audio versus video [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : audio versus video



musicman1999
08-02-2007, 04:39 PM
Peruvianskies proposed a question in another thread:What do people want high end audio or video?I think its a great question.
In a movie watching experience what percentage do people think is video and what percentage audio?and why.

thanks
bill

PeruvianSkies
08-02-2007, 04:51 PM
Peruvianskies proposed a question in another thread:What do people want high end audio or video?I think its a great question.
In a movie watching experience what percentage do people think is video and what percentage audio?and why.

thanks
bill

To answer my own question....I would say about 85% video and 15% audio. This is NOT to say that people don't care about what they hear, but this seems to be the ratio when it comes to putting funds together...example: my friend spent $2200 on his LCD and $400 on his audio system (speakers + receiver all in one box).

musicman1999
08-02-2007, 05:23 PM
Sorry,i was not to clear,i did not mean dollar wise.I meant if you sit down to watch a film is the video more important than the audio,or vise versa,or is it 50-50.Do you enjoy a film that has substandard video,if it has a killer audio track?Does it have to have good sound and video,maybe the story is more important.

bill

PeruvianSkies
08-02-2007, 06:02 PM
Sorry,i was not to clear,i did not mean dollar wise.I meant if you sit down to watch a film is the video more important than the audio,or vise versa,or is it 50-50.Do you enjoy a film that has substandard video,if it has a killer audio track?Does it have to have good sound and video,maybe the story is more important.

bill

Ahhh. Well, let's put it this way...if you were in a movie theater and the image was out-of-focus I think people would complain much more regularly about it than they would if the audio was out-of-sync. If the audio was distorted they would less likely complain than if the picture was scratched and fuzzy. In terms of 'quality' I am about 50-50...If the film doesn't have a good quality recording and sound-design than it's less engaging for me and likewise the film needs to have good picture quality in order to achieve a visual narrative. Both picture and sound must work hand-in-hand in order to achieve a multi-sensory experience.

Mr Peabody
08-02-2007, 06:21 PM
It's tough to dissect an experience that counts on both aspects but I definitely get more irritated with a bad soundtrack. I can deal with some video imperfections if you throw in some cool sound effects.

drseid
08-03-2007, 03:42 AM
Peruvianskies proposed a question in another thread:What do people want high end audio or video?I think its a great question.
In a movie watching experience what percentage do people think is video and what percentage audio?and why.

thanks
bill

For HT I am about 60% video, 40% audio. That said, I enjoy listening to music more than watching films (even though both are my hobbies) so I would invest more in audio if it were a split system for use with both.

---Dave

Luvin Da Blues
08-03-2007, 04:19 AM
For me it depends on the movie.

If its a movie with great special audio effects, a musical or a bio about an artist/performer then the SQ has to be there B4 the PQ. If it's a movie thats mostly dialog or great visual effects then the PQ has to be there B4 SQ.

Of course some (most?) movies have to have both.

kexodusc
08-03-2007, 05:50 AM
There's a lot of research on this topic - depending on which study you cite, the visual sense is the dominant sense in 60-85% of the population, followed by auditory, then physical.
In every study I've seen Visual wins out at about 2:1 over Auditory, or more. This doesn't mean these people don't care about audio, just that video is more important.
My dominant sense is visual, yet I'm more fussy about my stereo than my display, prefer music to movies/tv, and music is a big part of my life. Still, I think there's a reason that movies outsell "books-on-tape".

musicman1999
08-03-2007, 07:29 AM
Kex
i think you are right that most people's dominant sense is visual and i am afraid that many people just don't care about the audio,not so much for people here,but people in general.Me,i would like to say i am 50-50 but i am far more picky about the audio side.Good audio can contribute to films other than big action films,it can be subtle like in the way a door slam is placed just right in the soundfield or the way the background music is rendered.

bill

kelsci
08-03-2007, 08:15 AM
Good question. Most of the time I seem to lean to the audio. Sometimes, it is a seesaw.

kexodusc
08-03-2007, 12:12 PM
Kex
i think you are right that most people's dominant sense is visual and i am afraid that many people just don't care about the audio,not so much for people here,but people in general.Me,i would like to say i am 50-50 but i am far more picky about the audio side.Good audio can contribute to films other than big action films,it can be subtle like in the way a door slam is placed just right in the soundfield or the way the background music is rendered.

bill

I use to think I was primarily audio, but I keep scoring visual - a lot of companies test this sort of thing on those goofy corporate training seminars...mine was done with those Myers-Briggs tests. I'm definitely visually dominant. But that doesn't mean you prefer video to audio always.
I think home audio is an acquired taste that takes longer to develop and appreciate. Visual stimuli are faster, easier...kinda like the dark side of the force.

PeruvianSkies
08-03-2007, 12:49 PM
So check this out...

I was thinking about this question today and I realized a few things. The first, is that in our lifetime most of us get to see many great displays of visual splendor (i.e. a sunset, beachfront, nature, or a painting), but few of us get to experience audio-bliss. That is, the lifelike sounds coming from an symphony or the timbre of a solo acoustic guitar. They might get to experience these things in person, but not in a reproduction, therefore sometimes you can't truly appreciate good audio until you hear it for yourself.

musicman1999
08-03-2007, 01:49 PM
Some truth there,but i don't believe there is an audio system out there that comes close to a good live concert experience.

bill

Wireworm5
08-03-2007, 05:23 PM
IMO, Audio is not essential in conveying the story line of a movie. You can get the jist of a movie watching a 10" black n white tv. And be just as caught up in the story. However I think back to when I was into gaming on the computer and I just used the soundcard that came with the computer. Then a friend talked me into getting a good soundcard, and I did. The enhanced sound made the gaming experience much more enjoyable.
This was a real eye opener for me on how sound although not our dominate sense is none the less a sense that we rely on to a great extent.
Getting the soundcard was also a big motivating factor for me in persuing a HT system. I was always interested in audio but wouldn't invest in a home stereo after having my first system stolen in '79. Now I have my own home and insurance and I can crank it as loud as I want with nobody to complain. Life is good. :)

Wireworm5
08-03-2007, 05:43 PM
Some truth there,but i don't believe there is an audio system out there that comes close to a good live concert experience.

bill

I was at the bar the other night listening to a band called 'Cold Filter' ( I bought their cd and they sound like Metallica St. Anger album) and listened intently on the overall sound. The bass guitar had way more harmonics than anything I've heard on my home system and the drums just dominate. But I couldn't hear the lead guitar, probably due to location to the right of the stage. Only my best DTS concert dvd comes close to this realism.
I don't think it's because stereo equipment isn't capable of reproducing these realisms. It just can't be fully captured on present day recording methods.

Mr Peabody
08-03-2007, 05:46 PM
Hey, has anyone seen Edtyct on the boards lately? He usually had good input on video and he has been absent on our HD disc threads, nor have I seen any recent posts.

musicman1999
08-03-2007, 05:57 PM
Hey, has anyone seen Edtyct on the boards lately? He usually had good input on video and he has been absent on our HD disc threads, nor have I seen any recent posts.

No,not for some time.

bill

musicman1999
08-03-2007, 06:07 PM
I was at the bar the other night listening to a band called 'Cold Filter' ( I bought their cd and they sound like Metallica St. Anger album) and listened intently on the overall sound. The bass guitar had way more harmonics than anything I've heard on my home system and the drums just dominate. But I couldn't hear the lead guitar, probably due to location to the right of the stage. Only my best DTS concert dvd comes close to this realism.
I don't think it's because stereo equipment isn't capable of reproducing these realisms. It just can't be fully captured on present day recording methods.

Bars are not known for accoustics,so that may have something to do with it.Even if classical music is not your thing,i suggest hearing an orchestra in a good concert hall,it will change the way you think about live music.Talk about power.You can't reproduce that kind of dynamics in your listening room,or anyone's.

bill

Wireworm5
08-03-2007, 06:25 PM
In terms of what a stereo can do, amplified music is a good benchmark. The bar although not perfect, generally sounds a heck of alot better than any arena concert I been to ( if we compare home audio to that, I''ll vote the home audio, please), and it's right in your face at some 95 db's.
In a good venue with unamplied instruments, I won't argue your point.

PeruvianSkies
08-03-2007, 06:36 PM
IMO, Audio is not essential in conveying the story line of a movie.

Oh please. Audio is equally important and just as vital. Most people think that silent movies never had any sound with them, which is totally false, most of the time they had live orchestras performing the music to aid as a soundtrack. You might be able to get the essentially elements of the storyline, but music and audio is quite important too, keep in mind we are talking about dialogue here as well.

Wireworm5
08-03-2007, 07:51 PM
Oh please. Audio is equally important and just as vital. Most people think that silent movies never had any sound with them, which is totally false, most of the time they had live orchestras performing the music to aid as a soundtrack. You might be able to get the essentially elements of the storyline, but music and audio is quite important too, keep in mind we are talking about dialogue here as well.

Sorry to disagree with you, but most of the time when listening to music I watch tv in closed caption. So No, I don't need the soundtrack to follow the story, just the words.
Another example: I used to work at a casino where they had a bank of tvs on one wall for simalcast horse racing. There were varies sizes in tv's some big, some small, some good picture quality others bad and well you couldn't hear the sound well due to all the other noise. Regardless of the tv type, they all served the purpose of conveying the info of what's happining with any particular horse race.
Visuals is all that is needed in conveying a message or story.

PeruvianSkies
08-03-2007, 09:16 PM
Sorry to disagree with you, but most of the time when listening to music I watch tv in closed caption. So No, I don't need the soundtrack to follow the story, just the words.
Another example: I used to work at a casino where they had a bank of tvs on one wall for simalcast horse racing. There were varies sizes in tv's some big, some small, some good picture quality others bad and well you couldn't hear the sound well due to all the other noise. Regardless of the tv type, they all served the purpose of conveying the info of what's happining with any particular horse race.
Visuals is all that is needed in conveying a message or story.

A horse race isn't exactly a narrative now is it?

pixelthis
08-04-2007, 12:23 AM
A horse race isn't exactly a narrative now is it?

Sure is, a blazing story of what happened to my paycheck
I went to see the third terminator movie, opened the door to another theater where it was in full swing, and it was georgous, and the DTS sound was amazing.
But in my theater the sound was flat, and I found out the DTS was "broken".
So I sat in the lobby at ten at night and waited an hour for the last showing in the other theater.
Do you know how many would do this? Not many.
I used to drive fifty miles to see movies with stadium seating and perfect sound and video,
a lot thought I was crazy(dont say it)
Trust me, video has audio beat hands down for the great unwashed, however.
Its just different is all. You keep asking this question because liking to listen to music
you think most feel that way but they dont.
They will sit and watch a movie but music is for parties, listening to while you jog or drive, etc, most arent serious music listeners.
I pointed out to you on another thread that up to 90% of the sound from a movie comes from the center channel and you didnt beleive me, well, thats because thats where most of the DIALOG comes from, and movies are mixed to be heard in theaters, so most sound comes from the front speakers
Because thats where the picture is, and where most of the sound comes from, which
is talking.
You keep trying to compare audio and video, but they are really two different experiences,
to most one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
And when it comes to sound for HT, they just want their helicopters to blow up on cue:yesnod:

PeruvianSkies
08-04-2007, 12:32 AM
Sure is, a blazing story of what happened to my paycheck
I went to see the third terminator movie, opened the door to another theater where it was in full swing, and it was georgous, and the DTS sound was amazing.
But in my theater the sound was flat, and I found out the DTS was "broken".
So I sat in the lobby at ten at night and waited an hour for the last showing in the other theater.
Do you know how many would do this? Not many.
I used to drive fifty miles to see movies with stadium seating and perfect sound and video,
a lot thought I was crazy(dont say it)
Trust me, video has audio beat hands down for the great unwashed, however.
Its just different is all. You keep asking this question because liking to listen to music
you think most feel that way but they dont.
They will sit and watch a movie but music is for parties, listening to while you jog or drive, etc, most arent serious music listeners.
I pointed out to you on another thread that up to 90% of the sound from a movie comes from the center channel and you didnt beleive me, well, thats because thats where most of the DIALOG comes from, and movies are mixed to be heard in theaters, so most sound comes from the front speakers
Because thats where the picture is, and where most of the sound comes from, which
is talking.
You keep trying to compare audio and video, but they are really two different experiences,
to most one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
And when it comes to sound for HT, they just want their helicopters to blow up on cue:yesnod:

There is no such thing as DIALOG, if you read that post where you talked about the center-speaker you will see that I pointed out that the word is DIALOGUE. Learn how to spell the things that you are talking about, especially if you are going to capitalize the word. I never said that audio and video are the same thing, they are no't, but the compliment each other. It's like asking the question, "which wing is more important on an airplane...the left or the right?" Maybe in your world the left wing is more important, but to most people they feel that both wings are important, you can't have the full experience without both, and in the case of the airplane, I guarantee you that you want to have both working at the same time. Although, feel free to fly with only one wing sometime if you'd like to disagree.

thekid
08-04-2007, 07:13 AM
Well obviously people say "let's watch a movie" as opposed to go " let's listen to a movie" so I think they go to a movie more to have their visual senses entertained. In an electronic store we have all witnessed people staring at the latest/greatest flat screens out there for fairly long periods of time even though there is no sound or what sound there is is being drowned out. However having said that, as technology advances and special audio effects become important in a lot of movies I think we might see more of a balance and audio will become more of a factor particularly with the growing popularity of HT.

The audio industry would probably serve itself by doing a little PR in this area. I think the general public thinks that often times high-end gear or even mid-budget gear takes a long time to set up and is complicated thus we have companies like Bose which emphasize the ease of setting up their 3-2-1 or Accoustimass systems getting a high percentage of the market. I think if the industry did more to educate people and a lot of companies spent some marketing dollars you might see a greater interest from the public on the audio end. Let's face it some companies out there foster the image of audio as being expensive and complex.

kexodusc
08-04-2007, 07:24 AM
Sorry to disagree with you, but most of the time when listening to music I watch tv in closed caption. So No, I don't need the soundtrack to follow the story, just the words.
Another example: I used to work at a casino where they had a bank of tvs on one wall for simalcast horse racing. There were varies sizes in tv's some big, some small, some good picture quality others bad and well you couldn't hear the sound well due to all the other noise. Regardless of the tv type, they all served the purpose of conveying the info of what's happining with any particular horse race.
Visuals is all that is needed in conveying a message or story.

I'm going to have to side with PS on this one. I think video is #1, but audio is a damn close second - it's a huge part of every little bit of the story telling - I'm going to qualify my opinion:

I think it's Season 5 of the show "24" on DVD that has a special feature about the guy who does the music - they do a neat exercise where they run the exact same scene over and over again, only each time they dub in a different background music theme. It is absolutely incredible how much of a difference in terms of setting the mood the musical selection makes, and the impression you take from what you're just watching. Off the top of my head, in one particular shot there's a romantic theme for Jack Bauer and his lady - Jack sees her for the first time in months and you can feel the sense of emotion the scene is trying to portray - they switched it up from the love music to a dark, creep, almost serial killer ditty - the same scene was eerily menacing. Instead of a sense for longing you thought that Jack was going to murder her! Only thing that changed was the background music. They do a few other musical selections, each time the scene conveys a totally different message.

I dare say the choice of audio in a lot of movies can make or break each shot. I've greatly underestimated it's importance.

Anyway, it's a great bonus feature bit that's worth watching if any of you have the DVD. I'd love to see examples of this.

Wireworm5
08-04-2007, 07:45 AM
You missed my point. As I mentioned earlier, enhanced sound took my gaming experience to a whole different level of enjoyment, with realistic explosions, etc.
So it's the same with movies, sound will take the movie experience to a whole different level of enjoyment.
As for sound being essential for either gaming or movies, NO!
On the other hand you have radio which can tell a story with just words. The scene or picture is filled with your imagination.

E-Stat
08-04-2007, 07:55 AM
In a movie watching experience what percentage do people think is video and what percentage audio?and why.
Interesting question. Like others, listening to music provides more enjoyment to me than watching movies. On the other hand, I find that the video experience is definitely improved when the sound component is more convincing. There if far more to a good soundtrack than the dialogue - I find the trick to be providing the illusion of being in whatever space the scene calls for. On a busy street. In the forest. In an auditorium. On a spacecraft. By far, the most convincing example I've heard is from a reviewer friend's spectacular system. It is significantly better than anything else I've heard, certainly including commercial theatres. It simply disappears and allows you focus on the story.

Because I am audio focused, I find that a poor system has a greater effect to detract from the experience. It is not unusual that I have to stuff some tissue in my ears at theatres because of the loud, harsh, mediocre quality sound. The same is true when I attend live plays. Recently, the wife and I attended a dinner theatre event at the local university. The sound reinforcement consisted of several Peavy PA horns. Whoever mounted the speakers did not understand the concept of dispersion. They had oriented the cabinets with the mouth of the HF horn aligned vertically - creating a narrowly focused, hard sounding beam aimed directly at our table! I was miserable until the break where I could pack my ears to prevent further misery. Didn't pay much attention to the play.

I'm saying 50/50.

rw

pixelthis
08-05-2007, 12:33 AM
Interesting question. Like others, listening to music provides more enjoyment to me than watching movies. On the other hand, I find that the video experience is definitely improved when the sound component is more convincing. There if far more to a good soundtrack than the dialogue - I find the trick to be providing the illusion of being in whatever space the scene calls for. On a busy street. In the forest. In an auditorium. On a spacecraft. By far, the most convincing example I've heard is from a reviewer friend's spectacular system. It is significantly better than anything else I've heard, certainly including commercial theatres. It simply disappears and allows you focus on the story.

Because I am audio focused, I find that a poor system has a greater effect to detract from the experience. It is not unusual that I have to stuff some tissue in my ears at theatres because of the loud, harsh, mediocre quality sound. The same is true when I attend live plays. Recently, the wife and I attended a dinner theatre event at the local university. The sound reinforcement consisted of several Peavy PA horns. Whoever mounted the speakers did not understand the concept of dispersion. They had oriented the cabinets with the mouth of the HF horn aligned vertically - creating a narrowly focused, hard sounding beam aimed directly at our table! I was miserable until the break where I could pack my ears to prevent further misery. Didn't pay much attention to the play.

I'm saying 50/50.

rw
WRONG, but I do agree with you that audio is important, even with dialog getting the right timber in the voices really adds to the experience.
And now let me settle this with a little experiment.

Think audio is near as important as video to humans?
Well, plug up your ears and walk around the house for awhile, how does that impair you?
NOW do the same with a blindfold on, you will quickly learn what the most important sense is to the average human.
Some old farts refuse to wear their hearing aids, but they ALL wear their glasses:thumbsup:

PeruvianSkies
08-05-2007, 02:53 AM
WRONG, but I do agree with you that audio is important, even with dialog getting the right timber in the voices really adds to the experience.
And now let me settle this with a little experiment.

Think audio is near as important as video to humans?
Well, plug up your ears and walk around the house for awhile, how does that impair you?
NOW do the same with a blindfold on, you will quickly learn what the most important sense is to the average human.
Some old farts refuse to wear their hearing aids, but they ALL wear their glasses:thumbsup:

Again, you can't see the forest through the trees. We are not talking about how important hearing and seeing is when walking around our house, we are talking about it's importance when watching (and hearing) a film. Also, how this relates to us in high-end video and high-end audio terms.

You tried to say that I am comparing apples and oranges...you aren't even comparing food, you're about as far off as apples and laundry detergent.

E-Stat
08-05-2007, 04:07 AM
Think audio is near as important as video to humans?
What does that have to do with the question advanced?

In a movie watching experience what percentage do people think is video and what percentage audio?and why.

rw

E-Stat
08-05-2007, 04:18 AM
Again, you can't see the forest through the trees.
No, but he is ("getting the right timber in the voices" ) thinking about lumber. :D

rw

GMichael
08-05-2007, 05:37 AM
I'd like to answer this questions two ways:

1) Average Joe probably cares more about the video quality. Maybe not as much as some of use do, but more so than the sound. As proof, I present the growing HD movement as well as the popularity of Bose cubes and HTIB systems.

2) From my perspective? Let's see, I paid about 4 times as much on my audio than my video. I'd say I care more about the sound. But I need to have both to be happy.

May I have both please? A 106 inch HD screen AND good sound with heart pounding base. Yeah, both is best. Mark me down for both.

musicman1999
08-05-2007, 10:32 AM
Great responses,keep em coming.It is good to see most people know how much the music and foley effects mean to the movie watching experience.I saw a film a while back,don't remember what it was,but it had an option to watch the film with only the music track.It really shows what music can do.If you have any films with this option,give it a try.

bill

PeruvianSkies
08-05-2007, 08:27 PM
No, but he is ("getting the right timber in the voices" ) thinking about lumber. :D

rw

In my best Larry the Cable Guy....

Now that's funny right there...I don't care who you are...that's funny!

pixelthis
08-05-2007, 10:52 PM
Again, you can't see the forest through the trees. We are not talking about how important hearing and seeing is when walking around our house, we are talking about it's importance when watching (and hearing) a film. Also, how this relates to us in high-end video and high-end audio terms.

You tried to say that I am comparing apples and oranges...you aren't even comparing food, you're about as far off as apples and laundry detergent.
More gobbledegook that signifies nothing.
You have tenk worth of audio gear so obviously good sound in important to you.
What I cant seem to get through that rather thick skull of yours is that
IS NOT NORMAL.
Why open a debate if you are not going to entertain what people tell you?
What I was pointing out in my little demo was that the visual sense is so overwhelmingly
important to the human animal that anything visual is going to outweigh
anything audio by a far margin.
I live in a college town with a population of 50 to 150 thousand , depening on when school is in.
And when I buy audio equipment I had better LOVE it because unless I want to give it away or put it in the attic I'm pretty much stuck with it.
My TV sets usually go fast and at a good price however.
In another thread you didnt beleive that I auditioned a pair of speakers for two hours, well, thats the minimum, because they are the key ingredient to your system,
and if I decide I cant live with em tough, I'm usually stuck with em.
Does this give you some impression of the importance of video vs audio to most?
EVERYBODY wants a HT hese days, but audiophile systems are rarer and rarer these days.
And that is a HT with crap speakers usually, most cant beleive that my center cost 300 bucks by itself. I dont bother to tell them that my front speaker cables were 200 bucks,
and I have over six hundred bucks worth of cables in my dvd/sacd player.
Most dont spend that much on their entire set of speakers these days:(

musicman1999
08-06-2007, 04:44 AM
More gobbledegook that signifies nothing.
You have tenk worth of audio gear so obviously good sound in important to you.
What I cant seem to get through that rather thick skull of yours is that
IS NOT NORMAL.
Why open a debate if you are not going to entertain what people tell you?
What I was pointing out in my little demo was that the visual sense is so overwhelmingly
important to the human animal that anything visual is going to outweigh
anything audio by a far margin.
I live in a college town with a population of 50 to 150 thousand , depening on when school is in.
And when I buy audio equipment I had better LOVE it because unless I want to give it away or put it in the attic I'm pretty much stuck with it.
My TV sets usually go fast and at a good price however.
In another thread you didnt beleive that I auditioned a pair of speakers for two hours, well, thats the minimum, because they are the key ingredient to your system,
and if I decide I cant live with em tough, I'm usually stuck with em.
Does this give you some impression of the importance of video vs audio to most?
EVERYBODY wants a HT hese days, but audiophile systems are rarer and rarer these days.
And that is a HT with crap speakers usually, most cant beleive that my center cost 300 bucks by itself. I dont bother to tell them that my front speaker cables were 200 bucks,
and I have over six hundred bucks worth of cables in my dvd/sacd player.
Most dont spend that much on their entire set of speakers these days:(
But what i wanted to know is,what is more important to YOU,not to people in general.And please stop quoting the price of your speakers,you must understand that many,many people on this forum would consider a $300 center a "crap speaker",but you don't hear them coming out with numbers.


bill

E-Stat
08-06-2007, 05:14 AM
In my best Larry the Cable Guy...
LTCG is hilarious. I catch him on XM comedy from time to time.

Why is this guy debating our preferences? There is no one answer here, right or wrong. D'ya think that those who post on audioreview.com might share a teeny weeny bias in the audio direction? :)

I think Pix would be happier if he chills out a bit.

rw

pixelthis
08-08-2007, 01:55 AM
LTCG is hilarious. I catch him on XM comedy from time to time.

Why is this guy debating our preferences? There is no one answer here, right or wrong. D'ya think that those who post on audioreview.com might share a teeny weeny bias in the audio direction? :)

I think Pix would be happier if he chills out a bit.

rw
Its five in the morning, I'm about as "chilled" as you can get.
If there is no "right or wrong" answer then why post the question?
And why is it important what I (or anybody) on this site perfers?
They are all a bunch of sticklers that are way outta the norm.
NOBODY I KNOW PAYS as much for speakers as I do, except a friend, sometimes we trade them back and forth.
And 300 bucks is a good average price for a center channel on a lower to midline system,
which is what I have. I dont have "ten k" to spend on an audio system alone,
I work for a living, but I will part with video before audio, if that answers your question,
which you dont seem to WANT answered:confused5:

kexodusc
08-08-2007, 03:36 AM
I dont bother to tell them that my front speaker cables were 200 bucks,
and I have over six hundred bucks worth of cables in my dvd/sacd player.

Yeah, I'd probably keep that on the down-low too, if I were you.

E-Stat
08-08-2007, 03:43 AM
Its five in the morning, I'm about as "chilled" as you can get.
It's all about attitude.


If there is no "right or wrong" answer then why post the question?
Frequently posters ask for opinions to better understand each other.


... but I will part with video before audio, if that answers your question,
which you dont seem to WANT answered:
Actually, you just made my point. Those who post here tend to favor the audio side.

rw

westcott
08-08-2007, 07:12 AM
I think audio is equally as important as video. But, from most of the entertainment centers\home theaters I have seen, audio definately takes a back seat to video in most cases. Improper speaker placement, poor seating distance, htib speaker approach in large rooms, improper room orientation, no calibration or bass management, etc. all in the name of good looks.

I am afraid we are the lucky few that know what quality sound is and have an equal appreciation for its reproduction.

musicman1999
08-08-2007, 07:29 AM
Well said.

bill

Feanor
08-08-2007, 09:16 AM
Peruvianskies proposed a question in another thread:What do people want high end audio or video?I think its a great question.
In a movie watching experience what percentage do people think is video and what percentage audio?and why.

thanks
bill

Worthwhile music vs. worthwhile video??? It might be a difficult question for some, but for me there's a lot more worthwhile music, (and 98% of it is classical :prrr: ; it's my current project to ensure that I have a decent recording of everything on my Core Classical Compositions list (http://ca.geocities.com/w_d_bailey/CoreClassical.htm)). You can tell from my rare participation in the Favorite Films forum that I'm not big into cinema much less other video forms.

I find when I do happen to be engrossed in a good movie that the sound experience becomes subliminal. And so it's hard for me to decide how important sound quality really is. Sure, I definitely prefer 5.1 to stereo, however for pure HT, that is, movies, I would never spend the kind of cash I'm willing to to listen to music. Chances are I'd settle for Bose, (or a cheaper as-good alternative).

Mr Peabody
08-08-2007, 04:29 PM
Is stickler another way of saying "elitest jerk"?

PeruvianSkies
08-12-2007, 09:54 PM
check this out!

http://www.psbspeakers.com/audioTopics.php?fpId=62&page_num=3&start=16

pixelthis
08-14-2007, 10:45 PM
Is stickler another way of saying "elitest jerk"?
I hope not because I am a stickler, which is just another way of saying perfectionist.
Peruvian skier is obsessed with this "audio vs video " question, and its a totally rediculous
thing, even those who love audio, when faced with going deaf or blind will choose
deaf, since a human who is deaf is still very functional.
Which one do I LIKE more? Well, watching a movie video is key, listening to a C.D
audio is king, which Do I like better?
Why do I have to like one over the other?
I like music but really like music videos, so do I favor video over audio? Who knows?
And who cares? I like enjoyable experiences, no matter what they are composed of,
go over to see your lady friend, does it matter what kind of car you drive?

Mr Peabody
08-15-2007, 06:08 PM
I hope not because I am a stickler, which is just another way of saying perfectionist.
Peruvian skier is obsessed with this "audio vs video " question, and its a totally rediculous
thing, even those who love audio, when faced with going deaf or blind will choose
deaf, since a human who is deaf is still very functional.

> Are you saying blind folks aren't functional? Watch out now. I personally would rather be blind. I couldn't imagine what it would be like without being able to listen to music.

Which one do I LIKE more? Well, watching a movie video is key, listening to a C.D
audio is king, which Do I like better?
Why do I have to like one over the other?

> Don't over analyze the question. It's not a trick question.

I like music but really like music videos, so do I favor video over audio? Who knows?
And who cares? I like enjoyable experiences, no matter what they are composed of,

Well pardon the analogy. Jerking off may be an enjoyable experience but would you rather do that or have a night of lustful passion with a 25 year old nimpho swim suit model?
go over to see your lady friend, does it matter what kind of car you drive?

> That probably depends on your lady friend. They would probably rather you drive them around in a BMW than a Hyundai missing a fender. And which would make them brag more? Well.... the answer to that question is if you were able to satisfy the nimpho :)

PeruvianSkies
08-16-2007, 12:20 AM
I hope not because I am a stickler, which is just another way of saying perfectionist.
Peruvian skier is obsessed with this "audio vs video " question, and its a totally rediculous
thing, even those who love audio, when faced with going deaf or blind will choose
deaf, since a human who is deaf is still very functional.
Which one do I LIKE more? Well, watching a movie video is key, listening to a C.D
audio is king, which Do I like better?
Why do I have to like one over the other?
I like music but really like music videos, so do I favor video over audio? Who knows?
And who cares? I like enjoyable experiences, no matter what they are composed of,
go over to see your lady friend, does it matter what kind of car you drive?

I am hardly obsessed with this question, but I do feel that it is an interesting one as it stirs debate and quite frankly the question is not posed in such a way that you need to choose one over the other. Both are equally important. However, my sense is that most people attribute a good home theater based on what they see (as in the size of the screen etc etc) and not the quality of the sound. That doesn't mean that sound is not critical, but typically people don't think about good and bad sound until they hear truly awful sound....then they notice it.

Mr Peabody
08-16-2007, 06:14 PM
I feel you are right, that the word "theater" in most minds is synonomous with a large screen. If you told a friend to come over and see your home theater set up, they would be disappointed to walk in and see a 27" TV, even if surrounded by a killer sound system.

PeruvianSkies
08-16-2007, 07:20 PM
I feel you are right, that the word "theater" in most minds is synonomous with a large screen. If you told a friend to come over and see your home theater set up, they would be disappointed to walk in and see a 27" TV, even if surrounded by a killer sound system.

FINALLY! I'm glad someone gets what I was trying to say all along! Whew.

westcott
08-17-2007, 04:51 AM
Both are equally important. However, my sense is that most people attribute a good home theater based on what they see (as in the size of the screen etc etc) and not the quality of the sound. That doesn't mean that sound is not critical, but typically people don't think about good and bad sound until they hear truly awful sound....then they notice it.

I guess we are on the same page then! But what else is new.:shocked:

PeruvianSkies
08-17-2007, 08:20 AM
I guess we are on the same page then! But what else is new.:shocked:

Not much I suppose...maybe it's time to throw out the MC vs. 2-channel question....lol

pixelthis
08-18-2007, 11:57 PM
FINALLY! I'm glad someone gets what I was trying to say all along! Whew.
And how often does THAT happen?:sleep: