loading time for Blu-ray players (1 Viewer)

[yin]

Alot of home theater fans are buying sony ps3 because the speed of loading the disc until the movie starts is the fastest.Why on earth is it not possible to make the stand alone Blu-ray players load just as fast as a normal DVD player can I don`t understand.This is why I have not bought a Blu-ray player,the PS 3 is not really for Home theater and it uses too much electrical current.I assume that the loading time will be excetable when Blu-ray has died.

 

[Jari K]

Yes, PS3 is indeed the "fastest" Blu-ray-player out there. I just read one new article (Blu-ray-player comparison etc) in my local magazine where they tested various players (inc. Panasonic BD30/50).

PS3 also got best results in the "DVD benchmark"-test in the same article. And it was easily the best as a "media player" also. PS3 rules, baby.

 

[Dave Moritz]

I believe this is one of the things that many brands are going to be improving with there new models. And I believe that ether Pioneer or Denon metioned improved loading times for there new player at CEDIA. I would look for more anouncements to be made at CES coming up in January.

 

[Doug Otte]

I don't understand this statement, and what is "excetable"?

Doug

 

[Gary Shipley]

I think he means "acceptable".

 

[PaulDA]

Well, if the PS3 is good enough for Criterion to use as their test player in their HT setup, I can't agree that it is isn't "really for Home Theater". However, the power consumption issue is a fair complaint (though I'm happy with my PS3 in my "home theatre" regardless). On the other hand, I suspect (though I'm merely speculating) that part of the "fast loading time" is owing to the processor power of the PS3 (much more powerful than even many home computers) which requires more electrical power than other BD machines' processors. So faster loading times for stand-alone players will likely only reach PS3 speeds when either A) processors become more power efficient or B) those players adopt a similarly powerful (and energy-hungry) processor of their own.

 

[Nick Martin]

Just because it doesn't look like your typical DVD player/VCR/Stereo receiver/BD player with a display, play/pause/stop/etc buttons, and instead looks like some weird, well I don't know what to compare its design to, doesn't mean it's not 'really for home theater'. It's just fine.

I like the option to stand it on its side, I like that there's no distracting display (I never realized how much a display annoyed me until now, because PS3 doesn't have one at all and it's not missed) and I like that I can pause the disc while in the bedroom or bathroom if I wanted to.

Hell I could turn it off from my balcony!

 

[chuckg]

As well as having a screaming fast processor, the PS3 likely has many times the memory capacity, and memory speed, as most other Blu-ray players.

You can't make electronics faster without consuming more power...just one of those things.

I wish they'd get rid of all the cutesy intro stuff on the BD, and take me straight to the "play movie" screen ....

 

[CraigF]

Oh, you mean like the Batman Begins BD? Which starts playing automatically. Except that WB, in another of their actions to seemingly push lossless audio to the backburner, chose lossy as the default. So the autostart is useless. But yes, I do agree it's nice not to have tons of trailers before the menu a la Disney. At this point I don't mind watching some, just to see what they look like in BD, but that'll get tired soon. Pretty quick to blast past them though.

It's got to be the powerful hardware in the PS3 that enables it to load so quickly. Not likely to see that in other stand-alone players for quite a while if ever, because it's very expensive. Also not to be neglected is the large "memory" it has for played discs and saved bookmarks due to the hard drive, most other machines might remember 20 or so.

 

[David Deeb]

Important too, for the success of BD as VOD gains more popularity.

All BDs should either auto play, or either go directly to the menu.

Can you imagine if each time you wanted to listen to a Beatles CD or read a Stephen King book, you had to sit through the same amount of previews, disclaimers, warnings, commercials and other bull*&@! that we have to endure with movies.

 

[Jonathan_Clarke]

Since so many models have come out, it's time to ressurrect this thread.

What player has the best loading time?

My upstairs dvd player just died so it's time to upgrade to Blu-Ray. I have a SONY S300 and the load times are interminable! At least a minute to turn on, a good 2-3 minutes to load, and it shuts itself off after half an hour! So my new player should beat that. But which should it be?

 

[TheBat]

the last two warner bros titles now default on trueHD.. it was gran torino and friday the 13.

Jacob

 

[Gerald LaFrance]

I had bought a Samsung P3600 and the load times are relativley fast. It also boots up almost instantly not much of a wait time if any??

But this is my 1st blu ray I havent noticed these lag times most talk about??

 

[Leo Kerr]

One of the things that made me hesitant to enter the BluRay frey was load-time and other performance.

When I did the jump, I got the new Oppo BD-83(?). Fairly prompt; not significantly slower than my old Panasonic DVD player.

Plus an excellent scaler for SD playback.

 

[Stephen Tu]

Some person on another forum tested a bunch of players; the fastest loaders were the new LG (390 I think), JVC, and Oppo.

Anything this year will be a lot faster than 1st/2nd gen models. My Sony S350 is "OK", a ton faster than my mother's freebie Sharp HP20 that she got with her TV. The Sharp I want to throw out the window, it takes so long to boot & load ...

 

[Stephen_J_H]

I have no complaints about the boot time of the BDP-S350. Yes, it's longer than a DVD player, but so is my HD-A30, and it is marginally slower than my 350. As one poster pointed out, it's all about whether or not you consider a brief wait worth the added value of HD.