videobruce

Questions;
I have had zero experience with Blu-ray. I want to replace my older Oppo 970 with a new player so I figured Blu-ray would make the most sense. Considering the drop in cost. I have just discovered that some/many BD discs have Java embedded within the disc for what I consider unnecessary gimmicks. Doing so apparently prevents the traditional resume function to work on some/many players.
Why?

I have also discovered, apparently one needs to run out a buy a brand new A/V receiver with HDMI inputs for the full Dolby Digital or DTS audio to work. Using the conventional optical or coaxial out from a BD player to a non HDMI receiver only nets you with two channel stereo.
Is this correct?
Why isn't the 5.1 available through those conventional outs as it is on a SD DVD player??

videobruce

The next question;
Will burning a backup copy of a BD movie solve any of this other than getting rid of the extra crap (DVD style)?

dsa_shea

It does suck to not have the resume feature but I just take a quick look at where I'm at in the film before I turn it off. Yes, it is a bit of a drawback to not have resume but in my opinion it is not worth going out of your way by burning extra copies or what not for that minor inconvenience.

As far as the audio goes you should get 5.1 sound just not uncompressed audio by going through any route other than HDMI and using a receiver that accepts HDMI. If you have a PS3 and a receiver with passthrough then the PS3 will do the decoding before sending it to the receiver. If you have a player that doesn't decode but sends it to the receiver to be decoded then you will need a receiver that can do just that.

wd40cloud

Bookmarking is your new friend

videobruce

Regarding "bookmarking", I read that some players dump those bookmarks when they are turned off.

dsa_shea; I don't have a HDMI receiver, nor do I want to go out and buy one.With a non HDMI receiver I would have to buy a BD player that decodes this 'new and improved' audio to get something other than two channel audio into the receiver?

islandclaws

Nope

videobruce

I just wouldn't have the lossless version of 5.1/7.1, correct?

Mr. Salty

I've not heard of that. I've owned Panasonic and Oppo Blu-ray players and they don't dump the bookmarks. Make sure the player has some sort of built-in storage just to be sure.
Correct.

You have a few options for connecting:

1. HDMI to a new, HDMI-capable receiver that decodes the new lossless formats, i.e. Dolby True HD and dts Master Audio.
2. Optical or coaxial digital output will strip off the lossless option, but your existing receiver will decode whatever lossy formats it's capable of, such as Dolby Digital or dts.
3. Blu-ray player with built-in decoders connected to your receiver via analog cables. The BD player will decode the lossless formats, then pass the uncompressed signal to your receiver.

videobruce

As long as that is the case. For now that's fine. Not knowing how much more that adds to the cost, it would then make more sense to put that $$ towards a new receiver.

videobruce

Now regarding the Java part of the question;
Why isn't the application already loaded (or have the ability to load) within the player like a PC instead o having the app. included with each and every disc??
Why can't that be within the firmware?

Also, when backing up these BD discs, is there a choice not to include the app if you aren't interested in all the bells & whistles?

kefrank

For now? I'm curious what more you would want. Even with legacy connections (optical or digital coax) you get 5.1 lossy audio at slightly higher fidelity than DVD.

Not necessarily. It just depends on what else you want in a Blu-ray player and whether you have any other compelling reason to get a new receiver. If you love the sound with your current receiver and it has multi-channel analog inputs, then it might make more sense to just spend $500 on an Oppo BDP-93 than to spend $100 on a lesser Blu-ray player and $400 on a budget receiver.

You're asking a futile question here, because:
1. Receiving an answer would require you to understand technological details that you don't currently grasp.
2. Even once you grasped them, it wouldn't change the way it works or your lack of satisfaction with it.

It depends on what you mean by "backing up" but that discussion could quickly turn toward a violation of forum rules.

videobruce

The way many seem to be talking regarding the virtues of the new and improved audio, one would think everyone would want it.It would never make any sense to spend $500 on just a player. And you know this how?

clckworang

He's probably basing that on some of the questions you asked here.

Whether you think the upgrade in audio is worth buying a new receiver is up to you, just like it would be up to you to decide to buy a 1080p TV. I just use optical with my Blu-ray player and have been very happy with the audio quality and don't want to spend the amount of money I would need for a receiver that would have everything I want (at least don't want to spend it now). We can't tell you whether you will think it's worth the money. We can just tell you the functionality, which we have done. Optical cables will work just like optical cables are supposed to work with a Blu-ray player.

kefrank

What I mean is, how else would you expect it to work? You're not going to get multi-channel lossless audio without additional new equipment, just like you're not going to get 1080p video if your TV only displays 480p. A Blu-ray player is ultimately just a source, not a magical all-encompassing solution. And it provides slightly-better-than-DVD audio even with legacy equipment and connections (such as your current receiver with optical hookup). I'm not sure what would be unsatisfactory about that.

That's entirely subjective. If it saves you from spending more than $500 on a Blu-ray player and new receiver combined then it seems like it would make sense.

Based on the way you asked the question. I didn't intend that to be antagonistic at all. My intention is only to save you the grief of trying to understand technological intricacies when having that understanding is not going to change the situation at all and isn't going to make you feel any better about the associated limitations.

videobruce

Is that anything like an assumption?

videobruce

kefrank; I think you misunderstand me. All I was saying was, many seem to think since I'm upgrading to Blu-ray, I should upgrade the audio also. Again, for now, I'm ok with 5.1 as is. It would be nice to make another step, but all I wanted was to replace my existing player and Blu-ray seemed to make more sense than just getting another DVD player.

As far as spending $500 on a player, yes it is subjective just as it is subjective to spend $20k on a pair of speakers. Yes, I know you didn't, sorry that I asked some basic questions. Every time someone re-invents the wheel, I gasp and shake my head between the dozens of new acronyms and other related details. You think you have a handle on things, but you find out you don't have a clue.

kefrank

Ah, ok. Yes, I did misunderstand the context of that comment - my bad. You certainly don't need to upgrade your audio system immediately. For the first 2+ years of owning a blu-ray player, I was still doing 5.1 lossy with my old receiver.

Yeah. My only point there was that a $500 player could represent a good value proposition upgrade depending on your other existing equipment. I tend to bristle at declarative statements that use absolute terms like "never" but that might be a personal character flaw.

I hear ya and your frustration is warranted when it comes to Blu-ray for the most part. For example, just keeping track of the different HDMI profiles and what's important about them can be a chore in and of itself.

But that's progress for you. There's a general rule with technology that says: with increased functionality comes increased complexity. :/

E Unit

Keep in mind when/if you do this, most BD's are 50 gig discs. So even if you have a dual layer BD burner, the dual layer discs are probably more expensive than the movie itself. If you choose to strip down the extras and compress the movie to a single layer 25 gig disc, the quality will definitely suffer.

videobruce

kefrank; Yes, the term 'never' probably should not of been used.

trespoochies; I thought (assumed) BD movies were 25Gb?? Sure it's not 25 for the movie and 25 more for the Java & extras??

E Unit

Not in the least. If I had to guess, I'd say 75-80% of the movies released on BD are 50 gig. You can downconvert to 25, but again you're just sacrificing picture quality. Seems like you're defeating the purpose just to avoid dealing with what you call "unnecessary gimmicks". If you're assuming movie only is on 25 gigs, and everything else is on the other 25, that would be incorrect. The movie takes up most of the space.

TheBang

To answer your question about Java, there is no "common Java app" that they use for every disc. Each disc has its own unique Java app (should it choose to go the route of Java), so what you have proposed is impossible. What is within the player firmware is the Java Runtime Environment which executes the unique and different app on each disc.

Regarding resume playback, I've noticed a much higher percentage of more recently authored discs with Java to have the resume function added to the app. Studios seem to be finally getting the message that consumers want resume functions.

clckworang

You know, it hadn't really occurred to me until I read your message, but I have noticed the resume option showing up on a lot more of my Blu-rays. It seemed like very few of the early ones had it included.

videobruce

Assuming no, hoping yes. (note the smiley)Ok, that sort of makes sense, but why couldn't all of this be designed so a common app would work (just like in a PC) and any additional code would/could be loaded on each disc if necessary?

This whole setup is ridiculous and unnecessary. It's suppose to be a movie, not a computer. A huge quality increase isn't enough? Watch the movie, forget the nonsense.

I though regular DVD's were bad with all the added crap, this bloat only adds to the complexity and to the problems. It's hard to say which is worse, this or those even more ridiculous so called 'apps' for Internet streaming that rarely work judging by all the problems according to the hundred or so reviews from Amazon and elsewhere that I have seen.

videobruce

I'm a firm believer in K.I.S.S.

BSTNFAN

You said you were replacing a current Oppo. To other Oppo owners, that gives a sense that you appreciate a well made machine with great customer service and a proven track record of firmware upgrades. Many people also prefer Oppos for region free capabilities...If any of this matters to you, I don't think it was presumptuous to recommend the Oppo 93 over some less expensive no name machine. I have multiple players including a region free modded Oppo 93, a PS3, a Panasonic and two Sonys. Although the Oppo and the PS3 were by far the more expensive machines, they were easily the best values to me (for different reasons).