 copies of movies on the server- SD and HD or upgrade rooms that do not have or do not warrant HD players to BR players. Yes, I am thinking ahead

 

[ptrubey]

Hmmm. Interesting point, Jerry, about the desire for an SD video stream for Blu-ray content. However, I can't think of a way that K could allow existing players to play downrezzed, or transcoded (think VC-1 to MPEG-2) Blu-ray content on existing players. I just don't think it's technically possible.

 

[iansilv]

Hmmm. Interesting point, Jerry, about the desire for an SD video stream for Blu-ray content. However, I can't think of a way that K could allow existing players to play downrezzed, or transcoded (think VC-1 to MPEG-2) Blu-ray content on existing players. I just don't think it's technically possible.

Actually- I think it is- think about this- wasn't one of the original hdcp protocols that video not played through an hdcp compliant device is automatically downrezzed to a resolution 1/4 of the original?

So- turn off hdcp, and the video is sent at a lower resolution maybe...

 

[JerryL]

I like the thinking here but I think you are talking about what they were discussing for component video because the content owners were worried about giving a high quality open signal would encourage piracy. I happen to disagree with this. Anyway, the problem is that the players we all have today only understand MPEG2. I suppose if a BR movie were encoded in MPEG2 it might work because we have HD content that comes from K on our servers and that is MPEG2. But, would the existing K players recognize the BR disc structure? I doubt it. So its 2 problems for backwards compatibility- 1. the BR disc structure itself. 2. the video formats.

I think this is going to be one time that if you want to have BR playback, even if you want to play it back on a SD device, you're gonna need a BR compatible K player. I will put my vote in now for a BR version of not just the regular player with its reader in it, but also the mini.

 

[sfisher]

Now that a little time has passed, are there any more folks out there that can compare the KPLAYER 5000 to the new 1080p players? I have a C3X 1080 projector -- will I see a significant difference with the new players?

 

[JerryL]

I think it depends on if you are using any video processor. If not then I bet the new players are an improvement. But if you are and if its any good then 480i out over HDMI or component will be all you need. The 5000 player has a very good image.

 

[cinelife]

Another factor is screen size. Obviously, the larger the screen the more relevant resolution becomes. For example, when comparing the SD DVD and BR version of a movie (which we've done many times) on 40"-50" screens and below the differences, even to those of us with videophile discerning eyes , can be insignificant. Make the same comparison on a 120"+ and the difference in image quality is easily apparent. Regarding SD upscaling, these differences are less noticeable. Those achieving noticeable improvements between 1080i and 1080p SD material tend to have excellent processing somewhere in the chain. It might be an external processor, or it might be in the player (or in my case the Sim2 HT5000 PJ). By most accounts, K has done an excellent job with the new player's processing so you may see an improvement.

IMO, the difference between 1080i and 1080p (when referring to upscaled SD material) is insignificant. Image quality is really a function of the amount of data being delivered, not whether it is 1080i or 1080p. That said, enthusiasts tend to seek out anything identified as an "improvement."

(Note: Also, just to be clear, 1080p BR is obviously not the same as 1080p SD. I only used the BR example to illustrate the screen size factor.)

Jim