For the videophiles

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Yet nobody really seems to following them as there still mass confusion

----- Original Message ----
From: Rodolfo La Maestra <[email protected]>
To: HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 9:05:01 PM
Subject: For the videophiles

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Nicetry,

Those regulations are in place since 2000, courtesy of the CEA (CEMA at that
time).

However, I personally only follow one book, the engineering book: ATSC table
3 (no EDTV 480p).

Check the Glossary:

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/glossary.php?range=all

810i and DTV paragraphs.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Nicetry
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 9:47 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: For the audiophiles ...

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Excellent thought We know 480 p is not hd Regulations should be in place
that mandate a display labeled HD should be capable of accepting a digital
signal and output as fully resolved 720p signal If promoted as 1080i or
1080p then should be properly input the signal and process as necessary to
output as fully resolved 1080p End of confusion. the audio side has
been clarified by your commentary


----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Fisher <[email protected]>
To: HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:01:45 PM
Subject: Re: For the audiophiles ...

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

> There is no absolute answer to
> this subjective topic.

The absolute answer is 24/192

> Some people are more
> demanding than others and that's what I meant when stating that there is
> no absolute answer.

But there is and that is the rub for me. Is 480P HD or not?

What needs to be defined is to whom is this question directed? If it is
consumers for a marketing survey to determine a threshhold we already
know what they think and their threshold is quite low. They may very
well think that 480P qualifies as HD. They already think 16/44 is HD audio.

I am only trying to point out that if we can get past all the
shenanigans and deal with this question as professionals seeking perfect
copies the answer is quite clear and not open to debate.

24/192 or DSD

Richard Fisher
ISF and HAA certified
HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php

Dr Robert A Fowkes wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 03:36 PM 4/10/2007 -0400, you wrote:
>
>> > But I fully understand why some people would accept a 24/192 (or even
>> > 24/96) baseline as a starting point. There is no absolute answer to
>> > this subjective topic.
>>
>> Sure there is! Buy a disc that has both versions and hear the difference
>> for yourself. 24/192 is more, it sounds more better so it must be more
>> accurate.
>
>
> Richard,
>
> Of course I realize that 24/192 sounds better than 24/96! Give me a
> little more credit than that. The "no absolute answer" was a reference
> to at what point in the digital sampling spectrum people would be
> willing to accept the specs as a baseline. Some people are more
> demanding than others and that's what I meant when stating that there is
> no absolute answer. The question was, "At what point would a person
> begin to consider digital sound audiophile quality?"
>
> Understand?
>
>
> -- RAF
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
> same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]







To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]







To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Actually after 2004 the market has adjusted well to the idea of SD, ED, and
HD in terms of showing the resolution of the display in the specs,
especially because most sets sold were fixed displays.

One can see the vertical x horizontal spec more clearly on those than when
CRT was the king and the TVL lines of resolution required a PhD to
understand why is calculated in picture height rather than the full
horizontal line, like panels (also in the glossary if you care to have a nap
with it).

The confusion still exists in the area of feeding the display (content,
scaler, STB, settings, input capability, etc) because of the mix and match
of interfacing the pieces correctly to maximize the final resolution the
display can show.

Lots of people believe they are watching HD using S-video, but that
confusion is not because the display device spec is not clear (SD, ED or
HD), is because digital TV has brought now more regular people closer to the
HT concept than they were before with regular TVs connected to the wall,
they never had to be worried about that complexity to watch TV.

HT always required more knowledge than just hooking up the coax to the
antenna input, and now is more complex even for the typical HT enthusiasts,
imagine how complex would be for regular people that just wants to watch TV.

The CEA never did any efforts to improve that part of the puzzle, it was
left to the retail store, installer, cable/satellite installer, or capable
consumer. Regular TV people are not accustomed to pay for that
service/knowledge, and they might now just because the new TV is digital and
brings with it a bag of surrounding surprises with it.

But that complexity is not because of the ATSC table 3 or the CEA 2000
regulations, is because the pieces of the HDTV system before the display
device (boxes, cables, etc) are more complex to be set correctly.

That is not the point I responded to. Your question/comment was about
"labeling of displays for what they can display".

Regarding the "input part" of your point, all sets can input 480p, 1080i and
720p. The only point one could object "for certain videophiles" is that
certain 1080p displays can not accept 1080p, but as we discussed several
times most people would not be affected if not having Blu-ray 1080p outputs
and if not having a 1080p set that can handle 24fps for film, etc. Those
are mainly projector HT people, those would not have any problem
understanding what is not in a spec, how to connect, what to buy, etc.

That is not the mass market of regular TV people mentioned above, regular
people have a ton of other issues to understand and to get accustomed to
before they even worry about not receiving 24fps from Blu-ray.

Even if they understand the 24fpfs concept, most do not even know what to do
with it or do not have equipment to make a difference to their eyes, the
most important part.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Nicetry
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 10:12 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: For the videophiles

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Yet nobody really seems to following them as there still mass confusion

----- Original Message ----
From: Rodolfo La Maestra <[email protected]>
To: HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 9:05:01 PM
Subject: For the videophiles

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Nicetry,

Those regulations are in place since 2000, courtesy of the CEA (CEMA at that
time).

However, I personally only follow one book, the engineering book: ATSC table
3 (no EDTV 480p).

Check the Glossary:

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/glossary.php?range=all

810i and DTV paragraphs.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Nicetry
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 9:47 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: For the audiophiles ...

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Excellent thought We know 480 p is not hd Regulations should be in place
that mandate a display labeled HD should be capable of accepting a digital
signal and output as fully resolved 720p signal If promoted as 1080i or
1080p then should be properly input the signal and process as necessary to
output as fully resolved 1080p End of confusion. the audio side has
been clarified by your commentary


----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Fisher <[email protected]>
To: HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:01:45 PM
Subject: Re: For the audiophiles ...

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

> There is no absolute answer to
> this subjective topic.

The absolute answer is 24/192

> Some people are more
> demanding than others and that's what I meant when stating that there is
> no absolute answer.

But there is and that is the rub for me. Is 480P HD or not?

What needs to be defined is to whom is this question directed? If it is
consumers for a marketing survey to determine a threshhold we already
know what they think and their threshold is quite low. They may very
well think that 480P qualifies as HD. They already think 16/44 is HD audio.

I am only trying to point out that if we can get past all the
shenanigans and deal with this question as professionals seeking perfect
copies the answer is quite clear and not open to debate.

24/192 or DSD

Richard Fisher
ISF and HAA certified
HD Library is provided by Techservicesusa.com
Publisher http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/index.php

Dr Robert A Fowkes wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 03:36 PM 4/10/2007 -0400, you wrote:
>
>> > But I fully understand why some people would accept a 24/192 (or even
>> > 24/96) baseline as a starting point. There is no absolute answer to
>> > this subjective topic.
>>
>> Sure there is! Buy a disc that has both versions and hear the difference
>> for yourself. 24/192 is more, it sounds more better so it must be more
>> accurate.
>
>
> Richard,
>
> Of course I realize that 24/192 sounds better than 24/96! Give me a
> little more credit than that. The "no absolute answer" was a reference
> to at what point in the digital sampling spectrum people would be
> willing to accept the specs as a baseline. Some people are more
> demanding than others and that's what I meant when stating that there is
> no absolute answer. The question was, "At what point would a person
> begin to consider digital sound audiophile quality?"
>
> Understand?
>
>
> -- RAF
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
> same day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]







To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]







To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
day) send an email to:
[email protected]



To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

At 01:15 AM 4/12/2007 -0400, you wrote:
>....Even if they understand the 24fpfs concept, most do not even
>know what to do
>with it or do not have equipment to make a difference to their eyes, the
>most important part.

As always, a well stated answer, Rodolfo. And, as a corollary to
your point above, I would suggest that the same could be said about
the difference between "SD" and "HD" audio for the average
consumer. They don't understand what the big deal is about higher
bit rates because they are using audio equipment that can't make a
difference to their ears.


-- RAF


To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]

To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same day) send an email to:
[email protected]