Post by Iain February 3, 2014 (61 of 88)
|
|
Disbeliever said:
EXCELLENT however have not seen "casino Royal" BD
The recent Bond films, starting with "Casino Royale" have eliminated my disdain of the 007 genre.
My point of the opening title sequence however, is it's a great 3 minute check of the black levels of your display, as well as being a great film. "Quantum of Solace" is part 2 of it, and the recent "Skyfall" maintain the same level of excellence of the first two.
|
|
|
Post by rammiepie February 3, 2014 (62 of 88)
|
|
Iain said:
The recent Bond films, starting with "Casino Royale" have eliminated my disdain of the 007 genre.
My point of the opening title sequence however, is it's a great 3 minute check of the black levels of your display, as well as being a great film. "Quantum of Solace" is part 2 of it, and the recent "Skyfall" maintain the same level of excellence of the first two.
Loved Casino Royale and Skyfall but could never "warm up" to Quantum of Solace.
Most new TVs whether Plasma, LCD or LED have pretty much mastered the "black level" controversy, especially those toting THX certification.
Whether we really need 2K x 4K at this juncture is another matter altogether. The resolution of current TVs is pretty amazing, IMHO.
2K x 4K will be a projector "darling." The Bigger, the better!
|
|
|
|
|
|
IMO 2K 4K is a waste of time & money for TV sets , but could be better for Projection. I have yet to see a better picture than I am already getting on my Samsung LED . However of course this all depends on the quality of the program being broadcast. BBC Studio scenes are usually inferior to their outside broadcasts which are usually superb. I agree with you re Black levels but Know nothing about THX certification if it is like complex Audyssey forget it. I see from a review in Home Theatre of the Sony 5800ES AVR that the reviewer much prefers the Sony EQ set up to Audyssey, Fitzy take note. Kal too.
|
|
|
Post by rammiepie February 4, 2014 (64 of 88)
|
|
Disbeliever said:
IMO 2K 4K is a waste of time & money for TV sets , but could be better for Projection. I have yet to see a better picture than I am already getting on my Samsung LED . However of course this all depends on the quality of the program being broadcast. BBC Studio scenes are usually inferior to their outside broadcasts which are usually superb. I agree with you re Black levels but Know nothing about THX certification if it is like complex Audyssey forget it. I see from a review in Home Theatre of the Sony 5800ES AVR that the reviewer much prefers the Sony EQ set up to Audyssey, Fitzy take note. Kal too.
What a THX setting is for TVs, Gerald, is that it's parameters are set at the factory so there's no tinkering with the controls (brightness, contrast etc). Thus, a Perfect picture! The THX setting is user selectable and can be overridden by the user for custom preferences, if desired.
My Meridian DILA projector was also pre set at the factory and absolute truth be told.....I have NEVER touched it and am still amazed by it's excellence (unlike other projectors I have previously owned).
In my above post, I also mentioned that 4K x 2K would be better suited for projectors and larger flat screen panels (like 80" and above).
|
|
|
Post by Iain February 6, 2014 (65 of 88)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Iain said:
Obviously, you need a new display.
http://www.amazon.com/Glenn-Gould-Television-Broadcasts-1954-1977/dp/B005D4Y4H8 arrived and, being North American DVDs, is in NTSC 4:3 aspect ratio (16bit 48kHz PCM).
I'll be watching it on 'Academy' CRT then later on 'widescreen' Plasma because I'm curious to whether I'd feel differently by preferring one over the other ; generally, I don't enjoy having black vertical bars of 4:3 on 16:9 displays (nor do I enlarge 4:3 to fit 16:9 when it's encoded in 480 vertical frame resolution).
Similarly, in audio, I've kept most of the Marantz I'd collected (given away some to friends or family but seldom selling) regardless whether it be 'high-end' or low. Because knowing each product through study (not least studying thoroughly the user manual) and varied accumulated usage means I can assemble a playback chain that will emotionally satisfy specific needs. For example, although I defer to streaming online audio primarily with the Consolette due to its precision in replaying what digital data is present, I will also try listening with the amplification of Marantz MusicLink SC-22 to MA-23s when I want the reproduction it reproduces, a velvety valve-like warmth to vocals in talks...
Indeed, my heart is in audio, I trust Ken's quality control and is keener to save to live my favourite music (as well as explore current media) with each new Marantz release.
Incidentally, Andrew Everard's http://andreweverard.com/2013/11/01/amidst-all-the-weeping-and-wailing-about-the-end-of-plasma-are-we-missing-the-bigger-picture/ along with his other writings such as http://andreweverard.com/2013/12/30/oled-tv-could-be-turning-into-the-plasma-of-the-future-and-not-in-a-good-way/ and http://andreweverard.com/2014/01/14/the-dawn-of-the-high-resolution-audio-age-maybe-next-year-eh/ might be of interest to you ?
And, furthermore, from another good site that I regularly visit, 2 free Glenn Gould short films (max of 1080p) :
https://www.nfb.ca/film/glenn_gould_off_record
https://www.nfb.ca/film/glenn_gould_on_record
|
|
|
Post by sylvian February 12, 2014 (67 of 88)
|
|
Kveld-Úlfr said:
I guess my desert island discs would be all of them. I just love music too much. Selecting a bunch from them would be sacrificing and elitism to me... dear ! I really couldn't.
Yes, Antoine as an experienced buyer/listener (which does not necessarily mean "consumer") I can hardly imagine to live without music and also cannont pick "desert island selection" from my collection ever.I simply feel that I have grown with music, stick to music and probably die accompanied by music. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui said:
« So the answer I give is, I think the smartest thing to do is to read everything you read—and that includes what I write, I would always tell people this—skeptically. And in fact, an honest writer will try to make it clear what his or her biases are and where the work is starting from, so that then readers can compensate—they can say, "This person's coming from over here, and that's the way she's looking at the world, now I can correct for what may well be her bias ; I can decide for myself whether what she's telling me is accurate, because at least she's making her premises clear." And people 'should' do that. You should start by being very skeptical about anything that comes to you from any sort of power system—and about everything else too. You should be skeptical about what I tell you—why should you believe a word of it ? I got my own ax to grind. So figure it out for yourself. There really is no other answer. »
— Noam Chomsky (who I'm studying as if to truly know my opponent, know his dissident interpretation...)
I wake to find the meaning of "audiophile" being discussed in /showthread/115200
With regard to Chomsky re-quoted above (as 'zeus' himself said /showthread/111713/111869/#111869 of our Olympus of thought : "Posting stuff on this forum is transitory..." and [is topic for that, plus a new, Thread] like the seasons—words return), I'd say the kindest thought would be that an audiophile is someone who loves audio, its faithful (thus, hi-fi [high-fidelity] reproduction ; cost of equipment is a red-herring [a boxing of ears if you hear my English pun]) because, due to context, Hi-Fi can be found in one product, one step.
What I've studied (and collected) most is of Ken's work at Marantz ; he, as an audiophile, believes in achieving simplicity and harmony—a balance of all the active and passive components within a product, then a further balancing when assembling products for a system (like for a football team, just gathering the best players doesn't guarantee the win, thus, need to harmonise the attributes and roles of each individual). I'd liken it /showthread/39611/110674/#110674 "akin to attaining perfect-spheres that fit..."
For example, for modest spaces, the all-in-one Marantz Consolette is personally endorsed by Ken to be an "audiophile Dock" :
http://youtube.com/watch?v=KFVNgL6AYuQ
Incidentally, the partly obscured Marantz to the left is my MusicLink PH-22, as has coincidentally been somewhat documented by :
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/i-picked-up-a-marantz-ph-22-phono-stage.261709/
Yes, the PH-22 is regarded as Audiophile grade in itself—but it does need additional products, more steps... Ken still uses it for the SC-7S2 connected to 2x MA-9S2s...
Likewise, my SA-17S1 can be reduced to 2 Audiophile steps by matching its headphone jack to...
Well, an audiophile can be liken to much (and often fervent), including of being a (products) matchmaker and of Odysseus journeying for home...
Your take on an "audiophile" shows more of where you're venturing from ; your "utility of interpretations" as Chomsky quoted of Pascal...
And apologies to David on behalf of Anthony—for if he'd seen your reply I'm sure he'd make time to reply. I too struggle to make time to write...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui said:
JLG said :
« I read something by Borges where he spoke of a man who wanted to create a world. So he created houses, provinces, valleys, rivers, tools, fish, lovers, and then at the end of his life he notices that this 'patient labyrinth is none other then his own portrait.' I had quite this same feeling in the middle of Pierrot... »
Thus, for me, everything I do (and have done) online contributes to a 'personal' portrait. And rightly so ! Especially here (SA-CD.net), speaking up (primarily) in support of a friend's work in Hi-Fi design, his passion in music ; and elsewhere too (for this or any other cause).
Recently, the afternoon of the above photo, I reread some favourite sections of Nabokov's Ada ; it was like returning home.
Likewise, for the same feeling, I've just set aside watching new loans of 'Stoker' and 'Smurfs 2' for Criterion Collection's 'Pierrot le fou' I'd bought ; will never likely watch more than the late Chapter of Smurfs 2 I'd picked, nor might I finish Stoker.
There's only so much time per day ; per lifetime. I like to be aware... And am aware of the "home" that... That music built.
As to my replying to replies, the upkeep of Threads I'd started, I promise to do my best when...
"Incidentally [...] one cannot read a book: one can only reread it. A good reader, a major reader, an active and creative reader is a rereader. And I shall tell you why. When we read a book for the first time the very process of laboriously moving our eyes from left to right, line after line, page after page, this complicated physical work upon the book, the very process of learning in terms of space and time what the book is about, this stands between us and artistic appreciation. When we look at a painting we do not have to move our eyes in a special way even if, as in a book, the picture contains elements of depth and development. The element of time does not really enter in a first contact with a painting. In reading a book, we must have time to acquaint ourselves with it. We have no physical organ (as we have the eye in regard to a painting) that takes in the whole picture and then can enjoy its details. But at a second, or third, or fourth reading we do, in a sense, behave towards the book as we do towards a painting. However, let us not confuse the physical eye, that monstrous masterpiece of evolution, with the mind, an even more monstrous achievement. A book, no matter what it is—a work of fiction or a work of science (the boundary line between the two is not as clear as is generally believed)—a book of fiction appeals first of all to the mind. The mind, the brain, the top of the tingling spine, is, or should be, the only instrument used upon a book..."
http://www.facebook.com/notes/squire-of-strong-opinions-vladimir-nabokov/good-readers-and-good-writers/291774314198346
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wilhelm—Xu Zhong-Rui said:
"Three passions, simple but overwhelmingly strong, have governed my life :
the longing for love, the search for knowledge, and unbearable pity for the suffering of mankind."
— Bertrand Russell
I trust "in its true spirit—of inclusion" it's good to see (well, you've clicked to see—your choice of valuing) what or how others think to better appreciate their #5 /showthread/109915/110057#110057
Fleshing out the ignorant, to coin a phrase...
Well, briefly, to the skeletons rattling 'bout in /showthread/115712 of what they know SA-CD.net 'is' ; it (and most concerns) has always been more than what you fugally like it to be.
Specifically, Iain (and others akin), is your own immaterial mind 'region locked' more so than particular physical discs ? New Zealand alone being 'region free' would qualify the word "international" ; readers are welcome to comment of their own countries' policies plus their own attitude to prohibition, whether they've 'open region' players...
Amazon.com ships it, /support this site ?
Of which, the above title currently sells there for $38.99, you save $30.96 (44%) from List Price...
http://www.criterion.com/boxsets/326-the-complete-monterey-pop-festival
* Restored high-definition digital transfers of all three films, supervised and approved by D. A. Pennebaker
* Soundtracks featuring 5.1 mixes by legendary recording engineer Eddie Kramer, presented in Dolby Digital and DTS-HD Master Audio on Blu-ray edition
On a beautiful June weekend in 1967, at the height of the Summer of Love, the first and only Monterey International Pop Festival roared forward, capturing a decade’s spirit and ushering in a new era of rock and roll. Monterey would launch the careers of Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, and Otis Redding, but they were just a few among a wildly diverse cast that included Simon and Garfunkel, the Mamas and the Papas, the Who, the Byrds, Hugh Masekela, and the extraordinary Ravi Shankar. With his characteristic vérité style, D. A. Pennebaker captured it all, immortalizing moments that have become legend: Pete Townshend destroying his guitar; Hendrix burning his. The Criterion Collection is proud to present the most comprehensive document of the Monterey International Pop Festival ever produced, featuring the films Monterey Pop, Jimi Plays Monterey, and Shake! Otis at Monterey, along with every available complete performance filmed by Pennebaker and his crew...
|
|
