Hopefully got jail break in few months or can be 1 year

ic. Oppo PCM to AVR vs bitstream to AVR. Got big different?

AVR is better

Tested UDP-203 for mkv playback on audio bitstream
1. DTSMA - ok
2. DTS-X - ok
3. TrueHD - some can bit stream, some MLP
4. Atmos - MLP only

Seem like Oppo have some compatibility issue with Dolby

I think the new dune should be on par with oppo. Anyway is always best to use AVR for processing

Does this happen to ordinary DD 640kbps or DD+ also?

You mean the Dune Solo 4K selling for rm1500? That was my plan but gave up due to not true 4K (hdmi 1.4 and 4k30p only) and don't support HDR and Dolby Vision. Sound quality I don't think on par to Oppo
DD so far ok

Oh I didn't know that about the dune solo. Well can't do anything until there is jailbreak on the sound. I read in FB that some reporting of audio drop every 30mins for 4K Disc

Oh,  there is latest firmware released. Hope will fix the bugs. Btw, without JB the Oppo UDP-203 not supporting iso file and BDMV folder.

You mean the Dune Solo 4K selling for rm1500? That was my plan but gave up due to not true 4K (hdmi 1.4 and 4k30p only) and don't support HDR and Dolby Vision. Sound quality I don't think on par to Oppo
DD so far ok

You said Dune Solo 4K do NOT support HDR and Dolby Vision. What is confusing for me is... the player support is needed.

A lot of things that I am saying now is blur blur and ignorant so please be patient with me. I can be wrong here.

I may have missed it but I have Googled everywhere and couldn't find any info on whether HDR and Dolby Vision need 4K bluray player to support it.

I do know that bitstreaming audio out to AVR do NOT need bluray player to support True-Hd/DTS/Atmos/DTSX/Auro-3D because the decoding is not done by the player. Only when player is not set to bitstream, then the player decodes the audio into PCM.

Here is what I believe... there is no player that decodes HDR and Dolby Vision because its not necessary. Such work is done by the visual display decoder, i.e TV/Projector.

What I also believe is that the HDR & Dolby Vision data in the 4K bluray is "merely" read and bitstreamed out to the TV to decode the HDR & DVision. What the player can probably do is either block (filter) out the HDR & DVision data or allow it to pass through. If true, I think such "On/Off" filter is needed because such "additional data" may cause Non-HDR/DVision TV to output incorrect dynamic range, colour, etc.

So, simply said... isn't HDR and Dolby Vision all about decoding support from the video device (TV/PRojector/Phone) and not about players?

Don't need source 4K Bluray/Media Player to support HDR & DVision as it just "passes" it out... OR is it like what you said... need the Player (Dune) to support it.

Probably the player support is needed because it need to be able to recognise it and if not, then such data will be "ignored" and lost when video is sent out. Is this the reason why support is needed?

   

If anyone knows a clear answer to this, PLEASE do chime in and correct me. I need to learn more here. Will certainly appreciate it.

You said Dune Solo 4K do NOT support HDR and Dolby Vision. What is confusing for me is... the player support is needed.

A lot of things that I am saying now is blur blur and ignorant so please be patient with me. I can be wrong here.

I may have missed it but I have Googled everywhere and couldn't find any info on whether HDR and Dolby Vision need 4K bluray player to support it.

I do know that bitstreaming audio out to AVR do NOT need bluray player to support True-Hd/DTS/Atmos/DTSX/Auro-3D because the decoding is not done by the player. Only when player is not set to bitstream, then the player decodes the audio into PCM.

Here is what I believe... there is no player that decodes HDR and Dolby Vision because its not necessary. Such work is done by the visual display decoder, i.e TV/Projector.

What I also believe is that the HDR & Dolby Vision data in the 4K bluray is "merely" read and bitstreamed out to the TV to decode the HDR & DVision. What the player can probably do is either block (filter) out the HDR & DVision data or allow it to pass through. If true, I think such "On/Off" filter is needed because such "additional data" may cause Non-HDR/DVision TV to output incorrect dynamic range, colour, etc.

So, simply said... isn't HDR and Dolby Vision all about decoding support from the video device (TV/PRojector/Phone) and not about players?

Don't need source 4K Bluray/Media Player to support HDR & DVision as it just "passes" it out... OR is it like what you said... need the Player (Dune) to support it.

Probably the player support is needed because it need to be able to recognise it and if not, then such data will be "ignored" and lost when video is sent out. Is this the reason why support is needed?

   

If anyone knows a clear answer to this, PLEASE do chime in and correct me. I need to learn more here. Will certainly appreciate it.

As long as the display is capable of receiving HDR10 metadata, then it can display it (keyword is receiving, whether the display can even do HDR properly or not is another topic). The receiver/player needs to be set to passthrough (or anything equivalent) and no processing can be done.

Dolby Vision is a little more complicated. The reason the majority of TVs and players don't support it is more down due to licensing fees. Why pay when you have free? Dolby Vision is better, no questions asked. But when you have 99% of the movie-buffs not even being able to tell the difference between an 8bit and 10bit panel, then what's the point in spending the effort for the speck of minority who cares?

There is "filter" needed. If a display has no capabilities of receiving HDR metadata, it simply won't display it. Plain and simple. No such issues as wrong color range.

I however, cannot answer why some players can passthrough HDR and some cannot. It's not exactly HDCP or HDMI related, as even something as old as the PS4 which consists of HDCP 1.2 and HDMI 1.4 can passthrough HDR without issues.

Its fine to use this method of picking just 1 file to play. However, there are many times when the entire move is broken up to numerous smaller files AND these files may not be numbered in the same order such as 00021.m2ts plays the first chapter and then 00016.m2ts plays the second chapter. This usually happens for most Lionsgate films WHEN they used "profuscation" (or is it proliferation) method to mess up the chapters with the wrong playlist being played by the bd media player so probably this is one way that they use to fight piracy. There is a downside to playing bluray folder/ISO with full menu too... sometimes ripping can go wrong and the wrong playlist are read.

Whenever the movie is broken into multiple files, the only way is to use computer to remux the bd movie using the correct playlist (xxxx.mpls). The playlist file contains intructions to play the the multiple files in the correct order/sequence. There are software that can auto choose the correct playlist BUT mistakes CAN happen when the wrong playlist are chosen... and the result is that you have to search manually (tough, tough) which playlist to use in remuxing to single MKV, M2TS, or MP4 file. Can you imagine searching through (example) 50+ mpls files?

As an example... the bd movie Allegiant (distributed by Lionsgate) do have 148 MPLS files and when ripped to harddisk as full ISO or BDMV folder, the movie played in the WRONG ORDER!! Even remuxing to a single untouched MKV file do NOT help. What I did find out is that "somehow" the player chose the wrong 00484.mpls file to play the ripped bd when the correct one is 00897.mpls. So, even if you have the genuine bd and wants to rip this to your harddisk as an archive to play... chapter sequence problems CAN happen! Bear in mind that its the computer software that can choose the wrong playlist for ripping. But... without the software, you cannot join all the multiple files as a single file to play and you cannot just select play in numerical order because the numbering is messed up.

Ok... coming back to your method of picking 1 single to play. Yes, its a good way to do it without ALL the hassle and the stupid "waiting" for the menu, trailers, titles, etc. BUT.... problems WILL appear when there are multiple files. Also... this method means "convenience" BUT remuxing to single file, searching for correct mpls file to use, etc etc is NOT convenient loh.

Anyway, I do agree with your method in general but there are problems that need to be fixed loh.

Note: Gods Of Egypt (2016) Blu-Ray is another one that needed to be fixed for the chapter skipping issues (have multiple files). No comment on "internet download" ones which may have been "fixed" or may still have problems. Sometimes the same movie for EU release don't have problems with just a single file but US release have such issues with multiple files. It depends on the Release version too.
I do agree with your method of playing just the single file. Read my answer to bad2928 above for the problems that do appear.

I absolutely do agree with you about ALL the nonsense that we have to endure to watch a bluray!

What I am going to say next is my opinion based on own reasoning. You wondered why people still use physical discs to play but I think you may have missed something here.

The shorter the transmission path of playing the movie to the AVR and TV the better. Its not because the best steps have not been taken to reduce interference. As an example, no matter what is done, a much longer path from ripped movie in NAS harddisk to USB cable to bd media player can introduce signal interference that can reduce the PQ and SQ. Directly playing the physical disc from the player to the AVR and TV IS the shortest path and can (in my opinion) help to reduce interference such as EMI and whatever noise. Yes, I will not dispute with you if you say that we will not have ears that are so perfect to notice any minute difference especially when properly shielded cables are used, good AC adapters used for the NAS harddisks, good power conditioner/filters used and so forth. Be it as it may, there are people like me that are "naive" to believe a better SQ/PQ from playing physical discs. Whenever I listened to the physical discs, it somehow sounded more dynamic, better details, etc for my Concert blurays. Two of my friends who did not believe it was a believer after they listened to the comparisons. Of course the "minute difference" will be more apparent when normal (not LPS high quality) AC adapter used for the external harddisk, SATA harddisk used (with internal rotating discs) instead of SSD ones, poorly shielded USB cables used, etc etc. I believe (may be technically wrong) that using laser light to read can reduce interference that is otherwise caused by spinning magnetic discs or electrically-charged solid-state cells. Granted, I may NOT be totally right but the reason I am explaining this to you is to help you better understand the reason why.

Yes... "a gigantic waste of pointless time". You are not wrong since its just only once that we have to endure to take the time to "rip" each bluray from our personal collection. At least its still better than constantly enduring the "nonsense" every time the same bluray is played. Eventhough ripping is done once... some time IS also used. Yes, slowly done one by one immediately after each bluray purchase will not seem much time taken... however, if 100+ blurays are done together, its a headache. IF only everything is perfect... it will be a great hassle with much more time wasted in correcting chapter problems as I have stated earlier.

Just for the sake of argument... I don't know whether ripping my genuine blurays as a "copy" in my harddisk is illegal or not in Malaysia. Maybe legal as people says its a "fair copy" to protect the original from wear and tear. One to one duplicate as ISO or BDMV "may" be ok BUT altering to a MKV or MP4 is a big No No. I don't even dare to talk about any internet downloads which is easy and no hassle with a fast connection. Hehe, you already know why.

In retrospect, I don't dispute what you have said. I am merely clarifying to clear the air when you wondered why people chose physical discs. Generally you are right except for my difference of opinion on the "transmission path".

Talking about legal downloads.. yes, such as from Apple Store but the ugly DRM monster comes in too! And the quality from such movie downloads just cannot compare to the blurays. NetFlix now allows me to download for offline viewing but the quality is incomparable to blurays (with DTSMA and Dolby TrueHD). Even when I watch a Netflix 4K movie on my TV, the 4K quality cannot even beat the bluray PQ !

While true there are movies that has different chapters, it's not an issue if I just use makeMKV to remux them into a single file. Doesn't take long for me either, but that's down to CPU hardware so one person's preference/experience will differ to another.

I believe we've discussed this before in regards to playing the source with as little paths as possible to eliminate any sort of interference. I studied programming and still is a part time programmer, so the knowledge I'm armed with does not allow me to believe that an "analog" interference will alter a digital piece of code UNLESS the hardware/device itself is faulty in the first place. The data being transported from one place to another is all done digitally, by 1 and 0s. If a 0 becomes a 1, then an artifact appears or the source just skips or has an error on a particular time domain. 

So... yeah, for me the signal path does not matter. To make a comparison, a piece of digital product like say a game which has hundred of thousands of lines of more variable data and has no difference being played on a HDD/SSD vs a disc, a movie which has no variable code in its source data will not be able to sound different just because they're playing from a different device.

Of course, playing on a high-end BD player (like the Oppos) has its own benefits. Not saying it doesn't and I won't dispute that. Darbee post processing can be a bonus, as does the HDMI scaler on the Oppo is better than on most receivers/TVs as well. But similarly, playing it on a PC and you're given choices like madvr provided you have the hardware to take advantage of it. But disable all of these bs and it's impossible to tell a difference other than your mind being in a placebo effect.

Well again, to each their own. Not going to say you're wrong, because it's your system so of course you should enjoy it the way you want to. And if I were to visit your place, I wouldn't be rolling my eyes endlessly while you're skipping through the piracy warnings.

No problem. No harm done.

I actually didn't know about TL;DR until I found out from Wikipedia which "generally" mean negative view of people who write too long. That is why I misunderstood you.

Still no problem... nobody can expect everyone to agree or disagree. Anyone do have the right to choose not to read my post loh. Yes, no offense intended by you BUT you ARE right in saying that I write too long. My Bad.

Mmm... I don't think that the studios are not interested. Its just not the right time yet to include 3D into 4K blurays because 4K bluray releases are still at the early stage so the consumer response is not yet clear.

As you already know, 3D do have 2 frames (for left and right eye) which does pose problems with additional bluray diskspace needed but technology did manage to "fit" the 3D movie into the BD50 bluray disc. I actually don't know how its done and if you inspect the 3D bluray disc in your computer, you will notice an extra SSIF folder with additional files that increases the diskspace used to over 50GB, more than the capacity of the BD50 disc! When I ripped such disc to my harddisk as BDMV folders, the total size can go up to 70 to 80 GB size! Of course the studios can split the movie into extra discs just to fit the 3D extra size but that would mean increased production costs. With that being said... I may be wrong but I do believe that it needs more time to change the 3D 4K processing methods involved which alters the way on how to fit extra 3D data into the UHD discs. I am talking about 4K with a much larger resolution AND a huge file size PLUS HDR that needs to include 3D and then "fit" into BD100, BD66, BD50 or BD25 discs. At the present time, the maximum single UHD disc capacity is BD100 for 100GB. Yes, maybe 3D data have already been done to fit into the UHD discs but I still believe that it needs time for them to be produced. Maybe at the present time, they are just concentrating on non-3D 4K blurays.

Therefore, I will not say that the studios are "not interested". I will just say that they are presently reluctant to release 3D 4K blurays because of the reasons that I have explained above. Probably, they are having a "wait and see" attitude to see how the 4K blurays sales pick up in the future.

For the cinemas, the history of 3D started in the Fifties (mmm... 1953?) and as the years move on, many critics said that 3D are just a gimmick that will not last. They were proven wrong as 3D movies in cinemas are still around (eventhough not many cinemas). When the blurays were initially released in small numbers, there were practically no 3D blurays. At that time, I would be wrong to say that the studios were not interested in releasing 3D blurays loh. At that time, it was not the right time yet and they also needed time to find a method to "fit" extra 3D data into the limited capacity bluray disc too. Ok... when 3D finally did arrived in blurays, initially there were actually very few such 3D blurays being released... as time goes by... now more and more 3D blurays appeared. Now there are many 3D blurays BUT it does NOT mean that 3D blurays are more than the 2D ones.

If anyone were to ask me whether 4K blurays will release a 3D version or totally NOT, then I will say that the same question were also asked when bluray movies were released in those early days. At that time, there were people who believed that very few 3D blurays would be released because there weren't many 3D TVs available at that time and it was very expensive too. Let's go forward to the present time and you do already know that there are many 3d blurays available, not just a few.

Yes, 3D 4K Bluray is not yet available at the present time. Will it come in the near future? Yes, I believe it will come... as long as 4K blurays don't die! Will many 4K blurays be released in 3D in the future? I don't have to answer this question... just look at what happened when more and more 3D blurays appeared.

Thanks for your reply. Appreciated it.

You said "The receiver/player needs to be set to passthrough (or anything equivalent)". This is where I did understand much earlier. The metadata being "relayed out" without being touched by the AVR/Player so its the TV/Projector display that processes the HDR10 metadata. Yes, whether HDR can be properly processed or not is an ongoing debate. I should also say that I heard that the TV/Projector must also be calibrated (ISV?) properly and if not done properly, HDR can make it worse, not better.

My question was not about the complexity of Dolby Vision or possibly HDR. Its about the question on why any player must be compatible to just passthrough the HDR signal out to the display. I could not find the answer to this and you also cannot answer too when you replied "can't answer why some players can passthrough HDR and some can't" if player compatibility is not required.

IF, again IF, player compatibility is required, then it should also mean the same thing for the HT AVR/Pre-Amp when its connected to the player. Correct me if I am wrong... I haven't heard and did not find anywhere that says AVR/Pre-Amp needed to be compatible. If compatibility is needed then I believe the HDR logo should appear printed on the front body of the AVR/Pre-Amp (similar to Atmos logo) but I have not seen it.

Do correct me if I have misunderstood you... as you have said, non-HDR Ready TVs simply don't do anything to the "additional metadata" received so the picture will not be affected. If that being the case, why should Oppo put in the HDR "on and off" setting into 203 when the HDR metadata do not need to be filtered out to a Non-HDR TV/Projector? Having this HDR on or off did affect the picture as someone in Facebook have already tested. What did Oppo 203 do to the signal when its set to HDR On or HDR Off? By right, the Non-HDR TV/Projector just ignores the metadata so the HDR will not affect the picture... or am I wrong here?

I'm no expert here, just writing my thoughts for discussion.

I too think that all that is in the digital domain when unprocessed should comes out identical thru the signal path. But I have my doubts when I tried ripping audio CDs. I found out that what you rip may not be bit-to-bit accurate due to the source CD quality and also the CD reader. And the thing is there is no way of knowing if there is an error. So that kinda tells me that in this path there is lacking of error detection or correction here.

So when I think about it, it sounds logical since when it comes to streaming most of the data is in real-time and hence time sensitive and must be tolerant to errors. Unlike data files where accuracy is more important than timeliness, the system can afford to retry and therefore includes more accurate error detection and correction that will allow the system to ensure accuracy.

So in that sense, it maybe possible that the blue-ray player are allowed to read audio with errors to a certain extend. Same goes to audio bit streaming. If this is true, then it is desirable to have as short as possible path...

Arrived today
[attachmentid=8328262]

Bro.how much u pay for the oppo 4k bd player.tq

Bro.how much u pay for the oppo 4k bd player.tq