I wrote about the Warner Brothers exchange program last November. The company not only has continued the program, but has expanded it and made some changes. The DVD2Blu program still lets you exchange up to 25 existing DVDs for Blu-ray versions, but now the price for many of the exchanges has dropped from $7.95 to [...]
[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2010/05/hdtv-almanac-new-bds-for-old-dvds.php]Read Column[/url]
HDTV Almanac - New BDs for Old DVDs
-
alfredpoor
- Major Contributor
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:27 am
-
dgmeansit1
- Member
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 5:11 pm
Prices are usually cheaper
The last Blu-Ray player I purchased cost me $140 and it works better than the one I paid $550 for a couple of years ago. I never pay more than about $13 on the average for Blu-Ray titles. Most of the time I buy them on Amazon - and about half of those I buy used. They still work great! I've been able to accumulate many great Blu-Rays for as low as $7.00 !!!
It's no hard just look around. If you go into a retail store, I suggest you not make your purchase there since the same title could probably be found online for less than half of what that store would charge you. I have found Borders and Barnes and Noble to be extremely expense but they're a good place to browse.
It's no hard just look around. If you go into a retail store, I suggest you not make your purchase there since the same title could probably be found online for less than half of what that store would charge you. I have found Borders and Barnes and Noble to be extremely expense but they're a good place to browse.
-
AVInsights
- Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:13 am
-
miller
- Major Contributor
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 9:07 am
Hi Alfred,I expect that Blu-ray prices will continue to come down for both players and discs, but I’m not ready to make a major investment in the technology. I’m waiting to see how other delivery options for HD movies develop, such as cable on-demand and Internet delivery, before I go spending more money.
I've read your column for years ... even before it was here at HDTV Magazine ... so I know you're quite knowledgeable about all things HD. But if I'm hearing you right, you're actually recommending to the readership here that they NOT invest in Blu-ray? How can that possibly be? Surely I'm misreading your last few sentences. Have you really not purchased a Blu-ray player? Surely you know that cable, satellite and streaming options can't even touch the bandwidth of a Blu-ray video stream ... not to mention Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio.
Please tell me I've misread your recommendation ...
- Miller
-
ccclvib
- Major Contributor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:35 pm
Consider, too: it only costs a dollar more a month to rent ALL the titles in the world (practically, anyway) from Netflix on BD. That surely can't be considered a major investment for discs! And, as said above, prices for players are now down to $150, generally. That may be a whole fifty bucks more than most DVD players. I bought my Toshiba BD for $99 last Christmas. No way is this an expensive proposition, unless you think other delivery means are the only way to go - which is doubtful. In fact, if anything finally moves disc playing off center stage, I'll bet it's something not even thought of yet - and a while in coming.
Mike Richardson
Capitola, CA
On the shores of the blue - and cold - Pacific
Capitola, CA
On the shores of the blue - and cold - Pacific
-
paulsquillo
- New Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 4:08 pm
New BD's for old DVD's, not the other way around!
As someone in this business since the early '70's, I must say that the Blu-ray disc should be the answer to the prayers we've had for decades. Compact, sharable, with a true HD picture, not just standard def with a fool-you chip in it. Plus room for exquisite sound on all channels. As a representative of HDTV Magazine, you should be shouting from the rooftops, not giving dumb advice that is the antithesis of the magazine's purpose.
We all are aware that if we wait long enough, the on-line content providers will finally be able to give us quick downloads of HD content with stunning multi-channel sound... but will they bother to provide the quality if we don't show them that it's important to us? Besides, when has our hobby been about waiting? If we had all waited for 1080P HDTV to happen before we bought an HDTV, there wouldn't have been a TV industry left to develop it. We sustain the industry by desiring to move our systems forever closer to perfection.
As a musician first, I find it bad enough that portability and stinky-quality computer sound have time-warped us back in sound quality to the '70's, when we were forced to throw away half of the music to fit it onto a tape. When a mediocre-quality product sees popularity, the whole industry is affected negatively by it. I recently sold a state-of-the-art pair of speakers to a client, and the first thing he put on was an Alanis Morrisette CD that, even though it was a Grammy winner, was the most obnoxious-sounding mix I'd heard in years. How could it even get a Grammy? I love the music, but it's unlistenable. Great songs or not, we all should have returned it.
Let's support the Blu-ray not just for yet another disc technology, but for the marriage of great audio and video. And while we're at it, let's convince everyone that great sound must accompany a great picture.
Someday, we won't need Blu-ray, but if we don't give it the support and praise that it deserves, or make sure to engineer the quality of recordings that it is capable of playing, on-line content providers will never bother to try to match the Blu-ray's performance.
We all are aware that if we wait long enough, the on-line content providers will finally be able to give us quick downloads of HD content with stunning multi-channel sound... but will they bother to provide the quality if we don't show them that it's important to us? Besides, when has our hobby been about waiting? If we had all waited for 1080P HDTV to happen before we bought an HDTV, there wouldn't have been a TV industry left to develop it. We sustain the industry by desiring to move our systems forever closer to perfection.
As a musician first, I find it bad enough that portability and stinky-quality computer sound have time-warped us back in sound quality to the '70's, when we were forced to throw away half of the music to fit it onto a tape. When a mediocre-quality product sees popularity, the whole industry is affected negatively by it. I recently sold a state-of-the-art pair of speakers to a client, and the first thing he put on was an Alanis Morrisette CD that, even though it was a Grammy winner, was the most obnoxious-sounding mix I'd heard in years. How could it even get a Grammy? I love the music, but it's unlistenable. Great songs or not, we all should have returned it.
Let's support the Blu-ray not just for yet another disc technology, but for the marriage of great audio and video. And while we're at it, let's convince everyone that great sound must accompany a great picture.
Someday, we won't need Blu-ray, but if we don't give it the support and praise that it deserves, or make sure to engineer the quality of recordings that it is capable of playing, on-line content providers will never bother to try to match the Blu-ray's performance.
-
alfredpoor
- Major Contributor
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:27 am
One for All
I apologize, folks; I've been traveling and just now got a chance to reply to this thread.
First, thanks for all the responses: positive, negative, and in-between. Rather than address each one, let me make some blanket statements in response.
1. I'm cheap. I'm not an early adopter. I appreciate good quality in anything, but I don't tend to pay a big premium for the "best" when "good enough" is an option. I recognize that there are other views on this, and those are fine. However, I think that my take is close to how the average consumer sees it. I tend to aim my writing at the average consumer rather than the audiophile or videophile; they're the ones who need the information the most. (The people who want the best performance already know as much as I do, and in some cases they know more.)
2. Renting discs is a more cost-effective alternative to buying them, in my opinion. And that does bring down the cost of switching to Blu-ray. But spending $150 on a player when a good DVD player costs $30 to $50 (and I already have a bunch of good DVD players, which cost me nothing to keep using) is still a big premium. Yes, it's only a monthly cable bill for some people, but remember that I'm cheap and that I don't have any cable bill.
3. It's not my job to be a cheerleader for any particular technology. There are plenty of people out there ready to gush over the latest whatever. I view my mission as doing my best to understand the new technology and the market that it exists in, and to put that understanding in a context that is interesting and helpful to readers. Sometimes, I don't see the value proposition. You can count on me to say so.
Alfred
First, thanks for all the responses: positive, negative, and in-between. Rather than address each one, let me make some blanket statements in response.
1. I'm cheap. I'm not an early adopter. I appreciate good quality in anything, but I don't tend to pay a big premium for the "best" when "good enough" is an option. I recognize that there are other views on this, and those are fine. However, I think that my take is close to how the average consumer sees it. I tend to aim my writing at the average consumer rather than the audiophile or videophile; they're the ones who need the information the most. (The people who want the best performance already know as much as I do, and in some cases they know more.)
2. Renting discs is a more cost-effective alternative to buying them, in my opinion. And that does bring down the cost of switching to Blu-ray. But spending $150 on a player when a good DVD player costs $30 to $50 (and I already have a bunch of good DVD players, which cost me nothing to keep using) is still a big premium. Yes, it's only a monthly cable bill for some people, but remember that I'm cheap and that I don't have any cable bill.
3. It's not my job to be a cheerleader for any particular technology. There are plenty of people out there ready to gush over the latest whatever. I view my mission as doing my best to understand the new technology and the market that it exists in, and to put that understanding in a context that is interesting and helpful to readers. Sometimes, I don't see the value proposition. You can count on me to say so.
Alfred
-
AVInsights
- Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:13 am
-
ccclvib
- Major Contributor
- Posts: 91
- Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 10:35 pm
Then wouldn't you say your writing is possibly a message aimed at the wrong audience? I'll admit, though, an opinion that "speaks for the average man," probably isn't a bad thing in this forum. It's nice to know how the market forces will influence manufacturers' decisions. I also don't really think a cheerleader is necessary. My focus, though is what's coming and naysaying doesn't really prove much. I also don't think the general audience will be embracing streaming in great numbers any time soon. What you're seeing is, in general, the same early adopters doing their thing once again. The networks will be broadcasting and cable and satellite services will be doing their thing for a considerable time in the future. Any change will be slow, and lots can happen in the meantime. ...which means Blu-Ray may never be the "next big thing," but it, too will not only be around, but continue to attract users. It's just too good a medium for it not to be attractive for folks with HDTV - sooner or later.alfredpoor wrote:I tend to aim my writing at the average consumer rather than the audiophile or videophile
Mike Richardson
Capitola, CA
On the shores of the blue - and cold - Pacific
Capitola, CA
On the shores of the blue - and cold - Pacific