High Def Video BIG success.......HiRes Audio Not so much...How come?

[chg]

Uh, keep digging...

 

I'm not sure if what you're saying is bad, but just to be clear, I'm saying I, or (you, i.e., men in general) don't want trouble with a female.

[Julf]

I'm not sure if what you're saying is bad, but just to be clear, I'm saying I, or (you, i.e., men in general) don't want trouble with a female.

 

To a Northern European, your statement might sound sexist, and I am sure that won't help in making peace with Eloise...

[chg]

To a Northern European, your statement might sound sexist, and I am sure that won't help in making peace with Eloise...

 

Got it.

[Musicophile]

This thread has quickly morphed into the "Civility" kind of direction, I'm impressed.

[Julf]

This thread has quickly morphed into the "Civility" kind of direction, I'm impressed.

 

Must be the propellerhead gasbag objectivists who peed on the thread again...

[accwai]

This thread has quickly morphed into the "Civility" kind of direction, I'm impressed.

 

This thread? Lately, it feels like the whole place has morphed...

 

Andy

[firedog]

RE: why HD audio hasn't taken off...

At the end of the day it's about lifestyle. People's music listening habits tend to revolve around background listening. Most people these days don't even have a "stereo system", let alone one that would allow them to differentiate between CD quality and HD. Most people use an iPod dock at the most.

 

1. Eloise (above) has this right, I think. It's the same reason most people listen to mp3's and not CD's - even when they own a pretty good stereo, they'd rather just plug their iPod into a dock.

 

2. Because we all can see the difference between a really good picture on a TV screen and a not so good one. With audio, however, you need good equipment and generally most people need to train their listening to appreciate the sometimes subtle difference with hi-res audio. (Don't you all have friends who say "my mp3's sound the same as my Cd's"). So why would these people be interested in hi-res audio?

[Alice Wonder]

My Ogg Vorbis do sound the same as my CD's

 

OK no, I haven't actually ABX'd them but at q5 on my equipment, if there is a difference it isn't one I notice (between flac and ogg). On better equipment I might.

 

The low quality (q1) I make for my portable player I can hear the difference but the space saving is worth it and with aoTuV vorbis encoder it's actually pretty good and I doubt with my ear buds it matters - I don't buy expensive ear buds because I have a tendency to damage them. I'm epileptic, it can't be helped.

[Paul R]

Now that is just weird - we just downloaded The Avengers and Battleship, both of which insisted on downloading the SD versions as well as the 1080p HD versions. There is no way I think anyone could miss the difference between them.

 

Only think that I can even faintly think of is, are you using an ATV Generation 2 or 3? You need the 3 to see 1080p video. You also need to be sure to set the preferences to display through HDMI with the highest possible resolution.

 

Oh yeah, we are also feeding the ATV3 here through an AVR, which upscales. I will see if feeding the TV direct from the ATV3 makes a difference. It should not, but it is probably worth checking. The ATV3 here puts out a much better picture than the ATV2 does, and I thought that the ATV2 was pretty darn good.

 

-Paul

 

 

That's what I thought too. I downloaded "Up" from iTunes. It downloads both the regular and high-res version. Because of some glitch, I wound up watching the regular def version, commenting to everyone how great it looked in high definition, until I found out what had happened. I've since compared the two versions, and I cannot tell the difference, except for the file size. We have a 52" Samsung 1080p LCD TV, FWIW.

[wgscott]

I have ATV2, and the "high res" UP I have is 720P, not 1080P. (I checked subsequent to your first response). I can play 1080P out my computer, so maybe I should get one of those and see.

 

My internet connection is sufficiently slow to preclude renting/streaming HD videos.

[Audio_ELF]

I have ATV2, and the "high res" UP I have is 720P, not 1080P. (I checked subsequent to your first response). I can play 1080P out my computer, so maybe I should get one of those and see.

 

My internet connection is sufficiently slow to preclude renting/streaming HD videos.

The Apple TV 2 only supports 720p IIRC.

 

Eloise

[abqnmusa]

sadly the masses are happy with the thin sounding 128 Kbs MP3's they prirated on the net or from friends

they are listening with ear buds anyway; so it does not matter the music is missing all the detail, some instruments, voices, etc.

 

Audiophiles have always been a minority

 

>>>>> Support the companies that are offering 24bit downloads (HDtracks, 2L, etc.. <<<<<<

 

I think the 24bit mastered music sounds better and is work supporting. That will help our situation.

[wgscott]

The Apple TV 2 only supports 720p IIRC.

 

Eloise

 

 

Yes, but my mac mini can do 1080P.

 

I just realized I do have a 1080P video -- the one offered from the Bowers and Wilkins soc of sound. The resolution is pretty remarkable. You can see every unshaven folicle on Gergiev's face.

[Audio_ELF]

Yes, but my Mac Mini can do 1080P.

Doh, yes you did say.

 

On the other hand I'm yet to be convinced that (for the majority of films) 1080i from SkyTV (satellite) is an improvement over the DVD played on a decent (Cambridge Audio Bluray) player. This is the bit-rate argument I mentioned earlier.

 

Eloise

[spdif-usb]

I just can't ignore the scientific method.

You can upsample 16/44.1 to 24/192 and sell it in the form of a DVD-A disc while advertizing it as an audiophile product and, obviously, the quality of the recording equipment, the recording technique, as well as the mastering process all also play a key role as for the final sound quality that can be achieved through HiRes playback. Moreover, there is substantial objective evidence to support the hypothesis that blind listening tests are fundamentally flawed.

The fact 16/44.1 is insufficient to store all information required to transparently reconstruct an audio signal is really nothing new. Early mathematical explanations date back as far as the mid-1990s, even. Nowadays, with the application of near-perfect noise shaped dither and insanely advanced minimum-phase filtering, the noise floor of correctly quantized 16/44.1 can still be audible because the dynamic range it can provide is roughly 30 dB short of human hearing threshold if 120 dBspl is assumed at listening position. Admittedly, nobody listens at 120 dBspl, but a certain amount of headroom is required in order to adequately compensate for various distortions caused by the rest of the real-world audio reproduction chain. So, basically, the scientific method works. Unfortunately however, some people will just argue to the death to defend their definition of correct science.

[mayhem13]

Uh, keep digging...

 

Don't worry, openly inappropriate, sexist comments from a subjective position won't get you banned on CA.

[sandyk]

On the other hand I'm yet to be convinced that (for the majority of films) 1080i from SkyTV (satellite) is an improvement over the DVD played on a decent (Cambridge Audio Bluray) player. This is the bit-rate argument I mentioned earlier.

 

Eloise

If what I have seem from both Satellite and cable TV is anything to go by, it would appear that their version of HDTV with reduced bit rate is no better than a good Terrestial SDTV transmission.(if that!) Even with SDTV, the difference in quality is quite easy to pick when the original source was HD, and then downconverted to SDTV for transmission.

Fortunately, more local productions appear to be using HD, for at least some outside footage.

Alex

[sandyk]

Duplicate post deleted.

[chg]

So you accept I'm right... Then I'm happy :-)

 

Yes, but then that would mean your audio knowledge is close to 0% as you never agree with me - I don't really see that as something you would be saying!!

 

Anyway - as I say those views were subjective for the most part and are based on UK television / broadcasting so may be different for other people and other parts of the world...

 

Eloise

 

Hi Eloise,

 

Yesterday I was in a rush and just about to shut things down and head out when the questions came in (from this post and the other), so my apologies for any poor etiquette.

 

So you accept I'm right... Then I'm happy :-)

 

Yes, now that I read it with fresh eyes, and more carefully, I would say you are right. There are, however, maybe two minor details I differ on, but you should still be happy.

 

Yes, but then that would mean your audio knowledge is close to 0% as you never agree with me - I don't really see that as something you would be saying!!

 

O.K., How about 95% and 90%? And the comment "you never agree with me" is definitely untrue. I've only disagreed with the occasional "trouble maker" replies. Fact is, I'm impressed by your level of knowledge. You're one of the more knowledgeable here and certainly the most knowledgeable female here that I'm aware of. I wish there were more females like you in this hobby.

 

and are based on UK television / broadcasting so may be different for other people and other parts of the world...

 

Not that it makes your assessment wrong for other parts of the world, but an excellent point and I did fail to notice that earlier.

[Audio_ELF]

O.K., How about 95% and 90%? And the comment "you never agree with me" is definitely untrue. I've only disagreed with the occasional "trouble maker" replies. Fact is, I'm impressed by your level of knowledge. You're one of the more knowledgeable here and certainly the most knowledgeable female here that I'm aware of. I wish there were more females like you in this hobby.

Well in that case thank you CHG (sorry I don't know or at least don't recall your name so CHG will have to do).

 

I apologise that I read your previous comment as being sarcastic if that was not the intention.

 

Eloise

[chg]

Well in that case thank you CHG (sorry I don't know or at least don't recall your name so CHG will have to do).

 

I apologise that I read your previous comment as being sarcastic if that was not the intention.

 

Eloise

 

No apologies necessary on your part.

 

I've learned that type written communication (as opposed to verbal) can many times come across as sarcastic when it's not meant to be.

 

BTW: I like the new avatar.

[chg]

Don't worry, openly inappropriate, sexist comments from a subjective position won't get you banned on CA.

 

You seem to be unable to refrain from spreading your "mayhem". Now you're questioning the integrity in how Chris runs his site! It's clear that you (and possibly Julf) are only looking to scrutinize my posts in order to retaliate against legitimate criticisms I made against you earlier. The comment in question was a harmless, lighthearted, playful comment that you want to try and blow out of proportion. At least you chose an accurate username.

[Julf]

You seem to be unable to refrain from spreading your "mayhem". Now you're questioning the integrity in how Chris runs his site! It's clear that you (and possibly Julf) are only looking to scrutinize my posts in order to retaliate against legitimate criticisms I made against you earlier. The comment in question was a harmless, lighthearted, playful comment that you want to try and blow out of proportion. At least you chose an accurate username.

 

Carthage must be destroyed!

[Paul R]

Yes, it certainly is. We can tell much more of a difference between SD, 720p, and 1080p when the AVR is not scaling everything up to 1080p, but there are still differences, with true 1080p being unmistakeably better here.

 

True 1080p coming from Bluray disks or from iTunes. Not sure what is coming from Netflix, but I think it might be 1080i at best, and with the adaptive connections, it is often less - much less. Even on old b&w movies the quality will degade, and that is over a 107 mps link. We think Suddenlink is throttling NetFlix and iTunes, but you can just download purchased iTunes material to a local server.

 

Paul

 

 

 

Yes, but my mac mini can do 1080P.

 

I just realized I do have a 1080P video -- the one offered from the Bowers and Wilkins soc of sound. The resolution is pretty remarkable. You can see every unshaven folicle on Gergiev's face.

[Richard Dale]

....which is in starK contradiction to how much 'audiophiles' spend on playback gear. Although not intended by this thread....and interesting paradox.

 

Why do you put audiophiles in quotes?