 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.164.94.242
In Reply to: RE: "As for his films, I don't like 'em either..." - Then why are you 'flapping your lip' ... posted by Audiophilander on December 08, 2007 at 22:54:31
Come on, AuPhL, this is silly. You are pretending that you have to like an expert's body of work to acknowledge his expertise.Bay is a professional filmmaker with very respectable experience in visual media. When he and other filmmakers say Blu-ray is the way to go, you have to be a bit stupid to ignore that simply because you don't like his films.
Meanwhile, you are enthralled with the optinions of people who have never worked with film a day in their lives simply because it makes you feel good about adopting HD DVD.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Edits: 12/09/07Follow Ups:
Are you aware that Michael Bay was supporting HD-DVD as recently as August; I guess he's a "Transformed" man (must've been something SONY put in his water, ...or was it his wallet?). BTW, his "Bad Boy" Microsoft conspiracy theory (that Bill Gates is trying to destroy both formats and conquer with world with downloads) hangs like a pie-pan flying saucer over this debate. If this assertion was any more looney tunes MB would probably be wearing a tin-foil hat, similar to those that fan-boys around here often sport. When are you guys going to figure out that driving force behind "The Rock" is really a pom-a-granite like yourselves?Michael Bay's HD-DVD vs Blu-ray is a Microsoft Conspiracy Theory (Dec. 6)...
http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9829956-1.html
If you Blu-ray cheer-leaders keep serving up half-baked baloney while twirling your batons, before long folks'll be sayin' "Armageddon" outta here! ;0)
Ugh, you're really not following the Bay saga very closely. Running to avs and finding links is a poor substitute.
As for microsoft, it's not a theory. The company seeks to eliminate competition through noncompetitive business practices with little regard for what's best for consumers. That's how it operated from inception. That's how Gates became so wealthy. That's how MS software has consistently been a letdown. Then you HD DVD adopters come along and pretend MS farts don't stink. Really weird AuPhL, that an old hippydippy like you would find yourself defending the epitome of corporate greed and lack of consumer concern.
Even weirder that you would pretend a disparity of 20 gigs is irrelevant to an HD format war, but we've beaten that horse to a pulp and you're still clueless as ever. Continue to wave your pompoms for HD DVD (see how easy it is to engage in your idiotic rhetoric?).
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
... not to mention discouragin the use of PIP, seamless branching, better video bitrates etc.
For some reason, no one pays much attention to bandwidth limitations but I suspect this is the biggest reason, HD DVD movie releases tend not to include lossless/uncompressed audio.
While bandwidth limitations would certainly have an impact on unusually long features on single disc HD unless the inevitable multi-layer presentations come to pass, the "lossless/uncompressed" algorithm issues are more rumour and cheer-leading hyperbole than fact based. Have you personally ever heard any subjective difference in sound quality between the same titles offered in both formats?
BTW, have you had a chance to try out that 3x1 HDMI switcher? I upgraded to an Oppo switcher about a month ago so I don't need the loaner back, but if you don't want it a couple of folks at the meeting elicited an interest.
...being discussed. And I've disagreed with Zyber before...
There's always been a very obvious subjective difference between lossy and lossless with the same movie on my system, but than again the vast majority of lossy is no better than 640k DD+). I don't have any "high lossy" (1.5mbs DD+) vs. lossless soundtracks on the same movie to compare to (yet).
"Transformers" provides one of the best soundmixes I've heard (minus the LFE which I've had issues with on the LG) but I still don't think it matches the clarity, separation, and dynamic peaks of some movies I have with lossless or uncompressed PCM soundtracks... YMMV.
... that having 20 more gigs lined up doesn't matter if the seats are empty. ;0)
> > > "Ugh, you're really not following the Bay saga very closely." < < <
Never intended to, Michael Bay is the guy YOU look up to for validation.
> > > "Running to avs and finding links is a poor substitute." < < <
It was much easier, a quick Google search located a whole bunch; I just posted one at random to prove a point.
> > > "Continue to wave your pompoms for HD DVD (see how easy it is to engage in your idiotic rhetoric?)." < < <
Please, try to make your case; so far all you've succeeded in accomplishing is a display of hyperbole, innuendo and subjective bias. FTR, I never denounced Blu-ray or stated unequivocally that HD-DVD is the only solution because I believe that both formats show promise and both have limitations.
My criticisms target the arrogant, knuckle-headed cheer-leaders who carpet bomb this site with every scrap of Blu-ray propaganda that they come across trying to convince folks that being a fan-boy for SONY makes their choices superior. Instead of doing cartwheels for blue disc why don't you demonstrate a little maturity (for once) and admit that both formats have pros and cons, and that HD-DVD may even provide greater flexibility for some consumer applications than Blu-ray?
Since the difference in picture quality is negligible folks will select either or both for a variety of practical reasons that are in sync with their personal viewing habits, format capacity notwithstanding. A prediction: As more dual format players arrive on the market and the hardware drops in price the anal retentive pompom bearers will look about as silly as Rudy Giuliani in drag.
AuPh
> > Please, try to make your case; so far all you've succeeded in accomplishing is a display of hyperbole, innuendo and subjective bias. < <Subjective bias is your domain and the basis of your decisions. My decisions are based on the superior capacity of Blu-ray, which you ignore like a preschooler covering his ears.
Sales figures and specs are hardly "every scrap of blu-ray propaganda". As for the Bay comments, I think it's germane because he is an industry insider who has worked with film and the two HD formats. If you know of others who are as experienced and have commented about the relative merits of each, I'd certainly respect that a helluva lot more than your endless droning about pom poms, cheerleaders and other idiotic banter. Unfortunately for you, no one is saying that they prefer HD DVD for reasons of substance.
You've managed to put yourself in the unenviable position of defending microsoft and an inferior format, while incessantly trying to insult people excited about the better format. That's not a rational position you've taken, and your posts are increasingly irrational.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...just because the latter has greater capacity? ;O)> > > "Unfortunately for you, no one is saying that they prefer HD DVD for reasons of substance." < < <
Not so, I've provided several SOLID reasons reasons why one might forgo Blu-ray and opt for HD-DVD; all you've provided is, well, substance abuse! ;^D
> > > "You've managed to put yourself in the unenviable position of defending microsoft and an inferior format, while incessantly trying to insult people excited about the better format." < < <
You, sir, are a prevaricator; I hope that word doesn't exceed your capacity! :O)
FYI, this isn't about the 'evil' Microsoft, and my defense is for a quality format that delivers. I'm standing up for a format that you incessantly insult with assertions about inferiority, when that hasn't proven to be the case. I only ridicule the SONY fan-boys and cheer leaders who, out of malicious self-interest, are predisposed to knocking the HD-DVD format and all those own and like it.
BTW, if you define "excitement" as the zealotry that goes along with unrestrained advocacy, then I'd say that you're seriously mixed up, because what you are demonstrating is defensive posturing.
Cheers,
AuPh
Your yacht isn't sporting too many amenities. Let's see if it floats, and for how long. The analogy doesn't work for me because when you talk about the luxury of the vessel, you're talking about the film. I'm talking about the capacity of an optical format. You know somewhere in the atrophied recesses of your mind that uncompressed, lossless digital content is best for high res audio and video applications and that greater capacity and high bitrates are the key to that. You know that successful formats won't be around just for today but for many years. Who knows what innovations will come. Already we're seeing HD DVD maxed out. Warner couldn't even fit the A&E documentary "Hidden Secrets of Harry Potter" on the Order of the Phoenix HD DVD (it's on the blu-ray version). That's just the beginning of the limitations you are facing by choosing hd dvd. The idea that you had to adopt it because you wanted the cheap player, casablanca and matrix which you've seen a million times, is unsubstantive and illogical. It is not a rational reason to adopt. Sorry, but your position is bogus.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
... seems about par for your putt-putt coarse. No offense, 'Dory', but it's quite amusing that your own memory apparently has about as much vacant space as the SONY superior capacity claims you tout during one of your fan-boy pompompous rants. The irony is that if your attention span really is that short, then you'd probably be better off looking at still pictures than watching something which displays too much information to assimilate! ;0)Here's a clue: Matrix was never mentioned by your's truly as having a place on my must-have list, and the classic Casablanca is just one of several important films exclusive to HD that I listed! BTW, the Toshiba player's price point was NOT my first consideration; in fact, ultimately it wasn't even a deciding factor (the 5 disc giveaway was appealing, but a reasonable price-point was just icing on a very tasty cake).
FTR, the titles I mentioned were (pay attention, there may be a quiz later!): John Carpenter's The Thing, Forbidden Planet, Casablanca (which was on the 5 free disc list, BTW), and Star Trek The Original series (1st season), and just to make the oxides shed from your dopamine challenged memory that much quicker, I'll add to that Joss Whedon's Serenity. :o)
Oh, and while I would agree that the original Matrix is a great motion picture visually, as a series Matrix jumped the shark big-time after the first entry, so it isn't currently on my must have list. Now, I may add Batman Begins to my HD short list; it's the best Batman flick to date. BTW, is that even available on Blu?
Cheers,
AuPh
just let me know when (hint).
doesn't change my point one bit. You made a decision based on nothing of significance...a few titles you've probably seen dozens of times. Even if there were 10 hd dvd exclusives you wanted, or 20, you should have looked at the broader issues before adopting. You didn't. And that's cool. It's just that you cant admit it.BTW, I can't remember what HD DVDs you own because I don't care and it doesn't affect my point about your reasons for adopting and your ongoing stance that capacity isn't important. That stance is almost as weird as your compulsion to defend microsoft. Ah well...we all have our priorities.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Tsk, tsk, next time you try selling your soul to SONY for the opportunity to be a champion 'blues' man make sure someone better qualified hasn't beat you to the crossroads! :O)> > > "...doesn't change my point one bit." < < <
So, is the point you're trying to raise still flaccid? That little 'Blu' pill you've swallowed, adopted and keep promoting should be providing better results to correct the underutilized 'capacity'! ;O}
> > > "Even if there were 10 hd dvd exclusives you wanted, or 20, you should have looked at the broader issues before adopting." < < <
Obviously you're in this 'game' for some other reason than as a movie fan! So, do you have anything of value to offer in a discussion of high definition movie appreciation besides supporting the Blu-ray agenda?
> > > "BTW, I can't remember what HD DVDs you own because I don't care and it doesn't affect my point about your reasons for adopting and your ongoing stance that capacity isn't important." < < <
Sorry, but the only point that stands out is the fact that you're acting as an unpaid SONY shill, and the less said about your stance the better! Heck, even a prostitute deserves to get paid for performing services above and beyond the call of duty.
> > > "Ah well...we all have our priorities." < < <
*Ahem* Yesiree, THAT we can clearly see. You really should hang up those pompoms even if your clients have a thing for cheer-leaders; it's rather unseemly regardless of the width of your stance! ;0)
Cheers (Rah! Rah! LOL!),
AuPh
Guess you're just not a savvy consumer. You've stated that you don't care about audio in HT applications, either. Not much common ground with you. I own A/V gear from VAC, YBA, VPI, Electraglide, PS Audio, B&W and Tivo, too...it ain't like I live, breath and worship Sony, so your continued fixation on Sony points to problems with you, not me. More than a dozen companies belong to the BDA--it ain't just Sony.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
There are folks a lot smarter than you or I who are working to make HD-DVD performance virtually indistinguishable from Blu-ray content wise; I'm confident that over time the goal of increasing available space can and will be achieved through improved disc mastering and ethernet upgrades without resorting to a third option (new hardware).
All that's needed to increase HD-DVD storage capacity are additional layers and extra gigabyte space will only be required on lengthier Director's cuts and Special Editions anyway. But don't stop grousing on my account, ...that echo emanating from your empty warehouse sounds kind of funky! :o)
> > > "More than a dozen companies belong to the BDA..." < < <
And at least one fan-boy! ;O)
Cheers,
AuPh
It amazes me that you have actually convinced yourself you are informed on these issues. There is nothing THEORETICAL about it. Blu-ray can hold 20 gigs more content than HD DVD. It is therefore a superior HD format.
If you're looking for a metaphor for "empty warehouse", try your skull.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
;0)
> > > "Blu-ray can hold 20 gigs more content than HD DVD. It is therefore a superior HD format." < < <
Can hold and does hold are two different things. If in the end, the discs released have the same codecs, remastering and level of content and in an A/B comparison you can't tell a Blu-ray release from the same movie released on an HD-DVD, then the 20 gigs of 'warehouse' space doesn't mean zip; you can put that in your zip-file and smoke it!
The bottom line: capacity doesn't mean diddly if it isn't used. Now some films, like Harry Potter which is being released on both formats, are providing extra content in 1080P on Blu-ray as opposed to 480P on the HD-DVD discs. If those extras, such as making documentaries, are as important to you as the movie in higher definition then maybe you should consider Blu-ray, but I'll wager that the movies on both formats look exactly the same in side by side comparisons.
> > > "If you're looking for a metaphor for "empty warehouse", try your skull." < < <
Actually, I'm looking for a metaphor for pompom carrying fanboy, but as much as your moniker keeps popping up around here I bet a Google search would just link your name to any search.
Have a good'un! ;^D
AuPh
> > Can hold and does hold are two different things. If in the end, the discs released have the same codecs, remastering and level of content and in an A/B comparison you can't tell a Blu-ray release from the same movie released on an HD-DVD, then the 20 gigs of 'warehouse' space doesn't mean zip; you can put that in your zip-file and smoke it! < <
You have unwittingly hit upon another reason that hd dvd is bad news: the fact that studios releasing both formats are producing the content for HD DVD and simply porting it over to blu-ray. In other words, your camp is dumbing down content for everyone and screwing the consumer out of the best possible product. But hey, what do you care. You don't even think audio quality is important.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Wasn't it the blu-boys that used to chant "CONTENT IS KING"? Of course picking one format over the other based on exclusives is a valid reason. It may be the ONLY valid reason. What good is an HD format if you don't like the movies offered? I'm sure if he preferred Cars, or "Spidey", and went BD, you would applaud him.
Your stance here is almost as strange as your Microsoft conspiracy theories.
Jack
Anyone who bases such decisions on titles at a time when only about 100 titles had even been released is not making rational decisions.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Studio backing is only as valuable as the titles they put out. A studio's catalog is worthless if it never sees the light of day.
Jack
You guys genuinely don't seem to understand that this is not a static situation. The concept that titles are continually coming out seems lost on you. Basing decisions on the available titles at a fixed point in time, early in format rollout, is completely nuts.
And this is where voting with your dollars comes into play. By jumping the fence from one side to the other, you are not telling the studios what format you prefer and you are encouraging the war rather than the format. Decide which is best and support it. Right now, neither format has the title availability to justify interest in terms of building a serious library.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
> > > Basing decisions on the available titles at a fixed point in time, early in format rollout, is completely nuts. < < <
No, basing decisions on titles that may never see the light of day is nuts.
> > > And this is where voting with your dollars comes into play. By jumping the fence from one side to the other, you are not telling the studios what format you prefer and you are encouraging the war rather than the format. Decide which is best and support it. Right now, neither format has the title availability to justify interest in terms of building a serious library. < < <
I'm telling the studios, that I'm a movie lover, not a format cheerleader.
Of course, that's why I still buy DVDs.
Jack
...on my tombstone (not that I'm in any hurry! -grin). If folks are content to wait around until the dust settles to enjoy their favorite films in high definition they might be under the latter before they even see the former! :o)
Cheers,
AuPh
Truely pathetic.
Jack
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
You have no idea what is in my collection, and you are grasping at straws.
Jack
There simply aren't many good titles out there on either HD format to be a logical reason to adopt.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
.
;0)
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...BRP! ;0)
E.g. I waited for the Extended (DTS) versions of LOTR before I bought them on DVD. For the long-term, bandwidth and storage are very important considerations, that consideration is driving my selections for now.
What good is a format, if you don't like what its offering? That's why I jumped off the SACD bandwagon 6 months after I jumped on it.
Oh sure, its nice to hear promises of how glorious things will be in the future, but what good is that if they don't have any movies you want to see?
Jack
There is only one reason to buy into HD: a fascination with QUALITY and a desire to see a tremendous volume of films released with that QUALITY.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
But I have over 80 HD DVDs, and only 20 BDs-5 of which were free, and the Ocean's Trilogy I got on BD because the HD DVD was sold out.
OTOH, I have over 1000 DVDs. Most of my watching is still SD.
> > > There is only one reason to buy into HD: a fascination with QUALITY < < <
I'm not going to buy a nice picture of a movie that I don't like. If you want to do that, by all means go for it. I won't-that sends the wrong message to the studios: "I'll buy anything in HD!".
I'm sure Sony loves you.
Jack
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
