Toshiba hd-A1 vs XA1

wingnut4772

What is the difference!? I did a search and I still don't know. I called Sound
Advice and it went like this ::eek:


Me: Hi. Can you tell me the difference between the Toshiba A1 and the Xa1?

SAGuy: Um...the XA1 has a bigger processor.....

Me: ..Ooookkk... so what does that mean exactly in terms of performance?

SAGuy: Well it's better and it gives you a better picture.

Me: I see...can you tell me how exactly?

SAGuy: <crickets>

Me: Ok . Thanks let me think about it.


So I see that one is $499.00 and on is $799.00 and I still don't know why...exactly;)

millerman 3732

Besies the things that you listed the only differance I've found, just from reading the adds in a couple of audio mags that is, is it supposed to have better build quality, I think that means prettier to look at, and it also has a backlit remote, which I wouldn't mind having my self.

sickicw

take a look at avsforums.com They have many threads about these.

Might consider holding out for blu-ray. You will get 1080p, plus 5.1 or 7.1 channels of HD audio (PCM) output. The Toshiba will only give you 2 channels of high def audio.

Gaara

wingnut4772,

Our Toshiba rep came in to do a HD-DVD demo about a month and a half ago, and that was the first question I asked. According to him there are three differences. The first is the RS232 port in the X model, not in the standard. The second was a heavier thicker chassis. The third was the remote, I can't remember what the difference between them was, perhaps it is the backlighting like millerman said.

Jared

PolkThug

Just put a small brick in the A1 and be done with it.

millerman 3732

The A1 already has an ethernet port, why do you need the RS232 port.

Gaara

Our rep said the port was used for certain remotes and home automation systems, like Elan. I am not to familiar with these systems, so I can't embellish any further.

Jared

wingnut4772

So PQ and SQ are the same?

I probably will wait. I am pretty fond of 7.1

cheddar

sickicw wrote:

take a look at avsforums.com They have many threads about these.

Might consider holding out for blu-ray. You will get 1080p, plus 5.1 or 7.1 channels of HD audio (PCM) output. The Toshiba will only give you 2 channels of high def audio.

Really? The internal decoder only outputs stereo? I'm assuming it can still pass a signal to a future pre-amp to decode into multichannel. Right?

Handicapping the audio playback just seems so silly...

sickicw

cheddar wrote:

Really? The internal decoder only outputs stereo? I'm assuming it can still pass a signal to a future pre-amp to decode into multichannel. Right?

Handicapping the audio playback just seems so silly...

well, that is why i am waiting for blu-ray...

The only way to pass the encoded high def audio to a receiver is by using a hdmi 1.3 interface which doesn't exist yet.

Sorry, but if you buy this, you are stuck with stereo for the new high def audio, or you can use the regular old dobly digital or dts signals (5.1 or 7.1).

cheddar

I was going to wait for second generation players anyways, but this seals it. Didn't buy all this audio gear to have the HD player cheap out on me. Thanks for the heads up.

Sami

sickicw wrote:

Sorry, but if you buy this, you are stuck with stereo for the new high def audio, or you can use the regular old dobly digital or dts signals (5.1 or 7.1).

Not entirely true. http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/archive/index.php/t-233072.html

Are you waiting on Blu-Ray or just second gen. players? Blu-Ray's 1st generation players are not supposed to be any better IIRC.

Sami

cheddar wrote:

I was going to wait for second generation players anyways, but this seals it. Didn't buy all this audio gear to have the HD player cheap out on me. Thanks for the heads up.

I think you are still stuck buying a new preamp with HDMI 1.3. Right?

cheddar

Sami wrote:

I think you are still stuck buying a new preamp with HDMI 1.3. Right?

All in the plan. I've been pushing my Denon 3803 as long as I can until all this format stuff settles down. Then I'll pick up a good HD player and a state of the art pre-amp .

sickicw

Sami wrote:

Not entirely true. http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/archive/index.php/t-233072.html

Are you waiting on Blu-Ray or just second gen. players? Blu-Ray's 1st generation players are not supposed to be any better IIRC.

No, you can't get 6 channels of the new dolby truehd or dts-hd master from this player. Only 2 channels of dolby truehd or 5.1/7.1 of old dolby or dts.

Blu-Ray players will output the new high rez audio because it is already decoded on the disk as PCM. Therefore, no decoding is needed. The PCM is sent directly to the receiver via HDMI 1.1 capable receiver. Or if you dont have a receiver that can handle it, you can use the multi channel analog outputs from the blu-ray player and the multi channel inputs from your receiver. Either way it will work.

Of couse blu-ray gets around this by not encoding it in the first place because they have so much more disk space than hd-dvd.

Edit: I am waiting for the PS3 with blu-ray.

Sami

sickicw wrote:

No, you can't get 6 channels of the new dolby truehd or dts-hd master from this player. Only 2 channels of dolby truehd or 5.1/7.1 of old dolby or dts.

5.1 DD+ or DTS core, both of whom the receiver/pre will see as DTS. You don't get old DD/DTS at all with this player.

sickicw wrote:

Of couse blu-ray gets around this by not encoding it in the first place because they have so much more disk space than hd-dvd.

The 1st gen. will actually have LESS space than HD-DVD, 25GB vs 30GB. They also have worse video coder (mpeg2) which means their first releases potentially are of lesser quality than HD-DVD. In reality both have more than enough space unless you're talking about LOTR EE discs...

cheddar

Sami wrote:

You don't get old DD/DTS at all with this player.

I think it still plays regular DVDs? No?

Sami wrote:

They also have worse video coder (mpeg2) which means their first releases potentially are of lesser quality than HD-DVD.

MPEG2 means less compression of the content. So, the picture is still high quality, I thought.

Sami

cheddar wrote:

I think it still plays regular DVDs? No?

Yes, but no DD for them either, it's converter to DTS. At all, for HD discs.

cheddar wrote:

MPEG2 means less compression of the content. So, the picture is still high quality, I thought.

Less compression means it will require more space for the same PQ versus VC-1.

cheddar

Sami wrote:

Yes, but no DD for them either, it's converter to DTS. At all, for HD discs.

Less compression means it will require more space for the same PQ versus VC-1.

Geez,

Another layer of conversion? Just another reason to wait on this player. And I understood about it taking up more space. But you seemed to imply that the quality of the video would somehow suffer. You can get great HD from MPEG2 compression, you just need more room. I think when they start putting all the xtras on the disks and economies of scale bring production costs down, blu-ray will add another layer as needed. No reason to put out an expensive disk if you don't need the room.

Sami

cheddar wrote:

Another layer of conversion?

On a movie, what does it really matter? HD audio is not that important as HD video, just a little extra. 99% or more of us don't have the equipment or the ears to hear a difference in a movie. (ok, I will put on the flame suit so go ahead )

cheddar wrote:

But you seemed to imply that the quality of the video would somehow suffer.

No I did not, read it again. *In theory* Blu-Ray has the disadvantage as they have less space on the disc (atm) and losing extra space on their video compression as well. But like I said in my earlier post: "In reality both have more than enough space unless you're talking about LOTR EE discs..."

For video playback both formats are more than adequate. The added disc space with Blu-Ray will come to play in computer application but judging from the DL DVD vs SL DVD prices and usage I doubt it will play a significant role. TV shows maybe, but I don't see them playing a major role in the format war.

p.s. I don't favour either camp. While I would like to see BR as the winner I wouldn't mind if HD-DVD wins it either, for movies neither one has a major advantage over the other.

cheddar

Well, I think we've taken this thread off topic enough. So I'll keep it short. The HD formats include up to 7.1 surround. So a player at these price points that's not future proof will look pretty silly when disks come out that take advantage of the capabilities (maybe they'll come up with a slew of firmware updates, who knows?). If you don't think you can hear the difference, I guess you'll save yourself a lot of money by not upgrading your stuff. Although I haven't heard the HD audio myself, the CD to DVD-A difference in resolution is pretty clear. I'd like at least the option of hearing it and deciding on my own, especially since this thing is supposed to be a next gen player afterall.

Sami

cheddar wrote:

Although I haven't heard the HD audio myself, the CD to DVD-A difference in resolution is pretty clear.

That's music, we're talking about movies. You don't spend time listening to the different nuances in sound with your eyes closed with movies. In any case, just my opinion, I think while the HD audio would be nice it's not a deal breaker right now.

cheddar wrote:

I'd like at least the option of hearing it and deciding on my own, especially since this thing is supposed to be a next gen player afterall.

This Toshiba will be a temporary solution for me really so I am not losing anything (except little money) by getting HD picture now. When the time comes when new players offer features, and get rid of the unfriendly operation of this player, I will get another HD format player and move this permanently to my HT room. Right now it is a "mobile" device but mostly spends time in my bedroom.

I just would like to say that I feel some of you are splitting hairs with all the little details. I wonder how many of those concerned about this and that are going to hook the player to a 720p display?

sickicw

yea, to me its not little detail. Circuit city by my house has a dvr box that can supply the new samsung 1080p tvs with 1080p signals, and let me tell you, when they turn it on, It looks awesome. I can't wait to get some of this stuff in my house. Yea, 720p looks good, but 1080p looks so much better..

As far as audio goes, the biggest thing that I am looking forward to is the large increase in dynamic range that comes with these formats. This will make your movies so much more life-like. Might want to wait three weeks for blu-ray and then demo it out. These little details end up being huge.

Sami

sickicw wrote:

yea, to me its not little detail. Circuit city by my house has a dvr box that can supply the new samsung 1080p tvs with 1080p signals, and let me tell you, when they turn it on, It looks awesome.

That's what I have in my bedroom, Samsung HL-R6168W (1080p). I can tell you, Discovery HD last night with all those colourful venomous fish, stunning.

sickicw wrote:

Might want to wait three weeks for blu-ray and then demo it out. These little details end up being huge.

While I think $500 I can sacrifice for HD picture, I don't think I can justify $1000+ for the added stuff. And even then, it is reported to not be there, BR initially will be "inferior" to HD-DVD. PS3, $599 is not bad especially if you play console games, but the street price is likely to be much higher for a while.

sickicw

As far as I know, Blu-ray is better than HD-DVD in every technical way. Here are some examples:
HD-DVD: Single-layer (15GB) - Dual-layer (30GB)
Blu-ray: Single-layer (25GB) - Dual-layer (50GB)

Blu-ray uses mpeg2 OR mpeg4 compession. They have chosen to use mpeg2 for the initial releases because they have more disk space and mpeg2 equipment is cheaper and easier to produce. They have said, however, that they might use mpeg 4 later if they feel the need to.

Also Blu-ray is releasing at least two movies with the duel-layer disk.

I dont understand how you say BR is inferior when the inital BR players can ouput at twice the video resolution and more than twice the audio bandwith?

Sami

sickicw wrote:

I dont understand how you say BR is inferior

BR will be single layer initially so less space and worse compression ratio.

sickicw wrote:

twice the video resolution and more than twice the audio bandwith?

Do you have links to verify that? I thought both are supporting DD+ and HD DTS and both require HDMI 1.3. Neither players will have these initially so maybe you are thinking that the Toshiba does not and the first generation BR will? In any case there are no preprocessors for them yet. Or are you referring to the 192KHz PCM over HDMI 1.1 that is mandatory for BR discs? You still need a decoder with HDMI to get that.

"Initially inferior" was in regards to reports of the first BR we will get, single layer MPEG2 with the same audio as HD-DVD. Don't think I am saying that BR actually is inferior to HD-DVD as I am not. I obviously have not seen or heard BR yet but I don't think for a second it won't deliver a stunning picture just like HD-DVD.

Resolution of course is the same 1920*1080 so maybe you're referring to something else like data transfer rate? That is 36Mbps on both but BR is rumoured to have that increased. But you won't get that in the first, or maybe not even on second generation players. And really, *uncompressed* 1080p24 requires only 48Mbps ( + DTS HD 3Mbps) so what do we in reality gain from it for movies? Uncompressed movies when the BR multilayer discs hit the market, hey, I'm all for it but is it really going to make a difference? I'm not saying it won't, just asking a question. I think it's a valid question since there isn't supposed to be much difference between 1080i output to 1080p vs 1080p to 1080p.

Sami

As a sidenote, Toshiba actually supports DD+ through the analog outputs. I haven't tried it yet as right now my preamp in bedroom is stereo (don't worry, not for long...:)).

cheddar

Sami,

I think all you're trying to say is that MPEG2 is a less efficient compression scheme than MPEG4. But what does it really matter when you even acknowledge that the movies fit fine at 25GB or 30GB. That's why the comments below seem confusing. Lesser quality and inferior seem kind of harsh when even if every argument you're making is true, the BEST you can say is that in actual use the two will be roughly equivalent (I think sickicw does have some valid points, though. And I really don't need to close my eyes to hear the difference with DVD-A. It has nuances, yes, but the overall difference hits you like a sledghammer of fuller, richer dynamics.).

Sami wrote:

The 1st gen. will actually have LESS space than HD-DVD, 25GB vs 30GB. They also have worse video coder (mpeg2) which means their first releases potentially are of lesser quality than HD-DVD.

Sami wrote:

While I think $500 I can sacrifice for HD picture, I don't think I can justify $1000+ for the added stuff. And even then, it is reported to not be there, BR initially will be "inferior" to HD-DVD.

In any case, I understand why you bought your player. I will probably have to make some compromises too if I pick up the PS3 while I wait for the second generation players to come out. I can only imagine that the picture quality on the Toshibas is amazing!

sickicw

Sami wrote:

BR will be single layer initially so less space and worse compression ratio.....

Or are you referring to the 192KHz PCM over HDMI 1.1 that is mandatory for BR discs? You still need a decoder with HDMI to get that.....

Resolution of course is the same 1920*1080 so maybe you're referring to something else like data transfer rate?...

- BR will be single and dual layer initially. Black Hawk Down and The Bridge on the River Kwai are released this summer on dual layer.
http://www.blu-raydisc.com/Article-14871.html

- PCM is not encoded. That is the entire point of it. It takes more space to not encode it (which blu-ray has) but you don't have to worry about a decoder. Blu-ray player simply outputs it directly from the analog multi outputs (using the players DAC), or they can output it using a hdmi 1.1 or higher connection to a receiver and use the receivers DAC.

- The current HD_DVD player outputs data at 1080i (1920*1080 interlaced)
- All blu-ray players outputs data 1080p (1920*1080 progressive scan)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080i
Take a look at the picture at the bottom of the page in the link above.

sickicw

Actually this link is better...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Resolution_chart.png

mutelight

sickicw wrote:

- The current HD_DVD player outputs data at 1080i (1920*1080 interlaced)
- All blu-ray players outputs data 1080p (1920*1080 progressive scan)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1080i
Take a look at the picture at the bottom of the page in the link above.

While true all HD-DVDs are in 1080p format. Many reviewers have said (and I hav e witnessed at the demo kiosk at Best Buy that the A1 is REDICULOUSLY slow even when turning on. It is the very first HD format player and I would avoid it unless you absolutely have to be on the bleeding edge. I personally would wait until the prices came down and they offered 1080p output.