Re: PS3 vs Samsung P2500 vs Panasonic DMP-BD55?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sadbttru
Started to do some reading and think that I may soon be making the jump to hd.
I have read a little about this and may be missing the individual threads but hear are my questions:
I will be using the 7.1 channel analog audio inputs on my avr (denon 3800). I do not know much about the ps3, but does it have these?
|
No, it does not. This was the point that made me hesitate for a while, but, in the end, I chose to live with "lossy" audio until a receiver/pre-pro upgrade down the line because of everything else the PS3 does so well, especially for its price. To be fair, when I got mine, the stand alone options were not nearly as attractive in terms of price/features as they are now.
Quote:
| If it does not which would be the best player using those inputs? |
In the most popular price range, the Sony and Panasonic seem to hold the edge (Panasonic in particular) but there have been a number of new models announced at CES with lots of features and lower price points (Vizio among them), as well as a highly anticipated Oppo player--your options (especially in the next 2-3 months) are becoming quite varied.
Quote:
Also, the word "analog" scares me. is there some explaination of if these would be better than using a 5.1 digital connection?
thanks! |
Much of that goes to the "lossy" vs "lossless" debate for audio (do a search, there is a lot of material on this debate--though be warned, it can resemble arguments over religious dogma at times). IF the player has sufficiently flexible internal audio management (speaker delay settings, crossover settings and internal decoding of the advanced audio codecs being the most important), then there is no reason to be "scared". However, capabilities vary widely and wildly, so some research is definitely in order. I believe, based on what I've read for specs, the Panasonic, Sony and upcoming Oppo are the best choices for that. Unless you are HDMI capable, the 5.1 digital option is limited to "lossy" audio (hence the need for analogue connections). I will offer my own observation--take it as you wish. I have always been very happy with DD/DTS 5.1 audio on SD DVD, so remaining "lossy" with BDs (and HD DVDs for that matter) has also been quite satisfactory to me. I am of the opinion that the distraction of visuals greatly diminishes the difference between "lossy" and "lossless" audio whereas the distinction is easier to make (if still somewhat subtle--again, to me) when it comes to MCH audio only (SACD/DVD-A vs DD/DTS). Others will swear up and down that there is a huge difference even with visuals. My approach has been--"lossy" has been very good until now and I will eventually benefit from "lossless" later when I upgrade my receiver (it's not like "lossy" DD/DTS is unlistenable). I cannot miss what I've never had. But, again, when I made my player selection, my options were a lot more limited than they are now. IF the option of lossless (via analogue) is available at a reasonable price with good overall performance, then it is worth pursuing. Personally, though, I would not spend double on a player knowing that within 12-24 months I'll be upgrading my receiver (which is my situation). But if I was not going to update my receiver for another 3-5 or more years, I would then have considered spending for the lossless audio via analogue. Circumstances ultimately dictate choices.
