• 11-20-2005, 08:39 AM
    robert393
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Jim Clark
    OK, you made one excellent point in all of this -Dvhs. It's not something I give a lot of thought to, for a number of reasons. To call it a languishing format would be an understatement. To spend 30 to 40 bucks on a title in a format that nobody thinks is going to survive didn't make any sense to me, clearly you thought otherwise. Maybe that will turn out to be a good investment for you. So, hat's off to you. It took a while but you actually made a good point and clearly win that one.


    jc

    I agree with the "languishing" technology part. The D-VHS came as a free gift with the purchase of the JVC SX21U LCoS projector, or believe me, I would never have paid $1000.00 for the technology. It also came with 4 free tapes (of my choice). I see High Definition DVD (or HD-VOD?) eiking out the D-VHS market. Like laserdisk, I think technology will simply leapfrog D-VHS. But, since I have the hardware, I have no problem paying $30 for 1080i titles. The PQ is so good it is scary!

    If we are "tipping-hats" here, I owe you one for bringing to my attention the flaw in my calculations regarding this study. I misunderstood the findings, and it has become clear that you "win" that one!

    This whole thing between NA & I got started way back, and for my part I'm done with it. He is convinced 480p is superior to 1080i, and I'm through trying to convince him other wise. His statements are here
    Post # 10- "higher resolution projector...They just didn't look any better."
    # 12- "everything I've read says that 480p is better than anything i...or interlaced."
    #14- "Well I think the big thing is that even though 1080i has more scan lines, it still suffers from interlacing which is why 480p is preferred over 1080i."
    #17- "I preferred 480p because 1080i still suffers from interlacing."
    #48- "We want to see this 'major difference' between 480p and 1080i you keep talking about."
    #65- "1080i was ZERO improvement in my (and most everyone else's) eyes."
    I could continue, but I think you get the picture........

    I guess I'm just a "hard-core" enthusiast, (and I'm in the industry) and I just got really frustrated. I let it get personal, when maybe I should just diregard. The MAIN reason I didn't just diregard is I feel an obligation to this forum and it's members to stop the misinformation. I still feel it was the right thing to do, but surely I cound have gone about it in a different (less abrasive?) manner.

    To add insult to injury, I felt slighted after I made SEVERAL compliments regarding NA's setup, only to get "smashed" by him regarding mine. He has never said ONE good thing about my setup, except to tell me how "shotty" my gear is, and it seemed you were taking the same attitude. Again, I let it get personal.

    I am a long-time member here, and have seen hundreds of members come and go. This site has weathered many "storms". I'm not going anywhere. I do however wish to "bury the hatchet" and move forward here and share in the exchange of knowledge available here!

    Robert
  • 11-20-2005, 08:57 AM
    GMichael
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by robert393
    I agree with the "languishing" technology part. The D-VHS came as a free gift with the purchase of the JVC SX21U LCoS projector, or believe me, I would never have paid $1000.00 for the technology. It also came with 4 free tapes (of my choice). I see High Definition DVD (or HD-VOD?) eiking out the D-VHS market. Like laserdisk, I think technology will simply leapfrog D-VHS. But, since I have the hardware, I have no problem paying $30 for 1080i titles. The PQ is so good it is scary!

    If we are "tipping-hats" here, I owe you one for bringing to my attention the flaw in my calculations regarding this study. I misunderstood the findings, and it has become clear that you "win" that one!

    This whole thing between NA & I got started way back, and for my part I'm done with it. He is convinced 480p is superior to 1080i, and I'm through trying to convince him other wise. His statements are here
    Post # 10- "higher resolution projector...They just didn't look any better."
    # 12- "everything I've read says that 480p is better than anything i...or interlaced."
    #14- "Well I think the big thing is that even though 1080i has more scan lines, it still suffers from interlacing which is why 480p is preferred over 1080i."
    #17- "I preferred 480p because 1080i still suffers from interlacing."
    #48- "We want to see this 'major difference' between 480p and 1080i you keep talking about."
    #65- "1080i was ZERO improvement in my (and most everyone else's) eyes."
    I could continue, but I think you get the picture........

    I guess I'm just a "hard-core" enthusiast, (and I'm in the industry) and I just got really frustrated. I let it get personal, when maybe I should just diregard. The MAIN reason I didn't just diregard is I feel an obligation to this forum and it's members to stop the misinformation. I still feel it was the right thing to do, but surely I cound have gone about it in a different (less abrasive?) manner.

    To add insult to injury, I felt slighted after I made SEVERAL compliments regarding NA's setup, only to get "smashed" by him regarding mine. He has never said ONE good thing about my setup, except to tell me how "shotty" my gear is, and it seemed you were taking the same attitude. Again, I let it get personal.

    I am a long-time member here, and have seen hundreds of members come and go. This site has weathered many "storms". I'm not going anywhere. I do however wish to "bury the hatchet" and move forward here and share in the exchange of knowledge available here!

    Robert

    I think that what Nab was trying to say was that for "his use" 480 was best because he is only planning to use it for DVD's. He left out the "for his use" part but I knew what he was saying.

    Let's all chalk it up as a misunderstanding and try to move on from here.
  • 11-20-2005, 09:10 AM
    robert393
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GMichael
    Works for me.

    The fire place is a nice touch. I still haven't decided on which room I want mine in. Do you have any sound issues with yours?

    When I first viewed the room I thought "Perfect! Except for the damn Fireplace!", but to my amazement, it has turned into a REALLY NICE deal! Who would have thought it?

    Sound Issues. 95% of my listening is HT. I thought "OMG, I'm going to have to treat the wood-panel walls". But, thankfully I waited to see how the room actually sounded before changing it.
    For HT, their are no issues with the fireplace or panel walls. It actually sounds incredible. But, I think it is MUCH EASIER to get 5.1 or 6.1 to sound good with 1) proper equipment, 2) speaker placement.

    Critical music listening is an entirely different story. Very mixed reviews on my part with this room.
    1) 2-channel - Good to very good. Biggest limitation is the speakers themselves. They are Bi-Polar HT speakers. They ARE NOT pure music speakers. Bypassing Stereo and utilizing Pure Direct provides the best 2-channel results. But room reflections are minimal. Over-all I'm content.

    2) 6-channel DVDA - Very good to excellent. Biggest factor is where you are seated. The large sectional in the center of the room is best seating. Full surround! Room reflections are more pronounced than 2-channel, and are certainly present, but not to the point of being distracted by them.

    3) 7-channel stereo - The worst of the 3! But the "upside" is it works well for non-critical listening, and works great when we have parties! Afterall, who would actually listen to 7-channel stereo for "critical" listening? So, I guess it serves it's function.

    Anyway, I hope that answered your questions. Now, I wish you would start a NEW THREAD regarding your gear & some of the room posibilities you are considering for your HT placement so we could get off this thread....it has gone in so many different directions, maybe it is time to give it a proper funeral?
    I'm very interested in hearing what your room posibilities are ie, lighting, viewing distances, approximation to other parts of the house, viewing distances etc....
    I agree with your earlier statement regarding having a larger monitor than the 50", but just how big can we get and still have proper viewing distances?
    Robert
  • 11-20-2005, 09:29 AM
    robert393
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by GMichael
    I think that what Nab was trying to say was that for "his use" 480 was best because he is only planning to use it for DVD's. He left out the "for his use" part but I knew what he was saying.

    Let's all chalk it up as a misunderstanding and try to move on from here.

    Please read his quotes....that is NOT WHAT he said. He was clear in this thread. Here are some excerpts:
    Post # 10- "higher resolution projector...They just didn't look any better."
    # 12- "everything I've read says that 480p is better than anything i...or interlaced."
    #14- "Well I think the big thing is that even though 1080i has more scan lines, it still suffers from interlacing which is why 480p is preferred over 1080i."
    #17- "I preferred 480p because 1080i still suffers from interlacing."
    #48- "We want to see this 'major difference' between 480p and 1080i you keep talking about."
    #65- "1080i was ZERO improvement in my (and most everyone else's) eyes."
    I could continue, but I think you get the picture.......

    Good point though GM, I'm ready to drop it and move forward too........
    Robert
  • 11-20-2005, 01:47 PM
    N. Abstentia
    Gollum/Robert...news flash....nobody cares any more. Give it a rest.

    Your obsession has become unhealthy.
  • 11-21-2005, 11:43 AM
    Stereomaniac
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by robert393
    Yeah, you don't want to get confused with the facts when your mind is already made-up....lol! As for me, I would much rather deal in the realms of reality & facts.....with supporting documentation. Sorry that the ACTUAL numbers and facts are of no interest to you. As for who's right or wrong....the numbers don't lie. They are not bias. The numbers are just that what they are.....they don't take sides.
    Obviously, you mistake a MEMBER THAT GIVES FACTS, AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION as being "smug". Too bad.
    GMichael, you started this thread, and I tried to provide quality input.
    Robert

    No, actually it's your use of language, condescending attitude, and the continual, irritating use of all caps and exclamation points among other things that make you present yourself like a know-it-all 16 year old hopped up on Mountain Dew.
  • 11-22-2005, 08:55 AM
    recoveryone
    With all this said, let me just say Amen and goodnight