Author Topic: What [ticks] me off is... (Read 80413 times)

goodie · « **Reply #165 on:** January 25, 2008, 05:10:21 PM »

Quote from: Chupperson Weird on January 23, 2008, 06:54:03 PM

Also, except for games and certain channels that actually transmit correctly, it looks worse than a normal analog receiver because you can see all the MPEG-4 compression way clearer.

That's usually only the case with satellite. Over-the-air and cable usually use Mpeg-2, which, oddly enough, usually looks better.

MEGAß¥TE · « **Reply #166 on:** January 25, 2008, 08:06:54 PM »

As it should considering 10 times the amount of data is being transmitted.

Lizard Dude · « **Reply #167 on:** January 25, 2008, 10:45:10 PM »

Quote from: Chupperson Weird on January 23, 2008, 06:54:03 PM

Also, except for games and certain channels that actually transmit correctly, it looks worse than a normal analog receiver because you can see all the MPEG-4 compression way clearer.

So we should never try to improve because it makes old stuff look bad? Come on, dude.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #168 on:** January 26, 2008, 02:39:55 AM »

No, it makes new stuff look bad too. That's the whole problem.

MEGAß¥TE · « **Reply #169 on:** January 26, 2008, 11:16:30 AM »

Going by what you said, it makes new stuff that doesn't transmit correctly look bad, which isn't a fault of the new technology.

Lizard Dude · « **Reply #170 on:** January 26, 2008, 03:13:33 PM »

And at least it's all somewhat backwards compatible.

You must have had a hissy fit when you found out how your CD player made records sound...

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #171 on:** January 26, 2008, 11:32:48 PM »

Since they don't use the same media, your analogy crashes on takeoff, but actually depending on the condition of the record it can sound as good as or better than a CD. This is my own personal experience.

Lizard Dude · « **Reply #172 on:** January 26, 2008, 11:39:41 PM »

It's not an analogy, it's a comparison.

New-fangled moving picture showers can still show old moving picture data straight from the original sources.

New-fangled music players can't.

MEGAß¥TE · « **Reply #173 on:** January 26, 2008, 11:52:53 PM »

That comparison doesn't make much sense. You should compare cassette to CD vs. VHS to DVD or CD to SACD/DVD Audio vs. DVD to HD-DVD/Blu-ray or even LP to CD vs. LD to DVD.

Chupperson Weird · « **Reply #174 on:** January 27, 2008, 02:31:55 AM »

That doesn't make any sense at all. I have a turntable and a CD player in the same unit, playing through the same speakers, therefore a new music player can play old media from its original source, just like I have a VCR and a DVD player coming through the same TV. The only thing is that better speakers only make things sound better (except in the case of some new music, which is actually engineered to sound bad and thus you need bad speakers to mask the imperfections in the mastering). New TVs, on the other hand, make the old media look worse because of the way it handles low-resolution video.

Lizard Dude · « **Reply #175 on:** January 27, 2008, 01:46:24 PM »

Hmm, yes I see where I went wrong.

But what are new TVs supposed to do? Include built-in upconverting compression artifact descramblers?

MEGAß¥TE · « **Reply #176 on:** January 27, 2008, 02:37:06 PM »

Actually, many new TVs DO have good upscan converters. Good enough that many consumers are satisfied with DVD upscanned to HD rather than the newer formats. These should also help reduce block effects.

chucknorris · « **Reply #177 on:** March 02, 2008, 01:04:36 PM »

i hate french class.

ShadowBrain · « **Reply #178 on:** March 02, 2008, 01:09:02 PM »

^ Welcome to my world.

PaperLuigi · « **Reply #179 on:** March 02, 2008, 01:12:08 PM »

Yeah, I don't really like my language class either. :(