Denon BD Player and Transport up on their web site

[chlngr1970]

I popped onto the Denon site and found theDVD-BD3800 Blu Ray Disc player ( $1999us. )


They also have the Blu Ray Transport DVD-BT2500 ( $1199 ) with only an HDMI output, and RS232/12V Trigger.


Both player and transport are due to ship this month. Now, I had a training on their receivers a few weeks ago, and the question of an HD DVD player was brought up. Their answer was that Denon is looking at the option of producing an HD DVD player, and/or a combo. If Denon or Pioneer produced an HD DVD player, or combo, I would pick one up as soon as it hit the street

j

[Ruined]

What the hell is a BD Transport? Is that code name for post-deadline no-longer compliant BD Profile 1.0 player?

On that note, $1199 for a player that doesn't even have HQV (like the $2k one) or video processing nor latest BD-J support? Can we say ripoff?

[videoworx]

What the hell is a BD Transport?

Transport is a fancy term that simply means there's no analog conversion (or any kind of decoding) going on. It' just a drive. There are any multi-thousand dollar CD transports out there.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by videoworx

Transport is a fancy term that simply means there's no analog conversion (or any kind of decoding) going on. It' just a drive. There are any multi-thousand dollar CD transports out there.

Yes I'm familiar with the term transport, but if this was truly a transport it would not work with any HDTV as they do not have builtin MPEG2, AVC, and VC-1 stream decoders; as you stated, a transport has no decoding going on, and this so-called "transport" is decoding the original video bitstream internally. CD transports output the PCM digitally to be decoded, this does not output the video bitstream digitally to be decoded. And even if an HDTV did have the capability to decode all those codecs, there is no cable transmission spec to actually transmit them "bitstream" (HDMI is TDMS). Therefore the term "Transport" does not really apply here.

So, the question is, why did Denon care to invent this term for a video player that is not truly a transport anyway? I noticed that the more expensive Denon PLAYER has "Latest BD-J support" as a feature while the TRANSPORT does not. Instead, the transport just says "outputs full HD audio and video" - and I bet that releasing a BD "Transport" allows Denon to sidestep the BD Profile 1.0 deadline for PLAYERS. No mention of BD-J or interactivity at all with this player. Sounds Profile 1.0 to me, no?

[dugpa]

The transport is intended for people who have one of the higher end denon receivers and need no internal decoding of the audio formats. And yes, it does have to conform to the 1.1 spec and will. Even though I'll probably get one of the Denon receivers, I'll still probably go for the DVD-BD3800 myself.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by dugpa

The transport is intended for people who have one of the higher end denon receivers and need no internal decoding of the audio formats. And yes, it does have to conform to the 1.1 spec and will. Even though I'll probably get one of the Denon receivers, I'll still probably go for the DVD-BD3800 myself.

But those two things conflict. For BD profile 1.1 it is mandatory that the player have an internal standard Dolby Digital/DTS decoder for the core of PiP streams. And, if the signal is sent bitstream with no decoding in the player, then you lose the sound of IME. So without any internal decoding of audio at all, many of the Profile 1.1 features will be worthless. Looking at all the press materials, this really does look like a profile 1.0 player. Where do you see evidence that it is not?

Calling the player a "transport" is a misnomer simply because it is doing more than that on the video side no matter what, and also more than that on the audio side if it is BD profile 1.1 compliant.

[videoworx]

Ruined, you aren't (and never will be) remotely interested in owning a Blu-Ray player, so why are you complaining about this? If Denon wants to call it a transport, does it really matter that much to you?

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by videoworx

Ruined, you aren't (and never will be) remotely interested in owning a Blu-Ray player, so why are you complaining about this? If Denon wants to call it a transport, does it really matter that much to you?

I just found it funny and curious because it makes no sense, and was wondering the reason behind it.

Seriously though, who would buy the $1200 Denon player that: looks like it may be BD profile 1.0, has no special video processing, no builtin audio decoders and no analog outputs of any sort... When you can get the dual format BD/HD DVD Samsung BD-UP5000 with all the decoders + Reon video procesing + HDi + BD-J 1.1 for $800? $400 more for a player with 1/2 of the features and 1/2 the formats that will almost definitely look worse as an upconverter? Unless you like getting ripped off, I don't see the point.

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Looking at all the press materials, this really does look like a profile 1.0 player. Where do you see evidence that it is not?

Deductive reasoning. All players after Oct. 31, 2007 have to support profile 1.1 or better. It is after Oct. 31, 2007, thus is must support profile 1.1 or better. They can call the DVD-BT2500 a player or a transport or bubbles mcgoodtimes if they want, but if it's going to carry the blu-ray logo it has to meet the 1.1 standard. The spec sheet on the website states that secondary video playback is included in the player. It'd be silly for them to include it but not a way to hear the audio with it, don't you think? My guess is either they'll pass the bitstream of the secondary audio on it's own without mixing, or if you select secondary pip it will reencode audio to standard DD or DTS. The second is my guess since the player does include standard DD and DTS Surround logos on the front. Why put those (but not TrueHD or DTS-MA or such) on the unit if it didn't have decoders for them. So yeah, it technically does some things that don't meet the definition of a transport, but for the most part it does.

[Taxi]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Seriously though, who would buy the $1200 Denon player that: looks like it may be BD profile 1.0, has no special video processing, no builtin audio decoders and no analog outputs of any sort... When you can get the dual format BD/HD DVD Samsung BD-UP5000 with all the decoders + Reon video procesing + HDi + BD-J 1.1 for $800? $400 more for a player with 1/2 of the features and 1/2 the formats that will almost definitely look worse as an upconverter? Unless you like getting ripped off, I don't see the point.

How about because some people prefer the Denon brand over Samsung for starters? And how you think that it will look worse as an upconverter is a mystery to me. It's because my DVD-5900 does such a good job of upconverting that I've not jumped on the HiDef DVD bandwagon yet.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Taxi

How about because some people prefer the Denon brand over Samsung for starters? And how you think that it will look worse as an upconverter is a mystery to me. It's because my DVD-5900 does such a good job of upconverting that I've not jumped on the HiDef DVD bandwagon yet.

Very simple: Reon/HQV video processing. Silicon Optix's chipsets have proven to be king of video processing for SD and HD. On the high end $2k model, Denon uses Silicon Optix HQV processing, so it therefore implies that HQV is better than Denon's standard processing on the $1.2k model.

The Samsung also has HQV, except it is $1200 cheaper (and supports an additional format, too). It is not quite as full featured as the HQV on the $2k Denon, but I'd bet my britches it beats out the $1.2k Denon.

[Taxi]

Originally Posted by Ruined

Very simple: Reon/HQV video processing. Silicon Optix's chipsets have proven to be king of video processing for SD and HD. On the high end $2k model, Denon uses Silicon Optix HQV processing, so it therefore implies that HQV is better than Denon's standard processing on the $1.2k model.

The Samsung also has HQV, except it is $1200 cheaper (and supports an additional format, too). It is not quite as full featured as the HQV on the $2k Denon, but I'd bet my britches it beats out the $1.2k Denon.

I don't think you're thinking like a transport. This receiver (which I'm sure will pair nicely with the BT2500) has the HQV processor that you're talking about.

Edit: So does this one.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Taxi

I don't think you're thinking like a transport. This receiver (which I'm sure will pair nicely with the BT2500) has the HQV processor that you're talking about.

Edit: So does this one.

Well that's great and all (my pre/pro also has HQV), but then you're basically paying $1200 for something that you are using at the level of a $200 HD-A3 since you will be outputting at 1080i for the video. Again, this is ripoff territory. What exactly are you getting for the extra money here? Cheaper players have better upconversion and the same "transport" bitstreaming of audio if you choose. Cheaper players have HQV builtin so you don't need an expensive receiver alongside. Cheaper players have builtin decoders so you can get full quality with full interactivity.

Indulge me, how is this player in any way better than the $499 Panasonic DMP-BD30? Because it has "Denon" stamped on it? Pay over double for a name? Remove video processors that improve quality, increase the price, and call it a "transport?" Sounds like a snow job IMO.

[Taxi]

Well, then I'd suspect you're not a fan of Meridian either.

Obviously there is a market for this kind of "high-end" equipment. I can't claim to be an expert on this particular device (there isn't much info out there about it yet) but apparently Denon believes that the technology in it (like the Precision Drive Mechanism, etc.) are worth a bit more than other players.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Taxi

Well, then I'd suspect you're not a fan of Meridian either.

Obviously there is a market for this kind of "high-end" equipment. I can't claim to be an expert on this particular device (there isn't much info out there about it yet) but apparently Denon believes that the technology in it (like the Precision Drive Mechanism, etc.) are worth a bit more than other players.

We'll see what Meridian does with their upcoming hidef player. If it is similar to the low-priced Denon, then I will call it out with the same problems. The higher price Denon offers some things that the sub-$1000 players do not (Realta chipset) and therefore you could argue that you are getting something more for your money. The lower priced one just looks like a cash-in for people who aren't all that savvy, using a fancy term (transport) that is not even accurate in order to make it look more attractive.

[Taxi]

But see, I think there is where you're missing the point.

The idea behind a "transport" as apposed to a full-blown player is that you're going to use some other external device to do the decoding. What if something comes along that's better than HQV or whatever is "best" right now? If you buy the 2K Denon player, you're stuck. If you save $800 and get the transport, then you can upgrade later on.

I know this concept is not unfamilar to you, so I'm not sure why you're arguing so passionately against it, other than that it's a Blu-Ray player, rather than HD-DVD.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Taxi

The idea behind a "transport" as apposed to a full-blown player is that you're going to use some other external device to do the decoding. What if something comes along that's better than HQV or whatever is "best" right now? If you buy the 2K Denon player, you're stuck. If you save $800 and get the transport, then you can upgrade later on.

In this case you're not using an external device to do the video decoding, but rather the scaling/deinterlacing. And, the simple answer to your question is to just set the Reon-enabled player to 1080i if you want a different processor to do the work instead of HQV. If you want to go this route, instead of saving $800 and getting the Denon transport you can save $1600 and get any of the multitude of BD players out there and functionally use them the same way (and get the same quality, since another component will be doing the heavy lifting/deinterlacing).

I know this concept is not unfamilar to you, so I'm not sure why you're arguing so passionately against it, other than that it's a Blu-Ray player, rather than HD-DVD.

It should be obvious, because its a $1200 player with the features and output quality of a $300 player, that's why!! It doesn't even match up to the $700 players with HQV processing! If an HD DVD player was so blatently underfeatured and overpriced I'd call it out as well.

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Ruined

What exactly are you getting for the extra money here?

Better power supplies to eliminate noise, much better shielding and build quality to reduce vibrations and other noise inducing signal issues, and a better drive transport (my guess is the Denon will actually play a disc unlike my friend who's now on his third A3 after constantly getting the 408bc504 error that seems to plague them). Yeah, at that price to me you might as well jump up to the 3800BDCI, but this player is not without its merits.

I also like how you're judging the image quality of players you've never seen before.

[Sehnzeleid]

Originally Posted by dugpa

Yeah, at that price to me you might as well jump up to the 3800BDCI, but this player is not without its merits.

Yeah, Denon does make quality when they want to, my 2910 hasn't had a single problem since I bought it in 2004. Crazy thing is you argue Denon's prior 2900 is built even better than the 2910.

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by Sehnzeleid

Yeah, Denon does make quality when they want to, my 2910 hasn't had a single problem since I bought it in 2004. Crazy thing is you argue Denon's prior 2900 is built even better than the 2910.

Wirehed, don't you have a Denon DVD-2910? Or do you have a DVD-3910?

Peace...

[tomdkat]

Originally Posted by dugpa

They can call the DVD-BT2500 a player or a transport or bubbles mcgoodtimes if they want,

dugpa is my new hero!

Peace...

[Taxi]

The top player now appears to be called the 3800BDCI and it has a new URL. (The old one is dead.)

[dugpa]

The player has always been called the 3800BDCI since they first announced it back last July. The transport is the 2500BTCI. That page has been up there since late November as well. I know because I have it bookmarked and salivate over it every day. Though I note they updated it to "Shipping February" instead of January as it used to say. At this late time I wish they'd just go profile 2.0 so firmware updates could be easily gotten.

[Taxi]

I went to my local Magnolia Audio-Video and they won't have the 2500 in stock until next Wednesday. The guy at the desk said they're getting 40 for the whole Pacific NW area, which probably means 40 in Seatlle, and 10 down here.

Looks like the retail price has dropped 200 bucks since j's original post.

[dugpa]

I've decided I'm going to hold off and wait till Denon releases a profile 2.0 player. I figure if I'm going to drop that much cash it better have all the bells and whistles.