-->

Archive for the ‘Home Theater’ Category

David Fincher’s Zodiac and Digital Cinema Problems

Monday, March 12th, 2007

Zodiac_448x190.shkl.jpg

My parents visited last week to see their grandchildren and offered to babysit a few nights so my wife and I could go out on some much needed dates.

On the second date we went to see David Fincher’s Zodiac. As usual, the movie theater experience was less than satisfactory. I was distracted the whole 160 minutes of the feature by red light blooms on each bottom corner of the screen (I assume from EXIT signs, how dare the theater choose fire safety over my videophile ideals?). In the film’s many darkly lit scenes the red reflections were the brightest element in my vision. I also didn’t appreciate the jabber-jaws sitting two seats to our left (what luck with only like eight people in the entire theater).

Zodiac was shot in HD digital and then processed with slight de-saturation and sepia for a vintage 70’s look (to my eye, more detail on the Cinematographers’ Guild (click on magazine and then find the 3/2007 issue with the Zodiac article)). A problem I had with this style is a complete loss of color in dark scenes and shadows o brighter scenes. The effect looks like a gray-green posterization in the shadow of a face that should be a deep brown as in the screen cap above). The reason this look bugs me is that it’s a common artifact of an underexposed, noisy digital still camera image. It just looks like a mistake rather than a pleasing effect. Other movies that exhibit this artifact include Zathura and Serenity. (My real gripe with this “dead shadow” look is I thought it was my projector’s fault, or more specifically, my custom calibration of the projector, as I’m more confident about my calibration skills now, I know it’s the sources’ fault.) I saw a film print of Zodiac so maybe there was a problem with the digital printing to film, though I doubt it, we’ll see if the DVD looks different.

Other than my visual quibbles I really enjoyed the content of the film. The murder scenes are very point blank, matter of fact and Fincher slo-mo detailed all at the same time. All the investigation and theory bits reminded me of one of my favorite movies: All the President’s Men. Every performance was great, including Jake Gyllenhall as obsessed and unreliable cartoonist/crime author Robert Graysmith (intrigued by the film, I read Graysmith’s first book Zodiac in a few days, then I was confused by some differences between the book and film and found the Zodiac Killer site where message board members fact check Graysmith’s books and shoot holes in many of his accounts which are twisted to fit his prime suspect. The Zodiac wiki may be more objective.)

Popularity: 10% [?]

Update - More HDMI Switch Controversy - Belkin vs. Monoprice

Monday, February 26th, 2007

belkin-monoprice-HDMI-switch.jpg

It looks like everyone’s favorite super-expensive ethernet cable company, Belkin, are inflating the price of their $199 HDMI Interface 3-to-1 Video Switch, the same OEM HDMI box as BetterCables and Comects’ Neptune (also favorably reviewed by Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity, described as “inexpensive” at $222). It appears Monoprice has the same hardware for $67.46.

You have to ask yourself what premium you are willing to pay for branding from BetterCables and Belkin. As AV consumers we expect higher quality from our boutique brands. We assume that we are paying a higher price for their product because the company invested many hours on R&D and quality assurance. But what if that warm feeling is just a placebo caused by a rebadging of an OEM product? What if the only creative thought that went into these products was where to place your logo and how to spin the tech copy to justify its price and also scare you away from more affordable (or even fairly priced) alternatives (that look suspiciously like the same product).

Video switchers are not a sexy product, they are completely utilitarian. It’s awful that we even have to consider paying this much money for a boutique company’s product that is really an affordable OEM with the exact same functionality and performance. A backlash to industry wide HDMI price gouging is growing fueled by the extremely low prices of Monoprice and other discount cable suppliers (like RAM Electronics).

I assume as a response to my post this morning (and being featured on Gizmodo), BetterCables has removed the pricing and description of their HDMI switcher. I hope they explain themselves soon. The Secrets site was down this morning (coincidence?) but when they came back their review of BetterCables HDMI Switcher was unchanged.

Popularity: 10% [?]

HDMI Twins: Is BetterCables Selling an $89 HDMI Switcher for $350?

Sunday, February 25th, 2007

HDMI_5x1_Compare.jpg

I’ve been on the lookout for an affordable HDMI switcher in anticipation of an additional HTPC and next gen console (hopefully the Xbox 360 will have HDMI by this spring). Monoprice has a good assortment of HDMI switchers, and I’ve had my eye on their 5X1 Enhanced HDMI Switch, but it has been sold out for weeks (looks like they have them back in stock today). The switcher only costs $88.73 (with an “original value” of $299), so it’s a very attractive option. An AVS Forum member posted this thorough review and found no problems (like sparkling) all the way up to 1080p.

Yesterday, I read the BetterCables Display Magic 5×1 HDMI Switcher ($350) review on Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity. The reviewer, Kris Deering, found no fault with the switcher, comparing it in quality to the rest of BetterCables’ product offerings (high). He concludes:

BetterCables has always offered outstanding performance and quality in their products regardless of price point. The Display Magic 5.1 HDMI switcher continues that tradition. Regardless of the source I had connected to it, the unit passed the entire signal and didn’t tamper with it in any way. That is all you can ask of an A/V switcher. The flexibility this adds to a setup that is limited in HDMI switching is immeasurable. This product gets my highest recommendation.

Continue reading HDMI Twins: Is BetterCables Selling an $89 HDMI Switcher for $350?

Popularity: 8% [?]

Why I Need an HDTV Capable HTPC

Tuesday, February 20th, 2007

I miss HDTV.

Last year I gave up my HD satellite STB as part of a household cost cutting plan. I only had the box downstairs on the big screen and never watched it for two reasons: warming up my projector and turning on my whole home theater system didn’t fit with my desire for instant TV gratification and the STB had no time shifting/PVR facilities (essential to any TV viewer but more so if you have kids that don’t appreciate midwest prime time).

Recently, I caught a glimpse of HDTV and thought, “Wow, that looks really good, much better than my upscaled DVD video, I should really finally build an HTPC.”

Before dropping any money into video cards and large hard drives I wanted to assess my current HTPC (home theater personal computer) capabilities:

Continue reading Why I Need an HDTV Capable HTPC

Popularity: 12% [?]

Russ Andrews Microphonic Equipment Placement and Time Smear

Wednesday, February 7th, 2007

Hi-Fi News’ Russ Andrews has a system set up column, “Russ’ Top Tips,” where he has suggested that music listeners should place their equipment rack in between the left and right loudspeakers. Many readers wrote in not liking the idea and Mr. Andrews defends the placement in his latest column (at least the issue available in the US, Feb. 2007, page 98, maybe the UK is a month ahead).

According to Andrews, you need to place your equipment rack dead center and maybe a little nearer the front wall of the front loudspeakers (at least behind the front baffles to avoid imaging interference) because that is the quietest and most in time place in the room when music is playing. Huh? I’m not sure how the spot between the speakers is the quietest (though we could all easily check with an SPL meter), but lets take his word for it. What I have a problem with is his reasoning behind the “quiet” spot: all of your equipment’s internal components (diodes, caps, etc.) are microphonic, meaning they are reabsorbing the sound waves out of time and this is distorting the music. Isn’t that called feedback? Shouldn’t we all be dealing with shrill whines from our loudspeakers that change depending on placement?

Continue reading Russ Andrews Microphonic Equipment Placement and Time Smear

Popularity: 8% [?]

Exact Audio Copy Finally Works on a Mac

Saturday, February 3rd, 2007

eac_parallels_448x260.shkl.png

The latest Parallels Desktop build (3150) was released this week and it finally has a virtual CD drive that Exact Audio Copy (EAC) recognizes. With previous versions, I always got stuck trying to test the CD drive in EAC’s setup wizard. Now I just need to find some advanced EAC tutorials and I can start ripping better than perfect digital copies of my favorite (or for more fun, worst sounding) CDs into lossless formats (Apple Lossless for me).

After I’ve ripped a few CDs I may also check out Foobar’s Windows playback and find out if it really makes a difference over a Mac OS iTunes, as suggested by Empirical Audio.

Happy Exact Audio Copying Parallels users.

Popularity: 17% [?]

Transfer Your LPs to High-Res 24/96 DVDs

Monday, January 29th, 2007

AudioXpress, the only DIY audio hobbyist print mag, recently published a great how to article about transferring your LPs to DVD audio (though not necessarily DVD-A). Transferring LPs to DVDs in High Resolution by Victor Skaggs (PDF download) is the most detailed LP digitizing article I’ve encountered (Hi-Fi News recently published another how to, but stopped a CD quality audio). As a bonus Mr. Skaggs does all his digitizing on a Mac using affordable software and hardware (with many low and high end alternatives). He’s so into digitizing LPs to high resolution audio that he’s discovered hidden features in Roxio Toast and had features added to Toast (music-only DVD authoring) and ClickRepair (96 kHz file support). I wish I had as much ambition and input with my software tools.

Since my successes with ripping CDs to lossless audio files (with MAX) and listening through my low jitter Airport Express, I’ve wanted to compare a high resolution LP to digital transfer to the digital CD originals. By Victor Skaggs’ comments, I’d have to think the transferred LP would win followed by lossless audio and CD last.

When I get a free weekend I’ll pop open my Rogue preamp, flip the second outputs to fixed and hook it up to my MacBook Pro. Following the AudioXpress article, I’ll record Shellac’s At Action Park, clean it up and burn a 96/24 DVD (or 192/24 DVD-A if I can figure that out). Watch out for the head-to-head test.

(via Macintouch)

Popularity: 14% [?]

Cost No Object Music Room Shames Mortal Audiophiles

Wednesday, January 24th, 2007

music_room_019_448x297.shkl.jpg

A friend tipped me off to this amazing music room built into a barn or guest house. Follow the link for loads of pics of five-figure turntables, loudspeakers, tube amps, CD players and cables. This guy has really bought into the “cables and isolation accessories make a difference” with interconnects and speaker cables that resemble vacuum cleaners, ceramic cable lifters (I guess DIY cable lifter kegger cups wouldn’t blend well with surrounding décor) and tank-like turntable isolation rack sitting on top of a granite tile (which I assume must be twice as thick as normal granite judging by the overbuilt quality of the rest of the room).

As impressive as the audio system components is the acoustic construction of the room, all built-in scalloped acoustic chambers on the walls and ceiling. I love the floor to high ceiling LP and CD storage that he needs those elementary school library rolling step stools to reach the highest shelf.

Too bad he’s not listening to phase and time coherent loudspeakers. All that money spent on massaging the perfect signal through four carat phono cartridges, preamps, amps and cables only to have the listening experience mangled by the loudspeaker. Heh, if you can hear the difference (I would hope this system to be punishingly revealing).

What a Fortress of Solitude (Auditude?). What’s this guy escaping from? (Not to judge, I’m just overcome with envy.)

Popularity: 10% [?]

iPhone Not True Widescreen - Hope for a 2.35:1 Video iPod

Wednesday, January 17th, 2007

2351cinepod_448x198.shkl.jpg
16x9cinepod_448x198.shkl.jpg

Engadget is reporting that though Apple boasts a “widescreen” display for the iPhone, its screen is actually a non-standard aspect ratio:

Well, anyone who sat in Moscone Center to witness the holy unveiling surely noticed the screen cropping (letterboxing) that occurred when Steve played Pirates of the Carribean. That’s because the iPhone isn’t “widescreen” as the term is customarily understood outside of the reality distortion field — it is not a 1.78:1 (16×9) aspect ratio. Rather, the display utilizes a 1.5:1 aspect ratio.

via Engadget via Crave

Apple has a history of creating and then filling its own hardware niches. Large capacity video iPods for those that enjoy watching David Caruso wince on CSI: Miami, iPod Nanos for jewelry and compressed music lovers and the iPod Shuffle for random players who lost the bolo piece from their bolo tie. The iPod family members all have distinct hardware bonuses and shortcomings that complement each other. So the iPhone isn’t really widescreen, does this leave the possibility open that a new device will fill our widescreen video needs? Will iPhone customers become frustrated while they watch 300 in a thin strip of a 2.40:1 letterbox?

Could Apple’s strategy be to introduce the iPhone’s new on screen dual touch, storage and display technologies to refine them over time and once popular reduce their cost to meet a true widescreen video iPod? Imagine a 16×9 screen dominating the gadget’s full front face, all AV controls on the dual touch screen for the same price as today’s 80 GB iPod. Like a large storage Sony PSP without the D-Pad and buttons (oh, and games, have to remember the PSP plays games).

Maybe all the dual touch patent rumor mock ups were right, we just have to wait for the iPhone to become a commodity and piss off enough videophiles to introduce the true widescreen video iPod. Though I’m sure true videophiles would prefer a 2.35:1 aspect, constant height screen with little velvet curtains on the sides to aid contrast when windowboxing squarer ratios (as mocked up above). Introducing the cinePod (as in Cinescope). Heh.

Popularity: 13% [?]

Do Not Repeat My Mistakes Calibrating Your Home Theater Projector

Tuesday, January 16th, 2007

With the HCFR 1.21 update I’ve been struggling with using Gretag Macbeth/X-Rite’s Eye One Pro or Eye One Display2 color meters. A list of my missteps so you don’t repeat my mistakes:

Continue reading Do Not Repeat My Mistakes Calibrating Your Home Theater Projector

Popularity: 13% [?]