I noticed that flesh tones from a DVD look far better on my retina imac than they do on my LCD TV or LCD 2nd monitor. Strangle enough my gig videos also look far better on my retina iMac than then do on my LG 43" TV as in lack of colour fringing I though or used to think that was down to yuotube and compression.
what's a grade 1 monitor comparted to the ultra 4K HD or wide galmet type.
Yep. That sounds about right. But you wouldt need to go that far. A RISC processor could be quite a bit less.
6809 mebbe...
Unusually you raise a good point. You never saw a panning picture jerking as you now often do on many digital sets, that and lipsync lag.
The thing is, 'most people' simply don't see such things and so can't complain about it.
When I got my first Freeview set I couldn't stop seeing it but then you just get used to it as 'they are all like that sir'.
Cheers, T i m
Whilst I agree with the observation, is it the actual display method, transmission bandwidth or the lack of (display processing) horsepower?
Cheers, T i m
Also judging by the *noise* that a 7 channel AV amp produces. Does all that base rumbling and vibrating really improve the film ?.
Since most people lose their ability to hear the higher frequencies as they age I would have thought that a tone control knob was essential for even the humblest of radios.
Watch a lot of flesh, do you? :)
That is rather like saying 'we can't afford it'
'They' choose not to make the necessary bandwidth available. So in later years they can bring out super HD to sell more gear.
Oddly, Philips once made some rather fine (for the time) car speakers. A long throw dual cone 4". Fitted as standard by Rolls Royce.
What sort of display does it use? Think it may be LED rather than LCD. Not had any experience of a full sized LED screen.
When looking for a 'cost effective' "Bedroom" TV set a few years ago, my main consideration was that any "HD Ready" 1080p 22 to 24 inch TVs would have to have sufficient cabinet depth to give its built in speakers a fighting chance at producing intelligible speech, unlike the dinky LG set we'd wasted our money on a few years earlier for use in the kitchen/diner (I'd been forced to hitch up a couple of cheap PC speakers via the headphone jack in order to be able to comprehend Jeremy Vine's questions and banter on Eggheads).
My quest led me to choose an obsolescent Akai TV with built in DVD player and, unlike the crappy LG, USB sockets that would allow playback of video file formats as well as mp3 and jpg. I didn't need the DVD optical disk function other than for its desired side effect of forcing the manufacturer into almost unwittingly providing sufficient cabinet volume to raise the audio quality standard to just short of what was once considered sufficient for CRT TV sets.
The stinky crappy LG in the kitchen/dining area was eventually relegated to the attic as a "poor man's spare PC monitor" by a slightly larger Philips TV we'd inherited from my late father's estate. The charm of this model was a similar 'cabinet volume' endowment to that of the Akai but without the encumbrance of an unnecessary DVD optical disk player drive.
Thus I was able to return the PC speakers to stock (now destined never to be sold to a customer as a "Shop Soiled" half priced bargain - no matter, the 5 quid 'bargain price' is now merely 'chump change' these days anyway) and I now merely need to crank the volume to 95% in order to hear Jeremy Vine's voice clearly enough when watching Eggheads.
The high volume setting requirement is largely to compensate for the HD audio standard that seems to be employed by the production crew, i.e. dead quiet so the loud bits don't clip. WTF??? Loud bits on a studio produced quiz show? Really? Must they???
Is it just me or does anyone else feel that such 'high fidelity' treatment of the sound is, for once, totally counter-productive, particularly in the absence of annoying audience participation that is often cursed with very obvious compression induced pumping effects on shows such as 'Mock the Week' and 'Pointless' et al? I can't believe I'm the only viewer who feels that the sound engineers on 'Eggheads' are, and continue, working to a totally inappropriate 'brief'.
But that's the whole idea of multi-channel surround. To impress the gullible.
Whilst that is true, I notice a big difference between the same presenter on FreeView radio and FreeView TV, both fed through the same broadcast quality sound system. TV seems no longer bothering to EQ a personal mic to make it sound closer to a decent one.
Only to the extent that it highlights the rubbish sound on some productions.
Until I get the slap ;-)
But actuaklly a friend was buying a new monitor for his PC and he couldnl't undertsand why there was such a price range as he assumed all LCDs were th e same and only the size dictated the cost. He brought a firefly DVD over and I put it on my cheap 24" LCD monitor and he said it looked OK, then on teh TV again it looked OK, but when he saw t he same image on my retina imac he could see the differnce as I pointed out that one of the things photogrphers did was look at skin tones for quality and not the typical amazon tree frog they show off in TV stores when showi ng how good the colour of thier TVs are. He didn't go for an expensive moni tor as he said he just wanted it mainly for gaming and writing.
I do wonder what the newer 4k ultra HD would be like in a simialar comparis ion.
Anyway with all these brazians about there's less hair covering the skin ;- )
LED backlit I think. But I'm trying to understand what the actual advantage would be of one of the new pro iMac screens something about overlaping pixels.
I suppose you could blame it on the EU.
EBU (european broadcast union) set the specification for digital recording levels such that the intended maximum would still have 10dB headroom - for accidents. And this level is still nominally applied by the big TV companies. But almost certainly not by other sound sources you may have which will peak to 0dBFS. And 10dB is a very noticeable increase in level.
Then add in some of the 'minority' channels like UK Drama etc who show mainly old repeats that seem to have been digitized by some work experience type who wouldn't know a decibel from a phon and simply sets the knob where it always is. So you get low levels - until the robotised announcer at the end of the prog blast you out of your seat.
How about a PGA?
Lack of bandwidth.
It's not intrinsic to the hardware in theory. cheap hardware may stutter..
It is probably simply lack of bandwith in the recieved signal. MP4 compressions is...compression.
Where ... and even from a local DVD / BD?
Cheers, T i m
Allowing an extra 10dB headroom on drama productions is legitimate enough, if a little wasteful of the dynamic range available in most domestic listening contexts and the inconsiderate shoutyness of the continuity announcer imposing audible vandalism on the end credits can usually be anticipated and adjusted for if you have the remote control in your hand but it makes very little sense to apply such rules to studio productions of pre-recorded game and quiz shows where the needs of intelligibility trump those of sonic fidelity.
As a matter of interest, this quest for sonic fidelity in drama productions has been pursued to the point where the general public (the general public for Gawd's sake!) have been complaining about the lack of intelligibility of the dialogue (normally an essential component of most audiovisual productions) to poor beleaguered Jeremy Vine on Points of View in recent years.
Very few viewers are prepared to wear headphones to reduce the ambisonics down from the sum of the studio or location and the home listening environment to just that of the studio or location alone in order to recreate the sonic landscape as experienced by the producer whom, one is left to presume, thought the sound quality of the production was sufficient or worthy enough to be presented to its intended audience.
Sonic fidelity is all very fine provided it isn't achieved at the expense of intelligibility of the dialogue which is normally the central component to any video play that aims to entertain beyond the level of 'Slapstick' or Mime. It seems a lot of these producers in recent times are unable to distinguish between Slapstick and Shakespeare.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.