DVD Players - Buy Now or Wait for the Violet Laser Models?

PateraSilk asks: "I've been resisting the DVD pull for a while but VHS is becoming more and more obselete. So, I'm thinking about joining the hordes, but I have two problems with the DVD format: compression artifacts and low-level pixel dithering, which annoy me no end. Maybe I've just seen crappy DVDs, but this leads me to my question: should I go ahead and purchase a DVD player regardless of my qualms or wait for a violet/blue laser standard to emerge? My hope is that a larger storage capacity would lead to a less lossy compression format, but, then again, I could be waiting in vain. Plus, I don't want to embrace a technology only to have it be replaced within a couple of years." Remember, Sony's violet-laser player has already hit the market, so hopefully it won't be long before other manufacturers follow suit. How long will it be before competition in this market drives down prices to reasonable levels?

Comments

Let me get this straight

[Naikrovek]

Ok, let me make sure I'm reading this correctly... You are currently using VHS, and the picture quality bothers you, but DVD artifacts bother you MORE? Did I read that right? DVD artifacts and pixelation bother you so much you won't leave VHS?

I'm not going to type anymore about this, that is just sbsurd.

Re:Let me get this straight

[PD]

Just like vinyl sounds better to an audiophile's ears than a CD, videotape just looks better to a videophiles eyes than a DVD. The digital technologies are just cold, and they don't reproduce those high harmonics, which are impossible to see or hear, but nevertheless make a performance sound or look "alive".

Re:Let me get this straight

[nathanh]

However, you'd be wrong. Again because of the same types of interference, and also because tones can be modulated by the surfaces they reflect off of (including those in your head), and can affect each other at reflection points, the reproduction of those beyond-hearing harmonics (especially in any multi-speaker reproduction) does alter the human-hearable part of the tone that your brain ends up perceiving.

Blah blah blah. What you failed to "educate" with your babble is that hi-fi speakers aren't going to reproduce any "beyond-hearing harmonics" so it's completely irrelevant if they exist or not.

Also if the "interferences" truly created noise in the audible frequency range then they will be recorded in the studio. So the hi-fi equipment will record and reproduce the "interferences" just fine.

Of course, I did know that you are speaking a load of crap. Yes, harmonics are real. No, your explanation of tone is completely wrong. And this gem of a sentence:

... tones can be modulated by the surfaces they reflect off of (including those in your head), and can affect each other at reflection points.

Takes the cake for Biggest Load of Audiophile Bullshit that I've ever had the displeasure to read. It's a string of buzzwords with no actual meaning. There's a grain of truth in there because audio is altered by reflection off surfaces, but it has nothing to do with "modulation" nor do the waves "affect each other".

Isn't it amazing how mysticism pervades every facet of our lives. From medicine (natural "healing") to music (audiophiles *puke*). I was particularly appalled at a recent story on the news where a cancer patient refused to take chemotherapy treatment, instead opting for traditional Greek remedies such as boiled tea leaves and bat-shit. When the cancer victim inevitably died after 3 years, the family blamed the hospitals and the government! I'm similarly appalled by audiophiles who enjoy the fruits of labour from actual audio engineers, yet invent these techno-babble BULLSHIT beliefs to surround it. It's mysticism in another form.

Re:Let me get this straight

[Piquan]

Just like vinyl sounds better to an audiophile's ears than a CD, videotape just looks better to a videophiles eyes than a DVD.

Speaking as a videophile, I have to disagree.

The analog encoding on VHS loses high-frequency information way too fast. (See this comparison for the sillyscope pics. It's comparing SVHS to VHS, but you can see how they all lose HF info.) Signal bleed and stretch kick in a week after you buy the tape. Moire (colors appearing in a black and white pattern) and susceptibility to poor combing (losing edges around 3.5 MHz) is inescapable, because the chroma signal is still overlaid on the intensity signal. (This last sentence applies if you hook up the DVD player with a composite cable, but I'm concentrating on VHS format problems, not connection follies.)

I know people who prefer laserdisc, which is an analog format, to DVD. It suffers from some of the problems as VHS (such as moire), but it does have a much higher bandwidth than VHS, meaning better resolution-- a sharper picture and clearer detail.

These laserdisc holdouts are a dwindling breed, though. The DVD revolution has taken hold.

So videophiles don't prefer VHS. What's PateraSilk's deal? I'm guessing he saw bad examples: poor transfers, possibly, or a bad (or misconfigured) player adding stairsteps when it downconverted a 16:9 tape. (See my other post in this article.) But I can't imagine anybody prefering VHS to DVD in general.

DVD players are so cheap...

[dotgod]

There are many decent DVD players avaliable for $100. Why not just get a cheap one for the time being then decide on buying a more expensive one when the new standards come out.

Unbelievable

[TheSnakeMan]

Just go buy one, you cheap son of a bitch. They're $50.

This is the worst Ask Slashdot ever.

Don' Wait

[p7]

My advice, Don't wait. The current DVD standard is widespread at this point. The industry is not going to drop DVD any time soon and you will probably find few movies done specifically done for higher capacity drives. Any transition will be very slow, especially since most people will be perfectly happy with a standard DVD.

There will always be poorly compressed videos

[KU_Fletch]

Being an early adopter of DVDs, I always have to act a bit shocked when I hear people don't have one when I'm on my 3rd player. So I fully suggest you go out and get one seeing as VHS is all but dead (hizzah!).

As per your comment on poor video compression, more often than not, poor video compression is the fault of the studios. I've seem a lot of crappy transfers (Highlander, Evil Dead, etc) and a lot of beautiful transfers (Anything Pixar has done, LOTR, Panic Room, etc). The fact is a lot of studios are willing to cram a crappy video transfer on a disc, edge "enhance" the hell out of it, and cram in some extras with th space they've saved. But the good studios (Dreamworks, Universal sometimes) have learned that it's better to put good video and audio on one disc and put the exras on a second, resulting in much improved video transfers.

So don't let a few bad transfers spoil the DVD experience, the bad transfers are usually equally as bad on VHS, so it's not like you're losing much. I'd say invest in a good solid medium range DVD player now (you can get solid progressive scan units for about $150), and then when the new laser models come out, wait through the price wars and tech sniggles and get one of them when the technology has been tightened up and the prices have gone down.

You can't be serious

[chunkwhite86]

I've been resisting the indoor-plumbing pull for a while but out-houses are becoming more and more obselete. So, I'm thinking about joining the hordes, but I have two problems with indoor plumbing: paying the water bill and the periodic cleaning, which annoy me to no end. Maybe I've just seen crappy looking toilet bowls, but this leads me to my question: should I go ahead and purchase a toilet and indoor plumbing regardless of my qualms or wait for a machine which sucks the shit straight out of my ass? My hope is that such a machine would lead to a more convenient defecating experience, but, then again, I could be waiting in vain. Plus, I don't want to embrace modern technology only to have it be replaced within a couple of years.

cheap vs. GOOD

[andrewleung]

ok... i am a video compression expert so it's my JOB to find artifacts and deal with them. in the lab, we have some seriously high end equipment, if the input signal sucks, the equipment shows it. if it's good, it shows it.

until recently, we have been feeding our alternate encoder with DVD source as a test for reliability. we had some PS2s sitting around and used that. on the set, you can see DVDs that were sourced from DV camera and it looked like shit with all the interlacing and the block noise in the shadows, etc.

THEN, we got a VERY nice Sony DVP-NS915 progressive output DVD player... the output with the SAME DVDs...

UNBELIEVEABLE.

there was such a world of difference! we even turned off the progressive mode and it was STILL beautiful! this thing kicked the crap out of the PS2 in output quality. no block noise, interlace noise gone, and a LOT cleaner image.

now i know, all DVD players are not equal. you definitely get what you pay for!

for a question like this, get a NICE DVD player and you'll be very happy. get a crappy one, well... you'll be asking this again and again.

also, blue-ray rocks! but you MUST have high end stuff end to end or you're just wasting money.