HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sight

Started by dweilmsn Jul 26, 2005 18 posts
Read-only archive
#1
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Tom,

Blu-Ray, like HD-DVD, will be backward compatible.

But I think the key point here is that two HD formats is a deal-breaker in
the real world. If these two groups actually bring their competing versions
of HD-compatible DVD to market, both will languish and die (or give the
appearance of being left for dead) until there's a single format.

Even if there are "hybrid" players in short order that do both formats, I
think it's clear that the HD market is not anywhere near being large enough
now (we can't count more than 5 million HD displays without digital inputs)
or in the medium-term for retailers to deal with the costly and hassle-heavy
scenario of stocking a comprehensive line of both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray
software.

And software ultimately drives hardware sales.

The good news is that there will be plenty of time to go back to the drawing
board or negotiating table in time to provide a single, universal
pre-recorded HD format -- once there are enough HD-ready consumers to
matter.

Otherwise, I think it's "money down the drain" to buy an HD-compatible DVD
player without at least 1,000 popular back-catalog titles readily available
in each format and routine same-day release of new movies on traditional DVD
disc and HD-compatible disc from studios supporting the respective formats.


Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Tom Vrolyk
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:09
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........what a joke

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

Folks, Will Blue Ray players play old DVDs?

another angle if Blue Ray is to survive it must play
old DVDs.. If that is a diff. many folks will opt for
the "DVD-HD" if it plays their old DVDs aswell as the
new ones in "HD"... naming is very important, for word
of mouth coverage
I want Blue-Ray, not a second thought about it...
but market will tell, is this like poker? and who is
bluffing?... there must be a clear direction, one has
to be better, for the cost.
What if there is a a new DVD burner/format next year
that will blow these machines out? if only for
capacity
Then cheaper now is better, maybe Sony is at a cross
roads, seems their Co is getting fragmented and seems
lost IMHO
TomV

--- [email protected] wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I would love to know how the naming even came to be.
> I mean, there isn't
> even a commonly used word for 'next generation DVD'
> besides HD DVD. So
> how was Toshiba or whomever able to
> trademark/reserve/copyright what is
> essentially a common noun? What if someone had
> trademarked High
> Definition and been the only ones allowed to use
> that name? if I were
> sony, I would start calling blu-ray "HD DVD"!
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:56 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass
> consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to
> which way they would
> lean?
>
> HD DVD of course! What is blu-ray...? why isn;t it
> called HD DVD?
>
> I think Toshiba has a huge perception lead in this
> battle for the mass
> market...
>
> Richard Fisher
> www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
>
> Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > You made my point Dale. I stated that " The only
> time I've seen this
> go the
> > other way was
> > when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group. So if
> you are
> > saying that the most influence on the success or
> failure of Blu-Ray
> or
> > HD-DVD will be exerted by the early adopters of HD
> TV, then I would
> agree,
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to which
> way they would
> lean?
> >
> > Anthony R.
> > Orlando, FL
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> > Dale Cripps
> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:49 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Building a pessimistic case by reflecting back
> upon what happened 20
> or more
> > years ago seems to me out of step with everything
> that is going on
> today.
> > With the help from some friends we chose HDTV over
> a wide varity of
> cheaper
> > "Fix Ups." We chose the superior images from DVD
> over the VCR,
> finally.
> > Today's constant improvement in displays hardly
> mirrors the old
> Betamax/VHS
> > decision days when you could barely make out the
> difference between
> those
> > two formats on any commercial display of that
> time. I might add that
> we
> > didn't have the Internet to educate so many people
> at once on what to
> look
> > for nor were many people even aware of recording
> or time-shifting or
> movies
> > on tape when the VHS decision was made. None of
> those old conditions
> > prevail among the early adopters today. I think
> we will get what is
> forward
> > looking today rather than what is backward
> looking. But without a
> doubt you
> > are right, the marketplace will decide. We are an
> influence to that
> > marketplace. -Dale
> >
> >
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>I agree Blu-Ray is the way to go. The market
> place will decide that
> >>ultimately. Looking on it's decisions in the
> past, I am not hopeful.
> >>They
> >>did pick VHS over Beta. The only time I've seen
> this go the other way
> was
> >>when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group that chose
> >>laser
> >>disc over RCA CED. As I said though we are talking
> about a much
> smaller
> >>group in that case.
> >>
> >>Anthony R.
> >>Orlando, FL
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> >>Dale E. Cripps
> >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:52 PM
> >>To: HDTV Magazine
> >>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >>
> >>
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>If we had depended upon surveys the famous HDTV
> survey done by MIT in
> '89
> >>would have led us to only ghost free standard TV
> with better audio and
> >>nothing more.
>
>>http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/history/2005/06/during_the_earl.php
> >>
> >>But we didn't rely upon those surveys (and they
> had powerful
> supporters).
> >>We
> >>forged ahead into new territory. Instead of some
> dead-end
> modernization of
> >>NTSC you have as a result HDTV with all of its
> headroom for future
> growth.
> >>
> >>I am going to take a page out of the HDTV story
> for this Blu-Ray vs.
> >>HD-DVD
> >>controversy. The one thing that our national move
> to a completely new
> >>platform (digital) proved is that 1) it can be
> done, and 2) that the
> >>maximum
> >>potential of contemporary technology comes into
> being through such
> leaps.
> >>
> >>It is a perilous leap, no question. But as long as
> both the opening
> >>performance of the new is superior to the old and
> the headroom for the
> new
> >>is deemed worthy of the risk, then the only smart
> thing to do is to go
> for
> >>the new and drop the old. If that means there is
> some cost
> >>associated....well, what doesn't have some cost
> associated
=== message truncated ===


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]
#2
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Amen

Anthony R.
Orlando, FL

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Doug Weil
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:42 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)


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

Tom,

Blu-Ray, like HD-DVD, will be backward compatible.

But I think the key point here is that two HD formats is a deal-breaker in
the real world. If these two groups actually bring their competing versions
of HD-compatible DVD to market, both will languish and die (or give the
appearance of being left for dead) until there's a single format.

Even if there are "hybrid" players in short order that do both formats, I
think it's clear that the HD market is not anywhere near being large enough
now (we can't count more than 5 million HD displays without digital inputs)
or in the medium-term for retailers to deal with the costly and hassle-heavy
scenario of stocking a comprehensive line of both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray
software.

And software ultimately drives hardware sales.

The good news is that there will be plenty of time to go back to the drawing
board or negotiating table in time to provide a single, universal
pre-recorded HD format -- once there are enough HD-ready consumers to
matter.

Otherwise, I think it's "money down the drain" to buy an HD-compatible DVD
player without at least 1,000 popular back-catalog titles readily available
in each format and routine same-day release of new movies on traditional DVD
disc and HD-compatible disc from studios supporting the respective formats.


Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Tom Vrolyk
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:09
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........what a joke

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

Folks, Will Blue Ray players play old DVDs?

another angle if Blue Ray is to survive it must play
old DVDs.. If that is a diff. many folks will opt for
the "DVD-HD" if it plays their old DVDs aswell as the
new ones in "HD"... naming is very important, for word
of mouth coverage
I want Blue-Ray, not a second thought about it...
but market will tell, is this like poker? and who is
bluffing?... there must be a clear direction, one has
to be better, for the cost.
What if there is a a new DVD burner/format next year
that will blow these machines out? if only for
capacity
Then cheaper now is better, maybe Sony is at a cross
roads, seems their Co is getting fragmented and seems
lost IMHO
TomV

--- [email protected] wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I would love to know how the naming even came to be.
> I mean, there isn't
> even a commonly used word for 'next generation DVD'
> besides HD DVD. So
> how was Toshiba or whomever able to
> trademark/reserve/copyright what is
> essentially a common noun? What if someone had
> trademarked High
> Definition and been the only ones allowed to use
> that name? if I were
> sony, I would start calling blu-ray "HD DVD"!
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:56 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass
> consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to
> which way they would
> lean?
>
> HD DVD of course! What is blu-ray...? why isn;t it
> called HD DVD?
>
> I think Toshiba has a huge perception lead in this
> battle for the mass
> market...
>
> Richard Fisher
> www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
>
> Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > You made my point Dale. I stated that " The only
> time I've seen this
> go the
> > other way was
> > when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group. So if
> you are
> > saying that the most influence on the success or
> failure of Blu-Ray
> or
> > HD-DVD will be exerted by the early adopters of HD
> TV, then I would
> agree,
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to which
> way they would
> lean?
> >
> > Anthony R.
> > Orlando, FL
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> > Dale Cripps
> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:49 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Building a pessimistic case by reflecting back
> upon what happened 20
> or more
> > years ago seems to me out of step with everything
> that is going on
> today.
> > With the help from some friends we chose HDTV over
> a wide varity of
> cheaper
> > "Fix Ups." We chose the superior images from DVD
> over the VCR,
> finally.
> > Today's constant improvement in displays hardly
> mirrors the old
> Betamax/VHS
> > decision days when you could barely make out the
> difference between
> those
> > two formats on any commercial display of that
> time. I might add that
> we
> > didn't have the Internet to educate so many people
> at once on what to
> look
> > for nor were many people even aware of recording
> or time-shifting or
> movies
> > on tape when the VHS decision was made. None of
> those old conditions
> > prevail among the early adopters today. I think
> we will get what is
> forward
> > looking today rather than what is backward
> looking. But without a
> doubt you
> > are right, the marketplace will decide. We are an
> influence to that
> > marketplace. -Dale
> >
> >
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>I agree Blu-Ray is the way to go. The market
> place will decide that
> >>ultimately. Looking on it's decisions in the
> past, I am not hopeful.
> >>They
> >>did pick VHS over Beta. The only time I've seen
> this go the other way
> was
> >>when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group that chose
> >>laser
> >>disc over RCA CED. As I said though we are talking
> about a much
> smaller
> >>group in that case.
> >>
> >>Anthony R.
> >>Orlando, FL
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> >>Dale E. Cripps
> >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:52 PM
> >>To: HDTV Magazine
> >>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >>
> >>
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>If we had depended upon surveys the famous HDTV
> survey done by MIT in
> '89
> >>would have led us to only ghost free standard TV
> with better audio and
> >>nothing more.
>
>>http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/history/2005/06/during_the_earl.php
> >>
> >>But we didn't rely upon those surveys (and they
> had powerful
> supporters).
> >>We
> >>forged ahead into new territory. Instead of some
> dead-end
> modernization of
> >>NTSC you have as a result HDTV with all of its
> headroom for future
> growth.
> >>
> >>I am going to take a page out of the HDTV story
> for this Blu-Ray vs.
> >>HD-DVD
> >>controversy. The one thing that our national move
> to a completely new
> >>platform (digital) proved is that 1) it can be
> done, and 2) that the
> >>maximum
> >>potential of contemporary technology comes into
> being through such
> leaps.
> >>
> >>It is a perilous leap, no question. But as long as
> both the opening
> >>performance of the new is superior to the old and
> the headroom for the
> new
> >>is deemed worthy of the risk, then the only smart
> thing to do is to go
> for
> >>the new and drop the old. If that means there is
> some cost
> >>associated....well, what doesn't have some cost
> associated
=== message truncated ===


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]
#3
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Doug,

The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is /was
not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This sad
to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel) blew
away the common CD.

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Anthony Rizzuto
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 6:05 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
of one hand clapping)

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

Amen

Anthony R.
Orlando, FL

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Doug Weil
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:42 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)


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

Tom,

Blu-Ray, like HD-DVD, will be backward compatible.

But I think the key point here is that two HD formats is a deal-breaker in
the real world. If these two groups actually bring their competing versions
of HD-compatible DVD to market, both will languish and die (or give the
appearance of being left for dead) until there's a single format.

Even if there are "hybrid" players in short order that do both formats, I
think it's clear that the HD market is not anywhere near being large enough
now (we can't count more than 5 million HD displays without digital inputs)
or in the medium-term for retailers to deal with the costly and hassle-heavy
scenario of stocking a comprehensive line of both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray
software.

And software ultimately drives hardware sales.

The good news is that there will be plenty of time to go back to the drawing
board or negotiating table in time to provide a single, universal
pre-recorded HD format -- once there are enough HD-ready consumers to
matter.

Otherwise, I think it's "money down the drain" to buy an HD-compatible DVD
player without at least 1,000 popular back-catalog titles readily available
in each format and routine same-day release of new movies on traditional DVD
disc and HD-compatible disc from studios supporting the respective formats.


Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Tom Vrolyk
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:09
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........what a joke

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

Folks, Will Blue Ray players play old DVDs?

another angle if Blue Ray is to survive it must play
old DVDs.. If that is a diff. many folks will opt for
the "DVD-HD" if it plays their old DVDs aswell as the
new ones in "HD"... naming is very important, for word
of mouth coverage
I want Blue-Ray, not a second thought about it...
but market will tell, is this like poker? and who is
bluffing?... there must be a clear direction, one has
to be better, for the cost.
What if there is a a new DVD burner/format next year
that will blow these machines out? if only for
capacity
Then cheaper now is better, maybe Sony is at a cross
roads, seems their Co is getting fragmented and seems
lost IMHO
TomV

--- [email protected] wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I would love to know how the naming even came to be.
> I mean, there isn't
> even a commonly used word for 'next generation DVD'
> besides HD DVD. So
> how was Toshiba or whomever able to
> trademark/reserve/copyright what is
> essentially a common noun? What if someone had
> trademarked High
> Definition and been the only ones allowed to use
> that name? if I were
> sony, I would start calling blu-ray "HD DVD"!
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:56 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass
> consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to
> which way they would
> lean?
>
> HD DVD of course! What is blu-ray...? why isn;t it
> called HD DVD?
>
> I think Toshiba has a huge perception lead in this
> battle for the mass
> market...
>
> Richard Fisher
> www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
>
> Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > You made my point Dale. I stated that " The only
> time I've seen this
> go the
> > other way was
> > when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group. So if
> you are
> > saying that the most influence on the success or
> failure of Blu-Ray
> or
> > HD-DVD will be exerted by the early adopters of HD
> TV, then I would
> agree,
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to which
> way they would
> lean?
> >
> > Anthony R.
> > Orlando, FL
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> > Dale Cripps
> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:49 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Building a pessimistic case by reflecting back
> upon what happened 20
> or more
> > years ago seems to me out of step with everything
> that is going on
> today.
> > With the help from some friends we chose HDTV over
> a wide varity of
> cheaper
> > "Fix Ups." We chose the superior images from DVD
> over the VCR,
> finally.
> > Today's constant improvement in displays hardly
> mirrors the old
> Betamax/VHS
> > decision days when you could barely make out the
> difference between
> those
> > two formats on any commercial display of that
> time. I might add that
> we
> > didn't have the Internet to educate so many people
> at once on what to
> look
> > for nor were many people even aware of recording
> or time-shifting or
> movies
> > on tape when the VHS decision was made. None of
> those old conditions
> > prevail among the early adopters today. I think
> we will get what is
> forward
> > looking today rather than what is backward
> looking. But without a
> doubt you
> > are right, the marketplace will decide. We are an
> influence to that
> > marketplace. -Dale
> >
> >
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>I agree Blu-Ray is the way to go. The market
> place will decide that
> >>ultimately. Looking on it's decisions in the
> past, I am not hopeful.
> >>They
> >>did pick VHS over Beta. The only time I've seen
> this go the other way
> was
> >>when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group that chose
> >>laser
> >>disc over RCA CED. As I said though we are talking
> about a much
> smaller
> >>group in that case.
> >>
> >>Anthony R.
> >>Orlando, FL
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> >>Dale E. Cripps
> >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:52 PM
> >>To: HDTV Magazine
> >>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >>
> >>
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>If we had depended upon surveys the famous HDTV
> survey done by MIT in
> '89
> >>would have led us to only ghost free standard TV
> with better audio and
> >>nothing more.
>
>>http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/history/2005/06/during_the_earl.php
> >>
> >>But we didn't rely upon those surveys (and they
> had powerful
> supporters).
> >>We
> >>forged ahead into new territory. Instead of some
> dead-end
> modernization of
> >>NTSC you have as a result HDTV with all of its
> headroom for future
> growth.
> >>
> >>I am going to take a page out of the HDTV story
> for this Blu-Ray vs.
> >>HD-DVD
> >>controversy. The one thing that our national move
> to a completely new
> >>platform (digital) proved is that 1) it can be
> done, and 2) that the
> >>maximum
> >>potential of contemporary technology comes into
> being through such
> leaps.
> >>
> >>It is a perilous leap, no question. But as long as
> both the opening
> >>performance of the new is superior to the old and
> the headroom for the
> new
> >>is deemed worthy of the risk, then the only smart
> thing to do is to go
> for
> >>the new and drop the old. If that means there is
> some cost
> >>associated....well, what doesn't have some cost
> associated
=== message truncated ===


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]
#4
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

The main problem was the cost for the players at the outset were prohibitive
for a lot of consumers. Add to that the fact that there were two competing
formats, little software and poor marketing and you end up in the place we
are now in where these formats are nearly dead. I hope the boys at Sony who
were partly responsible for this fiasco and those at Toshiba will have
learned a lesson from this.

Anthony R.
Orlando, FL

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Larry Megugorac
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 9:23 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)


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

Doug,

The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is /was
not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This sad
to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel) blew
away the common CD.

Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Anthony Rizzuto
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 6:05 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
of one hand clapping)

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

Amen

Anthony R.
Orlando, FL

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Doug Weil
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:42 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)


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

Tom,

Blu-Ray, like HD-DVD, will be backward compatible.

But I think the key point here is that two HD formats is a deal-breaker in
the real world. If these two groups actually bring their competing versions
of HD-compatible DVD to market, both will languish and die (or give the
appearance of being left for dead) until there's a single format.

Even if there are "hybrid" players in short order that do both formats, I
think it's clear that the HD market is not anywhere near being large enough
now (we can't count more than 5 million HD displays without digital inputs)
or in the medium-term for retailers to deal with the costly and hassle-heavy
scenario of stocking a comprehensive line of both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray
software.

And software ultimately drives hardware sales.

The good news is that there will be plenty of time to go back to the drawing
board or negotiating table in time to provide a single, universal
pre-recorded HD format -- once there are enough HD-ready consumers to
matter.

Otherwise, I think it's "money down the drain" to buy an HD-compatible DVD
player without at least 1,000 popular back-catalog titles readily available
in each format and routine same-day release of new movies on traditional DVD
disc and HD-compatible disc from studios supporting the respective formats.


Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Tom Vrolyk
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 4:09
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........what a joke

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

Folks, Will Blue Ray players play old DVDs?

another angle if Blue Ray is to survive it must play
old DVDs.. If that is a diff. many folks will opt for
the "DVD-HD" if it plays their old DVDs aswell as the
new ones in "HD"... naming is very important, for word
of mouth coverage
I want Blue-Ray, not a second thought about it...
but market will tell, is this like poker? and who is
bluffing?... there must be a clear direction, one has
to be better, for the cost.
What if there is a a new DVD burner/format next year
that will blow these machines out? if only for
capacity
Then cheaper now is better, maybe Sony is at a cross
roads, seems their Co is getting fragmented and seems
lost IMHO
TomV

--- [email protected] wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I would love to know how the naming even came to be.
> I mean, there isn't
> even a commonly used word for 'next generation DVD'
> besides HD DVD. So
> how was Toshiba or whomever able to
> trademark/reserve/copyright what is
> essentially a common noun? What if someone had
> trademarked High
> Definition and been the only ones allowed to use
> that name? if I were
> sony, I would start calling blu-ray "HD DVD"!
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of Richard
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:56 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass
> consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to
> which way they would
> lean?
>
> HD DVD of course! What is blu-ray...? why isn;t it
> called HD DVD?
>
> I think Toshiba has a huge perception lead in this
> battle for the mass
> market...
>
> Richard Fisher
> www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
>
> Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > You made my point Dale. I stated that " The only
> time I've seen this
> go the
> > other way was
> > when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group. So if
> you are
> > saying that the most influence on the success or
> failure of Blu-Ray
> or
> > HD-DVD will be exerted by the early adopters of HD
> TV, then I would
> agree,
> > quality will out. But, if the decision were left
> to the mass consumer
> > market do you really have any question as to which
> way they would
> lean?
> >
> > Anthony R.
> > Orlando, FL
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> > Dale Cripps
> > Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 4:49 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Building a pessimistic case by reflecting back
> upon what happened 20
> or more
> > years ago seems to me out of step with everything
> that is going on
> today.
> > With the help from some friends we chose HDTV over
> a wide varity of
> cheaper
> > "Fix Ups." We chose the superior images from DVD
> over the VCR,
> finally.
> > Today's constant improvement in displays hardly
> mirrors the old
> Betamax/VHS
> > decision days when you could barely make out the
> difference between
> those
> > two formats on any commercial display of that
> time. I might add that
> we
> > didn't have the Internet to educate so many people
> at once on what to
> look
> > for nor were many people even aware of recording
> or time-shifting or
> movies
> > on tape when the VHS decision was made. None of
> those old conditions
> > prevail among the early adopters today. I think
> we will get what is
> forward
> > looking today rather than what is backward
> looking. But without a
> doubt you
> > are right, the marketplace will decide. We are an
> influence to that
> > marketplace. -Dale
> >
> >
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>I agree Blu-Ray is the way to go. The market
> place will decide that
> >>ultimately. Looking on it's decisions in the
> past, I am not hopeful.
> >>They
> >>did pick VHS over Beta. The only time I've seen
> this go the other way
> was
> >>when the market was limited to a small quality
> minded group that chose
> >>laser
> >>disc over RCA CED. As I said though we are talking
> about a much
> smaller
> >>group in that case.
> >>
> >>Anthony R.
> >>Orlando, FL
> >>
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: HDTV Magazine
> On Behalf
> Of
> >>Dale E. Cripps
> >>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:52 PM
> >>To: HDTV Magazine
> >>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over
> Blu-Ray..........what a joke
> >>
> >>
> >>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >>
> >>If we had depended upon surveys the famous HDTV
> survey done by MIT in
> '89
> >>would have led us to only ghost free standard TV
> with better audio and
> >>nothing more.
>
>>http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/history/2005/06/during_the_earl.php
> >>
> >>But we didn't rely upon those surveys (and they
> had powerful
> supporters).
> >>We
> >>forged ahead into new territory. Instead of some
> dead-end
> modernization of
> >>NTSC you have as a result HDTV with all of its
> headroom for future
> growth.
> >>
> >>I am going to take a page out of the HDTV story
> for this Blu-Ray vs.
> >>HD-DVD
> >>controversy. The one thing that our national move
> to a completely new
> >>platform (digital) proved is that 1) it can be
> done, and 2) that the
> >>maximum
> >>potential of contemporary technology comes into
> being through such
> leaps.
> >>
> >>It is a perilous leap, no question. But as long as
> both the opening
> >>performance of the new is superior to the old and
> the headroom for the
> new
> >>is deemed worthy of the risk, then the only smart
> thing to do is to go
> for
> >>the new and drop the old. If that means there is
> some cost
> >>associated....well, what doesn't have some cost
> associated
=== message truncated ===


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]
#5
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is /was
>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This sad
>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel) blew
>away the common CD.

A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
priced spread?

Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
is lower than even the CD sources.

I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
the cause as it has been in the past.


-- 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]
#6
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
different league than audio improvements.

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)

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

At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
/was
>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
sad
>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
blew
>away the common CD.

A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
priced spread?

Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
is lower than even the CD sources.

I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
the cause as it has been in the past.


-- 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]
#7
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason,

Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you know
what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
listen for.

Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile, any
more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.

I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of the
buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.

Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy, as
the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.

Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do with
signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO, I
don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the average
consumer.

If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p or
1080p HD-format DVD.

Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude, even
with DVI and HDMI.

Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
of one hand clapping)

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

One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
different league than audio improvements.

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)

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

At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
/was
>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
sad
>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
blew
>away the common CD.

A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
priced spread?

Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
is lower than even the CD sources.

I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
the cause as it has been in the past.


-- 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]
#8
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I think you both (Jason and Doug) have a point or two. Millions of people
will go to HD much faster than they will the same perceived improvement in
audio. Most audio is listened to on MP3 players or in cars. Video is
viewed while sitting down and HD sells itself because you can have a big
screen tv and still have a super picture.

The move to high def. DVD is barely better than regular DVD. I've got three
movies on DVD that I also have on D-VHS and while the difference is
noticeable it is not compelling (except to me), especially to the millions
of people who buy DVDs. I'll pay more for a high definition DVD but most
people (95%) will not if given a choice. The percentage of people who will
switch to high def. DVDs is far lower than the people who are switching to
HDTV.

High def DVD will fly because it is visual, but SACD/DVD-A is never going to
be anything more than a niche market. The surround sound aspect is
attractive but not the slight audio improvement.

All the above is just my opinion and as usual, is worthless.

Hugh


----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Weil" <[email protected]>


> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Jason,
>
> Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
> it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you
> know
> what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
> listen for.
>
> Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile,
> any
> more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>
> I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
> relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
> pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of
> the
> buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>
> Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
> still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
> impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
> and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy,
> as
> the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
> huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
> then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do
> with
> signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO,
> I
> don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the
> average
> consumer.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
> difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
> public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close
> to
> approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p
> or
> 1080p HD-format DVD.
>
> Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
> HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
> substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
> improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude,
> even
> with DVI and HDMI.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Doug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
> of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
> audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
> than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
> tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
> more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
> the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
> different league than audio improvements.
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
> sights of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
> /was
>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
> sad
>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
> blew
>>away the common CD.
>
> A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
> the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
> available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
> content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
> listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
> (with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
> really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
> SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
> priced spread?
>
> Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
> (which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
> and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
> to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
> is lower than even the CD sources.
>
> I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
> HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
> practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
> agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
> cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
> the cause as it has been in the past.
>
>
> -- 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]
#9
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Hugh,

Don't be so hard on yourself. I think you nailed it.

High Def audio is a learned discipline while an HD picture is more
immediate.

That said I am one of the idiots that is truly disappointed that High Def.
Audio is not getting the marketing and education it deserves!

SACD/DVD-A is such an improvement that I can barely stand to listen to
standard CD's when I know what I could be hearing.

Larry


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Hugh Campbell
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
of one hand clapping)

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

I think you both (Jason and Doug) have a point or two. Millions of people
will go to HD much faster than they will the same perceived improvement in
audio. Most audio is listened to on MP3 players or in cars. Video is
viewed while sitting down and HD sells itself because you can have a big
screen tv and still have a super picture.

The move to high def. DVD is barely better than regular DVD. I've got three

movies on DVD that I also have on D-VHS and while the difference is
noticeable it is not compelling (except to me), especially to the millions
of people who buy DVDs. I'll pay more for a high definition DVD but most
people (95%) will not if given a choice. The percentage of people who will
switch to high def. DVDs is far lower than the people who are switching to
HDTV.

High def DVD will fly because it is visual, but SACD/DVD-A is never going to

be anything more than a niche market. The surround sound aspect is
attractive but not the slight audio improvement.

All the above is just my opinion and as usual, is worthless.

Hugh


----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Weil" <[email protected]>


> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Jason,
>
> Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
> it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you
> know
> what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
> listen for.
>
> Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile,
> any
> more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>
> I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
> relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
> pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of
> the
> buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>
> Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
> still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
> impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
> and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy,
> as
> the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
> huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
> then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do
> with
> signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO,

> I
> don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the
> average
> consumer.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
> difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
> public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close
> to
> approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p
> or
> 1080p HD-format DVD.
>
> Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
> HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
> substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
> improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude,
> even
> with DVI and HDMI.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Doug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
> of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
> audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
> than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
> tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
> more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
> the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
> different league than audio improvements.
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
> sights of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
> /was
>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
> sad
>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
> blew
>>away the common CD.
>
> A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
> the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
> available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
> content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
> listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
> (with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
> really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
> SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
> priced spread?
>
> Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
> (which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
> and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
> to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
> is lower than even the CD sources.
>
> I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
> HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
> practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
> agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
> cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
> the cause as it has been in the past.
>
>
> -- 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]
#10
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Doug, Interesting you say Full Bore HDTV
I had a chance to be in the HDNet truck during a Live
broadcast of a Nascar Race... the Full HD signal
straight from the Cameras was striking on the Plasma
(i think) big screen in the truck.
On the smaller monitors it was razor sharp...
I realized that we (I) may not be getting full
bandwidth from DBS or Cable
When I lived in LA and could rec OTA the Pic quality
was better than my current Cable solution.
TomV
Snip>>

--- Doug Weil <[email protected]> wrote:

> Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the
movies I watch on DVD
and then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably
has something to do with signal compression, but even
if full bore bandwidth were available on
HBO, I don't think the difference would be large
enough to truly excite the
average consumer.

If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing
HDTV that said
the difference in picture quality had to be 10 times
better than NTSC for the public to really sit up and
take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD
to either true 720p or 1080p HD-format DVD.

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]
#11
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I can't agree more. The difference in quality between 480p and 1080i on
HBO, Showtime, In HD, etc is nowhere near what it was prior to calibration.
Having said that, there is a dramatic difference in image quality on
programs that were shot in and for HDTV such as a majority of the
programming on Discovery HD. This is where I think the format truly shines.
One last point, with respect to newer films shown on HBO and Showtime HD,
why is it that a lot them are broadcast in 1:85 to 1 where as the DVD
version quite often is 2:35 to 1. Are there simply different wide screen
versions of motion picture out there, and are the 1:85 to 1 versions cutting
off the detail I'm seeing on the 2:35 to 1 versions. Logically that would
seem to be the case.

Anthony R.
Orlando, FL

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Doug Weil
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:47 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)


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

Jason,

Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you know
what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
listen for.

Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile, any
more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.

I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of the
buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.

Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy, as
the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.

Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do with
signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO, I
don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the average
consumer.

If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p or
1080p HD-format DVD.

Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude, even
with DVI and HDMI.

Regards,


Doug
Clearly Resolved Image & Sound

Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993

eMail: [email protected]
Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com

Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
http://www.imagingscience.com

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
of one hand clapping)

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

One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
different league than audio improvements.

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sights of one hand clapping)

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

At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
/was
>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
sad
>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
blew
>away the common CD.

A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
priced spread?

Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
is lower than even the CD sources.

I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
the cause as it has been in the past.


-- 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]
#12
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

> SACD/DVD-A is such an improvement that I can barely stand to listen to
> standard CD's when I know what I could be hearing.

Right On!

thinking about a $5-10K vinyl rig... and still thinking considering all
the ritual and collecting mentality involved. Digital is easy, stick it
in and push play, consistent results guaranteed!

It is a shame how both HD audio camps have marketed their stuff. The
first DVD-audio players were a joke while Sony made them too expensive.
Over the last 3 years there is a better balance now. The big change for
DVD-audio is the Dual-disc but here again we are left out hanging... it
can provide DVD-audio but you won't find that anywhere on the package or
on the disc. At least with the Rolling Stones foul up there were key
things you could look for and if you opened the packeage the disc did
have the SACD logo.

All I can say is ARGH! Speaking of SACD did you know about the War of
Worlds from 1978 was just released? Awesome!

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5424


Richard Fisher
www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation

Larry Megugorac wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Hugh,
>
> Don't be so hard on yourself. I think you nailed it.
>
> High Def audio is a learned discipline while an HD picture is more
> immediate.
>
> That said I am one of the idiots that is truly disappointed that High Def.
> Audio is not getting the marketing and education it deserves!
>
> SACD/DVD-A is such an improvement that I can barely stand to listen to
> standard CD's when I know what I could be hearing.
>
> Larry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Hugh Campbell
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:01 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
> of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I think you both (Jason and Doug) have a point or two. Millions of people
> will go to HD much faster than they will the same perceived improvement in
> audio. Most audio is listened to on MP3 players or in cars. Video is
> viewed while sitting down and HD sells itself because you can have a big
> screen tv and still have a super picture.
>
> The move to high def. DVD is barely better than regular DVD. I've got three
>
> movies on DVD that I also have on D-VHS and while the difference is
> noticeable it is not compelling (except to me), especially to the millions
> of people who buy DVDs. I'll pay more for a high definition DVD but most
> people (95%) will not if given a choice. The percentage of people who will
> switch to high def. DVDs is far lower than the people who are switching to
> HDTV.
>
> High def DVD will fly because it is visual, but SACD/DVD-A is never going to
>
> be anything more than a niche market. The surround sound aspect is
> attractive but not the slight audio improvement.
>
> All the above is just my opinion and as usual, is worthless.
>
> Hugh
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Doug Weil" <[email protected]>
>
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Jason,
>>
>>Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
>>it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you
>>know
>>what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
>>listen for.
>>
>>Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile,
>>any
>>more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>>
>>I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
>>relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
>>pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of
>>the
>>buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>>
>>Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
>>still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
>>impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
>>and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy,
>>as
>>the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
>>huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>>
>>Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
>>then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do
>>with
>>signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO,
>
>
>>I
>>don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the
>>average
>>consumer.
>>
>>If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
>>difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
>>public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close
>>to
>>approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p
>>or
>>1080p HD-format DVD.
>>
>>Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
>>HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
>>substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
>>improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude,
>>even
>>with DVI and HDMI.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>
>>Doug
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>[email protected]
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
>>of one hand clapping)
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
>>audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
>>than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
>>tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
>>more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
>>the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
>>different league than audio improvements.
>>
>>Jason Burroughs
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
>>Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
>>sights of one hand clapping)
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>>
>>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
>>
>>/was
>>
>>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
>>
>>sad
>>
>>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
>>
>>blew
>>
>>>away the common CD.
>>
>>A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
>>the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
>>available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
>>content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
>>listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
>>(with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
>>really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
>>SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
>>priced spread?
>>
>>Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
>>(which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
>>and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
>>to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
>>is lower than even the CD sources.
>>
>>I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
>>HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
>>practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
>>agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
>>cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
>>the cause as it has been in the past.
>>
>>
>>-- 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]
#13
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Those Schmucks...
http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3182

but even our champion HDnet can be too. I talked with Mark about the
Hogan's Heroes remaster and to keep the phone lines clear they decided
to master it as 14:9 so it nearly fills out the screen without losing
too much vertical rather than the original 4:3 with black bars on the
sides. If Mark would have kept it native I would have rewatched every
one of those classic shows!

Richard Fisher
www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation

Anthony Rizzuto wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I can't agree more. The difference in quality between 480p and 1080i on
> HBO, Showtime, In HD, etc is nowhere near what it was prior to calibration.
> Having said that, there is a dramatic difference in image quality on
> programs that were shot in and for HDTV such as a majority of the
> programming on Discovery HD. This is where I think the format truly shines.
> One last point, with respect to newer films shown on HBO and Showtime HD,
> why is it that a lot them are broadcast in 1:85 to 1 where as the DVD
> version quite often is 2:35 to 1. Are there simply different wide screen
> versions of motion picture out there, and are the 1:85 to 1 versions cutting
> off the detail I'm seeing on the 2:35 to 1 versions. Logically that would
> seem to be the case.
>
> Anthony R.
> Orlando, FL
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Doug Weil
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 11:47 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
> sights of one hand clapping)
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Jason,
>
> Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
> it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you know
> what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
> listen for.
>
> Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile, any
> more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>
> I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
> relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
> pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of the
> buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>
> Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
> still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
> impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
> and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy, as
> the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
> huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
> then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do with
> signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO, I
> don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the average
> consumer.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
> difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
> public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
> approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p or
> 1080p HD-format DVD.
>
> Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
> HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
> substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
> improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude, even
> with DVI and HDMI.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Doug
> Clearly Resolved Image & Sound
>
> Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
> Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993
>
> eMail: [email protected]
> Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com
>
> Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
> http://www.imagingscience.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
> of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
> audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
> than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
> tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
> more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
> the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
> different league than audio improvements.
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
> sights of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>
>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
>
> /was
>
>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
>
> sad
>
>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
>
> blew
>
>>away the common CD.
>
>
> A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
> the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
> available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
> content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
> listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
> (with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
> really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
> SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
> priced spread?
>
> Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
> (which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
> and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
> to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
> is lower than even the CD sources.
>
> I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
> HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
> practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
> agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
> cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
> the cause as it has been in the past.
>
>
> -- 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]
#14
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

> Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on
DVD and
> then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to
do with
> signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on
HBO, I
> don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the
average
> consumer.

Actually much of that has to do with the original film and mastering.
One or the other can result in soft images. In those cases the main
advantage with the HD version is less compression and better color
rendition.

As an example Towering Inferno is sharp as a tack with the DVD nearly
unwatchable yet My Fair Lady has no more detail than the DVD, just
better color and the blacks aren't crushed.

Richard Fisher
www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation

Doug Weil wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Jason,
>
> Believe me, I wish your statement was true, but I can't really agree with
> it. And while I agree that video improvements are very tangible if you know
> what to look for, I think the same is true for sound, if you know what to
> listen for.
>
> Just because someone has a big screen TV doesn't make them a videophile, any
> more than someone who builds huge Heathkit speakers is an audiophile.
>
> I think, in fact, that video quality awareness has taken an overall hit in
> relative terms in the past couple of years, simply because the quality of
> pictures available with little or no effort or knowledge on the part of the
> buyer is a magnitude better than what was available a decade ago.
>
> Granted, what consumers typically see at retail and take home with them is
> still relatively poor by videophile standards, but consumers are clearly
> impressed by what can be achieved in the purchase of a digital television
> and/or a basic DVD player and acquisition of an HD source. They're happy, as
> the sales results clearly indicate. But these Circuit City and Best Buy
> huddled masses are not videophiles by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> Personally, I don't see a huge difference in the movies I watch on DVD and
> then see on satellite HDTV. Granted, that probably has something to do with
> signal compression, but even if full bore bandwidth were available on HBO, I
> don't think the difference would be large enough to truly excite the average
> consumer.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, there was a metric in developing HDTV that said the
> difference in picture quality had to be 10 times better than NTSC for the
> public to really sit up and take notice. I don't believe that we're close to
> approaching a 10x gain in going from progressive DVD to either true 720p or
> 1080p HD-format DVD.
>
> Also, I think one of the least appreciated aspects of the existing DVD and
> HDTV formats is the fact that the native format is component video, with
> substantially more chroma information available than in the NTSC era. That
> improvement is a given now and can't be improved by the same magnitude, even
> with DVI and HDMI.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Doug
> Clearly Resolved Image & Sound
>
> Business: +1 (618) 234-2865
> Cell: +1 (314) 495-2993
>
> eMail: [email protected]
> Web: http://www.clearlyresolved.com
>
> Affiliated with the Imaging Science Foundation
> http://www.imagingscience.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:23
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and sights
> of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> One important point is numbers of enthusiasts. The number of real
> audiophiles is in the thousands or tens of thousands - surely no more
> than the hundred thousands. But the number of people with a big screen
> tv who want good video is far higher - the benefit of good video is far
> more obvious than good audio, no matter what people say about not seeing
> the difference between dvd and hd video. Video improvements are in a
> different league than audio improvements.
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Dr Robert A Fowkes
> Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:40 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
> sights of one hand clapping)
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 09:22 AM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>
>>The situation you describe is what happened to SACD/DVD-A. There is
>
> /was
>
>>not enough software to keep one or both technologies from dieing. This
>
> sad
>
>>to say because the higher resolution (whether stereo or multi-channel)
>
> blew
>
>>away the common CD.
>
>
> A very good point. And I'd like to add to the mix the fact that at
> the same time that SACD/DVD-A was improving the sound quality
> available the masses were becoming more accepting of lower resolution
> content by ripping their audio sources to iPods. Since they are
> listening on the run (literally) or in the environment of their cars
> (with humming tires and motors) etc. the average listener doesn't
> really care whether the rip comes from a CD or a higher resolution
> SACD/DVD-A. In fact, the CD is cheaper so why bother with the higher
> priced spread?
>
> Of course, I'm talking about the average person, not the audiophiles
> (which I suspect are in the majority here on this list) I have SACD
> and DVD-A capabilities several places in my home but I'll also admit
> to having over 8000 of my songs on my various iPods where the quality
> is lower than even the CD sources.
>
> I'm not recommending CDs over SACD/DVD-A, or AM over FM, or DVD over
> HD-DVD/Blue Ray, etc. merely pointing out the average person's
> practical use of the available options. And, of course, most of us
> agree that in the case of HD-DVD vs. Blue Ray the competition will
> cloud the issue even more and most likely be extremely detrimental to
> the cause as it has been in the past.
>
>
> -- 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]
#15
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

At 01:01 PM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
>I'll pay more for a high definition DVD but most
>people (95%) will not if given a choice. The percentage of people who will
>switch to high def. DVDs is far lower than the people who are switching to
>HDTV.

Exactly! And that's the point I was making in discussing the
preponderance of CD over the higher quality SACD/DVD-A. The average
person sees it as an added cost without a corresponding benefit. I'm
not arguing against high Def. DVDs any more than I would be arguing
against SACD/DVD-As. We are preaching to the choir here. I'm just
saying that it will be a hard sell to the average consumer as long as
movies are available in a cheaper format with the same convenience
factor. (DVD vs. high Def DVD). It's just not the same as going
from video tape to disc (random access, menus, extras, etc.) We saw
the same migration in audio from Cassette Tapes to CDs for the same
reasons. Yes, HDTVs will become more commonplace but that doesn't
mean that the normal viewer will always watch the best source
available if the (perceived) quality difference is incremental.


-- 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]
#16
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

RAF, You have a valid point. While several have commented about the
attractive gravity of HD content, I continue to be amazed by what most
viewers will accept. I am speaking particularly of the incredibly poor
quality of most of the DBS channels, and especially the down-rezzed
locals. Or how about the noise in the analog cable signals!

Even after exposure to quality HD visuals, a number of my acquaintances
just shrug their shoulders and walk away! I suppose that this response
may be similar to response to early color TV (which really had poor
PQ).

For my part, I have greatly attenuated my rate of DVD purchases, because
I can barely stand to watch them. I am anxiously awaiting the advent of
better PQ with the next generation technology, but I have the difficulty
that I do not have a display device with HDMI, and I will refuse to
spend on the order of an extra $6000 for a replacement just to enjoy
hddvds.

Perhaps I am like those who walk away from HD; my threshold for upgrade
is just scaled differently from my associates.

Howard in South Bend





On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 18:17 -0400, Dr Robert A Fowkes wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 01:01 PM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
> >I'll pay more for a high definition DVD but most
> >people (95%) will not if given a choice. The percentage of people who will
> >switch to high def. DVDs is far lower than the people who are switching to
> >HDTV.
>
> Exactly! And that's the point I was making in discussing the
> preponderance of CD over the higher quality SACD/DVD-A. The average
> person sees it as an added cost without a corresponding benefit. I'm
> not arguing against high Def. DVDs any more than I would be arguing
> against SACD/DVD-As. We are preaching to the choir here. I'm just
> saying that it will be a hard sell to the average consumer as long as
> movies are available in a cheaper format with the same convenience
> factor. (DVD vs. high Def DVD). It's just not the same as going
> from video tape to disc (random access, menus, extras, etc.) We saw
> the same migration in audio from Cassette Tapes to CDs for the same
> reasons. Yes, HDTVs will become more commonplace but that doesn't
> mean that the normal viewer will always watch the best source
> available if the (perceived) quality difference is incremental.
>
>
> -- 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]
#17
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Howard,

I'll admit there are some real dogs visually out there on DVD, but there are
also some real gems.
In the past couple of years I've found more gems than dogs at least in terms
of picture quality. I find it hard to believe that the image quality your
getting from DVD's is that bad. It begs the questions, what monitor are you
using, has it been calibrated and what DVD player are you using?

Anthony R.
Orlando, FL

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Howard A. Blackstead
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 10:59 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: HD-DVD Preferred over Blu-Ray..........(the sounds and
sightsof one hand clapping)


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

RAF, You have a valid point. While several have commented about the
attractive gravity of HD content, I continue to be amazed by what most
viewers will accept. I am speaking particularly of the incredibly poor
quality of most of the DBS channels, and especially the down-rezzed
locals. Or how about the noise in the analog cable signals!

Even after exposure to quality HD visuals, a number of my acquaintances
just shrug their shoulders and walk away! I suppose that this response
may be similar to response to early color TV (which really had poor
PQ).

For my part, I have greatly attenuated my rate of DVD purchases, because
I can barely stand to watch them. I am anxiously awaiting the advent of
better PQ with the next generation technology, but I have the difficulty
that I do not have a display device with HDMI, and I will refuse to
spend on the order of an extra $6000 for a replacement just to enjoy
hddvds.

Perhaps I am like those who walk away from HD; my threshold for upgrade
is just scaled differently from my associates.

Howard in South Bend





On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 18:17 -0400, Dr Robert A Fowkes wrote:
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> At 01:01 PM 7/26/2005, you wrote:
> >I'll pay more for a high definition DVD but most
> >people (95%) will not if given a choice. The percentage of people who
will
> >switch to high def. DVDs is far lower than the people who are switching
to
> >HDTV.
>
> Exactly! And that's the point I was making in discussing the
> preponderance of CD over the higher quality SACD/DVD-A. The average
> person sees it as an added cost without a corresponding benefit. I'm
> not arguing against high Def. DVDs any more than I would be arguing
> against SACD/DVD-As. We are preaching to the choir here. I'm just
> saying that it will be a hard sell to the average consumer as long as
> movies are available in a cheaper format with the same convenience
> factor. (DVD vs. high Def DVD). It's just not the same as going
> from video tape to disc (random access, menus, extras, etc.) We saw
> the same migration in audio from Cassette Tapes to CDs for the same
> reasons. Yes, HDTVs will become more commonplace but that doesn't
> mean that the normal viewer will always watch the best source
> available if the (perceived) quality difference is incremental.
>
>
> -- 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]
#18
----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

an interesting news day...

Legally Downloadable PSP Movies--In Japan

BenQ offers FP91V display with 4ms response

VSDA Calls for Next-Gen Disc Compromise

http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=87

Richard Fisher
www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation



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]