Open Question to All in This Group
Chet
I've got three old LD players, I won't bother with brand names and model
numbers, and a couple of hundred old discs and had made superb SVHS
copies of about a thousand more. I also have large screen sets. I have
a 62" set in my bedroom and my home cinema has a HD projection system
with a 10 foot screen.
I loved laser discs but after I saw what DVD could offer I never bought
or rented another laser disc. And now I have Blu-ray in addition to my
many DVD players.
So my question is simply this: What is the attraction that LDs still
offer to regulars in this group? Again, I'm not trying to be a troll.
I'm just interested.
I'll hang up and listen.
Thanks,
CB
Steve Fenwick
Chet <lo...@oldsouls.us> wrote:
There's material that's out on LD that is not on DVD or Blu-Ray, and may
never be.
Steve
--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
Thad Floryan
As was mentioned here 12+ years ago, sound on LaserDisc was far, FAR
better than what was available with many early DVD releases. The reason
for this was simple: DVD audio was being mixed for the lowest common
denominator (similar to music mixes for pop AM stations) which is/was
2-1/2" speakers built-in to a TV set (possessing audio quality equivalent
to a telephone).
DVD sound 3-5 years later began being seriously mixed for audiophiles
and I have no complaints with the sound on (most) any DVD released since
circa 2001 or so.
Comparing the sound of 1990s' DVDs to the corresponding LaserDisc was
something I did a lot of and, without exception, LD won without question.
Some DVDs back then were also flippers requiring a manual side change to
watch the remainder of the movie; PELICAN BRIEF (Julia Roberts and Denzel
Washington) was one with that problem, and there were others (DAS BOOT, etc.)
because dual-layer mass-production took awhile to perfect without a high
defect rejection.
And there are (some) LDs that are and never will appear on DVD except
for the ones I copy myself for personal use.
c4urs...@spam_yahoo.com
> So my question is simply this: What is the attraction that LDs still
> offer to regulars in this group? Again, I'm not trying to be a troll.
> I'm just interested.
I actually *started* a collection some three years ago.
Living in Europe surely doesn't make this easier.
I am attracted to laserdiscs in the same way as to vinyl records.
It's a very subjective matter.
Some day I will have my set hooked up to a massive valve amplifier and
ditto speakers, buy my neighbours a ticket far away and give my concert
laserdiscs a spin. I get goosebumps writing this.
Oliver Brose
> As was mentioned here 12+ years ago, sound on LaserDisc was far, FAR
> better than what was available with many early DVD releases. [Sound]
Quality was also part of my reason to stay with LD in the late 90s, but
as I only had a lowly Dolby Surround set back then it was rather video
quality. I am very likely to perceive compression artifacts (both audio
and video) and early DVDs were full of them in all possible forms.
Seeing what DVD had on offer – quality issues, high prices, small
selection, all the fuss of region coding and whatnot – and comparing to
LD – mature technology, prices constantly falling, incredible selection,
no hassle – I decided that it would take a good while for me to enter
DVD and that I would enjoy LD on the way. Actually it took quite a few
years until I bought into DVD.
Even today, I enjoy "putting on a Laser" much more than playing a DVD.
The format itself holds much more enjoyment compared to DVD. The big
artwork, heavy discs in protective sleeves, the noise of the player,
small touches like the external AC3-decoder, even the little charms of
the formats imperfections... there is much more "ritual quality" to LD.
It's been said before – LD is the videophile's vinyl.
Oliver
publius
technology?
Even today, LaserDisc is arguably the only way to build a really
serious library of Japanese animation. Besides the region-coding
issue, there are still many titles which have never made it to DVD, or
which have a severely compromised (or almost unavailable) DVD
release. I'm buying Blu-Ray releases of things I like when I can get
them, but I seriously doubt that BLUE SONNET or TEN LITTLE GALL FORCE
will ever get the treatment!
--publius--
davehartley
> Quality was also part of my reason to stay with LD in the late 90s, but
> as I only had a lowly Dolby Surround set back then it was rather video
> quality. I am very likely to perceive compression artifacts (both audio
> and video) and early DVDs were full of them in all possible forms.
Agreed. I'd go as far to say that, on a high-quality CRT television,
my LDs looked better than the DVDs that were coming out!
> Even today, I enjoy "putting on a Laser" much more than playing a DVD.
> The format itself holds much more enjoyment compared to DVD. The big
> artwork, heavy discs in protective sleeves, the noise of the player,
> small touches like the external AC3-decoder, even the little charms of
> the formats imperfections... there is much more "ritual quality" to LD.
> It's been said before – LD is the videophile's vinyl.
I still have a "sizeable" collection that I watch from on a regular
basis -- and you're right, there _is_ more of a "ritual" to watching
LDs! :D
Another thing I appreciate is the quality of the supplemental
material. "Back then", most of the things like commentaries,
documentaries, still-frame archives and the like were well-researched
and thoughtful as they were so expensive to include. With the mass-
produced "extras" on today's DVDs, the quality (of commentaries
mainly) has suffered, making finding out more about the film-making
process far less enjoyable. In fact, I can't think of the last DVD I
watched ALL the extra stuff on -- but I used to spend days on end
pouring over the supplemental material on my LDs! :)
bil...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Oliver,
I have my equipment set up in my 12 X 12 bedroom and my 9 year-old is
in the bedroom just on the other side of the wall. Because of that, I
can't have a big, booming speaker setup. I've noticed that the sound
from both my LD-V8000 LD player and from DVD movies I play via my PS2
is just fine.
Hope this helps,
Bill N. - Long Island, NY
film11
out, I preferred the superior sound found on LDs. And, thanks to
people like Thad Floryen on this site, I even had an exceptional
laserdisc player which delivered picture quality that was often equal
to (and in some cases better than) the equivalent DVDs being released
back then.
Since I didn't feel that DVDs offered a sizeable improvement, I never
got heavily into them aside from renting, like everyone else, to view
new releases). So I never needed to replace my LDs with DVDs, as many
others did. Besides, I knew HD was coming and I didn't want to get
caught up in an "interim" format. My LDs still looked and sounded
fine, and I told myself that I wouldn't be replacing them until HD
came along...because HD truly IS a big step forward.
Even though I occasionally sell-off some LDs every now and then, I
still have hundreds that I enjoy.
m...@privacy.net
> In article <MPG.25a4c271a...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Chet <lo...@oldsouls.us> wrote:
>
>> Please don't take my question as trolling. I'd like to know the answer.
>>
>> I've got three old LD players, I won't bother with brand names and model
>> numbers, and a couple of hundred old discs and had made superb SVHS
>> copies of about a thousand more. I also have large screen sets. I have
>> a 62" set in my bedroom and my home cinema has a HD projection system
>> with a 10 foot screen.
>>
>> I loved laser discs but after I saw what DVD could offer I never bought
>> or rented another laser disc. And now I have Blu-ray in addition to my
>> many DVD players.
>>
>> So my question is simply this: What is the attraction that LDs still
>> offer to regulars in this group? Again, I'm not trying to be a troll.
>> I'm just interested.
>>
>> I'll hang up and listen.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> CB
>
> There's material that's out on LD that is not on DVD or Blu-Ray, and may
> never be.
>
> Steve
>
Also, some of the supplemental material that are on the LD's didn't get
carried over to the DVD's of the same movie. Some of the early Sean
Connery James Bond flicks come to mind here.
bil...@yahoo.com
Steve,
Laserdiscs are like tapes in the fact that there is no
territory/zone lock out. As long as the disc player and the disc are
a match (NTSC or PAL) it will play. There are even some models of
Pioneer and Sony that can play both. Also, since the material on the
disc is analog, there is no blocky pixelization that you may get when
you blow up a DVD too big.
Take good care,
Bill N. - Long Island, NY
>Steve Fenwick wrote:
Thad Floryan
>
> Laserdiscs are like tapes in the fact that there is no
> territory/zone lock out. As long as the disc player and the disc are
> a match (NTSC or PAL) it will play. There are even some models of
> Pioneer and Sony that can play both. Also, since the material on the
> disc is analog, there is no blocky pixelization that you may get when
> you blow up a DVD too big.
Unless the LaserDisc or DVD has rotted. Then blocky pixelization occurs.
I have example of both (rotted DVDs and LaserDiscs).
Steve Fenwick
Thad Floryan <th...@thadlabs.com> wrote:
I don't get pixelization when I blow up DVDs, but I use a decent player
and projector for those sorts of presentations. With laserdisc, I get a
very large, fairly soft image, using the same projector and a Faroujda
NRS.
At this stage I'm only using laserdiscs for content that can't be had
elsewhere. Everything else is DVD, HD-DVD, or Blu-Ray.
Steve
--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, sidecar in the other, body thoroughly
Chet
with a DVD made by a schlock supplier, like Chinese bootleggers, in
1997, but that's not the way things are now. I run a home theatre with
a 10' screen and the difference in quality between a laser disc and a
DVD is astonishing. That analog NTSC or PAL laser disc just doesn't
carry anywhere near the detail and color fidelity, including smearing,
that a DVD does. Frankly I was shocked to see how much better the DVD
was. And Blu-ray CAN be many times better than a DVD, but usually the
difference is less astonishing than between LD and DVD. With DVD and LD
you get the best screen image when you don't try to introduce artificial
sharpening, just the opposite of analog LDs.
Don't get me wrong, I loved my LDs. Otherwise I wouldn't have gone
exclusively with them a couple of decades ago. But anyone that poo poos
the vast improvement in picture and sound that little digital discs
offer has just got their head in the sand. Digital 5.1, 6.1, or 7.1
sound beats the hell out of Dolby Matrix stereo found on laser discs.
Region codes are very easy to get around, nudge, nudge. And as for
supplementary materials, DVDs and BRDs are packing more of that stuff
into their product than ever before. Incidentally, lots of that
supplementary material, including running commentary is so full of
misinformation that it's just laughable. I appear in the supplements to
a few DVDs and I know whereof I speak.
I'm glad that people treasure their laser discs, but it's a bit moronic
to suggest that there's a quality advantage to those big silver discs.
Chet
In article <0iic36125fvllp6l9...@4ax.com>,
bil...@yahoo.com says...
publius
It still depends on the disc.
Discrete multichannel audio is certainly preferable to matrix, but
that only applies to certain cases, & outside of those PCM or analog
FM stereo from LD is superior to 192 kbps DD stereo on DVD. I'm a
Japanese animation fan, & aside from the question of whether something
is available on DVD at all (either in Region 1 or anywhere), many
American-release anime DVDs are of decidedly inferior quality.
Sometimes this is due to squeezing too many episodes onto a disc, but
not always -- the recent release of ICZER-ONE, for example, is
atrocious, whereas my 20-plus-year-old LD looks beautiful. There are
plenty of less-extreme cases, especially when dealing with older
material, which is where my interest mostly lies ; the AnimEigo DVDs
of URUSEI YATSURA & KIMAGURE ORANGE ROAD, for example, are necessarily
inferior to the LDs, because they were made from the same composite
master tapes.
So, depending on your area of interest, a blanket statement of the
superiority of DVD over LD may or may not be true. For mainstream
Hollywood movies, sure ; otherwise, maybe not. A lot of the
improvement is attributable not to the format but to better film-to-
video transfer techniques, which give a much better effect in high
definition ; and I am very glad for that to be finally here.
--publius--