 
|
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 |
66.27.65.71
This is going to be a treat. It's been at least 10 years since I saw this movie, and that was on lowly VHS. I've never seen it in its original aspect ratio, let alone in high definition.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Follow Ups:
Is it going to be worth $30 for Blu-Ray vs $10 for DVD ?I agree I need to see that movie again; might be a good candidate for a rental. I'm trying to resist the Blu-ray wallet blues but it's pretty darn difficult with SOTA video/audio Blu-Rays/HD-DVDs.
$20 - 10% discount, free shipping and no tax. Not as cheap as DVDs, but not a terrible price.
Jack
Amazon has DDA for $19.95 and I preordered it for 20% less than that using a code for Warner home video's online store. Never owned the DVD version, thus my excitement at having the opportunity to see this for the first time in more than 10 yrs.Just take a gander at Unforgiven if you want to see how far blu-ray can go beyond a DVD version. Your eyes don't lie. And as you've already noted, the audio capabilities of blu-ray let you go beyond the theater experience.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
But every improvement in video will pay off for old films.Who knows, maybe someday the home video experience will equal the movie going experience.
I guess I could hire some kids to talk behind me while I'm watching. Maybe I'll spill some coke on the floor to make sure its sticky. Perhaps I'll crank my volume up to painfull levels, and set my TV to be slightly out of focus, so it could equal the movie experience.
Personally, I *hate* the movie experience.
Jack
I'm talking about the difference between real film projected on a large screen and home video. The difference is night and day. IMO video is still quite pathetic and barely represents the original image. Film IS the original image. I suppose people like to use complaints about sticky floors and noisy kids as a rationalization for investing so much money into such vastly inferior technology. What next? No live music because the audience coughs too often? I do have news for you guys. There are projectionists that actually know how to do an excellent job of focusing the projector and keeping it in prime running condition. There are theaters that actually patrol for people being disruptive and there are theaters that actually mop the floor.
I understand the difference between the two, just as you understand that not all theaters are showing film at its best.> > > there are projectionists that actually know how to do an excellent job of focusing the projector and keeping it in prime running condition. There are theaters that actually patrol for people being disruptive and there are theaters that actually mop the floor. < < <
I'm sure that is true, but not at the theaters near me. If they are in your area, enjoy it while you can, for I beleive they are a shrinking minority.
I stand by my comments. I got tired of out of focus movies, torn splice joints, crappy sound, and generally miserable watching conditions. I don't like that expereince. If its better for you, then consider yourself fortunate.
Jack
"I understand the difference between the two,"Then you should know it has nothing to do with sticky floors or noisy kids.
" just as you understand that not all theaters are showing film at its best."
Nor are all home theaters showing video at their best. You point?
> > > Then you should know it has nothing to do with sticky floors or noisy kids. < < <
Being part of the theater environment, they certainly are part of the "theater experience", albeit a distracting part.The distractions are just that, and would be more likely to be tolerated if the films were pristine prints, sharply in focus with decent sound etc.
Unfortunately, since most movies aren't the above, there is little reason why I should have to deal with the annoying distractions.
As I said earlier, if your local theaters are more pleasant than mine, by all means enjoy them.
Jack
"Being part of the theater environment, they certainly are part of the "theater experience", albeit a distracting part."No they are a part of certain experiences. They are not a part of all. Heck you can have that problem in someone's home too.
"The distractions are just that, and would be more likely to be tolerated if the films were pristine prints, sharply in focus with decent sound etc."Soemthing that I have already explained is a reality in this world. Along with theaters that enforce a code of conduct that prevents audience based distractions. But you are still dwelling on an issue I was not trying to address. I guess even after I spell it out you insist on harping on issues that are utterly irelevant of image quality and are totally circumstantial and far from universal.
"Unfortunately, since most movies aren't the above,"As explained to you before. Ther are theaters that use the best projection equipment and the best prints etc. and enforce a code of conduct and clean their floors.
" there is little reason why I should have to deal with the annoying distractions."You'd rather settle for a vastly inferior picture. Fine your choice. Doesn't change my point. That being there is a huge divide between the quality available from film and home theater.
"As I said earlier, if your local theaters are more pleasant than mine, by all means enjoy them."I do
nt
...than the lowly 16 bit CD, it's just a different experience with different trade-offs.AuPh
> > > They are not a part of all. < < <
True, but they have been part of mine, and that effect *my* watching.> > > Heck you can have that problem in someone's home too. < < <
Then I won't go back to that person's house to watch movies.> > > But you are still dwelling on an issue I was not trying to address < < <
But I am trying to address it, because for ME, the watching environment is a big part of the experience, but maybe not for others. I don't know why you keep avoiding this issue.> > > I guess even after I spell it out you insist on harping on issues that are utterly irelevant of image quality < < <
For me, there is more to the "theater experience" than just image quality. I don't understand why you cannot grasp this.> > > Ther are theaters that use the best projection equipment and the best prints etc. and enforce a code of conduct and clean their floors < < <
We've been through this-I should have specified *in my area*, not the entire galaxy. Again, I am speaking of MY experiences, not all of mankind's.> > > You'd rather settle for a vastly inferior picture. < < <
I was settling when I paid for blurry movies at my local theater, but no more.> > > That being there is a huge divide between the quality available from film and home theater. < < <
THAT IS ONLY TRUE IF THE THEATER IS PROPERLY SET UP AND THE MOVIE IS IN FOCUS, SOUND NOT DISTORTED etc. Your locals may be, but not all are. In my area, its hit and miss.
Jack
> > > But you are still dwelling on an issue I was not trying to address < < <
"But I am trying to address it,"Then you are trying to change the subject. Feel free to start another thread if you find this other unrelated issue interesting. But it has *nothing* to do with my comments on picture quality film v. home theater.
"because for ME, the watching environment is a big part of the experience, but maybe not for others. I don't know why you keep avoiding this issue."
Because, as stated so many times now, it isn't what I was talking about. Please go back and check out the context. The question was whether or not improvements in bluray over DVD were worth extra money when it comes to old films. WTF does noisy kids have to do with it? You misunderstood my comment about the film going experience. Maybe that was my fault but I clarified. You still hung onto the misunderstanding like a pitbull.If it is a subject that is near and dear to you please feel free to discuss it in a new thread or an old thread where it is relevant. seriously, it has no relevance here in a discussion on the value of bluray over DVD when it comes to old films.
> > > I guess even after I spell it out you insist on harping on issues that are utterly irelevant of image quality < < <
"For me, there is more to the "theater experience" than just image quality. I don't understand why you cannot grasp this."No, I do grasp it. That is why I made myself clear ther second time around. You just won't let it go.
> > > Ther are theaters that use the best projection equipment and the best prints etc. and enforce a code of conduct and clean their floors < < <
"We've been through this-I should have specified *in my area*, not the entire galaxy. Again, I am speaking of MY experiences, not all of mankind's."OK fine, you have shitty theaters where you live. that sucks. I feel for you. Now can we try to stay on subject now that you have clarified your points and I have clarified mine?
> > > That being there is a huge divide between the quality available from film and home theater. < < <
"THAT IS ONLY TRUE IF THE THEATER IS PROPERLY SET UP AND THE MOVIE IS IN FOCUS, SOUND NOT DISTORTED etc. Your locals may be, but not all are. In my area, its hit and miss."OK lets try to put this back into context. the huge divide between film and home video is irrelevant to any particular inferior experiences you have encountered. the question at hand was about Bluray v. DVD. As media they are both vastly inferior to the source, film. Therefore what I was trying to say with a little flair that got taken way out of context was that even with old films any real improvement in video playback has aesthetic merit because they all have a long way to go before they are of the same quality as one can get from film projection. even older films shot on inferior stock and degraded by age.
You said "OK lets try to put this back into context. the huge divide between film and home video is irrelevant to any particular inferior experiences you have encountered. the question at hand was about Bluray v. DVD. As media they are both vastly inferior to the source, film. "Correct, both Bluray and DVD, as media, are inferior to the source, film.
That does not mean that Bluray and DVD, as viewed in the home, are always going to be inferior to film as viewed in a theatre. Good home video can beat bad film projection at a theatre. We do need to distinguish between the theory and the implementation. While one theory may have advantages over another, what counts in real life is the implementation. Implement the good theory badly and you can get crap. Implement the poorer theory well and you can have something quite good.
The "movie experience" is what you get in real life. If your local theatres aren't good, the movie experience you get won't be good. If you only get a good experience when you visit another drive across town or visit somewhere else, then of course you're going to prefer your own HT setup if it's been setup well and is delivering high quality playback. You'd be mad not to. It's simply pointless preferring an experience you can't get so if good film playback is rarely an option for you, going to the theatre is not going to be the way you usually prefer watching a movie, even if you jump at the chance to go to a good theatre when you can.
This is really a coffee vs tea argument and you're missing the point. I prefer coffee over tea, but I do enjoy both. I don't drink tea as often as I drink coffe, but I enjoy it when I do. I drink tea for different reasons than those for why I drink coffee. I drink coffee for the taste and the caffeine. I drink tea because it suits some foods better if I'm having it with a meal, because I'm having a cup with a friend who enjoys tea more than coffee and it's a social thing, because a good cup of coffee isn't available at the time, or because sometimes I just feel like a cup of tea at that time. Regardless of whether you prefer the theatre or home video, you can still enjoy the other and people do have valid reasons for preferring one over the other, even if their preference disagrees with yours.
Some of my reasons for preferring home video over the theatre which haven't yet been canvassed in the sticky carpet and annoying audience debate:
- I can watch what I like when I want to. I don't have to choose from a limited range of films currently showing, or fit in with theatre session times.
- home is much better for double bills and late night movies. I can turn things off and walk to the bedroom without having to get in the car and drive.
David Aiken
I need to get some food in me.:-(
Jack
I'll try to be more direct and less poetic next time. That way I won't get others off the track.
I doubt most HTs will ever come close to movie theaters for the video experience simply because of the screen size; though I'm already critiquing the movie theater screen image vs. what I see in the home.
Greetings Oscar;Im presently spending some spare time looking through the forums today and duly noted you have the EMM Labs switchman and while Ive gone to there website I come away scratching my head. My question is twofold what is this piece used for and more importantly is it sonically beneficial.
Any info you can share is appreciated.
Regards,
/// Tim W. ///
At the time, I only had a preamp/processor which did not have 6 channel analog bypass (which you need for MC SACD or DVD-A). The Meitner was one of the few solutions available at the time which allowed me to play back multiple multichannel sources (one being the pre/pro's DD/DTS decoding of DVD or satellite). As a preamp, it kicked the butt out of my pre/pro so there were sonic benefits for music stereo playback too (I have an integrated HT/stereo system but I'm looking at going with separate systems because of tubes).A Blu-ray/HD DVD player with decent MC analog outputs also turns out to be a good fit using the Meitner in lieu of spending beaucoup bucks on an HDMI 1.3-capable Preamp/processor.
YMMV. If I'm starting over, I'd be taking a real hard look at an HDMI 1.3-capable version of the Halcro SSP-100.
Thanks oscar,So essentially its a high quality multichannel preamp.
I can understand your feelings about the rapid change in digital processing which is one of the main reasons I prefer to use AV Receivers. Putting the money into this part of the system seems like trying to catch the proverbial $$$ moving bullet, I know the Meitner products are highly respected,. The Halcro sounds tempting, as long as the software is upgradable. There's no " free lunch" in this industry.
Thanks for the detailed explanation!
Regards,
/// Tim W. ///
Grins
When I saw Letters from Iwo Jima with my friend, the dood sitting next to her let out many a loud fart during key scenes; guy sitting two rows in front of me wouldn't stop coughing through the whole movie; asshole behind us couldn't stop crinkling his packet of raisinettes or whatever he was eating. As usual, my shoes stuck to the ossified soft drink coating the floor and I was paranoid about the last crowd's junior mints sticking to my ass.Every time I go to the movies I find myself wondering why I subject myself to this, no matter how good the movie is.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
You're right about the sound. Dolby or DTS surround in a properly set-up HT system will trump most movie theaters (regardless of how contemporary or well designed). It's hard to upstage a finely tuned home theater for sound level and balance. Note: Cinemas rarely adjust sound in consideration of the average listener, much less in accord with each film's specific needs.Also, if a film requires focus readjustment some theater managers tend to ignore image problems knowing full well that unless the problem is severe most patrons will tolerate eye strain rather than object. BTW, those few who do complain can usually be bought off with a general apology for the inconvenience and free admissions to some other current or future show. Not the most satisfactory resolution, IMO.
OTOH, a HT set-up provides maximum personal management for enjoying the simulated film experience. One can invite friends over for mini-movie festivals, establish your own "showing" times and film line-ups, stop a film briefly for "concession" or restroom breaks, run the picture back briefly if a deceptively intricate scene or random dialog was missed, you name it. Finally, HT usually provides the best opportunity for viewing well remastered film prints, transfered from the best elements often with a plethora of extras that replace the short subjects, newsreels and cartoons that were an important part of the movie going experience in the Halcyon days of cinema.Of course, I realize that I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but luring movie lovers to the dark side (brightly lit HT is sacrilege) is part of every HT owners conversion directive. ;0)
AuPh
It's a new day, auph. Check out what blu-ray can do for ya.Linear PCM (LPCM)
Dolby Digital Plus (DD+)
Dolby TrueHD - extension of MLP Lossless, lossless encoding of up to 8 channels
DTS-HD - extension of DTS, offers increased bitrates and up to 8 channels
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
Until the format war dies down and more titles are available that peak my interest (classic rock music titles; silent movies; etc.). So far, other than a smattering of classic and contemporary SF films I'm not that impressed. I'm perfectly happy with my upscaling Oppo player (OPDV971H) with DVI; in fact, I'll probably get a second one with HDMI that also does both Hi-Rez audio formats.Surround Sound-wise, new expanded field formats don't impress me all that much; here's where I stand:
Linear PCM (LPCM) - [got it]
Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - [have Dolby Digital (AC3) 5.1 that sounds fine; how much more can it improve?]
Dolby TrueHD - extension of MLP Lossless, lossless encoding of up to 8 channels - [don't need 8 channels; typically I use either 2 or 5.1, but the concept of a lossless signal is worthy of more investigation]
DTS-HD - extension of DTS, offers increased bitrates and up to 8 channels - [My Oppo can upsample a variety of sound sources and pass 192Khz raw; the DTS surround I currently have is excellent; can it be bettered? Possibly, but there is the law of diminishing return to be considered. IMHO, based upon what I'm hearing, improvement would be marginal at best]
- Here's a highly rated DVD player that will upsample to 1080p (with both SACD & DVD-A capability for music aficionados)... (Open in New Window)
You're confused.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
...angular PMS or what? ;^)From Webopedia:
"PCM is also the usual digital method used for music audio playback of music CDs. While supported by DVDs, DVDs have a greater volume so they use Linear PCM, which has a higher sampling rate — up to 24-bit at a sampling rate of 96 kHz."
That, Dolby AC3 and DTS (5.1 & 6.1) are the only audio formats to which I indicated having ready access in my rig. You can criticize my "poor unfortunate system" for not incorporating the latest and theoretically greatest whiz-bang digital Hi-Rez formats if you like, but I politely suggest that you avoid the condescending "confusion" rhetoric. I do keep current on the technologies and know what's what even if I don't wish to pay first class for a seat on the early adopter express.
AuPh
As Oscar told you a couple days ago, blu-ray features uncompressed PCM audio tracks with 8-10-fold the sampling rate of your DD content. Don't worry, auph. I can't access them either. But I recognize their importance and am planning an upgrade path around it. If you think it's just theoretical, go demo some modern rigs pronto.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
... but that doesn't mean that anyone should be labeled "confused" due to the inconsistency of the information provided. That's what I meant earlier about avoidance of condescending remarks. We're not Outside now; I'll gladly treat your opinions about audio & video with more respect than your political opinions in the other forum because you're obviously better informed here. Fair enough?AuPh
When they did, I didn't accuse them of condescensio. Also, I thought it went without saying that baggage on a different carousel stays on the other carousel, unless you can kindly pick it up and take it home so it doesn't keep going round and round.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
When I accused you of using condescending rhetoric it was over your application of the word confused in what seemed to me to be a very demeaning context. In this part of the country folks almost always use the word "confused" as a euphemism for folks with onset Alzheimer's; otherwise, it's used in a pejorative manner, as in a rude insinuation about personal competence.When folks in this area want to politely indicate that they think someone is relying on incorrect, incomplete or flawed information usually those claiming to be better informed will just suggest that the person conveying questionable data may be mistaken.
...But no harm; no foul.
Let's not turn this dubious mole-hill into a mountain of disagreement. As you apparently had no intention of making a condescending remark, I apologize for taking it as such. Is that better?
AuPh
Title selection is slim at the moment.
FWIW, my HD DVD player is a much better upscaler for DVDs than my Oppo, so even if the format doesn't make it, I've still got a really good DVD player.
Jack
There are significant jumps in audio quality with the higher bit rates. Not quite as dramatic as going from CD to SACD or 24/96 DVD-A, but after you get used to uncompressed PCM audio tracks with 8-10X the sampling rate of your typical DD soundtracks, you don't want to go back.The PQ with HD-DVD and Blu-Ray represent significant improvements over upsampled DVD movies. That was the first thing I confirmed when I auditioned a PS3 player on a 720p display.
if I didn't have the itch to collect movies, I wouldn't have paid the "early adopter penalty"; that moratorium on movie collecting (because DVD is becoming "passe") had to end some time. The release of "Casino Royale" on Blu-Ray helped push me over the edge.
but when I heard a setup using DTS HD MA and uncompressed LPCM, I decided I had to have both the PQ and audio upgrade. Auph needs to hear this sometime (at risk to his wallet).
But even now I am enjoying the benefits.
-------------"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
