Main > Everything Else

Star Wars Laserdisc

<< < (6/13) > >>

Gray_Area:
Yeah, Howard's showing his age on that one. Unfortunately, he opened the door, and walked himself right into it.

Every time there's a mention of Star Wars, and a mention of sound fidelity of music, these discussions go off wild and stray.

Straight up, the movie screen is still the best image you're going to get. Even projectors in the 70s. The technology wasn't that sophisticated, but very effective.

I saw every Star Wars movie in the theatre, because I wanted to, and my dad wanted to. (Well, I got free showing to a pre-screening of Jedi.) Yes I watched them any time they came on cable, and even regular TV, though the latter kinda blew because of commercials....except when you wanted to get up for a snack or to pee. Now....I only watch things on my 50" plasma if it's at least 720P and 2.5gb (except for a copy of Batman I got recently that was 1080P but only 1.5 gigs, I was damn impressed.

Howard_Casto:

--- Quote from: DaveMMR on June 01, 2013, 08:42:00 am ---
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on May 31, 2013, 07:45:10 pm ---There's no sense polluting the thread with this kind of thing, but the "audiophile" typically translates to "hipster" and like with all things, they don't know what they are talking about. 

Vinyl sounds different from cds that is to be sure, but if you want to hear what the artist intended, you should go with a cd. 

--- End quote ---

Sorry, I have to pollute the thread further. Saying a CD is 'how the artist intended' is completely ignoring the whole 'loudness war' debacle that's been ruining CD's by completely eliminating the range of sound. Ond explained it with the "In the Air Tonight". Quiet parts are made louder, and loud parts are muted to avoid clipping. Essentially, the record labels take away any volume control the listener might have had and discard any 'kick.'

Also, there's a difference between 'audiophile' and 'hipster.' An Audiophile will spend quite literally a fortune on turntables, styli, storage, mylar bags, cleaners, speakers, etc. to get the absolute best possible sound out of their records. They don't really do it to impress anyone else but their ears. Hipsters will have a stack of records, store them improperly, play them on a cheap turntable, or better yet, some 1980's Fisher-Price model they found at a yard sale. They'll listen to the violent crackling of a very dirty, dusty record with a crappy needle and say to themselves, "oh how delightfully natural."

(Disclosure: I, like some of my friend, fall between the two extremes. We didn't spend a fortune on equipment but we do pay mind to take care of our collections.)

I'll give you that CD's play flawlessly more often than vinyl. And you may even like the sound of ones and zeros over natural sound, which is fine. But to call people who notice the difference full of crap (paraphrasing) is pretty much highlighting your lack of knowledge on the topic.

Now I'm going to go back and watch my copy of Return of the Jedi on VHS on my 1970's-era tube TV.

--- End quote ---


I ignored it because I didn't want to blatantly say that that just isn't the case.  As I said, vinyl sounds different, but it's still an inferior sound.  I'm not lacking in knowledge, I just don't buy into b.s. that some other people do.  Sound is subjective though so I'll play devil's advocate on this one.  Let's say that the range is much better on vinyl (it really isn't except in rare cases where the cd was shoddily remastered... audio normalizing is a GOOD thing).  Fair enough, but with rare exceptions records just aren't made anymore.  Find yourself a record that you want that even though it's 25+ years old is in perfect condition.  Ok now even with an expensive rig, try keeping it in that prefect condition when a needle is physically touching the record to play it.  Oh and heaven forbid you want to listen to something released after the mid-90's because you likely won't be able to find it on vinyl.  So the audio is better on a cd, because it's better in multiple was and only arguably worse in one.  Like I said,  vinyl is inferior.     

And nope the only difference between a hipster and an audiophile is one has more money to invest in their worthlessly dated technology.  If you base a system around vinyl then you are going about it the wrong way.  If you think the range on a cd has been shrunk so be it... get a high level mixer and adjust it back the way to like it... don't resort to using a record though.   

Is perfectly fine if you prefer vinyl, just like it's perfectly fine if you enjoy the laserdisc versions of Star Wars... so long as you don't go around telling people that it's better... it isn't, you prefer the worse version, and again, that's perfectly ok.

 
Gray_Area:  Showing my age?  WTF?  I'm 33.  I agree with you about seeing them in person though.  Film resolution even for older films, is far greater than anything you can watch at home.  That's why they'll frequently remaster a film from the 60's or 70's to bluray and it'll look brand new.  The resolution was always there, it's just home players have been too crappy to take advantage of the source material.

DaveMMR:
I'm sorry Howard but this...


--- Quote ---Fair enough, but with rare exceptions records just aren't made anymore.
--- End quote ---

...nullifies your arguement.

You're also ignoring the fact that Record Store Day drives a ton of money into small independent businesses.


--- Quote ---audio normalizing is a GOOD thing
--- End quote ---

And furthermore, if you think this is okay:



Or this was overblown: Metallica's "Death Magnetic"

...then maybe you're not the best authority in this matter.  ;)

My arms are killing me from carrying tons (literally) of vinyl when I moved yesterday. I like to think I'm not suffering because I'm trying too hard to be a 37 year old hipster.  ;D

yotsuya:
I hook up my iPod to an FM modulator and listen to it through a transistor radio. That's how I listened to music growing up.  >:D

Xiaou2:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version