Quote Originally Posted by nightflier
Revive this thread? I started it! Somehow you managed to crap all over it when your diaper fell off. Now let me hose down this mess to rid us of your offending presence.
You crapped all over your own thread liar. You have lied, twisted facts, invented other, been caught in your own lies, and have been proven to know less than your kid when it comes to audio. As so far the only thing you have hosed is your own sorry ass reputation.


The point is you stuck with it. Yes, lil't. it's an inferiority complex. Look it up. And now you've added that cavaliers avatar - as if there was something noble about you, LOL. I guess the green plume was just a little too effeminate for you? You've got insecurity and gender issues that it would take a psychologist a good tome to sort out, not to mention some pretty defensive ethnic issues. And I'm not even going to address the "tongue and cheek" comment.
Wow, you must have been the smartest stupid kid in your class. The Cavaliers are a drum and bugle corps stupid azz. And what you need to do is stop projecting your inadequencies on other folks. If you cannot debate based on the topic and facts, go back to your kiddy sandbox and play with the other boys.



Funny from someone who beats the typo horse to death when it suits his argument. Let me illustrate the point that your juxtapositions do nothing but contradict your own argument...
Wow, has so little to add to the discussion you have resorted to correct typos and judging the accuracy of what one said. All this from somebody that has been busted in lies(hence the name nightliar), and has shown how smartly he can be stupid.



I said that for the purpose of keeping your from getting your diaper in a bunch, I didn't do level matching. I'm just trying to keep you from crapping all over the place here. Of course I've tried it with level matching, but for the sake of this argument, let's say I did not do level matching and that for my purposes (the room is fairly evenly laid out, I have the acoustic panels, and the speakers are positioned as good as they can be), the level matching is not necessary. So don't call me a liar. Until you've actually been to my house (that is after you get your a** whoopin'), don't try and tell me what I have and have not set on the setup menu on my components. You're not in my house, so don't tell me I'm a liar about how it's set up.
Damn, I am talking to a retarded foo. Level matching has nothing to do with acoustical panels. The two serve two different things. Level matching is required to get proper soundstaging, and forming a even soundfield. Acoustical panels take care of flutter echo and room resonances at mid to high frequencies. Just because you have acoustical panels does not mean you omit speaker level matching. Where do you get your ass backwards information. I have bass traps, diffusive material, reflective material, and absoptive material in my listening room, and speaker level matching still had to be done on my speakers. The two are not interelated, but both are required for accurate playback.


I said I used the SPL meter and it was decent for my needs. Then when I had the opportunity to add the acoustic panels I had a professional come it and do some more tweaking. You know lil't, there are lots of other ways to get more precise level matching than just tweaking the channel volumes in the receiver. Anyhow, my level matching, when I did try it, was inside the player. And for Pete's sake, it's spelled illustrated, lil't - something else you'll probably have to look up - do you even own a dictionary? You know you can look it up on dictionary.com, too.
Sorry nightliar, there is only one way to get level matching between speakers. It does not matter if the player does it, or the reciever does it, there is only one way for it to be done, at that does not include the addition of acoustical panels. Amplitude and frequency are quite difference. Level matching deals with amplitude, and acoustical panels deal with frequency response. Duh!!!



No, I'm pretty sure it isn't. You're the one with the schizo personality issues, bub.
Nothing to do with audio nightliar.



It's still Onkyo - and that's the truth (no lies, here). And looking at it's blue-book value, it's not keeping up with other amps in its class. That's kind of like putting a 12-cylinder German-engineered engine in a Mitsubishi - that also didn't keep the blue book on those cars up either - now you know why that's not a popular thing to do. Even if someone wanted to send them back to Germany for "upgrades," they still would never be able to recoup the hit from that badge on the hood. You like your amps and don't mind the necessary upgrades? Good for you. It's still an Onkyo, and valued accordingly, even if the insides were solid gold and designed by Einstein himself. That's truth, lil't, not lies. Can't handle it? Well that's because there's a lot of reality you can't handle apparently.
The shell still says Onkyo, very few parts inside are Onkyo. You cannot use a blue book value on a amp that has been custom redesigned. What does this have to do with anything? I am not selling my amps, they were redesign so they sound better, and play louder and cleaner.



You don't know what I have, so this is an invalid statement from the start. And what's with the one-upsmanship again? You really should stop trying to compare yourself so much, it's really childish. Yes, lil't that's an inferiority complex example.
I don't care what you have, who you are, where you live, or what color your living room furniture is. I REALLY do not care of your opinion of me, or what you think of my character. A liar is in no position to judge anyone.



And as I said with the Onkyo, it's a mass-market brand with all it's associated consumer-level value-engineered compromises. $15K, well I guess you're not that smart as you want everyone to believe you are. I think you're the one who's the but of that joke, LOL LOL LOL... Disagree? Well let's see what your little switcher fetches on the used market, when you do finally decide to upgrade.
Onkyo has some mass market products, but they also have high end ones as well. My upgrade and resdesign was meant to address any shortcomings the amps had, and they were well addressed. You know absolutely nothing about my switcher, so any comments on it are at best ignorant as hell, and at worst stupid as hell.



Hey, I don't "cast critisize" my stuff in the backyard - is that what you do? Not too bright, lil't. Regarding the Outlaw, maybe it's because when they designed it, HDMI was still a very unsure technology; and given how much it still is in flux (more on that below), I don't exactly blame them. It's a bit outdated, and I'll be the first to lament the lack of HDMI, but I don't use any of that - I'm strictly component right now, so no adapters needed. And besides, what does that have to do with a discussion about sound (DVI is video-only, didn't you know that)? Completely unrelated - cheap shot that got you nowhere. Weak, lil't, even for you.
And just what DVD player on any other video or audio related product supports DVI? Not many to zilch! They could have at least support basic HDMI 1.1 and would have been compatible with all upconverting DVD players, HD DVD and Bluray. It was a cheap low budget solution that does not solve a single problem with HDMI, and you are not so bright for mentioning that as a excuse for its lack of HDMI support. Its a bit dated? Its totally outdated and unuseful. And yes I know that DVI is video only, which makes your little Outlaw even less useful going forward into the future. Having component hook ups mean that you cannot get upconverted DVD, and only 1080i from any HD on disc. So if anything is weak, its your pre-pro.



And as far as the Outlaw as a pre-pro, it has better configuration options than any pre/pro in its price-range and many above it (your pathetic Sony included, probably). And the sound isn't that bad at all, so don't even start on this comparison nonsense - we've already established how childish that is and how it makes your argument so much weaker (if there was an argument in this at all). You're so weak, lil't, I'm surprised you can lift your baby hands onto a computer keyboard.
Your pre-pro does not support HDMI, mine does Your Outlaw does not upconvert video signals to 1080p, mine does. My Sony does all the things your Outlaw does and more. So since you started down the comparison road, then if that arguement is weak, you start it, its your weakness.

You know for someone who claims he's got a solid argument about everything he says, I haven't seen any evidence of that yet. Funny... and sad, really.
For a person asking for credibility, you lie too much.



More FUD. Lil't , you asked me about PCM. My DVD player is currently set to pass PCM straight out. That's what I said in the first place - I never said it was trying to decode DSD in its native form. I am telling you what it's set for, and I'm a liar? Again, you're not in my home, so don't tell me that what I have selected on my menu screen is not selected.
You are lying once again and here is proof.

Terry says "If you use bass management, delay, or level settings, the signal must be converted to PCM. There are no post processing tools in DSD except on the ultra high end SACD only players."

Nightliars response. "Well, then my Sony player (not too expensive) must be pretty high end." That is in post #66.

You are isinuating that your player has post processing tools for DSD, when in fact it does not. You are a liar plain and simple. Then you turn around and state this

My player has the option of converting to PCM or not. But I prefer not to do any any bass management in the player. That is out of post #69.


Never said that it was decoding DSD in its native form, so get off of it already. I said that I am passing PCM out, that the pre/pro is not doing any processing (yes the Outlaw has a setting for that, look it up), and that the ICBM then does the analog bass management before the remaining 5.0 channels are passed to the amp.
See above, because you did say your player has that option when in fact no DVD player has that option. You are tripping over your own lies nightliar.

Now I'm not saying I'm an expert at this or that I understand everything that's going on. What I expect is that any digital processing is only done in the player in this setup. If I am missing something, or if I don't understand this correctly, then let me know. I never claimed to be an expert at this - hence the reason I started a thread on sound output and how it relates to SACD settings.
Now you saying you are not an expert, yet for ten pages you are arguing as if you know what you are talking about, and asking me to say I am wrong when in fact you are. What an about face.

Now before I open that door, do yo think you can offer some constructive input without insults? Because if you're going to litter your post with insults and attempts at showing off how much smarter you are, then don't bother. I don't have the patience, and I doubt anyone else still reading this does either.
Offer constructive advice to someone who believes they know all about nothing. HELL NO! You bask in your own stupid ignorance for all I care.



So enlighten us, lil't. How exactly am I a liar? I am simply explaining how I have it set up for the purpose of this example. Stop the name-calling and explain to me how exactly this makes me a liar. Can you actually be mature or will you forever remain an child?
Easy. You said your player has the option of passing both DSD and PCM. No player has that option in existance. You lied.

You said Classe is thinking about releasing a player(and didn't specify which) and you read this in stereophile. Another lie because it was never stated in stereophile.

You made this outrageous statement that the single most important question that consumers are asking about the new format is what HDMI version the players are, which is a lie because the single most asked question is "does it play x movie?". Best buy did the survey, and it was reported in NDP.


How deep do you wana dig that hole, lil't? Again, you're making assumptions about my setup and my procedures w/o knowing enough about them. As I am saying for the umptieth time, you haven't been to my house, so don't go around calling me a liar. You really come off as a jerk when you do that, not just to me, but to everyone else who suffers through your ramblings. The professional installer is a friend of mine, so it didn't cost me anything except the cost of the panels and corner pieces, which, by the way, I got at cost.
You have lied so much, I do not even believe this.



Let's put the bragging aside and think about this for a minute. Now you also have a career as an installer, too? I thought you worked at mixing sound for a BR-only company? Well which is it? I guess with your other career as a clair-voyant, that's pretty much a trifecta no one can argue against. With keeping current on all your certifications, I'm amazed you find the time to bore us with your long-winded nonsense on this forum on top it all off. You are such a braggart, it's obvious you're trying to compensate for something. What is this nagging insecurity, lil't? I mean really...
Anyone who has been around this website for any amount of time has known that I mix full time, and have done installation as a side job for over 16 years.

You do not like what I post because you cannot lie and not be called on that lie. You are a pathological liar, and you need some help with that.

Green is not your best color is it?


You know, you better stop bringing my family into this... What with your other peripheral topics ranging from your sexuality to your ethnic background, I can't say I'm surprised. Anything to deflect meaningful commentary, right? Well at least you're admitting that you are arrogant - accepting the problem is a first step, I suppose. And just for the record, you're the one who started with the name calling, both here and elsewhere. Stop it already.
I have stated this over and over. I do not care about you, your family, your dog reggie, your aunts, uncles, or your hamster. I care about the words you post. I do not care if you throw your hamster into the microwave and eat it.


Really, I find that hard to believe. Care to enlighten us on that little gem of a claim? Got some links for us? Some insider info? How about some stats? LOL.
Funny, we do not need any of that to prove how ignorant you are when it comes to audio.



I don't think you use your ears at all. You certainly don't seem to hear the stampede of people wanting you to stop being such a blow-hard.
Your imagination is too active, I only see one liar begging me to stop uncovering his lies.



When someone says it's not the whole picture, it's not the same as dismissing them outright. Making mountains out of mole-hills again. Amazing how you twisted that one around. No, I'd say your word so far has been crap - amazing how it got from your diaper into your mouth. How does that taste? And regarding not remembering something I wrote previously, that happened once, just once lil't, and I fessed up to it. Again, making more mountains out of mole-hills. So infantile, lil't, really.
More backpeddling huh? The rest of this in nothing more than just blah blah blah to me.



Yes in your shallow, narrow little world. You don't know music as well as you claim you do - for someone who mixes sound tracks for a living (well we presume that's still your career), you really aught to broaden your musical horizons. I listed lots of examples, so maybe you should start your education there...
Since you have proven to be such a liar, just listing them is not enough. I want to see frequency versus amplitude plot that prove what you are saying. You word in bantha fodder.



How is that a lie? Never mind... Actually what I listen to is relevant here, because I'm the one who started this thread, using my own musical taste as example. That you don't care about what this thread is about, is painfully obvious, so the only question left is what the hell are you still doing here? Go! Leave! With your attitude, you're not wanted. Can't you take a hint?
Your own musical taste is no basis for an opinion. Your "taste" in music represents such a small sampling of ALL the acoustical music recorded, that it is impossible to use it to represent acoustical music as a whole.

Do you really think I am going to leave just because you say so? LOLOLOLOLOL, no way, I am having the time of my life uncovering your rediculous lies.


Even if there was only one symphony that featured the organ, it would be enough to make the argument. Actually there are far more than that and I don't need to provide links because I provided dozens of actual examples of composers and artists, not just classical artists by the way, who do make music that goes well below 40Hz. And, as I explained above, I brought up the example specifically because it is my musical preference. After all, it's my thread remember? If you don't want to talk about the topic, then don't squat here, you might crap through your diaper again, and frankly I've had enough of your crap. Stop trying to hijack this thread and make it your own - either contribute to the topic or get the hell out.
We are talking about acoustical music only here. That is what has been previously stated and debated. One symphony DOES NOT make you point at all. I am sorry, because you have not told the truth, you list does not mean $hit. I want links, and amplitude versus frequency charts, because that is the only way to get to the truth. If you cannot or do not want to provide this, then it just becomes another one of your lies.



Why don't you just check out the artists I listed? You should listen to them, you might learn something.
I want to see amplitude versus frequency charts. You are no teacher to anyone, so you have no right to pass out homework. It is up to you to prove what you say, and the only way to do so is to provide the charts so EVERYONE reading this can see.



I never disputed that much of the recorded classical music out there is above 40Hz. I only said that there is music that does go below, especially in my collection because I tend to collect that. Stop trying to make something out of this. In this thread, it's a non-issue. As usual, you have no real argument so you try to invent one. Why did you even bother pointing out in the first place that much classical music doesn't go down below 40Hz? It's like you just wanted to dismiss my whole thread outright. And why are you still harping on this point? Is it really that hard to deal with a differing view-point? You really are transparent, you know. Either contribute to the topic at hand or leave, your choice is pretty simple.
I do not have a problem with a different point of view as long as it is factual. You point of view is not factual at all. Now you are backpeddling once again away from previous statements.

Here is why I pointed out that

Nightliar "Anyhow, your ignorant statement: there is not much audio below 40hz in most classical and jazz music is just that, ignorant, and nothing more." post #69

Also from post #69

Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
LFE is completely unnecessary in music.

Nightliar response "Tell that to everyone else here. It's an ignorant statement, and you know it."

Did you forget you said this? That is why I stated what I stated. Selective memory, how convient.

Let's add in the classe releasing a player. First you said this.

" I also think that companies like Classe are already ramping up to release a HD player, but they will do like most other companies and wait out this holiday season"

Then it comes to this

"Classe is thinking about releasing a high-def player sometime early next year (I read that in Stereophile)."

Then this

'I'm pretty sure I read that in Stereophile, or one of my other print magazines. I don't remember exactly were, but I was pretty sure it was in one of the reports from one of the recent shows. I'll see if I can dig it up."

To this

"I asked one of my friends to inquire what if anything they had in the works. He is a long time Classe fanatic, owns several components, and is also waiting to see if Classe will release something."

Then it turns to this

"Now regarding that quote about Classe, it did not come from my friend, it came straight from Classe's sales department."

This is just a evolving lie that just keeps getting more twisted by the response.




You have proven nothing. I've pointed out numerous ways that makes your comparison of the market share growth of DVDs in 1997 with the market share growth of HD disks today, pretty weak. The Internet has changed sales, advertising, and distribution methods so much that the two can't be compared. Remember it was you who said that HD disks have grown faster than DVD disks. And it was you who said that this is an indication of the superiority of the HD format. Ludicrous. The impact that the internet has had makes this claim seriously flawed. And nobody needs to see any stats to understand that. You simply cannot say that the Internet had the same impact as it did in 1997. LOL. If you're going to draw a line in the sand, at least try to be standing on some.
Both Wooch and I have put you down like a lame dog on this one, so there is not point in going over it again.



I can't speak for Peru (although he certainly does speak for himself well enough), but you have yet to show anyone here that I'm a liar. I'm sorry, is it because I said that what my SACD player's menu is set for, isn't what you believe it's set for? Is it because I said that you are driving your setup with an Onkyo receiver? Or is it because you claimed that I know less about the music that I own than you do? Or that you are the belligerent one on my thread? Or that you claimed that you were never wrong? Or that you are arrogant? Or that you are compensating for something? How many other truths do I have to bring up?
Blah blah blah blah yawn!

Sounds to me like you are much more of a liar than I am. Fact is, you have yet to point out a single time that I lied (and that one time that I forgot having written something and then fessing up to it isn't a lie, by the way). Well, Mr. I'll-prove-everything? Do you have a single example of when I lied? Didn't think so. Now stop with that rant.
Read above, you lies are well documented.

So because they are not a major player in some sectors, they are insignificant? What kind of logic is that? Not only are they major players in several key industries, their reach into other industries makes them very significant across the board. I guess their expansion into banking, medical records, art, etc. are just insignificant, right? Maybe they shouldn't be part of the Dow Jones, either? You're are so ignorant. Just because Wells Fargo isn't the largest bank in the finance industry doesn't make them insignificant. And in case you didn't know, being a second-tier player isn't always a position of weakness either, but I know this is getting way over your head. Let me see if I can bring it down to your level and see if we can get your little mind to understand the concept. Just because a guard on a basketball team isn't big enough to beat the whole opposing team, doesn't mean he's not significant. Still too hard? How about this one: just because a fart in your diaper isn't the whole poop, it doesn't mean a big poop isn't on the way. Clear enough for you? I can't explain it any better. If you are too dumb to follow, maybe you should go learn a thing or two about analogies.
Microsoft has been a complete failure in trying to get into the television and movie business with their windows platform. Their shop while you watch was a disaster, interactive set top boxes featuring Micosoft software never got out of the gate. Their movie D/L business is at best paltry. They may be powerful in other areas, but they have been a complete failure in trying to get into the film and television business. Software is their games, and the only hardware they build is to support the software(games).

Bottom line is that Microsoft, through it's patents, cross-licensing, encryption, copyrights, financial positions and dominance in several key industries (i.e. computers), has access to just about every industry and this makes it a significant player. And yes, they are a significant player in the BR/HDDVD war too. You're the only slow-poke who wants to pretend they aren't. Even Sony considers them a threat, but the mighty lil't thinks otherwise. Sheeeez, I mean really, what kind of shovel are you using to dig that hole you're in?
So far their influence in the HD DVD/bluray war is not helping the cause much. There support of HD DVD is not helping the format sell disc, or players. So in this area, their influence is very questionable. Besides, Apple is eating their lunch in the mobile phone market, and Google is threatening their PC software package with a online package of their own. Google is beating their search engine, and Vista is an absolute disaster when compared to their other windows releases. Overplayed argument when carefully scrutinized.



You are stumbling over yourself so much I can't even understand what you're saying. But let me see if I can sort this nonsense out. You're saying they are not helping HDDVD? Really, that's certainly news to me. They have to give away players? Haven't seen any for free yet, but maybe you have... And even if they aren't making a profit there, they more than make up for it with software sales and royalties. Trust me, they aren't loosing their shirts on this one. They certainly are doing a whole lot better that Sony on the PS3 gaming front. I'm sure Groundbeef can fill in the holes in my understanding of this as it isn't what I know a lot about, but it certainly obvious you know far less.
Microsoft does no sell HD DVD players, or movies on disc. They do get royalties from the use of VC-1. They want to keep HD DVD alive for that reason, as they get nothing else out of HD DVD but a way to slow Sony down. In the end, they are not going to win this either.

You do not know $hit about audio, and know less than $hit about the gaming industry. So the best thing you can do for the benefit of all of us, is to insert your big fat foot in your mouth before you spread another lie, or another piece of FUD.



If there is one thing about Microsoft that most everyone can agree on is that they don't give up. They aren't scared of BD+, they just haven't found a way to beat it. Microsoft was never about winning early, but they always seem to win in the end. It's the nature of large companies, they can take a few punches and keep going. That's what makes them such a threat, lil't. But from down there, I doubt you can see the whole picture - after all you're so small.
You do not know what you are talking about, and that is usually the case. Microsoft is scared as hell of BD+, because if BD+ get's traction amoung the studios, their downloading business is history and they know it.



Ever heard of monopolyism? Microsoft doesn't want to be seen as a monopoly and does what it can to keep the government off it's back. Buying Google would not be in its interest - but they certainly have enough financial leverage to buy them out tomorrow, if they wanted to, that we all know (well everyone except you, apparently). Besides, Microsoft doesn't need to own Google right now. They are better off with Google in play because Google is also a threat to some of Microsoft's other competitors. And no, you dim-wit, Google isn't kicking the crap out of them. What kind of stupid statement is that? Care to back that up with a few links? Yeah, I didn't think so.
If you do not provide links to support your arguments, then you have no right to ask for them. Google search engine is kicking the $hit out of Microsofts attempt in that area.



Again showing off your limited understanding of this industry. Microsoft isn't just about software (although that's all you seem to want to grasp about them). If Microsoft just continues to push the HDDVD button enough just to keep people from buying enough BR, they will have just the effect they need to have. Microsoft is competing with Sony in the home electronics sector and anything that can hurt Sony (even if it is to boost HDDVD) is a win for them. No need for another long tirade about codecs to see that (although the VC-1 codec, certainly doesn't hurt them).
Microsoft is all about software, every who know anything about anything knows this. What is Vista? Software. What is Microsoft Office? Software. What does their gaming division do? Software. Why does microsoft build the XBOX? To support their gaming divisions software. If they were not in the gaming business, they would not make any hardware. Outside of the gaming business, all they make is software.

If Microsoft is so influential, then why couldn't their influence get Warner to go HD DVD exclusive when Warner was offered $225 million for their support by the HD DVD PG?



Never said otherwise, but thanks for furthering my point.



I'll repeat what I said before since you don't seem to read:

"So let me get this straight: for me to have an opinion or even the right to say anything about either format, I first have to buy into one or the other? What kind of doublespeak logic is that?"

No, lil't. For me to have an opinion, I do not need to own either format. I read. I study, I listen. I also happen to have several friends who own one or the other, so I do get to experience them. And just so you know I almost bought that Sharp BR player last week, but decided against it since I would want to own an Aquos TV to go with it, and I'm not entirely settled on that TV brand.
How do you listen when you do not have a player? This is more bull and nonsense.



Owning and watching are two different things. Since you're now such a flag-waiver for BR, I'm going to presume you watch those more. Nice try lil't. We both know you bought the HDDVD titles when you were in that camp. Lately you've been in the BR camp. I bet the HDDVD titles are much older, too.
So now you are the foremost expert on my viewing habits. You are now the foremost expert on my buying habit, and when I purchased my disc. Now you are the foremost expert on the age of my HD DVD collection. Shreik the Third is not very old is it? Transformers is not very old is it? Bourne Ulitmatum hasn't been released yet, but I have it on pre-order. So much for you expert knowledge. Now wasn't it you who said you have never been in my house, so you do not know about my stuff? Take to heart what you expouse yourself.

And yes, we have determined that you are shill. You work for a BR-only company, so obviously you'll make out if the format wins out. Just because your company could go back to doing sound for standard DVD, or heaven forbid, even HDDVD, doesn't mean that is going to happen. No, if BR wins, you win. That makes you a shill and hardly someone who is impartial, regardless of how many HDDVDs you own.
I work for a movie studio that support BR exclusively stupid. If BR does not win, we go on making movies stupid. We do not make movies exclusively for disc release, it is for theatrical release stupid. They still do release DVD's stupid. I get paid to mix movies for theatrical release stupid. If it happens that the movies are released on BR, great, but if there was no BR, we would still be making movies for theatrical, and DVD release stupid. My future, nor my paycheck is based on ANY FORMAT stupid. I have said this time and time again. I am hoping if I ended each sentence with the word stupid, you would know I am talking directly to you again.



No, plenty of others have too, including Groundbeef. But somehow, when I do it I'm the anti-Christ? Give me a break. Oh, yes, HD has only two letters, HDDVD/HD DVD/HD-DVD is 5 letters. Or have you forgotten how to count too?
Ground beef does not call Bluray HD, he calls it bluray. You are the only idiot that is calling bluray HD. You the anti-christ. Nope, you are not that smart.



LOL, yeah he wiped the floor with your *ss. I guess you barked up the wrong tree on that one. And if he handed your *ss to you, and I'm so much less intelligent, won't it be a kick in the pants when you walk out of this thread with your tail between your legs?
blah blah blah blah blah blah.



Now here's a perfect example of how you can't handle reality, lil't. Read this carefully: I told you exactly what was in the email from Classe. It's you who needed so much more clarification about who said what (about 5 posts' worth). The fact is, it came straight from Classe's marketing rep, and you didn't believe it until it was right in front of you. Now you can't accept that you got slapped in the face on this one. You pathetic little child, take your dunce hat and go sit in the corner, already.
You posted a bunch of words that support exactly what you have been posting here, claim its from classe, and expect people to believe you? You lie too much for that. I want to see the letter scanned, with Classe company logo on the letter, and with it signed by a classe employee. Otherwise it is just another of the many lies you have already told. If these are a bunch of words spoken, I want to hear it from Classe, not from a pathological liar like yourself.



Mostly consumer-level manufacturers. By the way, it's spelled Funai, and Philips is capitalized. You know very well that I am in the market for something a little more upscale, so that's who I contacted.
Sorry, once again. The manufacturers you listed are not trendsetters. The Japanese companies are. They are the ones creating new formats, not the Europeans. If you are so into upscale, then why do you have to wait for everything because of your kid? Sounds like wine taste on a beer budget to me.



Funny, last time I checked Philips was based in Eindhoven, Netherlands. By the way you left out quite a few Asian-based companies, above, how convenient. Anyhow, just because the higher-end companies are smaller, doesn't make them insignificant. As a matter of fact, given that they are more careful makes their word that much more important since they aren't going to flip-flop once they make a choice. They are waiting this out because there is no clear winner - my whole point from the beginning. You're making such a weak argument, here, and you know it. Just drop it, before you hurt yourself.
Philips works in concert with Sony. They did on the CD, they did on their version of the DVD, and they have also done it with Bluray. I did not feel a need to list all 170 companies that are part of the BDA. The higher end companies are followers, not leaders and not trendsetters. Has any of the companies you stated you contacted ever created or developed a format? No, they are usually late to the game.



As bright as minus 1000W bulb? Yeah, that's a real put-down lil't. At the very least come up with something more creative. You remind me of Jeff Albertson, the Comic Book Guy on the Simpsons. Kinda fits the whole musketeers and the green plume thing. Do you attend midieval fairs in full garb, too? LOL.
Blah blah blah blah blah, when you cannot debate the subject matter, you change the subject. A cowards game.

So let's dissect what you're trying to wiggle out of. So you "tweak and remix for BR release" right? So what percentage of your job is tweaking and remixing? Whatever that is, that's the amount of a shill you are. Just because you could make a living if BR went the way of SACD (and that's still a very real possibility), it doesn't mean that's the case now. As it stands, you're making money off BR disks, so that means you have a financial stake in the format winning out over HDDVD. Hence, you are a flag-waver for the BR camp and your opinion is far from unbiased. As far as you owning a bunch of HDDVDs and a player, well that's because that's were you started and we've already covered that. You are now definitely a shill for the BR camp, so just admit it already. You're not going to weasel out this one.
This logic would be stupid for an intelligent person. For you, par for the course. You do not know anything about the film industry, so I guess I can expect more ignorant statements like this.

You know I have to wonder, have you actually made any argument stick? I haven't seen one yet that has. Are you sure you even want to keep up your charade? You might just want to quit, lil't. After all, you've got a lot of work to do to get out of that hole...
Maybe you should stand in front of a mirror and say this to yourself. It would be the smartest thing you have done since you started this thread.

Hey, I can't make the studios go out and do surveys. And if these are not in their interest (as I pointed out), I doubt any will be forthcoming. The fact is that all the HDMI versions are confusing. It's a mess, and worst of all is that it's a mess by design. They decided to use computer notation for every new version (.1, .2, etc.) which means that it will continue to change. As a matter of fact HDMI 1.4 is just around the corner, isn't it? How are manufacturers supposed to keep up? And what are consumers supposed to settle on? It's a mess, and you know it.
There is no HDMI 1.4 stupid! How does a person who knowns nothing about HDMI and its versions make a judgement on it? Oh I know, their confusion is everyone confusion. Their stupidity and ignorance is everyones stupidity and ignorance. Now I get it, If you don't know anything about it, everyone must be as dumb as you. Bingo! (sarcasm off)



BS. Since I started this thread I've done quite a bit of reading on the subject, and yes, I do now know what they support (no thanks to you). I also happen to know that this distant future that you're referring to is already here with manufacturers now using 1.3 as the standard in their marketing campaigns (just read Sharp, Oppo and Denon's press releases). Only problem is there's a new number just around the corner and so far no one has promised any products that are 1.4 compliant. This only means that come April 2008, consumers will not want 1.3 anymore, even if that's all they need. It's a confusing mess. I can't tell you if it's hurting sales of all HDMI products, but it can't possibly be helping them.
Since I listed what HDMI supports what in this thread, and you say you didn't learn anything from it, perhaps you are just too stupid to comprehend plain english. Not my fault, that yours.

As far as HDMI 1.4 there is no April 2008 roll out of that version. Can you provide a link that says something different. I googled it, nothing. I went to HDMI website, no mention of it. There is nothing but rumors about it. Another one of you lies, probably, as evidence points in that direction.



Passing 8 channels of 24/192khz audio isn't everything, lil't. You're flinging FUD again. HDMI 1.3 and above support higher bandwidth, higher video resolutions, have a higher color depth, are capable of updated CEC communications (Sharp uses this between their Aquos player and TVs), and this was important for me: SACD support only came in HDMI 1.2a (DVD-A in 1.1).
Sorry nightstupid, but 24/192khz is the best you are going to get. This exceeds the resolution of vinyl, and is all anyone is every going to need. 1.3 does not support any audio resolution higher than that. HDMI it may support more video bandwidth in terms of transfer rate, but that is not needed to transmit 1080p from a player to a television. It does not support any higher resolution than 1080p. It does support deep color, but we will not see that on any current format because of bandwidth and disc space issues. It does support xvYCC, but that is not supported on any current video format. CEC has been in the HDMI specification since version 1.0, but has only begun to be used in CE products with HDMI version 1.3. So much for you studying!



And getting back to your suggestion that sending DTS and DD bitstreams to the receiver for decoding being inconsequential, I'm not so sure it's completely useless. After all, isn't that one of the advantages for sending SACD audio digitally to the pre/pro?
You do not know anything about this, so how do you know if it is useless or not? I am talking about Dts master audio lossless, and Dolby trueHD, these are both lossless, not lossy like Dts and DD. If the player does the decoding, both are transcoded to PCM with no losses. All commentary dialog, IME, and any mixed multiplexed audio is transferred along with the PCM stream. If the player sends out the undecoded bitstream to a receiver for decoding, then all commentary, IME, and any multiplexed audio is not transmitted along with the bitstream. You lose your interactive features. Since there is no improvement in the audio resolution, but a loss of extra value features, there is no benefit in having the receiver do the decoding. SACD is trancoded within the player to PCM,and transferred to the player via HDMI to a receiver that can do bass management, level matching, and delay which are all PCM based. No additional A/D or D/A is needed.


This allows one to adjust audio settings (channel balance, distance, cross-over, etc.) digitally, so I'm only guessing here, but then the same logic could apply to the ability to do this for DTS and DD, right? Certainly we can agree that not every single players out there has all the necessary settings built-in to their own decoders, especially not the lowest-priced players. Maybe none of the manufacturers are making use of this feature yet, and maybe there are some trade-offs, but then why add the feature? Certainly it took some extensive engineering to add that in, so I doubt it was done for no reason. But I'm just guessing about this, so I'm sure you'll point that out soon enough, with a whole barrage of unnecessary insults to boot. Go ahead, it's not like everyone reading this isn't expecting it - so let's have it...
You sure do try and pass yourself off as smarter than you are huh? Whether the player, or the receiver does the decoding, channel balance, delay, and crossover are still active. These tools are PCM based, and as long as the signal is transmitted via HDMI, the signal remains digital throughout the process. All player I know of have all the necessary bass management tools for proper reproduction. We are talking HD DVD and Bluray, not DVD. Since both HD format recommend decoding within the player, delay, crossever, and level is a part of every player except the PS3. That is not a problem for the PS3 as the signal can be sent via HDMI to a receiver that can perform these functions on its behalf. The feature is being used by Pioneer, and Samsung currently, with other players coming to market with this feature as well. It is nothing more than a marketing tool as there is no added resolution with the receiver doing the decoding.



I wonder if your friend falls under those employees who know so little about the products they sell?
Do you mean is he like you? Nope, he know exactly what he is talking about.

Are you making this blanket statement about every BB and CC employee? If so, I think there will be a long line of people waiting to kick your pompous *ss. Now I'm not going to make any such blanket statements, but the sales rep I did speak to knew a whole lot about the formats, and even explained to me the difference between 1.3a and 1.3b. I guess out where you live the sales reps come a little dumber, is that what you're saying? If that's true, do you measure yourself up to them too? Is that why you think you're so smart? You know, for a little feather-waving green-caped snot-nosed little mousqueteer-wanabe in diapers, you sure come off as one unpleasant little fella. If that's your gauge, than that certainly would go a long way to explaining your incessant whining on this forum.
Blah blah blah blah blah, somebody wake me when the bull$hit is over. What were you saying about insult?

More stupid blather not worthy of a response.




I have made nothing up. Everything I have stated has been true. You just can't deal with it. And as far as being sick of crap, hey, you're the one who keeps flinging it about. Keep your diaper on already.
To a pathological liar, yep, everything you said is true. Liars usually believe their own lies.



You have yet to point out a single lie. Every time I back up my statements you can't handle it. You deflect, you add FUD, and you dismiss anything you don't agree with. To top it off you litter every one of your posts with incessant insults that only weaken your case and your reputation here. You have wasted so much time with belligerent and insulting statements that you've shot your own credibility right in the foot. And the best part is, you don't even see it. That is why I feel sorry for you. You really are pathetic. I think you're the one who should quit.
Now hear is the pot calling the kettle black. You have called more names in one post, than I have done in this whole thread. Stop the freakin whining, if you dish it out, you should be able to take it. If you cannot take it, do not dish it out.

You have not posted a single link, chart, article, or even a old brownie to support your points. If you say you are backing up your statements, you are just telling another lie. Where is the amplitude versus frequency to support your music signals under 40hz comment? Where is the link that supports your Microsoft comments? We are still waiting on all of this. You have insisted that you do not need to supply any proof to your statements, not you are saying you have. Either you are confused as hell, or you are hella lying.

And just so you know, I'm not that young, I've been around the internet probably longer than you have. I may not have been an audio enthusiast as long as many people here, but I know my way around a message board. So stop trying to turn this around by making me out to be younger than I am. You're the one who's shown his true maturity, or lack thereof, here. In the last three threads I've had the displeasure of having to read through and respond to your childish tantrums, it was always you who started with the petty insults and juvenile behavior. You're an offensive troll and if this forum was only better monitored your account would long have been suspended already.
Cry me a river. This is classic passive aggressive crap. You have called twice as many names, and now you are crying victim. The problem you have is that you have lied, and been busted. You think you know more than you do, and you have been uncovered as a dummy. You have made claim after obsurd claim, and never support any of it with verifiable facts and links. You claim that you know so much about music, but have not supported your supposed knowledge with any links or charts. When links and charts have been provided to you, you dismiss them and continue with you ignorance.

If the moderation was better here, they would ban you for being too stupid to participate in an intelligent arguement.

And as far as "reviving" this thread. It was mine to begin with. You just came here to fling some crap around. For your information, I actually have a life and have spent the holidays with friends and relatives. I guess with the kind of attitude you've demonstrated, you have a lot more free time on your hands. Well take up another hobby, 'cause this one only adds to everyone's dislike of you.
Well goody goody for you (rolls eyes). Maybe you should continue reading and studying instead of giving out advice. Maybe you should learn to tell the truth, instead of lying to hide your ignorance. Maybe you should stop insulting and calling names if you do not like it coming back to you. And maybe you should look in the mirror and ask yourself did you not have every insult, or name called coming to you.