LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!
LDis...@webtv.net
laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
yet.
Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
Nick Baldasare
LDis...@webtv.net wrote in message
<27603-35D...@newsd-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
DSanner106
it becomes fully recordable at the home level with prices for home recorder /
players it might take over. Unfortunately it too is old technology. Sony and a
couple others already have newer products in line that will replace DVD and
don't intend to keep developing DVD for more than a year or two more. They may
not be on the platter format at all , I understand. No, I heard all these same
cries, and listened and went for the Beta machines and tapes when they were
out. Being a little better than your competition is no guarantee of success
where technology is concerned. It's nice that DVD discs are small enough to
carry around easily, but any other improvements over Laserdisc, must be
measured by machines, and that is just not enough improvement for survival.
ike
in storage medium knows that static memory in terms of optical data will
soon be a dinosaur. Flash memory & even more advanced methods are already
being tested. LDs and DVDs are an interim step, and a current handy method
of archiving. I love the nice big, pretty LD covers and boxed sets (I still
have 3000 LPs...). I am buying my 1st DVD player. My children will one day
get them all. There is no reason to bicker! Support your format choice by
buying, rant at your movie companies for not putting out what you want, and
enjoy the movies.
"Don't let Turner and his damn crayons near my movie!" -Orson Welles
DSanner106 wrote in message
<199808132124...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Norman Wilner
Hippies?
Norm Wilner
Starweek Magazine
Brad Wilson
>carry around easily, but any other improvements over Laserdisc, must be
>measured by machines, and that is just not enough improvement for survival.
The improvement is twofold, and visually marked.
First, the amount of storage on the platter is an important improvement, at
least in short term storage needs. DVD-ROM will most certainly be the
distribution method of the next 5 years.
Secondly, the storage of video in component format at about 20% higher
resolution is major win in terms of real, visible quality. DVDs are
markedly sharper, more detailed, have much better color saturation, and zero
color artifacts that are unavoidable with traditional comb filtering (which
is a "must do" step for laserdiscs).
-- Brad Wilson ----- Student of Objectivism ----- Mercenary Programmer --
Email: bradw<at>pobox<dot>com http<colon>//pobox<dot>com/<tilde>bradw
"Every argument commonly offered for the notion of God leads to a contra-
diction of the axiomatic concepts of philosophy. At every point, the
notion clashes with the facts of reality and with the preconditions of
thought." -- Leonard Peikoff
Gary
>
> I hate to tell you hippies in denial that LD is dead! Get with it,
> laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
> yet.
>
> Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
> it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
Hahahahahahaha!!!! This has to be one of the funniest things I have ever
seen. Web TV!!
Maybe you should mix in an actual computer, before you try to ridicule
others about being out of step wit technology.
--
__________________________________________________________________
"I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly . . . take a stress
pill, and think things over." HAL 9000 '2001:a space odyssey'
__________________________________________________________________
"You can't eat the venetian blinds, I just had them
installed on Wednesday." J.J. Gittes 'Chinatown'
__________________________________________________________________
Gary Lima
GL...@Prodigy.net
Brian Hedden
Norman Wilner wrote:
> LDis...@webtv.net wrote in message
> <27603-35D...@newsd-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
> >I hate to tell you hippies in denial that LD is dead! Get with it,
> >laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
> >yet.
> >
> >Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
> >it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
>
> Hippies?
>
> Norm Wilner
> Starweek Magazine
Yeah, maaaan...you know, like...the ones who DID take the brown acid?
Sheesh,
Brian
Pedro Colman-Arrellaga
>MUSE LDs have 8 times the resolution as DVDs ?!?!? Lets see DVDs are
>500 lines of resolution that would make MUSE LDs (8x500) 4000 lines of
>resolution !!!!! God almighty even HDTV is only 1080, shit even thats
>out of date already (and it's not even out yet), guess nobody is gonna
>need HDTV since the 10 year old HiVision technology is out there! Go
>laserdiscs!
You aren't thinking. Twice the horizontal resolution and vertical
resoution would equal 4 times the resolution. 4000 lines of resolution
would actually be about 64 times the resolution. I do however expect
that this is all flying right over your head just about now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Colman-Arréllaga | Believing is easier than thinking. Hence so
hiss...@cris.com | many more believers than thinkers.
hiss...@concentric.net | - Bruce Calvert
------------------------|
| Do I contradict myself?
"The Typhoid Mary of | Very well then, I contradict myself,
the shipping business" | (I am large, I contain multitudes).
| - Walt Whitman
----------------------------------------------------------------------
fyns...@webtv.net
let's not bag on Web TV just because one mongoloid peckerwood is sitting
on his couch typing posts with his nose.
Jon
or attempting to insight yet another (unwanted) laser/DVD war thread.
You twat.
MPRocks221
>laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
>yet.
>
>Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
>it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
You are a stupid pathetic troll. Get a life.
Thad Floryan
| The improvement is twofold, and visually marked.
|
| First, the amount of storage on the platter is an important improvement, at
| least in short term storage needs. DVD-ROM will most certainly be the
| distribution method of the next 5 years.
|
| Secondly, the storage of video in component format at about 20% higher
| resolution is major win in terms of real, visible quality. DVDs are
| markedly sharper, more detailed, have much better color saturation, and zero
| color artifacts that are unavoidable with traditional comb filtering (which
| is a "must do" step for laserdiscs).
All the more reason for everyone to buy HLD-X0 and HLD-X9 HiVision/MUSE LD
players whose HiVision laserdisc playback just stomps DVD into the ground with
greater than 8x resolution than DVD. Point being: DVD offers NO advantage
over HiVision LDs and HiVision players/discs are already fully HDTV compatible
in terms of resolution and have been available for years (and MUSE/HiVision is
also broadcast in Japan).
You missed the gist of the original article to which you responded:
It's nice that DVD discs are small enough to carry around easily,
but any other improvements over Laserdisc, must be measured by
machines, and that is just not enough improvement for survival.
Even "normal" laserdisc playback using an HLD-X9 looks as good or better
than ANY DVD playback I've seen to date which is why I bought two HLD-X9
players after completing my DVD evaluation earlier this year.
Final point being: after all the DVD hype, it still cannot exceed what has
already existed for years; there is no significant technical improvement and,
as such, is a disappointment considering the rate of technological advances
in, say, the computer field.
Thad
DG
>All the more reason for everyone to buy HLD-X0 and HLD-X9 HiVision/MUSE LD
>players whose HiVision laserdisc playback just stomps DVD into the ground with
>greater than 8x resolution than DVD. Point being: DVD offers NO advantage
>over HiVision LDs and HiVision players/discs are already fully HDTV compatible
>in terms of resolution and have been available for years (and MUSE/HiVision is
>also broadcast in Japan).
Yeah how many people are going to spend $125 per movie and have to
flip the discs four to five times?
paul_l...@studio.disney.com
LDis...@webtv.net wrote:
> I hate to tell you hippies in denial that LD is dead! Get with it,
> laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
> yet.
>
> Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
> it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
>
>
....Well then, could you explain why so many titles come out on LD, but not
DVD? I don't get it - how can LD be dead if the titles you want are only on
LD? If I want The Rock in DTS, I guess my travels would show me that DVD is
still kind of in the womb. Please explain your generic statement, if you can.
-p
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
WILLIAM A FULMER
laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
yet.
Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
man i think we need to all heed this patron saint of dvd....after all i
always trust those who have their finger on the pulse of modern
technology...and anyone with a WEBTV address sure has that .....
Glenise
Lion King, Jungle Book, Toy Story, The Little Toaster Goes To Mars,
Cinderella (Brandy)
I don't want to wait 10 years before these movies are released on DVD!!
I think both formats are great!!!
Bughunter
good but not better than LD.
I do enjoy watching a few minutes of DVD adds on info-mercials.....the first
sign of DEATH...............mmmm....haven't seen any LD adds on late night
info-mercials hmmmm Could be YOU are just a product of big corporations
letting YOU know what you should believe. Pretty soon your going to be able
to place that DVD player (in it's present form) right next to your fathers
Betamax cause I'm sure your problem is genetic!
Glenise
Lion King, Jungle Book, Toy Story, The Little Toaster Goes To Mars,
Cinderella (Brandy)
I don't want to wait 10 years before these movies are released on DVD!!
I think both formats are great!!!
LDis...@webtv.net wrote in message
Christoph Steinecke
about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
>Even "normal" laserdisc playback using an HLD-X9 looks as good or better
>than ANY DVD playback I've seen to date
keep telling this fairy tale and maybe people start believing it
then again, maybe they wont
Bye
Chris
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Christoph Steinecke email : ch...@pegasus.owl.de |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thad Floryan
| On Fri, 14 Aug 1998 03:16:42 GMT, dg...@msn.com (DG) wrote:
|
| >500 lines of resolution that would make MUSE LDs (8x500) 4000 lines of
| >resolution !!!!! God almighty even HDTV is only 1080, shit even thats
| >out of date already (and it's not even out yet), guess nobody is gonna
| >need HDTV since the 10 year old HiVision technology is out there! Go
| >laserdiscs!
|
| resoution would equal 4 times the resolution. 4000 lines of resolution
| would actually be about 64 times the resolution. I do however expect
| that this is all flying right over your head just about now.
I just posted the MUSE/HiVision specs (from two prior articles in AVL) in
my just-prior response in this thread, and I also included a brief description
of "lines of resolution" which is oft-misunderstood.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| th...@thadlabs.com (Thad Floryan) wrote:
|
| >All the more reason for everyone to buy HLD-X0 and HLD-X9 HiVision/MUSE LD
| >players whose HiVision laserdisc playback just stomps DVD into the ground
| >with greater than 8x resolution than DVD. Point being: DVD offers NO
| >advantage over HiVision LDs and HiVision players/discs are already fully
| >HDTV compatible in terms of resolution and have been available for years
| >(and MUSE/HiVision is also broadcast in Japan).
|
| Yeah how many people are going to spend $125 per movie and have to
| flip the discs four to five times?
Precisely my point re: the disappointment with DVD. One would think that
given the normal rate of technological improvements with consumer devices
(computers, cars, etc.) that something significantly better than existing
formats would have ensued.
Where do you get the "flip the discs four to five times"? A MUSE LD has
1 hour per side like conventional laserdiscs and the HLD-X9 autoflips.
Again, my point was: given the existence of "better" existing formats, we
all had higher hopes for a successor format in terms of better resolution
and lower cost. DVD is, at best, a small incremental improvement over the
conventional laserdisc and not the "leap" we would have expected after 20
years' experience with laserdiscs. To be fair, some of the letdown appears
to be the fault of studios afraid of "too good" a format in the hands of
consumers, but still ...
| MUSE LDs have 8 times the resolution as DVDs ?!?!? Lets see DVDs are
| 500 lines of resolution that would make MUSE LDs (8x500) 4000 lines of
| resolution !!!!! God almighty even HDTV is only 1080, shit even thats
| out of date already (and it's not even out yet), guess nobody is gonna
| need HDTV since the 10 year old HiVision technology is out there! Go
| laserdiscs!
Heh! Note the MUSE/HiVision baseband signal bandwidth is 30MHz and that the
MUSE/HiVision LDs have 1125 scan lines (vs. USA's HDTV 1080i). Two recent
articles (excerpted below) give the specs. Note the Y channel at 1920 pixels
is what I used to [approximately] derive the 8x better resolution per:
V x H
---- ----
MUSE/HiVision: 1125 x 1920 = 2,160,000 pixels per frame
DVD: 525 x ~500 = ~262,500 pixels per frame
BTW, you have confused "lines of resolution". Scan lines are fixed and all
of Commodore VIC-20, VHS player, and laserdisc and DVD players are constrained
to 525 scan lines (for NTSC). "Lines of resolution" actually means how many
vertical lines can be discerned in the horizontal direction in the central
area of the display within a width equal to the display's height.
FWIW, an HDTV 1080i (or HiVision) display looks simply incredible; scan lines
cannot be seen even with one's eye 1" from the screen. The only "thing" I
see that close is the shadow_mask/phosphors. BTW, with HiVision one needs a
display capable of handling 1125 scan lines.
Here's the HiVision info:
+ From: "Ivar" <av...@online.no>
+ Newsgroups: alt.video.laserdisc
+ Subject: Re: MUSE HiVision LD listing?
+ Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 17:57:52 +0200
+ Message-ID: <6q7b1h$97t$1...@o.online.no>
+ NNTP-Posting-Host: ti01a23-0014.dialup.online.no
+
+ Hi-Vision production/studio format is fairly close to the SMPTE 240E standard.
+
+ Total lines pr. frame: 1125
+ Active lines pr. frame: 1035
+ Scanning: 2:1 interlaced
+ Aspect ratio: 16:9 ( academy 1:1.33 material will have black
+ vertical bars )
+ Field rate: 60Hz ( not 59.94Hz )
+
+ Typically stored as color differential component YPbPr. If analogue storage,
+ all components will have 30MHz bandwidth, not just the luma component. If
+ digital storage is used the chroma component are normally subsampled so the
+ chroma bandwidth is reduced to 15MHz because of storage limitation.
+
+ DIGITAL STORAGE INFORMATION Y CHANNEL
+
+ Total pixels pr line: 2200
+ Total active pixels pr line: 1920
+ Pixel clock rate: 74.25MHz
+ The transfer function ( gamma ) is slightly different to standard resolution,
+ and so are the chromatic references of the primaries ( the color triangle ).
+ Which of cause causes the formula for Y, Cb and Cr to be slightly different
+ from YUV.
+
+ MUSE CODEC
+
+ Luma bandwidth; in stationary portions of the picture 22MHz; in moving
+ portions of the picture 16MHz. The color differential signals have 7.2MHz
+ bandwidth for the stationary part and 4MHz for the moving portions. Yes, MUSE
+ is a component differential format, not a composite format. In pixel terms
+ the stationary portion of the picture roughly equals 1440 x 1035. The
+ resulting bandwidth of the decoded signal is dependent on the encoder and the
+ decoder. There have been many updates both to the encoder and the decoder,
+ especially the encoder.
+
+ The non active lines are used for transferring sound and other data like
+ motion vectors. There are two possible sound systems A and B. A is four
+ independent channel sound and B is two channel sound (often prologic encoded).
+ In addition nearly all A encoded movies also have a standard EFM track,
+ normally prologic encoded.
+
+ That is about everything I can think of just now, without getting too nitty
+ gritty.
+
+ Best regards,
+
+ Ivar Vikøren.
and
+ From: Alen Koebel <al...@home.com>
+ Newsgroups: alt.video.laserdisc
+ Subject: Re: MUSE HiVision LD listing?
+ Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 17:04:24 -0400
+ Organization: .
+ Lines: 40
+ Message-ID: <35C8C8...@home.com>
+ NNTP-Posting-Host: it306.electro.com
+
+ Ivar wrote:
+ >
+ > Thad Floryan wrote in message <6q71ud$f3r$1...@nntp2.ba.best.com>...
+ >
+ > >A Yahoo search on "muse" revealed about eleventy-seven museums, so at this
+ > >point I don't know the specs. Stay tuned; when the manuals are translated
+ > >I could provide some more info,
+ >
+ > They provide very little info, here are some cold facts:
+ >
+ > Hi-Vision production/studio format is fairly close to the SMPTE 240E
+ > standard.
+ >
+ > Total lines pr. frame: 1125
+ > Active lines pr. frame: 1035
+ > Scanning: 2:1 interlaced
+ > Aspect ratio: 16:9 ( academy 1:1.33 source material will have black vertical
+ > bars )
+ > Field rate: 60Hz ( not 59.94Hz )
+ >
+ > Typically stored as color differential component YPbPr. If analogue
+ > storage, all components will have 30MHz bandwidth, not just the luma
+ > component.
+
+ Only on tape. When broadcast and stored on "Hi-vision"
+ laserdisc, the most common sources of analog HDTV signals,
+ they are MUSE encoded and are hence reduced in bandwidth.
+ Out of a MUSE decoder, luma is around 20 - 22 MHz and the
+ color difference components are about 6.5 - 7 MHz. The MUSE
+ analog compression scheme also subsamples the color difference
+ signals vertically by 2:1, which the bandwidth numbers can't
+ show. Furthermore, the compression scheme causes a reduction
+ in the resolution of moving areas of the picture (because it
+ employs temporal subsampling in addition to spatial subsampling).
+ It all works amazingly well. Hi-vision laserdiscs are a joy to
+ behold.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| th...@thadlabs.com wrote at 14.08.98
| about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
|
| >Even "normal" laserdisc playback using an HLD-X9 looks as good or better
| >than ANY DVD playback I've seen to date
|
| keep telling this fairy tale and maybe people start believing it
|
| then again, maybe they wont
Why do I continually get the impression you haven't viewed the output of
an HLD-X9 in a good setup?
Direct A/B comparisons of, for example, the red Interpol warning played from
an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed them.
If you choose not to believe, that's your prerogative.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| [...]
| Obviously, there are good and bad DVDs and LDs, so it is hard to make
| generic comparisons, but DVD is a capable format when implemented well.
|
| A side-by-side comparison of 'Contact' DVD vs LD is all it takes to prove a
| noticeable difference. The LD has several scenes riddled with rainbow moire
| effects (Ellie's jacket at the Hadden interview, branches of trees that have
| shed their leaves, etc). The DVD is as clean as a whistle. No video noise
That moire problem does not happen with an HLD-X9 player as I answered
Christy here about 2 months ago.
That (and HiVision capability) was why I bought a second HLD-X9 after
completing my evaluation of DVD several months ago. The player DOES
make a difference with laserdiscs.
Thad
joe_r...@merck.com
"Coddington, Paul" <pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
> A side-by-side comparison of 'Contact' DVD vs LD is all it takes to prove a
> noticeable difference.
The "Contact" LD is a Sony disc. Their defect rate aside, the majority of
their transfers all have a soft, fuzzy look. It is well known that Sony
makes the worst LDs in the business. Hardly a fair comparison.
The LD has several scenes riddled with rainbow moire
> effects (Ellie's jacket at the Hadden interview, branches of trees that have
> shed their leaves, etc). The DVD is as clean as a whistle. No video noise
> in darker scenes, either.
These do not show up on my player. However, the DVD does have numerous
undulating effects, such as the parking lot when Ellie arrives at the
transport's location, or the overhead camera pan over the gathered crowd,
numerous monitor shots, etc. etc. While the LD problems you mentioned don't
appear on my player, they may show up for those with different players or
monitors. By the same token, the DVD "shimmering" I described may not show up
on, say, the Sony 7000 player. Certainly, performance varies on both
formats, depending on the hardware. Therefore, I have no trouble believing
Thad when it comes to the HLD-X9. Now, where in NY can I get one?
joe_r...@merck.com
dg...@msn.com (DG) wrote:
>
> Yeah how many people are going to spend $125 per movie and have to
> flip the discs four to five times?
Obviously, you know nothing about LDs.
Don Borowski
[snip]
: Precisely my point re: the disappointment with DVD. One would think that
: given the normal rate of technological improvements with consumer devices
: (computers, cars, etc.) that something significantly better than existing
: formats would have ensued.
[snip]
: Again, my point was: given the existence of "better" existing formats, we
: all had higher hopes for a successor format in terms of better resolution
: and lower cost. DVD is, at best, a small incremental improvement over the
: conventional laserdisc and not the "leap" we would have expected after 20
: years' experience with laserdiscs. To be fair, some of the letdown appears
: to be the fault of studios afraid of "too good" a format in the hands of
: consumers, but still ...
The main reason that DVD is not a big leap over LD is due to the limitation
of the display device. It is stuck (on NTSC) with about 490 lines of
display vertically, interlaced at that (which causes loss of resolution
to the eye). Yeah, one could have gone to 1000 lines of horizontal
resolution, but you would still be stuck with the vertical problem.
It is only with the next generation of display (HDTV), with its doubling
of vertical lines, the ability to do progress scan, and wider aspect
ratio that the picture can significantly improve.
Donald Borowski WA6OMI Hewlett-Packard, Spokane Division
"Angels are able to fly because they take themselves so lightly."
-G.K. Chesterton
Mike Reber
dvd yet and the last time I checked, I am not getting any younger. I dont
want to wait till I am an old man to buy these films and up to right now
and probably a couple of years in the future these films are available on
laserdisc and I hope everyone agrees that lasers are betther than vhs, beta
or ced discs, therefore I think I am doing the right thing by supporting
the format!!!!!!!!!!!!
joe_r...@merck.com wrote in article <6r27h5$lg7$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
Mike Reber
but I have over 20 different ones RIGHT NOW in my collection. I dont want
to be a grandfather and still collecting abbott and costello films.
Mike Reber
on dvd?? No where near as many! I know I know dvd is new but I am
collecting RIGHT NOW and I want whats available RIGHT NOW not years from
now but RIGHT NOW! I am not going to put my entire collection on hold just
because it is not on dvd RIGHT NOW I will just simply buy it on laserdisc
RIGHT NOW!!!
Mike Reber
many more individual discs are there that many on dvd? NO NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO! Oh my thats too bad because I have them RIGHT NOW on
laserdisc and I am not going to be an asshole and wait for someone to get a
stump up their ass and release these cartoons on D V D! I want them and I
want them NOW not 5 years from now but RIGHT NOW!
Mike Reber
on dvd??? I have 9 of the 14 titles on laserdisc RIGHT NOW and the other 5
on vhs RIGHT NOW! How many sherlock holmes titles are on dvd??? Am I
supposed to wait for the rest of my life?? If the titles come to dvd
before laserdisc I will buy the dvd but I am not holding my breath.
Mike Reber
be laserdiscs! RIGHT NOW there are 10 to 1 laserdisc players in peoples
homes. Oh my!! I must say I do resent every time new technology comes out
they ram it up your asshole! What are you dvd buyers going to do when the
hdtv blue disc comes out?? It is better than vhs, ced, beta, laserdiscs,
dvd, divx and 8 tracks! Are you going to junk your dvds in favor of hdtv
blue disc??
At 1300 lines of resolution to go along with the hdtvs it will be better
all the way around but I am not excited because it is not here NOW.
I am not getting any younger and I want what I want RIGHT NOW. Laserdisc
still offers me an incredible selection RIGHT NOW TODAY!!!! Not 10 years
from today but TODAY RIGHT NOW!
Mike Reber
and laserdisc has always been the best format to buy up till now buy I am
not going to sell all my titles with the hopes they will release them on
dvd, only an asshole would do that! If they ever stop making laserdiscs
(and they are still releasing over 75 titles a month, more than I can keep
up with) I will start buying the new format what ever it is by then but for
now I cant see myself buying the newest james bond movie on dvd when I have
all of the others on laserdisc It just doesnt make sense. Goldeneye had
many extras did the dvd???
Mike Reber
buck privates had nothing but my LASERDISC HAS EXTRAS. I am a film buff
and like as much as I can get even when It cost pennies more. Oh my!!
Mike Reber
nice as they are on laserdisc RIGHT NOW! Do you think they will be
better?? Well they might be but the laserdiscs are very very nice probably
the best thing I own in my collection however I have the laserdiscs RIGHT
NOW and I dont have to wait for them to come out! I do not have to pay
each time I watch them! I dont have to beg disney to release my favorites
because they are available RIGHT NOW!!!! One thing I do like about the dvd
thing is I am able to buy rare lasers from you dvd buyers at a cheaper
rate, THANK YOU!!!!!
Mike Reber
player even if I liked dvds better. I would buy a combo player because so
many titles are cheaper than dvds it isnt even funny not to mention that
there are so many more titles on laserdisc RIGHT NOW. You can get twister
used on laserdisc anywhere up to $15 and I dont think the dvd will sell
that cheap RIGHT NOW! I cant believe that dvd buyers would sell their
lasers to change formats. They are probably the same people who sold their
records when cds came out. I have many lps on record that will never be on
cd unless I record it myself. Well I blasted dvds enough all I can say is
I cant wait to read what dvd buyers say when the HDTV BLUE DISC comes out!!
I guess they will be selling their dvds. Hey you can sell me your used
dvds if they are cheap enough!!
Ersatz
Celebrate, please.
Christy
It is interesting that you choose the interpol warning because those
usually are not mastered well and come from a composite source.
I've suggested this before and I would still love to do a shootout
between the X9, my progressive scan DVD player and my line doubled sony
S7000 and try to understand better the advantages and disadvantages of
each system. I own Video Essentials on both LD and DVD so this would be
very easy to do.
I think in the end for NTSC coded material that it will boil down to
which set of artifacts you prefer.
Obviously MUSE will look better than either NTSC LD or DVD. We'll have
to wait for HD-DVD or whatever storage medium that emerges for DTV to
compare muse to it. Honestly I think MUSE might have a good chance of
looking better than DTV 1080i unless we start getting cheap prog scan
playback of 1080i for films like we see now on DVD.
Cheers
--
Christy
-- Replace nospam with aurinia in order to reply
Gary
>
> It is interesting that you choose the interpol warning because those
> usually are not mastered well and come from a composite source.
What happend to your "rec.video.dvd.advocacy" header?
--
__________________________________________________________________
"I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly . . . take a stress
pill, and think things over." HAL 9000 '2001:a space odyssey'
__________________________________________________________________
"You can't eat the venetian blinds, I just had them
installed on Wednesday." J.J. Gittes 'Chinatown'
__________________________________________________________________
Gary Lima
GL...@Prodigy.net
Gary
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Gary
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
Mike Reber wrote:
I, for one, am really glad that Stanton is no longer here. The
combination of Mike, and Bill would certainly be more than most of us
would have been able to handle. :)
Christy
says...
> Even If I were getting into video starting now I would get a laserdisc
> player even if I liked dvds better. I would buy a combo player because so
> many titles are cheaper than dvds it isnt even funny not to mention that
> there are so many more titles on laserdisc RIGHT NOW. You can get twister
> used on laserdisc anywhere up to $15 and I dont think the dvd will sell
> that cheap RIGHT NOW! I cant believe that dvd buyers would sell their
> lasers to change formats. They are probably the same people who sold their
> records when cds came out. I have many lps on record that will never be on
> cd unless I record it myself. Well I blasted dvds enough all I can say is
> I cant wait to read what dvd buyers say when the HDTV BLUE DISC comes out!!
> I guess they will be selling their dvds. Hey you can sell me your used
> dvds if they are cheap enough!!
Hey, can you put up about three dozen more follow ups to this person?
I'm not sure I quite get the point...
:-)
Christy
> Christy wrote:
>
> >
> > It is interesting that you choose the interpol warning because those
> > usually are not mastered well and come from a composite source.
>
> What happend to your "rec.video.dvd.advocacy" header?
I found the thread too late so I figured it would just be noise at this
point. I hope you didn't find my post too much part of the noise.
Cheers
Coddington, Paul
ike wrote in message <9hJA1.1402$pf3.31...@news.wctc.net>...
>Anyone knowledgeable about the incredible rate of technological
advancements
>in storage medium knows that static memory in terms of optical data will
[snip]
Some knowledgable people actually claim the opposite - that is, stamping out
discs will always be cheaper and more reliable. Relative complexity, mass
production, reliability, that sort of thing.
PAUL CODDINGTON
pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au
http://www.geocities.com/athens/2488
PEC Pink Axolotl is a non-sensical disorganisation...
Coddington, Paul
DSanner106 wrote in message
<199808132124...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
[snip]
>where technology is concerned. It's nice that DVD discs are small enough to
>carry around easily, but any other improvements over Laserdisc, must be
>measured by machines, and that is just not enough improvement for survival.
[snip]
Obviously, there are good and bad DVDs and LDs, so it is hard to make
generic comparisons, but DVD is a capable format when implemented well.
A side-by-side comparison of 'Contact' DVD vs LD is all it takes to prove a
noticeable difference. The LD has several scenes riddled with rainbow moire
effects (Ellie's jacket at the Hadden interview, branches of trees that have
shed their leaves, etc). The DVD is as clean as a whistle. No video noise
in darker scenes, either. You don't need test instruments to notice that
sort of difference. Even on an average 4.3 TV, people on this DVD have skin
texture and freckles, doors have woodgrain textures visible under the paint.
With a DVD machine you can even reduce NTSC colour problems by converting
the output for Region 1 discs to pseudo-PAL.
Even so, when CDs were released I met plenty of people who thought they
sounded no different to cassette tape - so quality is not the only issue
when it comes to survival in the marketplace.
Mike Reber
to dvds what cds did to 8tracks!! You are waisting your time trying to
convert the public to dvd, beside you certainly can not be a real collector
anyway or you would still be buying lasers as well. I am going to come up
with a name for people like you, it will be something like trailer trash
but pertain to the format. Ill let the newsgroup what it is after I think
about it for a spell.
Ersatz <elect...@magic.fr> wrote in article
<35d5b66c...@news.supernews.com>...
leon
<pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au> wrote:
>
>DSanner106 wrote in message
><199808132124...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>
>[snip]
>>where technology is concerned. It's nice that DVD discs are small enough to
>>carry around easily, but any other improvements over Laserdisc, must be
>>measured by machines, and that is just not enough improvement for survival.
>[snip]
>
>Obviously, there are good and bad DVDs and LDs, so it is hard to make
>generic comparisons, but DVD is a capable format when implemented well.
>
>A side-by-side comparison of 'Contact' DVD vs LD is all it takes to prove a
>noticeable difference.
Why don't you try a side by side comparison of "The Highlander" for
the bases of comparison.
Christoph Steinecke
about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
>Why do I continually get the impression you haven't viewed the output of
>an HLD-X9 in a good setup?
probably because I havent :-)
>Direct A/B comparisons of, for example, the red Interpol warning played from
>an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed them.
I will take your word on it; since there is some noise in the LD signal
I would imagine that the HLD player does some "digital cleaning up"
of some sort in order to achieve this virtually noise free picture;
noting wrong with that but keep in mind that this is chroma noise free
picture is NOT originally on the LD and because of that 99.9% of all
LD users have a relatively noisy LD picture compared to DVD
>If you choose not to believe, that's your prerogative.
I do believe you and the great performance of the HLD-X9 but it still
cant add resolution which the format itself does not offer; this includes
approx 20% horizontal resolution and 33% vertical resolution
(if the DVD is 16:9 enhanced) both in favour of the DVD version
I wont go into other specs such as S/N noise ratio (or pressing defects
for that matter) but pretty much everything has the DVD ahead of LD
Bye
Chris
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Christoph Steinecke email : ch...@pegasus.owl.de |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christoph Steinecke
about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
>| A side-by-side comparison of 'Contact' DVD vs LD is all it takes to prove a
>| noticeable difference. The LD has several scenes riddled with rainbow
>moire | effects (Ellie's jacket at the Hadden interview, branches of trees
>that have | shed their leaves, etc). The DVD is as clean as a whistle. No
>video noise
>
>That moire problem does not happen with an HLD-X9 player as I answered
>Christy here about 2 months ago.
which raises the question : is that moire pattern in the LD signal and
the HLD "cleans it up" somehow or are all the "normal" LD players used
by 99% of the LD crowd just so bad to begin with ?
>That (and HiVision capability) was why I bought a second HLD-X9 after
>completing my evaluation of DVD several months ago. The player DOES
>make a difference with laserdiscs.
which makes you wonder why Pioneer never bothered to sell it in the US ?
Christoph Steinecke
about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
>These do not show up on my player. However, the DVD does have numerous
>undulating effects, such as the parking lot when Ellie arrives at the
>transport's location, or the overhead camera pan over the gathered crowd,
>numerous monitor shots, etc. etc. While the LD problems you mentioned don't
>appear on my player, they may show up for those with different players or
>monitors. By the same token, the DVD "shimmering" I described may not show up
>on, say, the Sony 7000 player. Certainly, performance varies on both
>formats, depending on the hardware. Therefore, I have no trouble believing
>Thad when it comes to the HLD-X9. Now, where in NY can I get one?
if Contact is run in 16:9 mode NONE of those problems occur
Coddington, Paul
Christoph Steinecke wrote in message <6ztU0...@pegasus.owl.de>...
>th...@thadlabs.com wrote at 14.08.98
>about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
[snip]
> which raises the question : is that moire pattern in the LD signal and
> the HLD "cleans it up" somehow or are all the "normal" LD players used
> by 99% of the LD crowd just so bad to begin with ?
And how much more expensive is it than an average LD player? Are we talking
about a machine that is within reach of most people? Or is it a case of
"average/good DVD beats average/good LD but can't compete with studio
reference LD worth several times as much". In audio it is possible to
outclass CD players with good turntables, but the CD players come up to 95%
of the quality and are up to 6x less expensive.
André F. Jølsen
Thad Floryan wrote in message <6r1q4r$r6t$4...@nntp2.ba.best.com>...
>"Coddington, Paul" <pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au> wrote:
>| [...]
>| Obviously, there are good and bad DVDs and LDs, so it is hard to make
>| generic comparisons, but DVD is a capable format when implemented well.
>|
>| A side-by-side comparison of 'Contact' DVD vs LD is all it takes to prove
a
>| noticeable difference. The LD has several scenes riddled with rainbow
moire
>| effects (Ellie's jacket at the Hadden interview, branches of trees that
have
>| shed their leaves, etc). The DVD is as clean as a whistle. No video
noise
>
>That moire problem does not happen with an HLD-X9 player as I answered
>Christy here about 2 months ago.
>
>That (and HiVision capability) was why I bought a second HLD-X9 after
>completing my evaluation of DVD several months ago. The player DOES
>make a difference with laserdiscs.
Thad, invite them over to your house - they won't believe this before they
see it with their own eyes. .-)
To be onest, I didn't either until I saw a X9 "in action"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
André F. Jølsen
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(sav...@newmedia.no)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Thad
eng...@hotmail.com
> Oh boy. Here we go again.....
> LDis...@webtv.net wrote in message
> <27603-35D...@newsd-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
> laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
> yet.
>
> Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
> it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
want to come over and watch Men In Black, Star Wars, Mission
Impossible, James Bond: Goldeye Special Edition, the Dust Till
Dawn Special Edition, T2: Special Edition, E.T., the Lost World,
Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones I, II, III!
DVD fans welcome!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted using Reference.COM http://WWW.Reference.COM
FREE Usenet and Mailing list archive, directory and clipping service
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Helmick
<pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au> wrote:
>And how much more expensive is it than an average LD player? Are we talking
>about a machine that is within reach of most people? Or is it a case of
>"average/good DVD beats average/good LD but can't compete with studio
>reference LD worth several times as much". In audio it is possible to
>outclass CD players with good turntables, but the CD players come up to 95%
>of the quality and are up to 6x less expensive.
Consider that this thread is housed in the laserdisc newsgroup, where
I will go out on a limb and venture to say that most of the people
posting (about laserdisc) probably own well over 200 titles (although
the average seems to be more like 3x that).
So for the average LD collector, if this player can bring their
existing collection up to snuff with DVD, then it's a very logical
investment to make...unless they're determined to start all over
again.
Dan
Gary
>
> In article <35D4F2...@Prodigy.net>, GL...@Prodigy.net says...
> > Christy wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It is interesting that you choose the interpol warning because those
> > > usually are not mastered well and come from a composite source.
> >
> > What happend to your "rec.video.dvd.advocacy" header?
>
> I found the thread too late so I figured it would just be noise at this
> point. I hope you didn't find my post too much part of the noise.
Hahaha. Like, I would be able to notice an increase in the noise level.
Brian Wescombe
eng...@hotmail.com wrote in message <6r47h6$o0t$1...@orthanc.reference.com>...
>On 13 Aug 1998 21:02:01 GMT, "Nick Baldasare" <ni...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
>> Oh boy. Here we go again.....
>> LDis...@webtv.net wrote in message
>> <27603-35D...@newsd-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
>> I hate to tell you hippies in denial that LD is dead! Get with it,
>> laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
>> yet.
>>
>> Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
>> it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
>
>Laser disc is dead? Hmmmm....Well, after the furneral does any1
>want to come over and watch Men In Black, Star Wars, Mission
>Impossible, James Bond: Goldeye Special Edition, the Dust Till
>Dawn Special Edition, T2: Special Edition, E.T., the Lost World,
>Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones I, II, III!
...or anything with DTS sound !
>
>DVD fans welcome!!
>
Ersatz
hell did you see that I was "trying to convert the public to dvd"?
You're smoking something.
Come up with whatever you want, I frankly don't give a flying fuck.
I'm still buying LDs, and I don't see how it justifies some crackpot
labeling me a "hippie". Hence the ironic reply.
Now get a life.
On 15 Aug 1998 00:32:51 GMT, "Mike Reber" <mike...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Ersatz, do you collect 8 tracks too? The new hdtv blue disc is going to do
>to dvds what cds did to 8tracks!! You are waisting your time trying to
>convert the public to dvd, beside you certainly can not be a real collector
>anyway or you would still be buying lasers as well. I am going to come up
>with a name for people like you, it will be something like trailer trash
>but pertain to the format. Ill let the newsgroup what it is after I think
>about it for a spell.
>
>Ersatz <elect...@magic.fr> wrote in article
><35d5b66c...@news.supernews.com>...
>Folks, I guess we have officially found the missing link in evolution.
>
>Celebrate, please.
>
>
>On Thu, 13 Aug 1998 14:12:15 -0500 (CDT), LDis...@webtv.net wrote:
>
David
of age. There is a lot of "color dot" problem, wavering, shimmering in
the body of the picture as well as whatever that stuff is which comes in
like a crispy layering running from bottom to top which probably is just
a bad "transfer" artifact. It just seems that a smaller disc would seem
less prone to all these physical problems. However, if DVD is just a
filler format, it doesn't make much sense to bother with it.Why are
these things always so complicated.BTW have you priced a "webtv" lately?
Sure leaves a lot of cash for video stuff.
Dave
"Not that there's anything wrong with that"
´ceith
LDis...@webtv.net wrote:
§ I hate to tell you hippies in denial that LD is dead! Get with it,
§ laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
§ yet.
§
§ Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
§ it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
Hate to tell you this..my computer makes your webTV obsolete.
ƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒ
Trans-greshén website
http://www.theshop.net/trnsgres
\\\\best with java enabled browsers////
1 free cd giveaway until Sept 7th see website for details
ƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒƒ
06:21:03:11€20:08:05€13:01:09:14:19:20:18:05:01:13
Mike Reber
´ceith <nos...@screwyou.com> wrote in article
<nospam-1508...@orange38.theshop.net>...
Jeff Adkins
> Laser disc is dead? Hmmmm....Well, after the furneral does any1
>
> want to come over and watch
> Men In Black
Nah, commercial garbage. Last half hour drags on for what seems like
days.
> Star Wars
I don't need to come over. I already own it on laserdisc.
> Mission Impossible
Already own it on laserdisc but I'll be ditching it when the DVD comes
out later this year as I'm sure it will be far superior.
> James Bond: Goldeye Special Edition
Maybe. The extras on the LD are cool but the movie itself on DVD just
blows away the LD.
> From Dusk Till Dawn Special Edition
Again the LD has the best extras but the DVD looks superior.
> T2: Special Edition
Hated it. I like the original though.
> E.T.
Own it on laser.
>The Lost World
Watching this on any format would be more like a prison sentence than
entertainment.
>Jurassic Park
See above
>Indiana Jones I, II, III!
Already own them on laserdisc.
Jeff
Kraig McGann
Thanks for the invite. However, I am very sensitive to Chroma
noise and that's an awful lot of disc changing. What if you pull a
"hammy"? Laserdisc is not dead but it is terminal.
Kraig
eng...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> On 13 Aug 1998 21:02:01 GMT, "Nick Baldasare" <ni...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > Oh boy. Here we go again.....
>
> > LDis...@webtv.net wrote in message
>
> > <27603-35D...@newsd-104.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
>
> > I hate to tell you hippies in denial that LD is dead! Get with it,
>
> > laserdisc technology is old technology now, move to DVD if you haven't
>
> > yet.
>
> >
>
> > Most of you probably have already moved to DVD but don't want to admit
>
> > it. LD is dead, LONG LIVE DVD!!!!!!
>
> Laser disc is dead? Hmmmm....Well, after the furneral does any1
>
> want to come over and watch Men In Black, Star Wars, Mission
>
> Impossible, James Bond: Goldeye Special Edition, the Dust Till
>
> Dawn Special Edition, T2: Special Edition, E.T., the Lost World,
>
> Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones I, II, III!
Bughunter
Kraig McGann wrote in message <35D694A0...@home.com>...
alt...@pcmagic.net
> Direct A/B comparisons of, for example, the red Interpol warning played from
> an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed them.
>
> Thad
You say there is little or "no difference" between laserdiscs played on an
HLD-X9, and DVDs played on players costing one fifth as much as the HLD-X9?
This sounds like a rather powerful argument for DVD.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Thad Floryan
| Thad Floryan (th...@thadlabs.com) wrote:
|
| [snip]
|
| : Precisely my point re: the disappointment with DVD. One would think that
| : given the normal rate of technological improvements with consumer devices
| : (computers, cars, etc.) that something significantly better than existing
| : formats would have ensued.
|
| [snip]
|
| : Again, my point was: given the existence of "better" existing formats, we
| : all had higher hopes for a successor format in terms of better resolution
| : and lower cost. DVD is, at best, a small incremental improvement over the
| : conventional laserdisc and not the "leap" we would have expected after 20
| : years' experience with laserdiscs. To be fair, some of the letdown appears
| : to be the fault of studios afraid of "too good" a format in the hands of
| : consumers, but still ...
|
| The main reason that DVD is not a big leap over LD is due to the limitation
| of the display device. It is stuck (on NTSC) with about 490 lines of
| display vertically, interlaced at that (which causes loss of resolution
| to the eye). Yeah, one could have gone to 1000 lines of horizontal
| resolution, but you would still be stuck with the vertical problem.
|
| It is only with the next generation of display (HDTV), with its doubling
| of vertical lines, the ability to do progress scan, and wider aspect
| ratio that the picture can significantly improve.
Absolutely no argument from me in this regards; I've posted before that when
the progressive-scan stand-alone DVD players become available I'll be very
"interested".
BUT: HDTV-compatible display devices have been available for awhile re:
Barco, Runco, etc. projectors that people have been using with line doubler/
quadruplers for some time, and also the MUSE/HiVision displays available in
Japan for some time which, BTW, do work fine in the USA.
The HDTV specs did not just materialize out of thin air last year; given how
program material is stored on DVD media, the players could have had a switch
(or menu option) to change the output conversion/resolution (esp. with $1000-
$2000 players such as the original Sony S7000 and the recent Pioneer DV-09).
As it is, people who've already bought a DVD player will need to buy yet
another player or two to fully avail themselves of the potential DVD media's
resolution since it seems the 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation players were/are
intended to attract the VHS crowd who didn't [previously] buy-into laserdisc.
BTW, you mentioned "wider aspect ratio"; a number of DVDs are already encoded
16:9 which is compliant with HDTV and other existing 16:9 displays.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| In article <6r1pq6$r6t$3...@nntp2.ba.best.com>, th...@thadlabs.com says...
| > ch...@pegasus.owl.de (Christoph Steinecke) wrote:
| > | th...@thadlabs.com wrote at 14.08.98
| > | about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
| > |
| > | >than ANY DVD playback I've seen to date
| > |
| > | keep telling this fairy tale and maybe people start believing it
| > |
| > | then again, maybe they wont
| >
| > Why do I continually get the impression you haven't viewed the output of
| > an HLD-X9 in a good setup?
| >
| > an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed them.
| >
|
| usually are not mastered well and come from a composite source.
Really? (re: composite source)
The only reason I picked that as an example was due to how poorly the full-
red screen and lettering reproduces with normal laserdisc playback and how
good it looked (literally identical to a DVD playback) played with an HLD-X9
(compared to a CLD-99 and CLD-D704).
Numerous other examples abound, including the one you asked me about a while
back re: the lapel on Jody Foster's jacket in CONTACT.
| I've suggested this before and I would still love to do a shootout
| between the X9, my progressive scan DVD player and my line doubled sony
| S7000 and try to understand better the advantages and disadvantages of
| each system. I own Video Essentials on both LD and DVD so this would be
| very easy to do.
We've comminicated before via email and I guess we both need to touch base
again! :-)
I, too, have VIDEO ESSENTIALS in both formats and one very-interesting comment
I'd like to make concerns the fact that [in my setup] the "calibrations" were
so close (even the blue filter exercises) between LD (with an HLD-X9) and DVD
that no adjustments or corrections were really necessary; to say the least, I
was really [pleasantly] surprised. I mention this because I was [originally]
concerned about the lack of additional direct video inputs to my display(s)
given how I have "things" wired-up.
| I think in the end for NTSC coded material that it will boil down to
| which set of artifacts you prefer.
Heh! Reports from San Diego indicate the HDTV sets/displays sold like
wildfire last week, so the times, they are a'changing.
| Obviously MUSE will look better than either NTSC LD or DVD. We'll have
| to wait for HD-DVD or whatever storage medium that emerges for DTV to
| compare muse to it. Honestly I think MUSE might have a good chance of
| looking better than DTV 1080i unless we start getting cheap prog scan
| playback of 1080i for films like we see now on DVD.
I'm sure this will all occur in time. The "problem" is, how long does one
wish to wait? That was the reason for my interest in MUSE/HiVision today
(though I still need to "adjust" my budget for some HiVision laserdiscs).
Thad
Thad Floryan
| th...@thadlabs.com wrote at 14.08.98
| about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
|
| >an HLD-X9 in a good setup?
|
Heh! OK, no problem. :-)
| >Direct A/B comparisons of, for example, the red Interpol warning played from
| >an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed them.
|
| I will take your word on it; since there is some noise in the LD signal
| I would imagine that the HLD player does some "digital cleaning up"
| of some sort in order to achieve this virtually noise free picture;
| noting wrong with that but keep in mind that this is chroma noise free
| picture is NOT originally on the LD and because of that 99.9% of all
| LD users have a relatively noisy LD picture compared to DVD
You'll get no argument from me in this regards. For a long time I thought
the CLD-99 was "great" until I saw and compared some LDs using the HLD-X9;
it took me only about 17-1/2 nanoSeconds to decide to buy a second HLD-X9.
| >If you choose not to believe, that's your prerogative.
|
| I do believe you and the great performance of the HLD-X9 but it still
| cant add resolution which the format itself does not offer; this includes
| approx 20% horizontal resolution and 33% vertical resolution
| (if the DVD is 16:9 enhanced) both in favour of the DVD version
For conventional LDs, yes. For MUSE/HiVision, no; it's still considerably
higher resolution than DVD.
| I wont go into other specs such as S/N noise ratio (or pressing defects
| for that matter) but pretty much everything has the DVD ahead of LD
Seriously, I believe we've all reached the point now where the weakest link
in the video playback "chain" is the display, the same as speakers are the
weakest link in the audio playback "chain".
Maybe tomorrow's A/V system will be a direct wet-wired brain connection? :-)
Thad
Thad Floryan
|
| > Direct A/B comparisons of, for example, the red Interpol warning played
| > from an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed
| > them.
| >
|
| You say there is little or "no difference" between laserdiscs played on an
| HLD-X9, and DVDs played on players costing one fifth as much as the HLD-X9?
| This sounds like a rather powerful argument for DVD.
I wasn't evaluating inexpensive DVD players so that point is moot for me.
The gamut of DVD players' prices I've seen ranges from US$400 to US$2,300
(including taxes and/or shipping). Damn taxes. Damn taxes. Damn taxes.
I entered this thread ("LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!") solely to illustrate that
one laserdisc format (MUSE/HiVision) exceeds current DVD specs and to iterate
that LD is still "big" in Japan.
FWIW, you can connect one of the several external Y/C devices to even a $200
laserdisc player for superior NTSC playback via an S-Video connection so the
cost argument isn't as valid. Browse alt.home-theater.misc for more info on
such Y/C separators.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| th...@thadlabs.com wrote at 14.08.98
| about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
|
| >| noticeable difference. The LD has several scenes riddled with rainbow
| >moire | effects (Ellie's jacket at the Hadden interview, branches of trees
| >that have | shed their leaves, etc). The DVD is as clean as a whistle. No
| >video noise
| >
| >That moire problem does not happen with an HLD-X9 player as I answered
| >Christy here about 2 months ago.
|
| the HLD "cleans it up" somehow or are all the "normal" LD players used
| by 99% of the LD crowd just so bad to begin with ?
The best answer is in one of Christy's articles, excerpted here:
+From: ka...@nospam.com (Christy)
+Newsgroups: alt.video.laserdisc
+Subject: Re: Defending Laserdisc
+Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 16:29:52 -0700
+Message-ID: <MPG.1014384d1...@news.netscape.com>
+
+[...]
+
+LD is a composite video format. It has 425 lines of luminance (Y) resolution,
+130 lines of Red-Y and 40 lines of Blue-Y. DVD is a component video format
+that offers at least 480 lines of luminance and 240 lines of R-Y and B-Y
+respectively. So in terms of color resolution DVD is quite a bit higher.
+However the eye doesn't see color as well as it sees black and white so this
+difference isn't as significant as some might think. The most signficant way
+the bandwidth limiting shows up is that a filter necessarily results in a
+phase shift at the cut off point which means there will be additional bluring
+of detail at those cut off frequencies.
+
+A much more severe flaw of composite video is the design of Y-C separation.
+Y-C separation artifacts are far worse of a problem than digital compression
+on DVD. Y-C separation artifacts include chroma burst and dot crawl. These
+are inescapable on composite video. This is part of the ANALOG COMPRESSION
+scheme known as NTSC video.
+
+Digital compression artifacts on a well mastered DVD are uncommon. Dot crawl
+and chroma burst occur with an annoying regularity even on an LD player with a
+good comb filter.
+
+[...]
+
+No you just choose different set of trade offs. You trade off digital
+compression for dot crawl, chroma bursting, high frequency phase shift
+bluring, and much higher levels of chroma noise.
+
+[...]
+
+I totally agree that LD is a great format and it should be preserved.
+There is no need to put down DVD or spread misinformation to try to
+defend it however. I think LD stands quite nicely on its own. It offers
+movie lovers a great package and a huge selection of titles. The two
+formats complement each other nicely in my home theater.
+
+Cheers
+--
+Christy
FWIW, the Y/C separation in the HLD-X9 is literally as good as possible and
definitely better than that in the CLD-99 and other Pioneer players.
| >That (and HiVision capability) was why I bought a second HLD-X9 after
| >completing my evaluation of DVD several months ago. The player DOES
| >make a difference with laserdiscs.
|
| which makes you wonder why Pioneer never bothered to sell it in the US ?
Excellent question.
Someone a year or two ago posted a comment that the best of the Japanese
products were "reserved" for the domestic (Japanese) marketplace without
stating a reason for that observation.
At least one can import such Japanese products oneself if one can tolerate
"problems" like the different voltage (requiring a stepdown transformer) and
the manuals and/or remotes written and/or legended only in Japanese.
Thad
Thad Floryan
|
| Christoph Steinecke wrote in message <6ztU0...@pegasus.owl.de>...
| > which raises the question : is that moire pattern in the LD signal and
| > the HLD "cleans it up" somehow or are all the "normal" LD players used
| > by 99% of the LD crowd just so bad to begin with ?
|
| about a machine that is within reach of most people? Or is it a case of
| "average/good DVD beats average/good LD but can't compete with studio
| reference LD worth several times as much". In audio it is possible to
| outclass CD players with good turntables, but the CD players come up to 95%
| of the quality and are up to 6x less expensive.
FWIW, the MSRP of the HLD-X9 in Japan is the same as what the MSRP of the
CLD-99 was in the USA circa 1996/1997 when the CLD-99 was still "current".
Yes, it's a top-of-the-line player by any standard.
I agree with you re: turntables vs. CD players in general (but I also happen
to have a good CD player and I've been "backing-up" many of my LPs to CD as
insurance against disaster).
The cost of an LD player must be considered in light of one's needs and the
size of one's LD collection. A number of people besides myself have claimed
1000+ LDs in their repertoire. Taking the US$2,400 MSRP (Japan) price of the
HLD-X9 compared to an [averge] US$35/LD (for illustrative purposes ONLY):
LDs Player%
----- -------
1,000 6.9%
2,000 3.4%
3,000 2,3%
4,000 1.7%
5,000 1.4%
As can be seen above, the cost of a high-end player is a small percentage
of the software cost for someone who's seriously "into" the format. Plus,
a player such as the HLD-X9 is built like a tank and "should" provide many
years' service.
I also put super-premium tires on my cars even though I'm not in the habit
of driving at 180 MPH.
"Peace of mind" is the (my) operative phrase.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| On Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:06:37 +1000, "Coddington, Paul"
| <pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au> wrote:
|
| >about a machine that is within reach of most people? Or is it a case of
| >"average/good DVD beats average/good LD but can't compete with studio
| >reference LD worth several times as much". In audio it is possible to
| >outclass CD players with good turntables, but the CD players come up to 95%
| >of the quality and are up to 6x less expensive.
|
| I will go out on a limb and venture to say that most of the people
| posting (about laserdisc) probably own well over 200 titles (although
| the average seems to be more like 3x that).
|
| So for the average LD collector, if this player can bring their
| existing collection up to snuff with DVD, then it's a very logical
| investment to make...unless they're determined to start all over
| again.
Precisely.
Though I did "re-buy" many titles when I switched from VHS to LD, I have no
intention of doing that with DVD even though the several DVD titles I do own
are "duplicates" of their LD counterparts since I needed material for doing
comparisons during my evaluations.
FOr me, the cost of rebuying DVD titles of LDs in my collection would be
manifold the cost of an HLD-X9 (or two :-), plus the progressive-scan DVD
stand-alone players aren't yet available. Progressive-scan is the point at
which I become interested since that's a real leap beyond the present state.
Thad
Thad Floryan
| joe_r...@merck.com wrote at 14.08.98
| about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
|
| >undulating effects, such as the parking lot when Ellie arrives at the
| >transport's location, or the overhead camera pan over the gathered crowd,
| >numerous monitor shots, etc. etc. While the LD problems you mentioned don't
| >appear on my player, they may show up for those with different players or
| >monitors. By the same token, the DVD "shimmering" I described may not show up
| >on, say, the Sony 7000 player. Certainly, performance varies on both
| >formats, depending on the hardware. Therefore, I have no trouble believing
| >Thad when it comes to the HLD-X9. Now, where in NY can I get one?
|
| if Contact is run in 16:9 mode NONE of those problems occur
Chris, if you have the DVD of THE FIFTH ELEMENT, would you please run one
test using your 16:9 display? I posted that during my evaluation the [outer
space] stars twinkled with the DVD but didn't with the LD when viewing the
opening scenes having the earth in the foreground as the field of view is
rotating just-prior to the spaceship appearing before landing in Egypt.
I [obviously :-)] don't have any way to recheck this at the moment and it's
been 3+ months since I've seen it. FWIW, I do own both an LD and DVD copy
of THE FIFTH ELEMENT (one of my most-watched movies next to THE MAN WHO WOULD
BE KING).
Thanks,
Thad
Thad Floryan
| The thing that bothers me is that so many of my LD's are showing signs
| of age. There is a lot of "color dot" problem, wavering, shimmering in
| the body of the picture as well as whatever that stuff is which comes in
| like a crispy layering running from bottom to top which probably is just
| a bad "transfer" artifact.
No disrespect intended, but have you considered having your player checked
for tracking because what you describe does not resemble any failure-mode
of the laserdisc media itself.
| It just seems that a smaller disc would seem
| less prone to all these physical problems. However, if DVD is just a
| filler format, it doesn't make much sense to bother with it.Why are
| these things always so complicated.
Heh, complicated. Same thing with computers. :-)
Thad
Starman
Looks like Mike Reber has taken the crown from DaViD Anderson as the most
obnoxious LD advocate on the net. Congratulations, Mike! You are now the
avl weenie.
Mike
Coddington, Paul
Thad Floryan wrote in message <6r8qmq$5gp$1...@nntp2.ba.best.com>...
[snip]
>+respectively. So in terms of color resolution DVD is quite a bit higher.
>+However the eye doesn't see color as well as it sees black and white so
this
>+difference isn't as significant as some might think. The most signficant
way
[snip]
While not doubting the rest, this particular argument (also used to justify
design compromises in NTSC) is not quite right. If it were true, we would
not see colour registration problems on screens, or printed pages, etc. In
any case, daylight vision is based on triple-primary colour reception
(quadruple, if you're a goldfish), and most colours activate all three
receptors at once to varying degrees.
Thad Floryan
| collection, especially now DVD is getting established. I suspect that, for
| most people, DVD will be the best bang for the buck for what they want to
| spend. As for collection size, I have trouble imagining 40 titles that I am
| serious enough to purchase, let alone 1000 (although some titles are entire
| TV series, admittedly).
|
| In terms of my original question, the price you quoted is about 6x the entry
| level for LD here in Australia. At that price, you would expect it have
| better performance and wash the car on Sundays...
Actually the HLD-X9 washes the car on Saturday and WAXES the car on Sunday!
:-)
I'm curious: you're in Australia which is DVD Zone 4 and Laserdisc Zone 0
(meaning all LDs are playable anywhere :-) Unless you've a code-free DVD
player, what is the selection like? Or do you import DVDs from the USA?
What would be an "average" laserdisc price in Australia? (Yes, I'm aware
that Australia's TV standard is PAL, but dual-standard players and displays
are available).
Thad
Alen Koebel
Hmm.... Mike Reber, LD advocate, ... Gary Reber, editor/owner of Widescreen
Review and LD advocate. Mike Reber, verbose to a fault (10 separate responses
to one post? Gimme a break) ... Gary Reber, verbose to a fault (and the record
holder for longest run-on sentence ever printed). Is there a connection? ;->
Coddington, Paul
Thad Floryan wrote in message <6r8rtg$5gp$1...@nntp2.ba.best.com>...
>"Coddington, Paul" <pa...@mail.act.apana.org.au> wrote:
[snip]
>| And how much more expensive is it than an average LD player? Are we
talking
>| about a machine that is within reach of most people? Or is it a case of
>| "average/good DVD beats average/good LD but can't compete with studio
>| reference LD worth several times as much". In audio it is possible to
>| outclass CD players with good turntables, but the CD players come up to
95%
>| of the quality and are up to 6x less expensive.
[snip]
>The cost of an LD player must be considered in light of one's needs and the
>size of one's LD collection. A number of people besides myself have
claimed
>1000+ LDs in their repertoire. Taking the US$2,400 MSRP (Japan) price of
the
>HLD-X9 compared to an [averge] US$35/LD (for illustrative purposes ONLY):
[snip]
No argument there - I'm a newbie to LD and will never have a substantial
collection, especially now DVD is getting established. I suspect that, for
most people, DVD will be the best bang for the buck for what they want to
spend. As for collection size, I have trouble imagining 40 titles that I am
serious enough to purchase, let alone 1000 (although some titles are entire
TV series, admittedly).
In terms of my original question, the price you quoted is about 6x the entry
level for LD here in Australia. At that price, you would expect it have
better performance and wash the car on Sundays...
PAUL CODDINGTON
Supercilii
what you have and shup up....unless you want to bitch then bitch...but you
sound pathetic!!!!!
like little kids.....stop touching me...mom, he took my toy.......go mow the
lawn...pay attention to your kids and wife......pay some bills......get a life.
Mike
Kraig McGann
DVD is a big leap. Now go take one. A big one.
Kraig
Trizia
wrote:
>Dear Thad
>
> DVD is a big leap. Now go take one. A big one.
> Kraig
>
<snip>
Now how come I never think up smart, witty things to say like that?
Gee, must've taken HOURS....
Tal
... can be operated by multiple users.
Christy
> ka...@nospam.com (Christy) wrote:
> | In article <6r1pq6$r6t$3...@nntp2.ba.best.com>, th...@thadlabs.com says...
> | > | th...@thadlabs.com wrote at 14.08.98
> | > | about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
> | > |
> | > | >than ANY DVD playback I've seen to date
> | > |
> | > | keep telling this fairy tale and maybe people start believing it
> | > |
> | > | then again, maybe they wont
> | >
> | > an HLD-X9 in a good setup?
> | >
> | > an HLD-X9 or DVD player show no difference to anyone who's viewed them.
> | >
> |
> | usually are not mastered well and come from a composite source.
>
> Really? (re: composite source)
>
> The only reason I picked that as an example was due to how poorly the full-
> red screen and lettering reproduces with normal laserdisc playback and how
> good it looked (literally identical to a DVD playback) played with an HLD-X9
> (compared to a CLD-99 and CLD-D704).
>
> Numerous other examples abound, including the one you asked me about a while
> back re: the lapel on Jody Foster's jacket in CONTACT.
>
> | I've suggested this before and I would still love to do a shootout
> | between the X9, my progressive scan DVD player and my line doubled sony
> | S7000 and try to understand better the advantages and disadvantages of
> | each system. I own Video Essentials on both LD and DVD so this would be
> | very easy to do.
>
> We've comminicated before via email and I guess we both need to touch base
> again! :-)
Yeah, last you left it was that you weren't interested in doing this
because you had no interest in DVD even though I was willing to show off
my progressive scan player. Perhaps we had a misunderstanding.
I'm still happy to get together sometime, I would love to see the X9 in
action and decide if it is enough of an improvement to warant yet another
LD player. I think a shootout between the X9 via line doubler vs prog
scan would be quite interesting.
Cheers
Christy
--
Christy
-- Replace nospam with aurinia in order to reply
Dan Helmick
>I'm still happy to get together sometime, I would love to see the X9 in
>action and decide if it is enough of an improvement to warant yet another
>LD player. I think a shootout between the X9 via line doubler vs prog
>scan would be quite interesting.
I hope y'all can give us some streaming Real Video coverage of this
comparison? B-)
Dan
john smith
Thad Floryan <th...@thadlabs.com> wrote in article
<6r8t6b$5gp$1...@nntp2.ba.best.com>...
ch...@pegasus.owl.de (Christoph Steinecke) wrote:
| joe_r...@merck.com wrote at 14.08.98
| about the topic "Re: LASERDISC IS DEAD!!!!!!!":
|
thx...@webtv.net
thx...@webtv.net
(....I can't get a thing through to a half-dozen people who I deal with
on f--kin webtv. What a joke....)
Anybody posting from a hotmail account is usually a joke not to be taken
seriously.
Btw, your grammar gets an F.