Re:Joe Sixpack isn't even using his 1080p right
on
Beyond HDTV
·
· Score: 1
From what I've been told, LED (even side-lit) monitors can still provide better contrast. I don't have enough attention to detail to really notice a difference.
Yes, that is what I saw in all of the specs when I was shopping for mine. IMHO it's still not worthwhile for the price difference (you could just spend the extra money on getting a higher-quality LCD).
Re:Does anyone really like 3D?
on
Beyond HDTV
·
· Score: 1
come back when those of us who already wear glasses can properly view '3d content'.
I wear glasses, and I've never had problems with 3D glasses on top of my own (though as someone else pointed out, contact lenses make the whole experience a bit nicer). All of the major manufacturers have figured out that people who wear glasses still want to spend money.
Re:Joe Sixpack isn't even using his 1080p right
on
Beyond HDTV
·
· Score: 1
I have a 47" 1080p TV in my living room and my couch is somewhere between 10-12 feet from my TV. I believe that I'm supposed to sit 6-7 feet from the TV to be able to see the full range of 1080p. That's just absurd.
That distance (6-7' for 47") sounds like the THX recommendations for viewing distance. That's a complete movie experience, which means the screen is filling quite a bit of your vision. I find that too close for home use. 10-12 sounds a bit far, but hey, most 1080p material is upscaled anyhow, so you're usually not losing any novel information!
Re:Joe Sixpack isn't even using his 1080p right
on
Beyond HDTV
·
· Score: 1
... please find me a quality LED monitor for a reasonable price...
Serious question: does it really need to be LED? All mainstream LED displays that I've seen are still lit from the edges, so they exhibit the same artifacts as "traditional" LCDs. They still blur colors with fast motion. They still cloud. Their contrast ratios are only slightly better. Accurate color reproduction and viewing angles still suck. Yet they're more expensive and you get fewer choices in models.
Look how many people complain about fluorescent or LED lighting being "too white"
Fluorescent lights typically have a very uneven spectrum, producing unexpected discolorations on lit surfaces that aren't perfectly white/gray themselves (e.g. sickly green skin). Full-spectrum fluorescent bulbs solve most of the warmth complaints, but they are still a very niche product. I believe LEDs are much better in this regard, but the astronomical up-front cost has prevented me from investigating them personally ($60 vs. $3 for a PAR 38 bulb last time I looked).
I've noticed over the past few years that many fluorescent bulb providers started advertising color temperature, but almost none of them advertise CRI ("similarity to full-spectrum sunlight"). Nobody knows, and sadly, nobody seems to care.
SACD can eat a bag of dicks. stupid, useless, cynical attempt from Sony to relive the good old days before cassette recorders. no amount of forged impulse response diagrams will convince me i can hear a positive difference from a 44/16 bounce of the same master.
Emphasis mine. I can't hear the extra bit depth, but the fact that the target audience actually cares about sound quality means that mastering engineers will be encouraged to do a good job instead of a cheap job.
I guess the big question is whether the SACD/Hybrid discs use the same mastering source for the CD channels (since the DSD DRM blocks fair use). If they do, that means you can rip lossless audio from a good master. If the CD version is a different master, well then I guess you're right, SACD can eat... uh... a bag of dicks.
I think you either didn't get the PS3 when it came out, or got a pretty amazing deal.
No, I didn't get it on first release, IIRC this was 2-3 years ago. How much did dedicated BD players cost when the PS3 was first released, and how many of them are still worth owning today? A first-release PS3 should still be chugging along, playing 3D content, streaming Netflix, and integrating with DLNA media servers (i.e. almost any Windows 7 laptop).
Maybe someday phones will get so powerful that you just plug them into docking stations and they become your PC or console.
Hah! And maybe someday someone will create a C compiler that actually spawns nasal demons when invoking undefined behavior. I wouldn't hold my breath for either.
Every time I have tried integrating a PS3, the garbage BLuetooth to IR gateways are unreliable.
I have a Harmony remote integrated to my PS3 with such a gateway and the only problem I had was the bad user interface in Logitech's software (no option for "PS3 + IR gateway" meant that the software warned me about my PS3 not being compatible, when it in fact was). Since setup it has cooperated flawlessly.
Regarding high-end installations: I would expect to see RS-232 integration—not IR—which the PS3 lacks entirely. Personally, my PS3 is the somehow the loudest household computer, making it unpleasant for movie watching.
Hell, most TVs can do [Netflix, random games, etc.] now.
I have the original Wolfenstein on my PS3 (purchased for the cost of two lattes, totally worth it). I've not seen any TV that offers random games like that. I also see top-of-the-line TV owners recommend not using the TV's built-in Netflix support if another player is available to do it. Sorry, I cannot find a link at the moment, but it was one of (avforums|avsforum|highdefjunkies).com. I personally cannot stand the built-in Youtube interface on my schmancy TV, because it requires me to use old-school 1ABC 2DEF 3GHI keypad typing. So yeah, you can spend a lot of money to get a TV that does a mediocre job of streaming/games/what-have-you, or you can buy a PS3 or modern BD player and attach that to any HDTV.
... you were looking at a $700 to $800 investment in that PS3.
When I bought my PS3, it was $350, which was within $50 (plus or minus, I forget) of reasonable Blu-Ray players. I don't know if this is still the case, but at one point in time the PS3 was the benchmark for disc load-times. I'm pretty sure my nostalgia glasses are working fine.
i suppose i understand why some people might not want to use it.
I've heard some weird effects (crescendo/decrescendo behavior added or mucked up, or transitions between tracks) due to some volume normalization systems. In my home, I would use compression either for nighttime activities, TV (which is horribly normalized), or background music during a party / chore-day. I would never leave it on for any dedicated listening or a movie. On a portable player, I think I would find the volume normalizer exactly once and just leave it on "heavy".
Well, that's why I prefer to buy things in say, lossless formats...good for the good living room stereo, and I can also rip them to lossy formats for portable players in poor environments
The format doesn't matter when you're discussing loudness, compression, and "brickwall limiting" as is discussed. The audio engineers (and sometimes the musicians) are distorting the signal somewhere along the path to the final master. Thus, what you have in your lossless audio is lossless garbage, and what you have in your lossey audio is lossey garbage.
For example, poke around the Internet for Muse's "Knights of Cydonia". The tracks used in Guitar Hero are cleaner than the mix used for the CD, so someone went through and actually remixed the song from the GH tracks and got a pleasant-sounding result. As a counterpoint, listen to pretty much anything from Foo Fighters' "Wasting Light". They have mp3-quality audio available on their website, and it is not difficult to hear the impact of a good recording/mastering process.
I wish Muse would release a properly-mastered version of Black Holes and Revelations. I think I would even pay for a SACD version of it, just knowing that the intended audience has a higher listening standard. It's sad that the CD just doesn't play well outside of a car stereo, and it paradoxically makes the CD rock less because it's unbearable to crank the volume.
Very entertaining. Along those lines (Christopher Nolan), I recommend Memento.
Transformers (new)
The first of the Michael Bay trilogy? That one's worth it, just for the visuals and throwback. If you mean either the second or third, save your time and stab your brain instead.
"By taking this route, Michael Brown, sheriff in Bedford County, Va., and a board member and executive committee member of the National Sheriffs' Association is essentially giving up on child molesters. This government intrusion into internet providers' business does nothing to stop children from being sexually exploited. It is his job to stop children from being sexually exploited, not tell small businesses how to to run themselves. This will only increase internet fees and cost American jobs, and will do nothing to stop child molesters from murdering your children."
Maybe tighten that up a little. It's a fine line between the type of crazy that those people believe and the type of crazy that even those people realize is crazy.
Yeah, s/murdering/kidnapping/ and you're about par.
In 5 years they'll be regretting the hell out of this decision. They should have invested the time and money in improving the algorithm and implementation, and thrown commodity hardware at the problem....
This is why the market crashed - these "smartest guys in the room" aren't so smart sometimes.
This statement appears to be make two assumptions:
Anyone who doesn't use commodity hardware is not smart
The people who make software implementation decisions at JPM also make the trading and investment decisions.
The first one is just ridiculous, and you should know it. Specialized hardware doesn't exist for shits and giggles, and JPM is big enough to understand both the maintenance cost of specialization and the performance gains. The second assumption... well... it's much more likely to be a "Death Star Contractor" situation. I doubt the head traders and investment officers at JPM really care about FPGAs, and I doubt that the R&D lab understands all of the nuances of the derivatives trading in which their company takes part.
There most definitely was population growth, all through history and pre-history. But, that growth, overall, was stable. Only in the 1800's do we see that "population explosion".
Whoosh... the point of the GP is that these two statements both describe the same mathematical phenomenon, i.e. pop(t+1) = C * pop(t)
Until about 1850, population growth was a stable thing, growing fractionally every century or so.
After about 1850, we saw this exponential growth.
The only difference is the constant factor. I believe the latter statement implies "larger constant" due to the use of "exponential" vs. "stable" and "fractionally"; but hey, this is news for nerds, and technical accuracy counts.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that is what I saw in all of the specs when I was shopping for mine. IMHO it's still not worthwhile for the price difference (you could just spend the extra money on getting a higher-quality LCD).
I wear glasses, and I've never had problems with 3D glasses on top of my own (though as someone else pointed out, contact lenses make the whole experience a bit nicer). All of the major manufacturers have figured out that people who wear glasses still want to spend money.
That distance (6-7' for 47") sounds like the THX recommendations for viewing distance. That's a complete movie experience, which means the screen is filling quite a bit of your vision. I find that too close for home use. 10-12 sounds a bit far, but hey, most 1080p material is upscaled anyhow, so you're usually not losing any novel information!
Serious question: does it really need to be LED? All mainstream LED displays that I've seen are still lit from the edges, so they exhibit the same artifacts as "traditional" LCDs. They still blur colors with fast motion. They still cloud. Their contrast ratios are only slightly better. Accurate color reproduction and viewing angles still suck. Yet they're more expensive and you get fewer choices in models.
Fluorescent lights typically have a very uneven spectrum, producing unexpected discolorations on lit surfaces that aren't perfectly white/gray themselves (e.g. sickly green skin). Full-spectrum fluorescent bulbs solve most of the warmth complaints, but they are still a very niche product. I believe LEDs are much better in this regard, but the astronomical up-front cost has prevented me from investigating them personally ($60 vs. $3 for a PAR 38 bulb last time I looked).
I've noticed over the past few years that many fluorescent bulb providers started advertising color temperature, but almost none of them advertise CRI ("similarity to full-spectrum sunlight"). Nobody knows, and sadly, nobody seems to care.
Emphasis mine. I can't hear the extra bit depth, but the fact that the target audience actually cares about sound quality means that mastering engineers will be encouraged to do a good job instead of a cheap job.
I guess the big question is whether the SACD/Hybrid discs use the same mastering source for the CD channels (since the DSD DRM blocks fair use). If they do, that means you can rip lossless audio from a good master. If the CD version is a different master, well then I guess you're right, SACD can eat... uh... a bag of dicks.
No, I didn't get it on first release, IIRC this was 2-3 years ago. How much did dedicated BD players cost when the PS3 was first released, and how many of them are still worth owning today? A first-release PS3 should still be chugging along, playing 3D content, streaming Netflix, and integrating with DLNA media servers (i.e. almost any Windows 7 laptop).
It's a trap! Thankfully, every player I've encountered (including the PS3) allows BD-Live to be disabled.
Hah! And maybe someday someone will create a C compiler that actually spawns nasal demons when invoking undefined behavior. I wouldn't hold my breath for either.
I have a Harmony remote integrated to my PS3 with such a gateway and the only problem I had was the bad user interface in Logitech's software (no option for "PS3 + IR gateway" meant that the software warned me about my PS3 not being compatible, when it in fact was). Since setup it has cooperated flawlessly.
Regarding high-end installations: I would expect to see RS-232 integration—not IR—which the PS3 lacks entirely. Personally, my PS3 is the somehow the loudest household computer, making it unpleasant for movie watching.
I have the original Wolfenstein on my PS3 (purchased for the cost of two lattes, totally worth it). I've not seen any TV that offers random games like that. I also see top-of-the-line TV owners recommend not using the TV's built-in Netflix support if another player is available to do it. Sorry, I cannot find a link at the moment, but it was one of (avforums|avsforum|highdefjunkies).com. I personally cannot stand the built-in Youtube interface on my schmancy TV, because it requires me to use old-school 1ABC 2DEF 3GHI keypad typing. So yeah, you can spend a lot of money to get a TV that does a mediocre job of streaming/games/what-have-you, or you can buy a PS3 or modern BD player and attach that to any HDTV.
When I bought my PS3, it was $350, which was within $50 (plus or minus, I forget) of reasonable Blu-Ray players. I don't know if this is still the case, but at one point in time the PS3 was the benchmark for disc load-times. I'm pretty sure my nostalgia glasses are working fine.
It's stated in UHF by what is presumably an NRA rep on TV in a dentist's office. But I'm sure someone else can find a quotation that precedes 1989.
I've heard some weird effects (crescendo/decrescendo behavior added or mucked up, or transitions between tracks) due to some volume normalization systems. In my home, I would use compression either for nighttime activities, TV (which is horribly normalized), or background music during a party / chore-day. I would never leave it on for any dedicated listening or a movie. On a portable player, I think I would find the volume normalizer exactly once and just leave it on "heavy".
Their manual says that? I want to buy their products just to encourage that style of documentation!
The format doesn't matter when you're discussing loudness, compression, and "brickwall limiting" as is discussed. The audio engineers (and sometimes the musicians) are distorting the signal somewhere along the path to the final master. Thus, what you have in your lossless audio is lossless garbage, and what you have in your lossey audio is lossey garbage.
For example, poke around the Internet for Muse's "Knights of Cydonia". The tracks used in Guitar Hero are cleaner than the mix used for the CD, so someone went through and actually remixed the song from the GH tracks and got a pleasant-sounding result. As a counterpoint, listen to pretty much anything from Foo Fighters' "Wasting Light". They have mp3-quality audio available on their website, and it is not difficult to hear the impact of a good recording/mastering process.
I wish Muse would release a properly-mastered version of Black Holes and Revelations. I think I would even pay for a SACD version of it, just knowing that the intended audience has a higher listening standard. It's sad that the CD just doesn't play well outside of a car stereo, and it paradoxically makes the CD rock less because it's unbearable to crank the volume.
No, it's always 3d6. That's a mean of 10.5, median of 10 or 11, and the prime requisite for wizards.
Yeah, that didn't work very well for Saruman either.
Very entertaining. Along those lines (Christopher Nolan), I recommend Memento.
The first of the Michael Bay trilogy? That one's worth it, just for the visuals and throwback. If you mean either the second or third, save your time and stab your brain instead.
Yeah, s/murdering/kidnapping/ and you're about par.
C++ has no warts.
<ducks>
This statement appears to be make two assumptions:
The first one is just ridiculous, and you should know it. Specialized hardware doesn't exist for shits and giggles, and JPM is big enough to understand both the maintenance cost of specialization and the performance gains. The second assumption... well... it's much more likely to be a "Death Star Contractor" situation. I doubt the head traders and investment officers at JPM really care about FPGAs, and I doubt that the R&D lab understands all of the nuances of the derivatives trading in which their company takes part.
Whoosh... the point of the GP is that these two statements both describe the same mathematical phenomenon, i.e. pop(t+1) = C * pop(t)
The only difference is the constant factor. I believe the latter statement implies "larger constant" due to the use of "exponential" vs. "stable" and "fractionally"; but hey, this is news for nerds, and technical accuracy counts.
Um, I'll take the fish, please?
Captain: What you say !!
CATS: You have no chance to survive make your time.