TVs & Home Theaters forum

General discussion

Blu-ray player suggestions

by bigadatank / December 12, 2009 5:38 AM PST

I have decided to purchase the Panasonic TC-P54V10 and don't want to get an inferior Blu-ray player that does not "show off" the TV. I am looking at the LG BD390 per Cnet and Consumer Reports' rave reviews. I am not in need of the wireless or Netflix option right now, but might be useful in the future. Will this Blu-ray be a player that will still be "high quality" a few years from now or is the technology still rapidly evolving? Are there other less expensive options that you would recommend?

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Blu-ray player suggestions
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Blu-ray player suggestions
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Panasonic is also good
by Pepe7 / December 12, 2009 12:12 PM PST

By no means are you limited to any particular brand. I like Oppo too, it's more or less a 'swiss army knife' of Blu Ray players.

Yes, it will still be considered 'high quality' a few years from now. Broadcasters are still not sending out 1080p yet since they haven't ponied up for the necessary hardware changes.
Collapse -
The BD390 is the best blu-ray player you can get right now
by minimalist / December 13, 2009 2:00 AM PST

in my opinion. The upscaling and blu-ray Picture quality is as good as any of the Panasonics, Sansung's, or Sony's on the market and its also got the fastest load time of any player out there (even the PS3.)

There is no modern blu-ray feature the LG is lacking unless you just have to have Pandora or Blockbuster rentals. Personally, I'd take the built in Netflix and Vudu (1080p streaming rentals) over them anyday. The ability to stream just about any video codec over a home network and built in wireless N pretty much seal the deal for me making it a full featured and very flexible video hub. It can internally decode or bitstream Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD so its got you covered the latest and greatest in high definition sound as well.

I don't see how the quality could really get any better so this player seems fairly future proof unless you want to wait for blu-ray 3d next year (the popularity of which remains to be seen).

Collapse -
Better to prefer a cheap one for now 3D is coming next year
by sojo2009 / December 14, 2009 10:55 PM PST

There are more than 10 Blu-ray Player Brands in the market. Panasonic and Sony is good for the value.

You can check LG BD370 which has a lower price.

But i can tell you that there will be 3D Blu-ray players and 3D capable TV's next year or later. This means that there will be some changes in Blu-ray Technology. Of course we can continue to watch normal Blu-ray movies with our current blu-ray players but these will result with the price drops in my opinion. If i were you, i will prefer a cheap option for now.

Collapse -
Wouldn?t hold my breath waiting for 3d to gain traction.
by minimalist / December 15, 2009 7:24 AM PST

Not only is it the content expensive to produce (meaning the selection will be very slim) but consumers need all new equipment in their living rooms to take advantage of it (both blu-ray players and TVs). Given that 2007-2008 were boom years for HDTV adoption I doubt many people who just upgraded to HDTV from their old analog sets are going to go replace all their expensive new equipment just so they can watch Avatar or a few Pixar movies in 3d.

Collapse -
by givemeaname / December 15, 2009 1:57 PM PST

Until one does not need glasses for 3D it will never ever take off.

It's not like 3D is new, how long has it been around 40-50years, still limited to very few movies on the big screen and still gives some people headaches; even with the sutter design glasses, beside the headaches they also mess with the brightness of the picture. Then there is the whole thing of those of us that need glasses anyway to watch TV/movies.

Look what happended at the cowboys game last week:

Collapse -
by givemeaname / December 15, 2009 2:00 PM PST
In reply to: Yah

Go for a Panny bd60/80 or Oppo bd player

Collapse -
by Flatworm / December 18, 2009 10:14 PM PST

EVERY Blu-Ray player will show off your TV. Their picture qualities do not differ in any way any consumer could ever possibly notice. They are all spectacular right down to the bottom of the barrel, which can now be bought in some sales for as low as $79.

The difference is in design (particularly of the remote), features and expected durability (although, of course, you can buy a LOT of $79 players for the $600 some of them still cost).

The additional features usually involve the capability to stream movies from various providers like Netflix. I admit I have a grudge against Netflix for their willingness to annoy me constantly with pop-under ads that evade my Firefox settings (and because of that policy of theirs I will never, ever give them as much as a red cent of mine), but with the price of Blu-Ray disks falling like a rock (I've started to see some advertised as low as $7.99), I personally do not find this to be a particularly attractive feature that would justify the additional cost. There is something I find peculiarly satisfying about owning the physical media rather than streaming diaphonous content over the ether, which is what my cable provider is for.

I'd look for something cheap with a remote control you like. Trust me... You will be MORE than satisfied with the picture quality no matter what you get. These aren't VHS recorders where the quality varied appreciably from brand to brand. With Blu-Ray, they're ALL good.

Collapse -
The really cheap players do have issues.
by minimalist / December 18, 2009 11:20 PM PST
In reply to: Hmmmm...

They are often not profile 2.0 which means you have no ethernet input for automatic firmware updates. During the first two years of ownership of my first Sony blu-ray I had 7 or 8 firmware updates to deal with. Big pain having down load them, burn them to a disk, and stick them in the player for 30 minutes. Profile 2.0 players do all this in the background very quickly just like your computer downloads updates. Especially when i had to find a windows machine to do this all on (no Mac support).

The door buster specials also don't support the new HD audio codecs (DTS-HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD). Aside from the vastly improved picture the improved audio is a primary reason to go blu-ray.

When shopping for a player, at the very least make sure you get one that supports profile 2.0 and HD audio codecs. You don't have to spend a fortune (you can probably find one for 150-200 dollars). I'd avoid the 79 dollar players however.

Popular Forums

Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Your favorite shows are back!

Don’t miss your dramas, sitcoms and reality shows. Find out when and where they’re airing!