Panasonic BD50 will likely not have LFE bug, accourding to AVSFORUM insiders

[Ruined]

Just a heads up as I've been following the BD10/BD30 low LFE saga.

According to the same insiders that found the BD10/BD30 LFE bug (Dressler/FilmMixer), it appears that the BD50 will very most likely *not* have the LFE bug according to their sources at Panasonic. The bug will be addressed on the BD50 before release. However Dressler seems to imply that the BD30 fix will remain a difficult one as it may require hardware modification, such as a resistor change. From my own perspective, I could see this being offered as a fix at service centers by Panasonic, though it would be an expensive one for the company.

Anyway, great news for the BD50! With this latest development, the BD50 looks poised to be the best BD player released under $1500 thus far! I am stoked, a final 2.0 profile BD player that looks set to rock the competition!

[Iguana Man]

That's still a lot of money for many people. Forgive me, but in a nutshell, what exactly does the 2.0 final spec bring to the table vs. the 1.0?

It sounds like you are set on this player so I look forward to your future review.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

That's still a lot of money for many people. Forgive me, but in a nutshell, what exactly does the 2.0 final spec bring to the table vs. the 1.0?

Not much really.

If a studio wants to include downloadable internet junk like trailers, film facts, blogs etc, they basically can & you can check them out if you have your gear hooked up via ethernet. Its the same principle as DVD-rom SD discs with the exception of picking up your lazy ass & putting the disc in your PC instead.

1.1 allows studios to do 2 true separate video streams simultaneously, ala picture in picture commentary.

1.0 will still support the advanced menu layouts, video & audio of the film as well as any extras that no one cares aboot.

And, just a heads up the PS3 is already the best BD playback devise. Maybe IMB could have thrown the CELL into these standalones to pimp out the speed. Alas these players will still boot up like a PC & navigate 1/4 the speed in comparison.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

That's still a lot of money for many people.

The BD50 is going to be $499 from what I've heard, but it will still be the best player under $1500 if things all pan out right

Forgive me, but in a nutshell, what exactly does the 2.0 final spec bring to the table vs. the 1.0?

1.0 = Basic/Audio Video. Basically standard DVD with hidef capability.
1.1 = Advanced offline interactivity, i.e. IME, U-Control, PiP, etc
2.0 = Online interactivity, i.e. downloads, online firmware updates, etc

Also, and this is a huge point for BD players, all of the 1.0 players are ungodly slow - slower than the original Toshiba HD-A1, we are talking 30sec to start then 2+ min to load some BD-J movies - while 1.1+ players seem to be much, much speedier.

It sounds like you are set on this player so I look forward to your future review.

Yep, but I can review it now before I get it as Panasonic has made clear what the BD50 is. The BD50 will be the BD30 minus the LFE bug, with Profile 2.0/Online support and all nextgen audio codecs decoders builtin + analog 5.1 added into the mix. This will apparently all be added at the same $499 price point according to BD insiders, though I wouldn't be surprised if it were released at $599 given its demand. It will have even more features than the PS3 (PS3 lacks bitstreaming & DTS-HDMA decoding, and hasn't yet been upgraded to BD2.0) and will be very fast.

Bottom line, even if you won't use the BD2.0 functionality, the BD50 will be the first fully-featured player - likely for $500 - that could actually be seen as a better option than the HD-A35 or PS3.

[Shadowman82]

This Panasonic player really does sound like the Blu-ray player to get .

[Astrakan]

Originally Posted by Shadowman82

This Panasonic player really does sound like the Blu-ray player to get .

Yeah... I'm crossing my fingers that it'll have stellar upconverting. If that's the case, I'll be all over it.

KM

[Buffalo Bill]

Originally Posted by Astrakan

Yeah... I'm crossing my fingers that it'll have stellar upconverting. If that's the case, I'll be all over it.

KM

With all the standard dvds I have I'm with you in hopes that it will be a great upconverter too.

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by Derb

And, just a heads up the PS3 is already the best BD playback devise.

So how's that DTS-MA decoding or bitstreaming on the PS3 working out for you then?

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by dugpa

So how's that DTS-MA decoding or bitstreaming on the PS3 working out for you then?

Uh oh, its the PS3 killer!

...And you forgot analog 5.1 outputs that the BD50 also has over the PS3

[videoworx]

Derb is simply suggesting tha a currently shipping Blu-Ray player (the PS3) is better than than one that isn't yet (in the US).

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by videoworx

Derb is simply suggesting tha a currently shipping Blu-Ray player (the PS3) is better than than one that isn't yet (in the US).

Except that it's not. No DTS MA decoding or bitstreaming is a big drawback in my book, considering that one entire studio uses it on all their titles. Sorry, but lossless audio trumps having my player boot up 30 seconds sooner in my book.
I'll be keeping an eye on the BD50. If the reports on the final release unit are good, it may be the Profile 2.0 player to replace my aging BDP-S1 (geesh, it's just over a year old and seems dated already).

[Iguana Man]

Originally Posted by dugpa

I'll be keeping an eye on the BD50. If the reports on the final release unit are good, it may be the Profile 2.0 player to replace my aging BDP-S1 (geesh, it's just over a year old and seems dated already).

On a side note, that does seem "geesh" worthy. I don't recall this being the case with the Toshi HD DVD players. At least, not to the extreme I see with your current player and the BD50. Then again, someone will tell me I'm wrong.

[ganthc]

PS3 owners are still waiting on the firmware that will allow for dts-hdma decoding. As far as bitstreaming is concerned, I still haven't heard someone tell me how it is so vastly better than PCM.

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by ganthc

PS3 owners are still waiting on the firmware that will allow for dts-hdma decoding. As far as bitstreaming is concerned, I still haven't heard someone tell me how it is so vastly better than PCM.

Yes, they're waiting and waiting and waiting and have been for ages now. And will be for ages more. They system has been out for 15 months now and PS3 users are still waiting. Honestly, I'm skeptical as to if it can actually be done. I don't know if I believe the hardware in the PS3 is capable of doing the DTS-MA decoding. Everyone seems to think firmware can magically do things but if the hardware doesn't support it, you're sunk. The "reports" I've seen of the PS3 having a firmware update coming to do DTS-MA usually are some poor sales schmuck at a trade show somewhere who gets asked about it and says, "Oh yeah, we're working on that." That hardly inspires confidence. But hey, I hope I'm wrong on this and all you PS3 owners get lossless DTS goodness. I'd almost consider a PS3 if they did that if it wasn't for it being a slot loader (Slot loaders are for cars and 5 year olds).
You're right, the difference between bitstream or conversion to PCM isn't that great. I was merely saying decoding/bitstreaming of DTS-MA to point out that there's no way at all to hear the actual lossless format with a PS3. I'd take either one personally, but the PS3 does neither.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by dugpa

Yes, they're waiting and waiting and waiting and have been for ages now. And will be for ages more. They system has been out for 15 months now and PS3 users are still waiting. Honestly, I'm skeptical as to if it can actually be done. I don't know if I believe the hardware in the PS3 is capable of doing the DTS-MA decoding. Everyone seems to think firmware can magically do things but if the hardware doesn't support it, you're sunk. The "reports" I've seen of the PS3 having a firmware update coming to do DTS-MA usually are some poor sales schmuck at a trade show somewhere who gets asked about it and says, "Oh yeah, we're working on that." That hardly inspires confidence. But hey, I hope I'm wrong on this and all you PS3 owners get lossless DTS goodness. I'd almost consider a PS3 if they did that if it wasn't for it being a slot loader (Slot loaders are for cars and 5 year olds).
You're right, the difference between bitstream or conversion to PCM isn't that great. I was merely saying decoding/bitstreaming of DTS-MA to point out that there's no way at all to hear the actual lossless format with a PS3. I'd take either one personally, but the PS3 does neither.

I guess I hold out hope it's possible. I'm not saying that firmware will magically allow it to play hd-dvd as well or something like that. I just think that with the hardware prowess of the ps3, there could be a way for it to decode and send the output via pcm...which is totally acceptable to me.

My thinking is that the dts-hdma decoding has been put off so that Sony can work on getting the ps3 up to 2.0 profile standards. It recently got it to 1.1 profile standards, but in order to get Universal and Paramount to switch over effortlessly (and probably to appeal to Warner's desire to have the HDM interactivity stuff), the ps3's next firmware is probably the 2.0 profile fix. To automatically make millions of bd players 2.0 capable would be a drawing point...or is a requirement for Warner.

Just a theory on my side.

[Iguana Man]

I think we will now find (soon enough) that the PS3 is going to be a game machine afterall. I don't mean that in a negative sense. Just...you know...it's now bound to happen.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by Iguana Man

I think we will now find (soon enough) that the PS3 is going to be a game machine afterall. I don't mean that in a negative sense. Just...you know...it's now bound to happen.

I disagree. Sony really does want to market the ps3 as an all-in-one entertainment machine, hoping to win consumers from two distinct entertainment segments with one machine. For movie enthusiasts, you will have people buying a quality bd machine at a low price. But perhaps they have kids that are growing up, or the guy wants to maybe dabble in some games. At any rate, this segment knows that the ps3 is capable of gaming. Even if 10% of those buying the ps3 as a movie machine purchase a few games, it's a growth potential.

On the other side you have the gamers. For this group, there is the marketing of movies in high definition. Sure, "Pride & Prejudice" won't get gamers all excited for HDM, but movies like Die Hard 4, and I am Legend will do just that. I think 300 was an example of where the gamer crowd can flex their muscle.

Sony will continue to push the ps3 as the panacea for next gen gaming/movie watching.

[videoworx]

Originally Posted by Ganthc

Sure, "Pride & Prejudice" won't get gamers all excited for HDM

That's a very narrow-minded view. People who love films can play games, and vice versa. It's not a one-way street, and taste varies from person to person.

The PS3 is a solid, albeit not perfect, Blu-Ray player. The upcoming BD-50 looks to equal, if not best, the PS3 - but I don't think it offers enough to justify replacing one for the other. For someone new to Blu-Ray, I'd probably suggest the BD-50 (once I've seen it in action), but for someone who already owns a PS3, I'd suggest waiting for the BD-70/90/etc.

Also, by the time the BD-50 ships in the US, it will have some competition from lower-end 2.0 models (The Philips 7200, for instance), and at least one of the Sony models (I assume the 330 and/or 550 models, keeping in line with Sony DVD model numbers from a decade ago).

That's the nice thing about a format supported by many CEs. Lots to choose from.

[dugpa]

Originally Posted by ganthc

My thinking is that the dts-hdma decoding has been put off so that Sony can work on getting the ps3 up to 2.0 profile standards. To automatically make millions of bd players 2.0 capable would be a drawing point...or is a requirement for Warner.

Well they've already got Warner, so no need to pander to them anymore. Honestly, 2.0 isn't really that big a deal, and I suspect if Sony wanted to they could make the PS3 2.0 compliant tomorrow. Afterall, the only real difference between 1.1 and 2.0 is 1gb of memory and an internet connection, both of which the PS3 already has. So it unofficially is 2.0 compliant already, someone just needs to make a 2.0 disc to test it with.

Originally Posted by videoworx

People who love films can play games, and vice versa.

True. Gamers just usually love really cappy films.

[ganthc]

Originally Posted by videoworx

That's a very narrow-minded view. People who love films can play games, and vice versa. It's not a one-way street, and taste varies from person to person.

Of course. But on average, if you polled gamers on if they have watched "Pride & Prejudice" or if they have seen "Casino Royale" which do you think they would more likely have seen?

And for those people that enjoy doing both segments, that makes the ps3 even more of a catch for them. I probably fall slightly into that category.

[Derb]

Originally Posted by dugpa

Yes, they're waiting and waiting and waiting and have been for ages now. And will be for ages more. They system has been out for 15 months now and PS3 users are still waiting. Honestly, I'm skeptical as to if it can actually be done.

Don't underestimate IBM.

btw, there is no difference in quality, LPCM or Bitstream & in fact most don't care. Its a marketing stragedy from CE's so they can show off them fancy logos for the next CES. Ooo my toy has this symbol & yours doesn't! Ha Ha.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by videoworx

Derb is simply suggesting tha a currently shipping Blu-Ray player (the PS3) is better than than one that isn't yet (in the US).

And of course, we are simply suggesting Derb is wrong that the PS3 is the "best" playback device. I am also unsure why it was brought up in this thread.

[Ruined]

Originally Posted by Derb

Don't underestimate IBM.

btw, there is no difference in quality, LPCM or Bitstream & in fact most don't care. Its a marketing stragedy from CE's so they can show off them fancy logos for the next CES. Ooo my toy has this symbol & yours doesn't! Ha Ha.

Obviously people do care about it otherwise the Onkyo 605 wouldn't be destroying the competition in sales. You can easily find a comparable cheaper receiver with PCM 5.1 over HDMI support.

There is likely no audible difference in quality between 1.5mbps lossy 5.1 audio and lossless 5.1 audio, but that doesn't mean people don't buy into the PR and think lossless audio sounds better. Heck Derb, for a while you were arguing that PCM as a format sounded better than lossless TrueHD due to the BDA PR on PCM sounding better since it was "uncompressed," which is of course a farce. Yet many still believe the PR arguments and will run with them. The arguments for bitstreaming some of those same people might make is that the DSP in a receiver may be better than the one in a player and that there is less chance of fouling up the signal (see Panasonic BD30) with bitstreaming; also, some may even go as far as saying bitstreaming is better as it will not suffer from jitter like LPCM transmission. Now I'm not saying I'm going to personally stand by any of those arguments, but I *do* want the option of bitstreaming, simply because my equipment supports it. On top of this, PS3 does not support DTS-HDMA decoding at this point, thus bitstreaming in that case is a valid argument regardless.

In addition to being having bitstream nextgen codec support, internal DTS-HDMA decoding, and analog 5.1 output - all features the PS3 fails to support, and at least 2 of which the PS3 can never add due to hardware limitations - the Panasonic BD50 also is smaller than the PS3, looks much more attractive, and is significantly quieter overall (the BD50 does not have ramped up louder stage2/3 fan modes like PS3). For as many people I see posting that the PS3 is quiet, I see others posting that it is inconsistent and can get very loud at times when watching movies. Since the BD50 doesn't have a massive fan like the PS3, you don't have to worry about the BD50 being loud at any time. Not to mention, the BD50 unlike most other BD standalones is a very speedy machine as it is based on the already speedy BD30 architecture. Overall, the BD50 looks like it will be a better purchase for most seeking a BD movie player IMO. If you are already interested in a video game machine and don't already have XBOX 360, the PS3 might be a better option despite it having less movie-related features, being much larger & much less attractive, and being louder.