Connect with us

Why I don't have a plasma or LCD TV either

Discussion in 'Electronic Repair' started by Jeff Strieble, Feb 3, 2004.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. I just read a post from someone who said most of what he owns is
    inherited or repaired; because of that he is always "about two steps
    behind the current technology". I am writing to say I am like that as
    well. I do not own a plasma or LCD TV at the present time (still have
    two 19" CRT TVs in my apartment, one nine and the other four years
    old--both work quite well); it may be some time, if ever, before I do
    get any kind of flat-panel TV.

    I cannot afford $6000 (!) for a large plasma TV, not to mention the
    fact that my apartment is far too small for any 60" set. Heck, I
    didn't get my first CD player (as part of a new bookshelf stereo
    system) until four years ago when I moved here, I replaced my computer
    monitor with a flat-screen (not flat panel) model just last year when
    the last one (CRT) failed, and I just recently (as in about a year
    ago) got digital cable. However, I do not yet have a DVD player (I am
    one of those people who are still fiercely loyal to VHS [I have about
    50 VHS cassettes, give or take a few, almost all of which have old TV
    shows and movies on them], and probably will be until the technology
    is legislated out of existence or is rendered hopelessly
    obsolete--that and the fact that I believe in keeping things as simple
    and reliable as possible. VHS VCRs, and Betamaxes before them, have
    been with us for over 25 years and have proven themselves to be
    reliable under most circumstances; DVD players have just recently
    become popular and still have a few bugs which must be addressed).

    Please note that I am not against the new technology; it's just that
    I cannot afford most of the new stuff at the present time, and as I
    mentioned above, I am a meat-and-potatoes Midwesterner who tends to
    stay with proven technology. When one has bills to pay, and precious
    little money with which to accomplish that end, it is difficult or
    even impossible to justify large expenditures for luxuries such as
    large-screen TV. I do not know anyone at this time among my relatives
    or friends who owns a large-screen TV or even a DVD player, but then
    again most of my relatives are elderly people on fixed incomes and my
    friends have families to support. When one is in either of those
    situations the necessities of life must come first.

    The other two big reasons I am reluctant as all get-out to get any
    kind of LCD or plasma TV are the longevity factor of this technology
    (many plasma panels do not last longer than two or three years at this
    stage of their development), and that plasma screens are susceptible
    to image burn-in. I also read a post to this group recently which
    stated that the projection lamps used with plasma panels and LCDs do
    not last very long at the present time, and cost about $400 to replace
    when they eventually burn out. The filaments in CRTs used in ordinary
    televisions often last for 20 years or more; the failure mode of CRTs
    is ordinarily decreased cathode emission of the electron guns or
    heater-cathode shorts. I have yet to hear of the phosphors on the
    screens of conventional CRTs wearing out; the chances of modern CRTs
    developing screen burns (what TV technicians used to know as ion
    burns) are very slim if not nonexistent these days. The only way any
    kind of screen can develop image burn-in is if a static image (test
    pattern, network logo, video game board, etc.) is left on the screen
    indefinitely, but then again conventional CRTs are prone to burn-in
    under the same conditions as well.

    I am sure plasma and LCD TVs will improve as time goes on, and
    heaven knows the prices will drop as the technology becomes more
    widespread, but at the present time it is far too expensive for most
    people to afford (and there are bugs which must be worked out such as
    the image burn-in problem, et al.). There are still instances,
    moreover, of some new projection sets (Zenith comes to mind as I write
    this) developing severe problems which have led to massive recalls,
    such as the infamous Zenith recall of some models of its projection
    sets a few years ago because of a tear in a gasket which caused a
    coolant leak. Until the design flaws which cause manufacturers to
    issue these often massive recalls are addressed and corrected, many
    consumers are going to be extremely reluctant to buy any kind of
    large-screen television. It is for this reason that I feel CRT-based
    TVs will be with us for some time yet. There will always be people who
    simply cannot afford thousands of dollars for a TV set, and more on
    top of that to keep the thing running when it eventually requires
    service (all TV shops charge outrageous fees just to look at a set;
    then there are the repair charges themselves). Add to that the cost of
    a satellite system or cable hookup (neither of which are cheap), and
    you have even more reasons why most of us are still using the
    time-proven 4:3 CRT technology, VHS VCRs, and in some cases getting
    our TV reception over antennas (as some folks on audiokarma.org's
    antique-TV forum have reported).


    Kind regards,

    Jeff Strieble, WB8NHV (mailto: )
    Fairport Harbor, Ohio
     
  2. James Sweet

    James Sweet Guest


    While I agree with much of this, DVD players are *so* cheap I have a hard
    time seeing why someone wouldn't want one, heck I've gotten my last 3 of
    them for free, a brand new one can be had for under 50 bucks. If you ever
    get one you'll never go back, the only thing VHS does better is record.
     
  3. tweak

    tweak Guest

    On 2 Feb 2004 21:24:03 -0800, (Jeff Strieble)
    wrote:

    Well said. Most youngsters don't realize that in day gone by we had
    just as much quality in our entertainment technology as we do today.
    Yes digital does do better in many respects, exceptionally in visual
    media. But it falls short in the audio department with 16 bit
    technology just not living up to the quality of the better anaog hifi
    gear, which can be gotten in thrift shops and second hand stores for
    next to nothing.(If you ever listen to a stereo system that uses
    valved amps you'll never pass a signal through a transistor again.)
    Maybe 24bit digital audio will correct that if it ever catches on.
    Flat screen HDTV would be nice to have, but it's got come way down in
    price.
    Todays intelligent consumerhas gotten to wise to the tricks of the
    retail industry. We all got burned with the outrageous overpricing of
    vcr technology when it came out and most vowed never again.
    when plasmas and hdtvs drop below agrand in price then you may see
    sales pick up in the general market.
    Most of us are worried with more important matters such as the
    crumbling economy and the crookery in Washington than with what's the
    latest gizmo on the market.
    It seems with every increase in technology in our lives we see a
    reduction in the things that are important, the quality of our lives
    and the freedoms we all enjoy.
    If I had to choose between having the latest movie to watch on my
    home set or having my constitutional freedoms and not having the
    government invading my life I believe I'd have to give up the movie.
    Most of the technology I do enjoy I got from using common sense and
    frugality not just running out and buying it just because everyone
    said so.
    My computer tower I bought second hand at a greatly reduced price.
    All else was scrounged. Monitor, mouse and keyboard.
    My vcr's are repair jobs gotten out of dustbins or the cheapest hifi
    models on sale at my local Wal-Mart.
    I've been a staunch supporter of the philosophy behind the Mother
    Jones publications all my life.
    people should realize that you can have a good quality of life and not
    be a slave to this consumeristic society we live in.

     
  4. James Sweet

    James Sweet Guest


    That's very subjective, I've listened to a $10k tube (valve) amp and
    honestly I can't say it sounded any better than my $150 Leach amp that I
    built from someone else's abandoned project, or a number of other large
    nicely made solid state amps. I guess I just don't have "golden ears" but
    then at least I don't have to waste my money on all the other audiophoolery.
    I've heard a number of relatively inexpensive tube amps as well, and they
    generally have sounded either a bit distorted or just weren't very powerful.
    Tubes have their place, and in some situations can provide a unique sound,
    but I can't say I prefer them overall.


    Some of the old analog VCR's do indeed have excellent sound, and believe me
    I'll hang onto my 13 year old Sony HiFi's until they crumble, but I find
    that having DVD players, I almost never turn on the VCR's. My only wish is
    for one that's built like the old stuff, but then again it'd probably cost
    $1500.
     
  5. tweak

    tweak Guest

    I have some old tube stuff, Macintosh and the like that spec out on a
    scope much better than most of my solid state stuff.
    True it's a highly subjective subject but one doesn't have to have
    golden ears. In fact valves amp do their best work in the low and mid
    end of the spectrum. A lot of the descriptive terms that are used are
    "more robust", fuller sound, smoother etc...
    and I find that to be mostly true which is why I use them on my
    theatre setup. And hey they're lower in cost as well.
    Not really. I have a fair amount of broadcast video gear with hifi
    that cost less than comparable consumer stuff.
    I have a Sanyo broadcast quality vhs editor that has all kinds of neat
    audio functions.
    It's a s-vhs machine with 4 channel stereo options.(instead of
    tracking down video signal it can burn down four fm audio channels
    with better specs than cd audio. 105 dbs dynamic range vs 90 for cd
    and signal to noise and w&f unmeasurable.)
    I picked it up for 270 bucks and it is built like a tank with 6 heads
    and something like 8 heavy duty servo motors.
    Check on e-bay in the professional video/audio sections.
    Great deals to be had.
     
  6. Alex Bird

    Alex Bird Guest

    I'm sure it kicks ass, but those numbers are just what you say -
    specs. The 105 number is almost certainly down to the aggressive
    companding used in hi-fi sound on video. Similar numbers were touted
    for dbx, which sounded awful, not that I'm saying your machine does.
    Most cd players cannot reach that theoretical dynamic range, and
    someone correct me if I'm wrong, but almost no speakers or analogue
    tape recording can either.
    There's the little matter of the head switching too...
    I might do that...

    Alex
     
  7. Well said. Most youngsters don't realize that in day gone by we had
    I some areas yes. I other areas, I beg to differ.
    Do you understand how digital audio works at all?

    In CD, 16-bit quantization allows up to 65,536 possible values of voltage for a
    given sample. This translates roughly into 96 decibels of dyanmic range with
    approximately the same level in signal-noise ratio. Mind you, this is on the
    average for a CD player, which is far superior to even the best $5000+ LP rigs.

    Plus with CD you have superior channel separation, better noise floor, wider
    and more even frequency response, lower THD+N, and wow and flutter below
    measurable thresholds.

    In terms of frequency response, CDs are sampled at a rate of 44,100 times a
    second. This translates directly into a maximum frequency response of 22,050
    cycles. With LPs, the master recording is rolled off at about 15-16 KHz for
    the record lathe. This is done because any attempts to run the lathe at
    frequencies exceeding the cutoff will overheat the cutter head.

    Also, CDs are more accurate than LPs because records have inherent even-ordered
    harmonic distortion. This means you have distortion that actually sounds
    pleasant, and this is what gives LPs their airiness and "muscality." But,
    regardless, LPs are not an accurate representation of the master tape purely
    because of this distortion.

    If you want to wonder why you may have a bad sounding CD, it can mean a few
    possibilities:

    1. The CD was not made optimally in respect for CD. Digital audio is most
    unforgiving to any deficiencies in a session recording. Whatever the limits
    are that could be concealed with various analogue formats will be reproduced in
    a digital audio system.

    2. The session recording was made with equipment not properly dithered, which
    means you get zero-bit noise. But improper dithering is still a problem with
    the recording and not the technology.

    3. CD sound may be limited by the playback equipment. Most CD players use
    rather cheap components, especially in the analogue section. For instance, any
    CD player that uses JRC 4560 or 4558 operational amps in their analogue
    sections is simply not a hi-fi piece of equipment. I have an Onkyo six-disc
    that I modified by beefing up the power supply somewhat and replacing the four
    JRC 4560 opamps with a set of Burr-Brown OPA2604 opamps. Result: improvement
    in sound which not only sounds cleaner and easier with good accuracy but
    eliminated listener's fatigue.
    Depends on the quality of the solid state equipment.

    A well designed solid state amplifier can yield extraordinary results with
    better reliability, efficiency, and accuracy than tube equipment.

    Of course, this also depends on other factors, such as the quality of the
    speakers and source equipment.

    Also, older tube equipment has a tendency to create even-ordered harmonic
    distortion.
    Be more specific when you describe a flat screen HDTV. I assume you mean
    plasma HDTV sets. You also have rear projection HDTV sets that have a flat
    screen and CRT HDTV sets that also have a flat screen. HDTV is coming down in
    price for rear projection and CRT models, and apparently faster than you
    realize.
    When VCRs first came out, it was a new technology. No technology has ever been
    released cheap when it first came out.
    How much did you think radios cost when they first came out? How much do you
    think the first TVs cost when they came out? How about the first color TVs?
    The first personal computer? The first CD player? The first DVD player? The
    first tangential tracking turntable? The first Hi-Fi VCR?
    Hey, that's how I built my system. While some components had to be new, like
    my audio receiver (Technics SA-DA10) and DVD player (Sony DVP-S360), a lot of
    my other components, such as my LaserDisc player (Pioneer DVL-700), VHS hi-fi
    (Sony SVO-160), Beta hi-fi (Sony SL-HF400), CED (RCA SJT-200), CD player (Onkyo
    DX-C106), tape deck (JVC TD-V711), turntable (Technics SL-7), stereo mains
    (Optimus Mach Three), and television (Sony KV-27S66) I got from looking around
    and buying cheap. Most of the stuff wasn't even working, so I repaired them to
    get them working.

    As for my computer, I bought many new components and I built the whole thing
    myself. For computers, you really ought to get what's up to date (doesn't mean
    highest end). Hell, I needed a computer that was powerful enough to run
    WindowsXP reliably. I would've went with Win98SE, but that OS runs unstable on
    my computer, so necessity dictates that I run WinXP.
    Good for you! But, other people may feel differently. There are people that
    buy things not because others tell them to, but because they really want
    something and are willing to spend what they earned to get it.

    As for my stuff, I've no regrets. I bought what I felt I wanted and I got it,
    not because some other schmuck told me to get it. For instance, I swear by
    Sony TVs. Not because other people say they're good, but because my own
    experience dictates this choice. I've found them to be very reliable and high
    resolution TV sets, especially in the professional scene. - Reinhart
     
  8. I have a Sanyo broadcast quality vhs editor that has all kinds of neat
    And your VCR also has the inherent 60 Hz switchpoint noise, even with the audio
    signals replacing the video, you will still get the switchpoint noise because
    of how the helical scan system for any VCR works.

    This is one of the main reasons why AFM on videotape, regardless of format and
    perceived quality, is never considered ideal for audio recording.

    http://www.faqs.org/faqs/AudioFAQ/part7/

    Scroll down to section 14.18 for a good explanation why VHS and Beta hi-fi
    aren't so hot for serious audio recording.

    I'd rather stick with digital, thank you very much. - Reinhart
     
  9. Most cd players cannot reach that theoretical dynamic range, and
    Actually, CDs can, or at least reach an SNR up to 106. Only problem is that
    this usually requires omitting a necessary function of digital audio recording:
    dithering. You can make a recording this way, but you'll have problems with
    zero-bit noise.

    After dithering, the SNR is about 96 decibels. But, this is still better than
    what can be achieved with the best LP rigs and is done without the use of any
    compression, unlike videotape AFM hi-fi. - Reinhart
     
  10. tweak

    tweak Guest

    Yes I do, Durin my days in professional audio I owned a slipstream
    24bit digital recording setup.(It was one of the first 24bit systems,
    even before sony's)
    Actually panasonic made a digital recorder that used vhs tapes. The
    first models were all 16bit and later they came out with a 24bit
    model.
    BAse cosr of these units were 1,999.
    The same can be said for any industrial quality vhs hifi deck. The w&f
    on my commercial vhs editors is below .003%.
    And anyone can tell you that fm stereo modulation gives very smooth
    frequency response.
    With fm modulation there is NO crosstalk.
    Your using vinyl lp's as the benchmark against cd's. OK
    But your forgetting DBX vinyl discs.
    I was at the CES show way back when a linn itok, a dbx unit abd a
    vavled amp beat the socks off sony's best digital entry both to the
    ear and the scope.
    True most of the standard vinyl offered to the public was atrocious in
    quality. Even the 1/2 speed masters were marginal.
    I had family that worked in the recording industry and that gsve me a
    source for the hard vinyl masters distributed to radio stations.
    it was a ceramic/vinyl composite mastered of the mother discs one to
    one. In that sense I was a bit spoiled.
    However most of what I listened to was cut off the original 3/4 inch
    studio mix down tapes or stuff that I recorded on reel ot reel from
    live sessions.
    You missed the point that 16bit encoding schemes just don't have what
    it takes to capture all the ambients in most recordings.
    Sony and the other pioneers of 16bit realized this limitation.
    Comb filters indiscriminately filter out some of the sounds as noise
    resulting in that "thin" or "shallow" sound you get from 16bit.
    I carefully checked every digital unit available when they first came
    out, since I felt that was the way studio recording was definitely
    going to go. Sony's offering fell woefully short. I AB'ed it against
    my best 24 track units and actually could see on the graph scopes
    where the digital system actually dropped sound bits.
    That's why I went with Slipstreams recorder. 24bit open ended
    recording required a more savy engineer(my guys all had to retrain on
    digital engineering concepts) but sacrificed none of the music.
    This was important since we did full orchestral scores exclusively.
    16bits couldn't cut the mustard.
    And yes I do have a bay full of 16bit commercial hardware, use it for
    remastering outside material.
    Yes there is equiment out there that mimics the sound quality of tube
    amps. For a small fortune.
    Yes I have some "snob" level solid state amps that do stunning work,
    once again the average consumer can't pay 10,000 or more per channel
    for quality sound.
    I normally use klipsh for my home theatre and have been a firm
    believer that JBL make's some of the best quality drivers you can buy.
    Yes there are bleeding edge "low mass" woofers and god knows what else
    coming out these days. But the veverage consumer can't spend in the
    order of 50 to 100 thousand for a home system. And if they did in my
    opinion they'd be nut's.
    When I was much younger and foolish I spent far too much on my sound
    equipment.
    Yes you can get some, hence the need to tweak the tubes.
    I looked at Panasonics latest offering a couple of months ago, A flat
    screen plasma going for just under 3,000, still too costly for the
    average consumer. It was a bit small as well.
    What the home viewer want's in a flat screen is to recreate the
    theatre experience in their own home.
    Taking into consideration the distance to size ratio of the average
    cinescope screen that we all grew up watching in the movie houses and
    the average size of the home den this would require a 60" minimum size
    for the home sceen.
    This size unit is still priced at a premium.
    True the price will drop. It's a stand off between consumers and the
    industry, we learned the hard way during the 80's with over priced
    vcr's.
    As long as consumers stand firm and don't buy they'll have to bring
    down the price to an "honest" level.
    If you had any inside knowledge of the design and manufacturing
    industry you'd know that even taking in R&D costs initial technology
    sales have always been boosted to high.
    The vhs deck wasn't new technology when it was released, just
    implementation of tech that had exsisted for nearly a decade.
    The revovling drum had been around since the early 60's.
    Magnetic tape technology even longer.
    1/2 inch video tape was invented by JVC under contract from Panasonic.
    JVC developed the recording signal back in the mid 70's, panasonic
    develpoed the vhs cassette to hold it and kept it all a secret untill
    sony came out with their beta systems.(It's always been the marketing
    strategy of Panasonic to allow Sony to rush out their half formed
    hardware designs then trumpimg them with something better at a lower
    cost.)
    As for the first color tv's. Their high cost was due to the method of
    manufacturing. They were made in the US, practically hand built.
    That's what drove their cost up.
    The first CD players were crap. A friend ran out and bought the first
    Sony offering. The motors and laser crapped out in the first year.
    Ultra cheap materials and manufacturing. Hardly worth the 1,300 he
    paid for it.
    Years later I bought a Tandberg unit for use in the studio for 1,800.
    Swiss made and still running strong, but then it was made to squeeze
    the most out of the cd's played in it.
    You have to take into consideration not just the tech side of the
    issue but the people side as well.
    Corporations are run by greedy no talent bastards that want to get
    rich yesterday. They're the ones who ultimately decide what the
    release price of a product will be. And what corners will be cut in
    manufaturing and design.
    What's wrong with win2kpro?
    XP is the bane of my business with all it's short comings.
    People oft confuse need and want and tend to go for the latter.
    I always ask myself if I really need something.
    That's the only reason I have much of the electronics I do have.
    For business reasons(I do video/film work).
    While you went with a Sony dvd I purchased a Daewoo that offered more
    in features and performance.(It's a clone of a commercial unit made by
    panasonic.) at less than half the price.
    From the day we open our eyes the programming starts.
    We are trained to be consumers and always buy whatever is new when it
    comes out. It's been made the cornerstone of our economy.
    We're conditioned to feel "good" when we buy something new.
    Why do you think there's a car dealership on every block and a 7/11 on
    every corner.
    Can you really say that Sony is superior quality?
    I don't even service Sony anymore it's such a pain to get parts.
    I have a back storage room full of new broken down Sony.
    That old sales slogan "It's a Sony" is about as lame as Nikon's old
    bit, "It's not a camera it a Nikon".
    Neither have turned out the quality products that made their name
    famous in quite some time.
     
  11. tweak

    tweak Guest

    You're probably refering to the 100 series of dbx(first gen slow
    analog switches) that gave out the old swish and boom.
    These units were designed to help boost the quality of LP's a bit.
    Most users maxed out the expansion slides and of course the output
    sounded like crap.
    I'm talking about the later 200 and higher series as well as the type
    one units used inrecording studios.
    They had fixed compression and expansion and were used to improve
    signal to noise and to preserve dynamic range. A good side effect was
    lower distortion due to expanded head room and lower recording levels.
    the type one units went one step beyond the old range riding units
    used in studios to give more linear results with smoother frequency
    response and totally eliminate the swish and hum effect with old
    analog mixing consoles.
    I have and old 224 unit for home use. 2:1 in 1:2 out.
    I use it mostly to dub old DBX vinyl I get from time ot time.
    My dbx unit have actually scoped out at around 115-20 dbs dynamic
    range and yes an analog recording can achieve that.
    I have an old Tanberg 15inch reel to reel that runs at 34ips.
    Combined with the dbx it can record some pretty impressive thunder
    with little or no measurable distortion.
    Of course standard drivers can't stant that type of range.
    I had the coils of the K15 woofers in my klipshorns rewrapped with low
    oxygen heavy load copper and the cones were reinforced as well.
    Still can't max it out but it produces such a sound level as to blow
    out window panes if I choose to.(No I use common sense and keep the
    volume level low. I use this setup for classical music something CD's
    fall down on badly.)
    Using this scheme, keeping the volume levels low and using high
    dynamic range, I get some really excellent hifi.
    The bass still comes in strong and robust and the highs are absolutely
    transparent and sharp. Low levels mean no clipping and almost no
    distortion and the transient response is smooth.
    You have to spend a small fortune to get the equivalent in a digital
    setup. I'm sure that someday soon digital user end will surpass this
    type of analog setup in performance/price.
    that's why I'm hopeful of the DVD format, it promises a future of
    24bit audio super dics. I have yet to see any on the market to date
    though.
     
  12. James Sweet

    James Sweet Guest


    They'll bring the price down once they've sold enough to recoup the hundreds
    of millions spent developing them. There's a lot more out there than
    flatscreens, I got my 50" rear projection set for free, it's got a faint
    channel logo burned into one corner but the picture is still pretty good,
    there's plenty of deals like that out there for someone who can fix stuff.
    I've gotten at least a dozen 27"+ TV's for free and most have been fairly
    easy to fix.


    2K works pretty well, though unfortunatly it's not available anymore. You
    can find a used copy occasionally, but if you want to buy something new and
    be legal your choice is pretty much just XP. Thankfully you can set the UI
    to look pretty much like 2k, but that argument is pretty silly since XP and
    2k both have such similar hardware requirements.



    I don't think everyone confuses want and need, if I only spent money on
    things I need I'd be renting a little room somewhere and sleeping on a cot.
    It's nobody's business but my own what I want and choose to spend my money
    on, I buy stuff that brings me enjoyment, it doesn't have to be factory new
    for it to be "new" to me. Granted there are certainly people out there who
    have to constantly have the latest and greatest, but that's great because if
    not for those people I'd have a hard time picking up discarded stuff for
    free, everything used would hold it's value much better and that'd force me
    to buy a lot more new stuff.


    I have a Sony TV that looks significantly better than most other TV's, at
    least to me. I've had several other Sony's that have come and gone, and I've
    fixed quite a few other sets. Sony isn't the one end all be all, but the
    older Trinitrons were very good sets, plenty of them still around and it's
    what I've come to prefer. For projection TV's I'd look elsewhere, Sony does
    seem to be very unforgiving to parts substitution, their Trinitron direct
    view CRT's are where they really shine. Gotta watch out for their lower end
    made in mexico stuff though, it's all too common today for a company to
    outsource to someone cheaper and slap their name on it, it's a downward
    spiral with everyone having to do it to compete with everyone else, I see no
    end in sight, and if I had the power to do the things I feel would help to
    fix this, I would become very unpopular very quickly.
     
  13. tweak

    tweak Guest

    Panasonic addressed this problem in their vhs format digital audio
    units.
    Yes, but 16bit still sucks. that's why I use a 24bit unit.
     
  14. You're probably refering to the 100 series of dbx(first gen slow
    That's changing the discussion.

    The original point made about your Sanyo VCR is that rather aggressive
    compression is used to achieve its ratings, particularly with signal-noise.
    Digital audio achieves its high ratings without compression.
    They are available. However, you have to look for them at larger scale record
    stores, hi-fi shops, or electronics stores. They can also be ordered online.
    - Reinhart
     
  15. tweak

    tweak Guest

    Win2k runs lots lighter on the system, freeing up system resources for
    intensive apps. Also XP has all kinds of bugs regarding burning
    duplicate media.
    a friend running XP on his video editing setup has problems getting
    his dvd burner to run under xp when duping his dvd masters.XP sees
    them as copyrighted material and shuts his burner down about half the
    time. He's gotten it about debugged but why go through the hassle when
    2k has none of these issues?
    XP was SO misreported when it was released that Bill oughta be
    ashamed. Takes up to 4 times the system required ram etc... to
    actually get it to perform without any hitches or dragging sooo slow.
    As for availablilty it's everywhere and can be had "legally" for
    reasonable prices.
    I opted to get it free since the tower I purchase originally had XP
    and ran really sucky with it.
    I consider this a bad faith violation since M$ lied like a thief about
    XP to begin with. Do you think they'd swap out the OS's to satisfy the
    customer though?
    My copy of XP went in the circular file pronto and I don't miss it a
    bit.
    Not everybody, just the vast majority.
    Experts would argue that Sony's single gun "Trinitron" tube is a poor
    concept lacking in resolution and yielding poor color quality.
    (Noise is higher as well as poor specs for saturation etc...)
    But your preference proves that it's largely a matter of personal
    taste.
    I like JVC's myself or commercial Panasonic monitors.
    The Consumer JVC's give the sharpest image, yet still have good color
    rendition. To their minus JVC still hasen't gotten the vertical
    linenarity stage bugs out and with ome video signals you'll get
    noticeable ripple in vertical edges.(I open them up when I buy them
    and tweek it out of them and have no problem after that.)
    If you really want the best color in a consumer tv then Zenith still
    produces a good set for the money and the later models have addressed
    the issue of lack of sharpness which the older models fell down on.
    I have a dozenor so of those "old" Sony vcr's in a back room with one
    problem or another. All were high end videophile models costing in the
    5-700 dollar range and all exibited problems in either the audio
    output stage or video input. Problems range from no audio signal to
    constantly shifting video signal or no chroma/burst signals.
    It's a shame that Sony felt it ok to produce so many crappy vhs
    machines. I often thought it was their attempt to drive consumers off
    the vhs market to beta.
    the fact that you've had good fortune with your units could be counted
    as indicative as to Sony's spotty record in production control.
    I alsohave a box full of walkman's from various generations that all
    crapped.
    Sony's policy with the small personal stereo products was that only
    they would service it. so the consumer was strapped to shipping it to
    japan and waiting six months to get it back.(I've heard they have
    repair centers stateside now but that repairs take nearly as long.)
    I just think that if you pay top dollar for a product it should be
    very reliable and it shouldn't be a crap shoot with one hoping they
    got a "good" unit this time.(This is what killed Campo's. They were an
    exclusive Sony retailer, would lie to the customer about how Sony was
    so rock solid. then when the consumer brought the unit back after a
    week or so crapped out Campo's would tell them THEY had to ship it
    back to Sony. Even it their last days when it was obvious that they
    were going under the change in policy where they'd ship it back to
    Sony for the customer wasn't enough for the pissed off customer.
    Had an Aunt who without consulting me went out and bought a 200 dollar
    Sony walkman only to have it burn up after a few hours of use.
    Campo's all but told her to piss off.
    she mailed it back to sony in Japan waited 8 months got it back
    unrepaired. Sony issued her a rebate certificate for credit towards a
    new Sony product from Campo's. Campo's was OOB by then and it took her
    a year of wrangling to get her money back.
    200 bucks for ANY personal stereo is insane in my book but most
    consumers not knowledgeable in electronics generally try to compensate
    by buying the most expensive model in the hopes of getting quality.
    Sony has always preyed on these types.
     
  16. tweak

    tweak Guest

    I was using it as an example, and it does produce very good analog
    hifi.
    If you want really good audio off a vhs tape,Panasonic marketed a
    digital audio recorder that did very good work for early digital.
    Still my old Slipstream unit still produces excellent 24bit digital.
    And you did bring up the point on how you though DBX was sucky.
    Oh really? Then what price range are we talking about?
    And I don't want 16bit.
    Granted you can build a PC up to do a good job as a studio in a
    box.(In fact trying to do just that currently.) but you do have to
    shell out some bucks for a commercial sound card and there are
    limitations inherent in going that way.
    OR you can shell out about 17,000 for an Avid system, and that's one
    of their bottom end units. Nevr liked Avid though to propriatary and
    they insist on Macs.
    I've been trying to find a sound card setup that will interface with
    most standard motherboards but most have to few imputs.
    I found one card that had 16 input but cost just over 500 bucks.
    And yes it was 24bit, this seems kinda pricey to me nd I'll think Ill
    just wait.
    I do have cakewalk pro audio 64 track software with 24bit audio codec
    drivers and I have some software from soundforge.
    But once again it's going to cost a pretty penny to get the mobo and
    case to handle the hardware hookups.
    So once again where can I find this not expensive digital setups?
    I live in a fairly large city and we have tower records as well as a
    virgin superstore.
    Didn't see any DVD audio discs the last time I went in.
     
  17. What brought this up?

    If it's relation to my response to why AFM on VHS and Beta is not a good choice
    for serious music recording, then you seem to be confused.

    Note that I said AFM, not PCM. There's a big difference.

    As for VHS cassettes being used for multi-track digital recording: yes. I am
    aware that there are professional digital recorders that use VHS cassettes,
    including a couple of such decks I've observed by Alesis and Panasonic.

    However, the key word is DIGITAL, where the limitations of AFM ANALOGUE
    recording do not apply.
    VHS AFM Hi-Fi will never compare to Compact Disc. The initial audio quality
    definitely suggests it to sound like CD quality, but if you give hi-fi decks a
    serious listening you'll find that it will pale in comparison to a reel-to-reel
    audiotape deck running at the fastest possible speed in an overall evaluation.

    AFM hi-fi uses heavy compression whereas digital recording doesn't rely on
    compression to achieve its rated specifications.
    Digital recording achieves w&f that is below measurable thresholds. The low
    w&f of AFM hi-fi is for the simple fact that the audio is turned into a
    frequency modulated carrier before being multiplexed either between the luma
    and chroma carriers with Beta hi-fi or written directly on the tape as a field
    before the video track is layered on top of it in VHS hi-fi.

    Hi-Fi does not write the audio directly on the tape like a stationary head
    would. It's written in exactly the same way a video signal would be written on
    a VCR, using the same relative write speed of the helical drum as would be used
    with video, which is 1800 RPM for NTSC.
    In the case of Hi-Fi VCRs, this is because each channel is written as a
    separate field.
    Which is not in common use. Plus, the use of an aggressive compander does
    present its own problems, like "breathing."

    LP has to try and achieve higher fidelity by doing more to the audio signal
    than you would need to if digital recording and reproduction were used.
    And who set up these tests?
    Again, do you know what you mean by 16-bit encoding?
    Bullshit.

    Poor sound quality can be attributed to bad analogue stages or the use of
    brickwall analogue filters in place of digital oversampling filters.
    "When they first came out." A-ha!
    I prefer something with sound quality that is flat and accurate with minimal
    coloration, not something that mimics a coloration.
    And I have a $900 receiver which I bought for around $250 which also gives, at
    least to my ear, very clean and accurate amplification.
    What about other brands of drivers?

    Infinity? Cerwin-Vega? KEF? And many more that I won't care to list?
    Stuff like KLH, Jensen, and Pioneer.
    And one doesn't have to.

    In the words of Julian Hirsch, the benefits of audiophile-grade components are
    "less than obvious."
    Of find a way to make a tube amp work faster.
    First off, you ignored the point I made here. I was mentioning the price drops
    for ***CRT*** based HDTV devices! CRT, as in CATHODE RAY TUBE. CRTs are also
    called PICTURE TUBES! Sony had invented a FLAT SCREEN DIRECT VIEW CRT, called
    the FD Trinitron, A.K.A. VVega.

    Plasma, I feel, is not the wave of the future. Not just price but also for
    reliability and cost of service.

    However, there are HDTV sets that use CRTs, both direct-view and
    rear-projection. You also have rear-projection LCD displays which are simple
    and very lightweight and don't cost much more than a CRT rear-projection set.
    Also, Sharp manufactures their Aquos line, which are flat-panel LCD, not
    plasma, displays.

    The one company that is really devoting their efforts towards making plasma
    displays is Pioneer. All the others, on the other hand, are not limited to
    just one kind of display technology for making HDTVs.

    An HDTV display doesn't automatically equal a plasma display. A flat-screen
    display doesn't automatically equal a plasma display.
    With the kind of effort that was put into VCRs back then versus today, the
    price seems to have a justification.

    Try building an $80 VCR that uses a die-cast chassis, using high quality
    components, modular circuitry designs, parts that are usually from Japanese
    suppliers instead of Chinese and Taiwanese suppliers, using a design that
    demanded more materials than what's used with today's designs, and built using
    labor that's not so cheap to be virtually slave labor.

    Also, try integrating a lot of components into an LSI in the 1980s where such
    integration was not developed for practical use quite yet.

    Plus, the 1980s saw a lot of new introductions to VCRs. The introduction of
    the front loading system, the introduction of hi-fi audio, the introduction of
    the first one-piece camcorder, the introduction of VHS HQ, the introduction of
    VHS-C, the introduction of Super VHS, the introduction of ED-Beta, and the list
    goes on.

    These developments required R&D, so R&D did, indeed continued throughout the
    1980s. R&D costs money, and those costs are passed on to the consumer through
    the products they buy. In addition, you also have marketing, business
    operations, and taxes which can further increase the price the customer has to
    pay.

    In addition, during the early 1980s, Sony and Universal were still at odds over
    the Betamax case, with the potential possibility that the Supreme Court could
    rule VCRs an illegal device in the USA. That kind of makes that business feel
    risky, perhaps to the point where you try to sell high to get back any money
    you may lose in case VCRs are suddenly declared illegal. Also the MPAA was
    debating on the implementation of a copyright tax on VCR sales if the court
    ruled in their favor but did not rule for an outright ban.
    Because there is risk in introducing a new product. The product may bomb, so,
    in a rather unusual way of thinking, they assume that charging high prices will
    allow them to recoup some of their losses as some people will still buy it.
    They've been around since the 1950s, with the introduction of the Ampex VR-1000
    VTR, which used four rotary heads in what is known as the Qudraplex system.
    Duh! It replaced magnetic wire recorders for dictation!
    ... by stealing key ideas from Sony's 3/4 inch U-Matic system when Matsushita
    was licensed to make U-Matic equipment.
    They also stole the M-load idea from Sony, which Sony was considering with Beta
    but couldn't perfect in time, so they went with the U-load configuration which
    is easier on the tape, but mechanically complex to implement.

    Betamax came out in 1975 while VHS came out in 1977. One of Sony's primary
    fallacies in the failure of Betamax was not the format, but their inability to
    trust third parties. For instance, they turned away Hitachi because they
    didn't want to alienate Matsushita. They also caused RCA to playball with VHS
    when Sony demanded too much in terms of licensing costs and refused RCA the
    ability to make changes that would allow Beta to be more marketable to the
    Americans.

    As a matter of fact, RCA did some things for VHS that JVC did not approve of,
    such as the introduction of the LP tape speed for the USA market (not to be
    confused with the LP speed for PAL VHS). But, what they did certainly helped
    to push the VBT-200 SelectaVision to greater sales than Betamax in the United
    States.

    For places like Europe, and particularly Great Britain, JVC had greater
    influence with Thorn-EMI than Sony did. Thorn-EMI, being one of the biggest
    media distributors in Europe, naturally favored VHS. More software was
    availble on VHS as a result for both rental and purchase, which led people to
    abandon Betamax in that market. Of course, it doesn't help that VHS came out
    earlier than Beta did in Europe.

    (It's always been the marketing
    That could also explain how they chagrined RCA when they introduced their CED
    system to Matsushita, only to be countered with JVC's VHD system.
    Again, what did you expect for a first generation unit? I would bet that if he
    went with Philips' first CD player, he would have had the same problem.

    Also, the Sony CDP-101 timeshared one DAC between two channels, which
    introduced a nasty 10 millisecond phaseshift to one of the channels.

    Denon fixed this problem by introducing a delay so a timeshared DAC design
    could be acceptable. You also have a dual DAC design, one DAC for each
    channel, which is what I would prefer.
    How about Revox or Studer?
    Well, duh again! That seems to be the prevailing attitude with Ford, GM, and
    Chrysler.

    RCA was like this and where did this get them: into receivership with the
    French.
    I didn't mention Windows 2000 Pro. I said Windows98 Second Edition.

    I went with Windows XP because the computer it's running on is for home use. A
    lot of programs that I would use, like many games such as "The Sims," WILL NOT
    RUN on Windows NT 2000.

    I can't use 98SE or Millienium because my computer has over 1 gig of RAM. This
    requires a modification to one of the INI files to cut down the file cache size
    in order to allow it to run properly. Without the modification to the INI, the
    computer would crash everytime I tried to install the nVidia nForce2 mainboard
    drivers.

    In addition, the clock speed is in excess of 2 GHz. 98SE and ME are not
    designed to run on a system that fast. As a result, I had nothing but
    bluescreens everytime I ran the computer.

    With XP PRO, those problems went away. Plus, keeping my OS updated helps, as
    well as performing housekeeping every week, such as scandisk, defrag, virus
    scan, and spyware scans.
    Well, then I have to say that you are far better off than other people when it
    comes to saving money.
    And how did you come to this determination?

    Did the Daewoo use a custom drive assembly that uses brushless motors for both
    the spindle and pickup kicker motor?

    Was the drive interface actually proprietary instead of being standard IDE?

    Was the media board composed almost entirely of Matsushita components with some
    Analog Devices components?

    Did the power supply actually use Matsushita 105 celcius caps and used
    Matsuhita branded components?

    I've worked on a lot of so-called bargain electronics and have been appalled at
    the lack of quality that's built into these things.

    I bought a Sony not because of its name but because I knew what I was getting.
    So far, I'm not disappointed because four years since I bought it, it's still
    working like new.

    I believe that true frugality starts with knowing the difference between true
    value and being penny-wise but dollar-foolish.

    It's good to save money, but it's bad to be a cheapskate.

    Working as a professional, you ought to know that.
    Yes. Your milage may vary. But, with professional video equipment, Sony kicks
    ass. They are more expensive, but they make the best displays, the best video
    recorders, the best camcorder rigs, and they even developed 24P DigiBeta video
    used to make "Star Wars: Episode 2" with specially developed Panavision lenses.
    ST:AOTC was filmed entirely on videotape during prinicipal photography. The
    money saved on film development costs, film stock costs, and time is
    tremendous, so this technology definitely has potential for more
    budget-conscious purposes when it's perfected further.

    My only complaint is that, yes, parts can be hard to find for Sony. The same
    can be said of Mitsubishi, Toshiba, Panasonic, and JVC however.

    Particularly Panasonic. Try to look for parts for a professional Panasonic
    video deck that's only a few years old.

    And particularly Mitsubishi. Why else did they earn the name "Mitsubitchy?"
    Maybe because they've had some problems with electrolytic failures in a huge
    slew of their own products for the longest time.
    Depends on what you buy. If you buy their low end stuff, then yes, you are not
    getting something that's decent. If you buy something that's a little more
    upscale, then you will get something that's decent.

    As for audio, Sony isn't my cup of tea except for their ES line. I would
    rather go with Yamaha or Denon but I do like Sony ES. In terms of CD players,
    Sony ES had some CD players that are considered some of the best the format can
    offer. But, of course, you have other choices from Rotel, AMC, Audio Alchemy,
    Parasound, Acurus, and Shanling. - Reinhart
     
  18. Win2k runs lots lighter on the system, freeing up system resources for
    But what about on a system that runs too fast, making it unstable?
    I had that problem. A registry mod fixed that problem for me, which disabled
    auto-insert notification for the CD writer.

    Besides, I don't rely on Roxio for CD writing. I rely on Nero.
    One such expert worked for Philips, which invented the invar shadow mask CRT
    which competes against Trinitron. Makes you think, don't it?

    Also, if Trinitron is so bad, then why is it used in all sorts of critical
    applications over all others such as professional video, film production, NASA
    mission control, and medical operations?

    I would love to read your explanations on those points, which are likely to be
    more bullshit.
    Zenith I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot cattle prod.

    First off, Zenith never made decent sets since the 1990s. Now, their sets are
    produced by their corporate parent: LG Electronics. They are better, but they
    aren't great in comparison to other manufacturers. The repair shop I go to
    almost always gets a Zenith in for repairs for one reason or another. One of
    their biggest problems: too many frickin' surface mount parts at critical
    locations which costs the customer in reliability and makes servicing a pain in
    the ass.
    I've been using Sony VCRs for the longest.

    All I've got to say is "no problems here."
    And do you seriously think Walkmans from any manufacturer are any good?

    But, I've got a Sony Walkman (WM-FX403) that ran daily for up to six years
    non-stop before the pinch roller decided to give up the ghost. - Reinhart
     
  19. You are a bit confused about the whole thing. But, the Plasma and LCD
    technology is still high priced for the average consumer. Plasma
    displays do not use illumination lamps. LCD panels do, the the LCD
    panel will not have burn in, as like a Plasma screen. CRT's can also
    burn in very easily, but not as easy as a Plasma display.

    LCD screens cannot have burnin. Their only weak point is the back
    plain lamps. But, in the expensive models, these are changable by the
    service center. The lamps are much cheaper than changing a CRT in a
    CRT set.

    A Plasma display can give an average of about 30,000 hours of service
    before the display starts to go weak. A CRT will last about 40,000
    hours with discent emission, if it is a good qaulity made one. There
    are some higher failure rates of some of the drive components in these
    sets. This is why the manufactures give extended warranties. We see
    failures in all of these technologies.

    The heater on a CRT may last for 20 years, but the catholds in the
    electron-gun will not after the rated hours of use. The phosphors also
    wear out. I see this on rebuilt tubes, where the phosphor lack some of
    the illumination in relation to the gun current when under test. I
    have also seen rebuilt tubes with some slight discoloration in the
    phsophors, when doing close evaluations.

    As like any electronic device, we found that after about 5 to 7 years
    of use, there is a degrading of performance.


    Jerry Greenberg
    http://www.zoom-one.com

    --





     
  20. Your quite long winded posting contains so much bluster and bullshit that
    the real information that you may have to impart is lost...
    You argue about the value of 24 bit recording systems over 16 bit and of
    valve designs yet you listen to Klipsh and think JBL makes some of the best
    driver? Give me a break...
    If you think that it is hard to get parts for Sony, you obviously don't
    service much of anything. Among the many manufacturers Sony is far from the
    worst in this regard. I don't mean to imply that they couldn't be better,
    but in this time of disposable consumer electronics there are many other
    companies that are worse.

    Leonard Caillouet
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-