audio versus video

[musicman1999]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[kexodusc]

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]

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]

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

[kelsci]

Good question. Most of the time I seem to lean to the audio. Sometimes, it is a seesaw.

[Mr Peabody]

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]

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

[thekid]

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.

[Wireworm5]

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]

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]

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

[PeruvianSkies]

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

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]

Again, you can't see the forest through the trees.

No, but he is ("getting the right timber in the voices" ) thinking about lumber.

rw

[GMichael]

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.

[PeruvianSkies]

No, but he is ("getting the right timber in the voices" ) thinking about lumber.

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]

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]

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