The nausea of the "must have" total video experience...

[Jovie]

If you go into a stereo shop (if you can find one) these days all you see are T.V.s.Everything is H.D. this,contrast ratio that. Though initially fascinated,five minutes in front of one of these T.V. was all I needed before I got bored.How many of you just aren't into hi-tech home theater,20 channel sound...,bluray,blah,blah,blah... nonsense?Is it your girlfriend or wife who wants you to buy into that? Perhaps it's the youthful excitement of your kids who must have it in the house because it's their era now ? Does anyone else feel as I do or am I just showing how old I actually have become?When I see the demo in Best Buy (not that I'm actively seeking it out), I see H. D. wrinkles on peoples faces that are best left hidden. Give me my 2 channel stereo and old 19" color T.V....and keep the two separate ! They're 2 different things.I'll bet the reason you don't see any stereo shops anymore is that most old school audio buffs probably felt as I do.

Blu-ray isn't really catching on.People prefer DVD because its cheaper and good enough (upconverted if your really into that).When Bluray comes down to the price of DVD (which will be phased out) people will buy it by default.They're not paying extra now because they don't care about the difference.Don't tell me of its Porn potential either.That would seem to be the absolute worst use of the technology.If someone really wanted to watch that stuff why would they want to see the flaws on the supposedly "perfect" people in the videos?This just doesn't make any sense.

Since I first heard about Hi-def video I've thought it to be tech whose time had come despite their not being a market for it.They haven't been very successful convincing us that we need it,either.If they had the equipment would have taken off with sales at the higher prices of several years agf course As the T.V.s have come down in price and older technology has been phased out,people are buying the newer technology by default.However,their selling feature is their flat panel design,not their definition and pixels counts.Also,blu-ray discs would be flying off the shelves at their current pricing which they are not.In fact video downloading is getting really popular despite its lower "hi-def " quality. This is proof that people want convenience foremost.After that it's all about pricing and availability.

My brother in law just wasted 10 grand on one of these things.I'm pretty sure its because he's rich and just assumes a house of his caliber must be so equipped.I personally don't have any of this stuff and it still makes me sick to my stomach.Does anybody here really want these expensive T.V.s,video systems,and overpriced disks?Could it be that many have just been brainwashed into thinking they need it?Am I in sort of a bad mood tonight and seriously just need to shut up and get some sleep?Go ahead and tell me how much you love this stuff.

 

[Fatdog]

I don't really get into all the hype that is expounded upon the new technology, at least regarding TVs. I helped my dad pick out a Samsung 42" LCD HD set and I absolutely love it! However, the non-HD channels look worse than my Philips analog TV. I'm sure if I won the lottery, I'd go out and get some cool new toys, but the only I would really want right now is the TV (maybe a 42" to 48" LCD). And unless you have a HUGE hi-def TV and great vision, most of the upconverted regular DVDs will look just as good as Blu-Ray.

 

[bill]

i have a old sony trinitron ballbearing model tv from 1984. i paid ten bucks for it and the picture is really nice.
it was never used and i have had it for about a year now.
for watching movies i have a old digital project i got for a couple hundred bucks.
we get up in the early hours of the morning and watch formula one races on it too.
i try to never buy anything first generation any more. i am fine with being behind with terms of technology. i mean i waited for a long time before buying a ipod and then i bought just a nano.
i like old stuff better. i dunno. i think spending ten grand on a tv and some speakers is up to you.
bluray does look cool. its super detailed and crisp.
for me tho being able to buy a huge stack of movies for ten bucks is cool.
i am sure i will buy some higher end gear once some of those older systems start to come up second hand.

 

[oldskool69]

For me it's the reality of "How much of this techmology can I really use?"

I still have my basic black Sprint/Nextel phone. Don't need a Palm Pilot or Blackberry. Just like I don't need an uber TV to watch Bill O'Reilly put the wood to some wishy washy politician or to see the latest perp on the news.

Will I get a hi-def setup? One day. Am I in a rush? Nope. Even my kids don't care as hi-def is being outside for them.

 

[Boom Shaka Laka]

Agree with everyone. Our 20+ year old NEC TV works like a charm (and won't need a converter box, so long as we're connected to cable)... and is sharp enough for me. Frankly, my eyes aren't all that sharp, so I don't need a HiDef picture. Why have a video screen that's clearer than my vision? I'm just happy our NEC is a color set... although, honestly, Jeopardy and Letterman look/sound pretty much the same in black and white.

Went to Best Buy about six months ago - first time in years - and was amazed to discover that (unlike the days when there were rows of boomboxes, including Kabooms, Walkman portables, and mini discs) there was absolutely nothing I wanted. I already own a pretty good computer, my stereo system works fine, and I have lots of portable audio devices, not to mention all the records/tapes/CD's I could ever want, as well as DVD's, laser discs and VHS/Beta tapes that still play fine on my equipment. It dawned on me that day that I may never feel the need to visit a stereo shop again in my lifetime. I guess I should be thankful for that, but I'm actually kind of sad. I miss being able to warm my hands on the heat from the Pioneer receivers!

P.S. After watching the recent Best Buy commercial, where a supposed sales girl tells us that she convinced a female customer to hide her husband's boombox during backyard parties, and instead put out cute, little speakers camouflaged as garden rocks... after watching that 60-second travesty - not once, but several times - I realized that I really was finished with Best Buy forever!

 

[2steppa]

Don't watch that much telly to be honest, but I've got a lovely Panasonic CRT 32 inch television set (not wide screen) and have it connected to a cheap basic digibox ready for when analogue gets switched off in my area (2010 I believe).
Plus the DVD recorder and a nice Sony Nicam VCR, I'm all set

Absolutely stunning image quality, no reason to change it, besides the fact I can't afford all this HD stuff anyway!

 

[jaetee]

Okay, while I may agree with some of what your saying, I'm pretty much on the other side of this one (somewhat)...

To qualify what I'm saying, I do enjoy television and I like:

• [*:767kcd8r]Movies (Sci-Fi, action, dramas, comedies)
  [*:767kcd8r]Some TV series
  [*:767kcd8r]Wildlife shows
  [*:767kcd8r]Football
  [*:767kcd8r]Basketball
  [*:767kcd8r]Auto Racing
  [*:767kcd8r]Golf
  [*:767kcd8r]News

Back in 2006, when it was soccer world cup season, my wife and I finally broke down and decided to pony up to a high def television. We had been talking about it for some time, but the World Cup, our anniversary date, and a wicked sale at Circuit City all came together at the right time and we finally took the plunge. After an extensive consumer reports review and coming to grips with our budget, we agreed on a 42" Sony Grand Wega rear-projection LCD. Our ancient low-end Sony surround sound receiver was no longer pushing sound to the rear speakers and I needed a new car stereo too. The sale at Circuit City was super agressive and we got the TV, an open-box low-end Onkyo 5.1 surround receiver and a Sony car stereo for a grand total of $1600. That was an almost unheard of deal back then. We are the kind of buyers that salespeople hate. We show up informed, knowing exactly what we want, and do not allow ourselves to be upsold on all the add-on crap that they try to hit you with. I find that 95 out of 100 times I know more about what I'm buying than the idiot trying to sell to me. Personally, I think that's a huge part of getting the most for your money. INFORM YOURSELF!!!

The picture on the TV is nothing short of amazing compared to the 27" Sharp that it replaced. The Sharp now lives in our bedroom. The difference is like night and day, especially for sports and for wildlife documentaries. if you are viewing an HD channel and switch to the same channel in normal definition, then you see a tremendous difference. The bigger the TV, the more of a difference you see. Let me tell you, watching the PLANET EARTH documentaries in HD alone was worth the money to both of us.

Expanding on that, a good friend of ours bought a 61" rear projection DLP HD TV and a blue ray player last year. Yes, I can see a bit of a difference in resolution comparing his Blue Ray picture to our 42" with regular DVDs, but not $1700 worth of difference when you factor in the additonal cost of his blue ray player. And that's comparing 2006 prices with his 2008 prices. A 61" back in 2006 would have been more like a $3000 price difference. Anyway, his 61" TV is in a pretty small living room, too... which to me it feels like its been shoe-horned into the room. Yea, the pic is impressive, but its also overkill to the point where diminishing returns on investment kicked in so hard that I can just shake my head. He'd have been best off (IMHO) with a 42" or 51" LCD flat panel mounted to the wall. Now he's talking about cutting into the bedroom's closet to make the TV flush with the wall where it is...

Anyway, I digress... I guess my point is that, while I love HD TV, I also feel that standard DVDs look good enough (at 42") to where the added expense of a Blue Ray player really doesn't make sense to me. I think the size of the room and the viewing distance should dictate the size TV you get. And if you're happy with your 19", 27", 31" or whatever CRT screen, then more power to you.

Now, about surround sound, I have been listening to TV and videos in stereo system since the second wave of HiFi VHS's hit the market in the mid 80's. And if I didn't have this surround system now, I would likely still be satisfied with stereo sound, as truly love the sound of rich, warm stereo, especially for music. I think the jump from mono TV sound to stereo is drastic. The jump from Stereo to 5.1 is noticeable, but not drastic. And the jump from 5.1 to 7.1 surround is IMHO, bareley noticeable in most homes. Since I live in a new home we had built for ourselves and I was able to put in surround speaker cables before they put in the drywall, the $100 we spent on that open-box Onkyo receiver has been put to very good use. Its a great feeling watching a movie and hearing the voices come from the front, but the chirping of birds and nature sounds coming from all over, or the added depth to science fiction move sound effects or F1 engines on race day. I do think it especially adds to the movie experience. But, with that said, I think that 5.1 surround sound is more than adequate for just about any home theater. In all candor, even simple stereo sound is fine if you have a decent amp and speakers pushing the noise. Now, Why someone would be dissatisfied with a 5.1 system and feel the need to go to a 7.1 system, that I just don't understand. I think you'd need a really, really large room (or dedicated "theater" room) to fully appreciate and realize the differences that type of system brings to the experience. Who the hell has room in their house for eight speakers to properly do their thing??? I bet that 99% of those people with a new, high-end 7.1 receiver in their home would be just as well served with a 5.1 receiver. And if I had to live with just stereo instead of my 5.1, it would not really bug me that much. But, since I do have it, and know how to adjust it properly... I gotta admit its pretty cool. Definitely worth the $100 I paid for the receiver, the $20 for the speaker cable, and the $80 for the rear speakers. For the center channel I am actually using an old pair of small JBL's linked in series. I got those at a pawn shop 10 years ago for $20 or so. My main L & R speakers are JBL L80T bad-ass speakers that I've owned since 1989 when I was in the miiltary, so I'm not even factoring those into the equation.

I do think some new technology is worth embracing, and HD TV is one of them. As with any new technology, though... I think its important that the consumer be informed and focus on getting the best bang for their buck. That law of diminishing returns can be a real bitch when money is involved. I also think most people can build a great system for themselves in the $1200~$2000 range.... and why someone would feel the need to spend $10K on an HD setup is beyond me. You could say the same about computers... why spend that extra $600 for the TOTL quad-core system when a top-notch dual core is more than adequate for how that computer will be used.

Oh, I forgot to mention that I have another friend who has an HD projector with a 100" screen in his living room. Its very well done and takes up almost no space. His big screen works good in that space because he has a pretty large living room. HIs projector and screen cost less than my other friend's 61" TV.

 

[Ewen]

Quick 2p:

TV wise, I run 2 x 42" HD Panasonic Plasmas and 1 x 46" HD Sony Bravia.

Sky HD into 2 of them, sports and movies look awesome / crystal clear.

The other 1 gets used for xbl gaming only, which is a bit of a shame as xbox games are only rendered in 720p so you can't actually get the 1080p experience YET - still amazes me how good the graphics and motion are compared to what I had in my early teens though.

Not a great fan of surround sound. My TV's go loud enough for my tastes.

So, overall - love the technology, and buy it to use -> totally agree with someone's comments that convenience is key. I can't remember the last time I bought or watched a DVD. What's the point when I can get movies via Sky, or download/stream them via the Mac, through the home power LAN and using DLNA into the TV !! Love it..

 

[oldskool69]

..I do think some new technology is worth embracing...

I agree with you John regarding embracing technology. But you really hit the nail on the head while mentioning diminishing returns or as I like to call it, "No ROI: Return on Investment".

In my world (and those who have kids between 7-17) there just isn't enough time to commit to really enjoying all the mega tech out there. Our lives are so busy it's ridiculous. I do believe that the real market for such hi-def devices is for those who can actually spend enough time to enjoy it. But are those who have the time, getting numb after the initial excitement? You bet.

When my kids were all six and under I did have a Dolby Digital setup with a 36" Panasoonic I bought while in Germany up 'til we moved to our new house. It was then that I realized I'm not getting anything out of it since we didn't have time to use it anyway. So, I sold stuff off and downsized to my few pieces of vintage gear which sounded better for music anyway.

As far as sporting events go, I couldn't concentrate long enough to really worry about seeing every grain on a football since my son and his freinds are whooping it up while watching the game. (Well, the adults too.) We can see clearly enough, the play, how it developed, how an injury occured, and even old footage comparos to poor Joe Theismans leg going under to Lawerence Taylor's tackle is way more than clear enough.

Also, put it like this:

A total system today midrange is about $3500...that will get you:

58.3 trips to the movies for a family of five. Or about five good movies a year for almost twelve years.

14 (or more depending on the seats) NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL games. At about a three a year average for five years.

With some shrewd planning, five nice family trips.

And I could go on.

The point is this. The average U.S. consumer will weigh all these things especially given today's reality check with the economy. And when you look at your day to day activities just how much of a return on the investment are you getting? It's at that point most people realize they got a real expensive toy for the kids to watch Hannah Montana, Jetix or MTV 's garbage. Or for the adults to watch reruns of M.A.S.H., HGTV, Local News, or if they have time, a sporting event while not even using the digital surrround.

This is where the marketing force sharks swim the waters to convince some that they "need" it. My father, an electronics repair technician of over 40 years put it to me like this years ago:

"Son, don't get into the electronics game. Sales or repair. There will come a time when we will hit a wall because there is only so much a TV or stereo can do and the eyes, ears, and brain can absorb at once. That's what makes nature and God so great. Because no matter what we develop technology wise, a hummingbird will never be as pretty as when seen live, with a slow breeze about, as God intended. The gear is fun, but what daily value does it give you? There will always be something "new" and "better" but on a day to day basis, is it really that much of a difference? More likely than not, we will get excited at first but go back to the same old thing we enjoyed. The surround sound you crow about will be just an overpriced tool for listening to the radio, and the superior graphics TV will become just that, the TV. Computers will get to that point too because like I said...day to day a man can only do so much with all the crap he has."

My dad is wise indeed. He waited until his 37" JVC died to replace it. I of course, will do the same with my TV's. Eventually, I will get another digital reciever as well. But no hurry. That's for sure.

 

[ahardb0dy]

We have a rear projection 50" tv it may not be as good as these new LCD or plasma tv's but it was cheap at the time and it works, as for surround sound I am running a 7.1 system and it really sounds good using a Dolby test disc that I have. mostly we use it when we play Rock band as that outputs 5.1 dolby, can't remember the last time I watched a movie in Surround. I do like the new technology but I don't go running out just to get the latest and greatest stuff. As for Blu-ray, my PS3 can play them if i want to, normal DVD's are fine for me.

 

[Jovie]

Don't get me wrong guys.I'm glad H.D. tech is out there for those who want it.New inventions make things interesting for people who happen to appreciate whatever it may be.When people buy the latest and greatest,it also helps the economy grow.I have read some on the technologies involved with interest.However its practical application interests me for no more than 5 minutes.I suppose I just become too quickly adjusted to the higher definition. At that point my mind sets this detail aside because I'm more interested in the storyline.Also,to be honest,the surround sound and sub jolts of a typical theater demo setup are just annoying to me.

I remember years ago (the last time I was in a theater) realizing of how little use an enormous screen actually was to my personal enjoyment of the movie.I understand it's necessary to have a bigger screen in a large room with many people.However ,I never considered it a good experience to sit so close to the giant screen that you have to move your eyes to see everything in a given scene.This just hurt my eyes.If I sit back far enough to see everything the experience is just not that much different than watching my much smaller T.V. also at an appropriate distance.I found that after my eyes adjusted it really seemed pretty much the same.

Concerning picture sharpness,seeing H.D. detail just doesn't give me a lasting thrill (as I said,maybe 5 minutes max.).It doesn't make me think I'm actually there because I'm smart enough to know I am watching a movie.Also,most H.D. detail is stuff I'd just rather not see.This includes grit on peoples faces,sweat flying off a soccer player,stray facial hair and split ends on your favorite actor,etc..I'm watching to be entertained,not grossed out.Personally speaking,a decent looking SD 27" tube T.V. and mono sound is really all I need.If we were all honest the quality of the story is 99% of your enjoyment.Why spend all that money for that very inconsequential 1% extra.It's like buying a $20.00 steak and paying $1,000.00 for some parsley.Personally speaking it wouldn't be worth the money.

 

[Johnny]

I enojy watching my big screen with a good movie, but only have so much time to do it and have not upgraded to a Blu-Ray player... not because I didn't wanna spend the cash, but how much better do you need than a dvd.... once the film encapsulates you witht the plot... the pixels dissappear.

I enjoy my radios and have a nice entertainment center but soon will downgrade to make room for an aquarium (for some hermit crabs) in my living room!

 

[Jovie]

[quote="Johnny"
...once the film encapsulates you with the plot... the pixels dissappear.