Video
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Tech Talk
Forum Description: Discuss musical instruments, equipment, hi-fi, speakers, vinyl, gadgets,etc.
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=38981
Printed Date: November 25 2024 at 09:55
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Video
Posted By: oliverstoned
Subject: Video
Date Posted: June 13 2007 at 05:08
|
Sources: -VHS decks VHS decks from JVC remain excellent, especially the high end models. The colours are more natural than numeric and the sound explodes any DVD deck, because of analog superiority. 
-DVD players Pioneer: Good news! the first models from Pioneer (90€, very cheap) already features an excellent picture quality. The sound is (just) decent. 
Arcam: If you're looking for a DVD player featuring a good sound, Arcam is recommended. Their audio circuits are the same than their CD players, so expect the same musicality. The picture quality is not as good as the Pionner however. 
Denon: In top high end, Denon is the king, fighting with Pioneer. 
Peritel:In a basic/budget setup, one can use a good peritel cable for enhanced picture and/or sound quality. Monster cable and QED are recommended. 
Optimization: The receipts in audio apply in video: power filtering, quality power cable, vib cancelling will enhance any video source and so the picture/sound quality as a result. One can also glue bitume plates inside the DVD player and add a granite plate on it, especially because DVD mechanics often vibrate much. |
Replies:
Posted By: PROGMAN
Date Posted: June 15 2007 at 18:50
|
Remember the old Betamax!! My family converted to VHS in 1989. ------------- CYMRU AM BYTH 
|
Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: June 16 2007 at 16:44
|
The Arcam DVD player is far superior to that Pioneer you've listed Oliver. I think you are mistaken.. I have a Pioneer DVD 696, the one that playes SACD and DVD-A. excellent picture but not as good as the Arcam base model. |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 16 2007 at 17:09
|
Sorry i didn't expressed well myself. It's a matter of price range. I don't pretend that the first Pioneer (90€) smokes the first Arcam (several times more expensive), but in term of image the last Pioneer in the same price range as the base Arcam may be more precise.
Unless Arcam made big progress on on picture recently. |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 16 2007 at 17:19
|
...but if you say true, i'm about to get the fisrt Arcam!
For sure the Arcam is musical and that's a great strenght to watch music DVDs. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 17 2007 at 03:54
 Add a high quality audio card (SB Audigy/X-Fi) and a good graphics card, and you have superior image quality over any standalone DVD player. Unfortunately it doesn't play SACD though, but DVD Audio.  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to: 
|
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 17 2007 at 14:40
|
Don't dream!
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 17 2007 at 15:04
#
And it looks so pretty too!!  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow"> 
|
MikeEnRegalia wrote:Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 02:19
i have a vcr/dvd combo - a Daewoo
 you can transfer old vcr tapes onto dvd using this machine, the sound and picture quality is excellent. i have transferred a lot of tapes over using this, including some rare TV rock shows from the 80's. the old tapes were covered in white dust, presumably mould, so they are now on dvd - amazingly this process improved the snowy picture quality of the videos, something that had always been a problem, but not any more.
 -------------  Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 02:46
It's you who is dreaming here, Olivier ... you can't beat my knowledge in the digital domain. Do you think I won my degree in the lottery? Computers with decent graphics cards have simply much, much more computational power than the simply standalone DVD players - and that power is put to good use to beautify the signal. Especially when you use a LCD TV connected digitally (via DVI or HDMI) to the TV the quality of the image can be outstanding. Of course it only works if the native resolution of the LCD can be used - most LG displays are capable of that, for example. And I'm also aware of the fact that currently LCDs have some inherent weaknesses in terms of contrast and color space, but they're catching up on the CRTs pretty fast ... and they're already superior in many areas: power consumption, sharpness, resolution (HDTV), reliability, geometry etc. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 04:59
Cambridge Audio DVD 89..
 it plays DVD, DVD-Audio 5.1, SACD5.1, stereo CD - everything! though it doesn't make the tea, and i once tried to play a beer mat in it but didn't work - oh well, you can't have everything!
 ------------- Prog Archives Tour Van
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 05:09
My Toshiba...
 ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: mystic fred
Date Posted: June 18 2007 at 05:14
'ello Tosh.....
 ------------- Prog Archives Tour Van
|
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 03:06
So which DVD players did you try and on which kind of screen? (LCD and Plasma are crap BTW). |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 03:08
^ and which LCDs/Plasmas did you try ... and which software DVD players for that matter? What I don't understand about your position on DVDs is that from a technical standpoint DVDs are for video what MP3 is for audio - but you like it! ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Neil
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 03:25
The colour signal on a VHS tape has less than 10% of the resolution of the original camera image, that is the only way that that quantity of information can be wedged onto the tape. The base audio track is a very poor linear mono recording and the "hi-fi" sound works by modulating the stereo sound onto a carrier frequency in a similar way to FM radio. Neither the video nor the sound could ever be described as superior to a DVD system. In a "blind" test (that's a funny concept, how do you blind test video?) even the best VHS machine would fall down to a reasonable DVD.
Don't simply assume that analogue is superior; it very much depends on the accuracy of the analogy. ------------- When people get lost in thought it's often because it's unfamiliar territory. |
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 04:43
That needs qualifying. Which DVD players are you comparing this to with this statement. Specifically, which standalone DVD players have you tried in your system?
And which top models by the top manufacturers have you compared it to? Because if you make a statement like that you have to have tested it against the very best available. For example, did you put it up against this? http://www.meridian-audio.com/p_800V4.htm - http://www.meridian-audio.com/p_800V4.htm
You need to give proof of comparative tests - citing models and other equipment used.
Also which DVDs did you use to do the comparison test?
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:02
|
^ I haven't conducted any tests myself ... I don't have the money to buy various DVD players and displays and compare them. My statement is based on various reviews that I read in magazines, and my computer setup seems to be very nice, as attested by people who I invited to watch DVDs. Of course this is entirely subjective ... BTW: Maybe my statement was a little over the top - I should have used "most" rather than "any". I guess that current top of the line DVD players have the processing power to compete with current computers (with the use of DSPs), but not those from several years ago. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:14
Strewth mate, that was a bit of an admission. No conducted tests yourself? Wouldn't that have been a good idea before stating so vehemently that your setup could outperform any stand-alone?
And you don't need to buy into gear to test, you can often borrow items for home testing, at least if you go to indie dealers who know what they are talking about and who also stock the better gear. It might be a good idea to go along to your local store to see where things are at now. But don't waste your time testing the mass-produced Japanese stuff. You obviously are more discerning than that. See some decent makes.
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:20
Her didn't say that he said that PCs have....
"much more computational power than the simply standalone DVD players "
....and he has already admitted that he went a bit over the top. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:23
| ^Blimey who rattled your cage? He seems more than capable of debating his own reasoning. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:24
I'm sorry, I thought this was a forum. I didn't realise I needed your permission to comment.
Bit cheeky for a NOOB.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:29
| Sarcasm very funny laddie - a bit rude for an old dog. If you want to defend your own statements that's fine. But as it was someone else who made a particular claim I made the reasonable request for an explanation. How is it that you feel the need to stand up for him - are you his bodyguard or something. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:31
Don't call me laddie.
This is an open forum.....not a two way conversation. I will comment where I see fit. If you have a problem with that.
TOUGH!!! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:34
| Tough eh - ooo what a big laddie you are LADDIE |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:37
The first half of your message shows of "free" was your attack, one more time. The second half shows one of your obsessions: everything that is new is good. The one year old device from X brand is automatically better than the two-years old model from the same...like that you told one time that a recent CD rom player would of course beat a 10 or 15 years old big hifi (good)digital setup. That's forgetting that's musicality and performance has not much to do with that, and that manufacturers often lie about the improvment on their products, and that even a same model can be downgraded to make it cheaper to make, so the older model may be better. That's also how you blindy defend digital, because it's new. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:40
Thanks Aussie moron. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:41
I don't need a blind test, just switch from the VHS deck to the DVD and see what happens. DVD may be more precise, but colours are pale compared to the VHS. Not to say that i don't like the DVD format, it's a good invention and numeric is not a disaster in the video field than in audio. The sound is of course much better on the (good JVC)VHS deck, it's simply like comparing a modest to good integrated CD player to a good tapedeck. That send us back to the analog Vs digital debate. |
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:44
Why waste your time sunshine - I don't care what you think, get back on topic
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:45
Sorry, but I have better things to do in my spare time ... I'm a computer expert, I know the DVD format and the limitations of the various display technologies, and I know what both software and hardware DVD players to to enhance the image quality. I've made up my mind, and you're free to ignore or even challenge my opinion ... for once I'll do like Olivier and simply lean back and say: My system is better than yours - if you don't believe me then come to my place and see for yourself!  ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:47
Sunshine? You really are a patronising twerp aren't you?
As it happens, I was on topic before you went off it. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:47
That's another good one mate. You don't know what I've got and your's is still better. We all need some of what you've got if it's that good.
|
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:49
He was joking. Its an old argument between him and Olivier, that you don't get, because you are a newbie. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:51
@Archer: Snow Dog is right - I'm not entirely serious here. But if you want to test my claims then all you need is a good computer display, a reasonably powerful computer and a good software DVD player (PowerDVD and WinDVD are the best IMO, confirmed by various tests) which is usually priced at not more than $50 - and most current computers ship with one of these players anyway. ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:51
Twerp eh? And that makes you seem so adult. And if you think that I went off-topic then perhaps you'd better read back.
|
Posted By: Neil
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 05:56
No it isn't because the sound from the best VHS is not as good as a good tape deck. Surely you can appreciate that some analogue methods are better than others. Wax discs were analogue but you'd struggle to find anyone who would say that they were hi-fi.
You say in an earlier post that MikeenRegalia thinks everything that is new is better. You appear to blindly think that everything that is analogue is better. I'm prepared to admit that real top of the range analogue kit ( in a reasonably accurate analogue media such vinyl or reel to reel tape) can sound as good as (or to some ears better) than good digital equipment (but the cost and the effort required makes it the preserve of the few where as mid range digi kit with perfectly acceptable hi-fi sound can be had by all).
The fact is that the picture and sound on VHS is a compromise. That's how the system was designed. The colour is about one quarter of the resolution of the luminance signal (which is also about one third as good as the original camera signal) which is why the edges of bright colours always look fuzzy on video. It's analogous to pixelation on digital images. There just isn't the bandwidth to carry all the information.
SVHS did improve on VHS a bit but it's still low quality compared to the original camera signal and because it pushed the tape harder dropouts and picture noise were more common. ------------- When people get lost in thought it's often because it's unfamiliar territory. |
Posted By: Snow Dog
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 06:00
Yes.......Twerp. I don't know what the use of that word has to do with age though.
 Reading back....
Ok...I'm going to climbdown here. Its obvious we have a clash of personality. No gain can be made from continuing this. Sorry for the misunderstanding. ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Snow_Dog" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Archer
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 06:09
Apology accepted
   |
Posted By: oliverstoned
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 08:38
Certainly, but sound on CD was compromised as well. I'm talking about high end JVC decks (S-VHS indeed), that i've listened to on a big system, and the sound was far superior (with an ordinary pre-recorded VHS tape) than any DVD player, to my knowledge. And yes, analog always win. |
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 19 2007 at 08:52
|
^ about S-VHS sound: "In terms of audio recording, S-VHS retains VHS's conventional analog (linear) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi-Fi - Hi-Fi (AFM) soundtracks. As neither is changed from the VHS format, the linear audio track delivers sound quality scarcely better than http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM_radio - AM radio . The Hi-Fi soundtrack uses VHS's depth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplexing - multiplexing technique to sandwich an AFM (audio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_modulation - frequency-modulated ) signal beneath the video signal, which delivers excellent audio fidelity, approaching http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CD - CD -quality. In addition, some professional S-VHS decks can record a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PCM - PCM digital audio track ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereophonic_sound - stereo 48 kHz), along with the normal video and Hi-Fi analog audio." (From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-VHS - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-VHS ) ------------- https://awesomeprog.com/users/Mike" rel="nofollow">Recently listened to:
|