freak@ihlpa.UUCP (c e malloy) (05/02/85)
I wish to start a new topic for discussion on this news group. That topic is this: Before the advent of video machines (VHS, Beta, CED, LV, etc.) there were two types of people that listened to music. These people were either people who listened to music, or they were audiophiles. Now there are people that have video machines for the purpose of watching movies and other things at home. Some of these people just like to watch movies without the hassles that they get in theaters, or they time-shift regular television programs, or various other reasons. (Some people copy movies, but that is not the topic for this discussion.) Other people must consider themselves VIDEOPHILES. My contension is this: You cannot be a videophile with either VHS or Beta tape machines. And CED is just marginal. In order to consider yourself a TRUE Videophile, you MUST have a Laser Disc Player. And Comments????????????????????????? From inside the Tesseract of Clancy Malloy
rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES) (05/02/85)
[] Words, words. What do they mean? I don't agree with you. While far from what I'd like to see, the quality of a good tape on a good TV is more than adequate to produce all the required effects on the viewer, especially if accompanied by a "Hi-Fi" sound track. THere are movies that are just stunning on the tube. Two right off: Apocolypse Now and Blade Runner, both in Beta Hi-Fi - so you know what I'm talking about. This sort of reasoning may or may not qualify me as a videophile, depending on the definition you had in mind. The $ensible Sound in a recent issue distinguishes between audiophiles and audiophobes, to wit: An audiophile loves music. He loves to hear it reproduced on fine equipment. Given a good album he will play it all the way through with enjoyment. An audiophobe loves to tweak equipment and has no positive feelings for music one way or the other. Given an album he cannot play it for more than 12 seconds without jumping up to adjust something. By analogy, then, I think there arelots of videophiles and few videophobes. Someone else's turn. -- "It's the thought, if any, that counts!" Dick Grantges hound!rfg
davew@shark.UUCP (Dave Williams) (05/03/85)
In article <209@ihlpa.UUCP> freak@ihlpa.UUCP (c e malloy) writes: > My contension is this: > > You cannot be a videophile with either VHS or Beta tape machines. >And CED is just marginal. In order to consider yourself a TRUE Videophile, >you MUST have a Laser Disc Player. > > And Comments????????????????????????? Perhaps what you really need is a Sony "C" format 1" professional VTR. They're sort of big, a little noisy and cost kilobucks, but what the heck, if the networks use them maybe a true videophile should have one also. The point is some people let technology get in the way of what they really need. Laser Disc Players are neat products, but if you want to do time shifting or rent a lot of movies then a VCR is the way to go. Unfortunately some of us have to remain within our budgets and a VCR, while not providing the best video quality does provide the flexibility required to get maximum usage. Sort of more bang for the buck. If I had an unlimited budget my family room would look like the master control room at NBC Burbank. Unfortunately it looks more like the back room at Joe's TV Repair Shop. :-} -- Dave Williams Tektronix, Inc. Graphic Workstations Division "The 6000 Family" "The workstations that made Wilsonville famous."
brown@nic_vax.UUCP (05/04/85)
> > I wish to start a new topic for discussion on this news group. > > That topic is this: > > Before the advent of video machines (VHS, Beta, CED, LV, etc.) > there were two types of people that listened to music. These people > were either people who listened to music, or they were audiophiles. Now > there are people that have video machines for the purpose of watching > movies and other things at home. Some of these people just like to watch > movies without the hassles that they get in theaters, or they time-shift > regular television programs, or various other reasons. (Some people copy > movies, but that is not the topic for this discussion.) Other people must > consider themselves VIDEOPHILES. > > My contension is this: > > You cannot be a videophile with either VHS or Beta tape machines. > And CED is just marginal. In order to consider yourself a TRUE Videophile, > you MUST have a Laser Disc Player. > > > And Comments????????????????????????? Ya! I have a comment. I do NOT agree. With advent of VHS and Beta Hi-Fi, a true videophile cannot be one without having a Hi-Fi machine. Why? Well, video is now an addition to audio. Why should an audiophile, that also goes video, lose the audiophile status by getting a laser disk machine. Until the digital sound of the laser disk is made available, the ONLY way to still be an audiophile and be a videophile at the same time, is to have a VHS or Beta video deck. AND, the audiophile can use the video deck as an audio recorder only. The VHS or Beta Hi-Fi video decks have MUCH BETTER specs than a reel-to-reel deck ever will, even with dbx. Now, even when laser disks start delivering digital sound with the video, the recording deck will still be a machine for the videophile. It is hard for a videophile to get some material on video disks. And even harder to get a disk without something wrong with it. Now, I don't know if I should consider myself a videophile or not, or even a real audiophile, but I think that I come close. Most of the videos that I purchase are because of the Hi-Fi sound. Most are music videos or music concerts. It is hard to record some of the specials that are on MTV on a laser disk. Yes, I record them in Hi-Fi stereo sound. I guess I have made my comment. I expect to be cut down in what I have said, but that is why this discussion exists. If I was afraid of being cut down, I wouldn't write this or anything to the net. A Ken Arndt(?) I am not, but! -- |------------| | |-------| o| JVC HRD725U Mr. Video | | | o| |--------------| | | | | | |----| o o o | | |-------| O| |--------------| |------------| VHS Hi-Fi (the only way to go) (!ihnp4!uwvax!astroatc!nic_vax!brown)
freak@ihlpa.UUCP (c e malloy) (05/07/85)
> Ya! I have a comment. I do NOT agree. With advent of VHS and Beta Hi-Fi, > a true videophile cannot be one without having a Hi-Fi machine. Why? Well, > video is now an addition to audio. Why should an audiophile, that also goes > video, lose the audiophile status by getting a laser disk machine. Until the > digital sound of the laser disk is made available, the ONLY way to still be > an audiophile and be a videophile at the same time, is to have a VHS or > Beta video deck. AND, the audiophile can use the video deck as an audio > recorder only. The VHS or Beta Hi-Fi video decks have MUCH BETTER specs > than a reel-to-reel deck ever will, even with dbx. And now the laser disc format has a true digital soundtrack. But even before that happened, the soundtrack of a laser disc was equal to that of "Hi-Fi". And stereo soundtarcks have always been on the laser discs. So if it's stereo sound you are after, why spend over $500 for a second machine to upgrade to stereo, when laser disc has had it for years? > Now, even when laser disks start delivering digital sound with the video, > the recording deck will still be a machine for the videophile. It is hard > for a videophile to get some material on video disks. And even harder to > get a disk without something wrong with it. Any movie that has been released in "Hi-Fi" is available on laser disc. At least, any one that I have seen. As for problems... That is also VERY untrue. The quality of the disc itself is not a problem, generally. While is it true that there was a problem in the past, in most cases, it is no longer true. What you have to look for is the place that it was made. Now that 3M is in the business of making discs, the problem has all but gone away. Of the 107 laser discs that I recently ordered, only two had any problems. One was the machine, and the other was a hum in the sound. I sent the one with the hum back and am waiting for the return of a new disc. If there is something wrong with it, they will refund my money or send another one. As with any defective product, the seller will always replace it. > Now, I don't know if I should consider myself a videophile or not, or even > a real audiophile, but I think that I come close. Most of the videos that > I purchase are because of the Hi-Fi sound. Most are music videos or music > concerts. It is hard to record some of the specials that are on MTV on a > laser disk. Yes, I record them in Hi-Fi stereo sound. In answer to the music video point, there are now 8" laser discs that contain music videos. And the sound is digital. > I guess I have made my comment. I expect to be cut down in what I have > said, but that is why this discussion exists. If I was afraid of being > cut down, I wouldn't write this or anything to the net. A Ken Arndt(?) > I am not, but! I would not dream of CUTTING DOWN anyones views. But, a couple or other points: The point was for the video not the audio. While a videophile might also be an audiophile, I was refering to the picture quality. What is described here is an audiophile who would also like a picture with the music. There is nothing wrong with that, but a laser disc would still be better, because of the digital sound that is included with the disc. Like most people with video machines in their homes I am a video junkie. Otherwise, most of my collection of tape would be pointless. Why have a complete set of _Mork And Mindy_ on tape? I also have _The Twilight Zone_, _Doctor Who_ and _Star Trek_ on tape, but with the release of _Star Trek_ on both Disc and Tape, I am replacing the tapes from the collection with the Discs. But I am also a videophile. I enjoy watching movies on a six-foot screen, with stereo sound, and no drop-outs that are on ALL tapes. If more people started buying Laser Disc machines, more companies would release movies on disc. And more people are. As a final point read the latest issue (June 1985) of Video Review. I got it in the mail yesterday, and they talk about the quality of the sound in the laser disc. From inside the Tesseract of Clancy Malloy
man@bocar.UUCP (M Nevar) (05/07/85)
< Any movie that has been released in "Hi-Fi" is available on laser disc. At < least, any one that I have seen. As for problems... That is also VERY From the latest issue of Video Magazine, titles issued in HI-FI, but not on disk (a partial list): The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Against all odds (mono on disk) Allegro Non tropo Around the world in 80 days Around the world under the sea Bachelor party Bolero The Bounty Cloak and Dagger Country Electric Dreams Grandview USA Heat and dust The Idolmaker The Karate Kid Kill Mary and Joseph Moscow on the Hudson The Natural The Wall Purple Hearts Razorback Red Dawn Revenge of the Nerds Rhinestone A rumor of war Sahara Shock Treatment Song remains the same Street of fire Thriller Top Secret I'm tired of typing...
freak@ihlpa.UUCP (c e malloy) (05/07/85)
> >From the latest issue of Video Magazine, titles issued in HI-FI, but not on > disk (a partial list): > > The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai > Against all odds (mono on disk) > Allegro Non tropo > Around the world in 80 days > Around the world under the sea > Bachelor party > Bolero > The Bounty > Cloak and Dagger > Country > Electric Dreams > Grandview USA > Heat and dust > The Idolmaker > The Karate Kid > Kill > Mary and Joseph > Moscow on the Hudson > The Natural > The Wall > Purple Hearts > Razorback > Red Dawn > Revenge of the Nerds > Rhinestone > A rumor of war > Sahara > Shock Treatment > Song remains the same > Street of fire > Thriller > Top Secret > > I'm tired of typing... Wrong (Anti-)Laser Breath!!! First, I have NEVER seen ANY video magazine give any credit to the LV format. Second, What is listed in a magazine is NEVER correct. Of the titles that you have named, I own four of them on Laser Disc. They Are: Moscow On The Hudson Red Dawn Top Secret The Wall BTW: Pink Floyd's "The Wall" has been around for over two years with the stereo soundtrack on Laser Disc. Before you start quoting a magazine, I would advise that you check with a company that distributes Laser Discs for a living. From inside the Tesseract of Clancy Malloy
rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES) (05/07/85)
[] It is true that the original laser disc sound was pretty good. It it not true that it was/is equivalent to the "Hi-Fi" sound of either VHS or BETA. Nothing, heretofore has been that good except digital compact discs (CD's) which are still better. -- "It's the thought, if any, that counts!" Dick Grantges hound!rfg
arcorp@utcsri.UUCP (Alias Research Corporation) (05/08/85)
> > You cannot be a videophile with either VHS or Beta tape machines. > > And CED is just marginal. In order to consider yourself a TRUE Videophile, > > you MUST have a Laser Disc Player. Absolutely! In order to be a *video*phile, one must have an appreciation of the visual quality of a recording. Image clarity is an important consideration for such individuals, and it affects their purchase. Since the VIDEO quality of all video cassette recorders is unacceptable, they cannot be considered as fundamental components in the videophile's system. On the other hand, since they can produce good results in the audio department, such machines are suitable for audiophiles or other beginners in video. I should state at this point that although I have a LaserDisc player, it has not stopped me from buying a 0.5" vcr for the purposes of recording shows off air. There are many shows that will not be released on video for a variety of reasons. (rights, market, etc...) Such shows I will record and keep. Other shows or movies will eventually show up on LaserDiscs, and I will upgrade to disc when they do. The poor quality of the vcr copies are something I just live with while I wait. A videophile will refuse to buy a pre-recorded videotape if the same thing is available as a LaserDisc. The latter offers higher quality at a lower cost. An added bonus in discs is their packaging. They fit in regular record racks; they are clearly labelled; they do not appear as clutter. LaserDiscs retain their high signal quality for an indefinite period of time. Many early discs have sold for $100 or more. In contrast, early videotapes have little or no value. There is a parallel here between audio records and audio tapes. I watch shows on a vcr; and enjoy them on Laser. Stephen Y. Trutiak Alias Research Inc. allegra!utcsri!alias!steve
freak@ihlpa.UUCP (c e malloy) (05/08/85)
> Words, words. What do they mean? What ever the person that is saying something is trying to express? > I don't agree with you. While far from what I'd like to see, > the quality of a good tape on a good TV is more than adequate > to produce all the required effects on the viewer, especially > if accompanied by a "Hi-Fi" sound track. If it is 'far from what I'd like to see', then I would suggest that you check out a laser disc player. > There are movies that > are just stunning on the tube. Two right off: Apocalypse Now > and Blade Runner, both in Beta Hi-Fi - so you know what I'm > talking about. This sort of reasoning may or may not qualify me > as a videophile, depending on the definition you had in mind. What I am talking about is BOTH the picture quality and the sound. It seems to have been taken as an audio question. And what I was originally talking about was the drop-out rate of tape vs. disc. > The $ensible Sound in a recent issue distinguishes between > audiophiles and audiophobes, to wit: > An audiophile loves music. He loves to hear it reproduced on > fine equipment. Given a good album he will play it all the way > through with enjoyment. An audiophobe loves to tweak equipment > and has no positive feelings for music one way or the other. > Given an album he cannot play it for more than 12 seconds > without jumping up to adjust something. By analogy, then, I > think there are lots of videophiles and few videophobes. Since it is virtually impossible to 'tweak' the video portion of any movie (tape or disc), I must agree. But, I contend that there are two types of people, videophiles and video junkies. I happen to be both. On the other hand, a video junkie can also be either an audiophile or an audiophobe. Also there is a third category for the audio, the audio junkie. This type of person far outnumbers the rest of the audio people. They will listen to the music that they like on any equipment (good or bad) and not notice (or care about) the difference. > It is true that the original laser disc sound was pretty good. > It it not true that it was/is equivalent to the "Hi-Fi" sound > of either VHS or BETA. Nothing, heretofore has been that good > except digital compact discs (CD's) which are still better. WAS??? The sound has not gotten any worse, in fact it has gotten better. With the advent of a digital soundtrack on some of the recordings, the sound exceeds that of any tape machine with the exception of PMS. From inside the Tesseract of Clancy Malloy
brown@nic_vax.UUCP (05/09/85)
(I won't repeat what was said previously. Please see past postings!) I guess that I will have to agree. The video of the laser disk can be better. I haven't see laser disks in awhile. But, if they really have improved the quality, great, cause it needed it. The sound quality, before digital, was not as good as Hi-Fi. That is why the CX thing was tried, to improve the S/N and dynamic range of the audio. It appears, by your definition, a videophile would only be interested in the video. Does that mean the sound could be missing and still enjoy the video? Not me man. I HAVE to have my Hi-Fi sound as well. I still say that a videophile will naturally grow out of a videophile. A regular video machine allows for time-shifting, which a laser disk does not. So, your idea of only having one machine wouldn't work, not in this family. Having a laser disk only would definately make my wife mad. "Spent all that money and I can't record anything?!" So, guess what, you still end up with a VCR anyway! I know about the digital sound and the laser mini disk and have seen the info on the new 3 in 1 laser disk player. Not much of the material is out now, but it will be. I just don't think that a family can only have a laser disk player without having a VCR as well. -- |------------| | |-------| o| JVC HRD725U Mr. Video | | | o| |--------------| | | | | | |----| o o o | | |-------| O| |--------------| |------------| VHS Hi-Fi (the only way to go) (!ihnp4!uwvax!astroatc!nic_vax!brown)
andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) (05/10/85)
>> From the latest issue of Video Magazine, titles issued in HI-FI, but not on >> disk (a partial list): > > Wrong (Anti-)Laser Breath!!! > First, I have NEVER seen ANY video magazine give any credit to the LV format. > Second, What is listed in a magazine is NEVER correct. > Of the titles that you have named, I own four of them on Laser Disc. And now for a bit of light on the subject. The video mag listings are for what was issued that month. This year there have been long lead times on disk production, and so laserdisks have been lagging tapes by a couple of months. (For example, I finally got "The Last Starfighter" this month; it's been on tape since before Christmas.) When the disk is issued, you'll see a note that makes you think the movie is only available on disk. The video editorial staffs would do well to consolidate these listings to reflect the history of the software on various media. I own both a laserdisk player and a VCR. I used to buy movies on tape, but no more. The sound on laserdisk is great, the picture is much better (laserdisk holds more scan lines per frame than does tape), and the movies are MUCH cheaper ... typically $30 versus $60. Nevertheless, there ARE movies out on tape which are not on disk. Tape production has a low up-front cost and a high per-unit cost, while disks are the opposite, so it doesn't pay to run a batch of disks that won't sell big. -=- Andrew Klossner (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew) [UUCP] (orca!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay) [ARPA]
boyajian@akov68.DEC (05/11/85)
What the Hell is all this crap about Videophiles? The impression I get from
the original poster is "my machine is better than your machine! nyah! nyah!"
A true Videophile would have a VHS Hi-Fi, a Beta Hi-Fi, AND a combo CD/LV
player. Not to mention a 6' projection tv, a satellite dish, processors,
video-amps, etc.
One of these days, I'll get around to buying a LV player --- most likely the
combo player mentioned above. In the meantime, I'm pleaseder than s**t about
my Sony SL-2700 Beta Hi-Fi.
Give me a break.
--- jayembee (Jerry Boyajian, DEC, Maynard, MA)
UUCP: {decvax|ihnp4|allegra|ucbvax|...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-akov68!boyajian
ARPA: boyajian%akov68.DEC@DECWRL.ARPAbrown@nicmad.UUCP (05/11/85)
> I own both a laserdisk player and a VCR. I used to buy movies on tape, > but no more. The sound on laserdisk is great, the picture is much > better (laserdisk holds more scan lines per frame than does tape), and > the movies are MUCH cheaper ... typically $30 versus $60. Sorry to tell you this, but the number of scan lines of all NTSC format machines is 525 (262.5/field). What you are thinking of is the horizontal resolution, which is the maximum number of vertical lines that could be drawn on the tv screen and still be able to see them. -- |------------| | |-------| o| JVC HRD725U Mr. Video | | | o| |--------------| | | | | | |----| o o o | | |-------| O| |--------------| |------------| VHS Hi-Fi (the only way to go) (!ihnp4!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!brown)
dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (05/12/85)
In article <1491@orca.UUCP> andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) writes: > >I own both a laserdisk player and a VCR. I used to buy movies on tape, >but no more. The sound on laserdisk is great, the picture is much >better (laserdisk holds more scan lines per frame than does tape), and >the movies are MUCH cheaper ... typically $30 versus $60. A factual correction: The number of scan lines in a video frame is determined solely by the ratio between horizontal and vertical sweep frequencies and the length of the vertical blanking period, all of which are fixed by the NTSC standard. The only way to get poorer vertical resolution than this is to use equipment that isn't working properly. The place video equipment differs is in video bandwidth, which determines the number of VERTICAL lines that can be displayed and still be seen as lines. Laser disks are presumably better here, and the end result is a sharper picture. But the number of scan lines is the same.
rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES) (05/13/85)
[] Atta Boy, Jerry, Give em hell! Us Beta-Hi-Fi lovers need to tell it like it is! -- "It's the thought, if any, that counts!" Dick Grantges hound!rfg