Should I get over my prejudice/ignorance/snobbery for WAV and change to mp3?

[sarasin]

@M...

LOL...yeah... we seen all the funny pics regarding this!

Like the Cellphone Camera? Cellphone....and camera...held together with an elastic band.


We are innovative!

But yeah, it sux dude. You have no idea. I DL at work...where it is FREE!

But for home...it sux man. Best way to do it, is get a decent line and share it via WiFi for your neighbours etc and get them to pay you a few bucks.

Then at least you split the costs etc.

The SpeedStick Mobile USB dongle I have, is REAL fast....5GB can go in an hour!
21Mb\s....but it rarely goes faster than 3Mb\s.

[sarasin]

Storage is cheap....but the bandwidth to get your data back down...is not.

Google Drive - 100GB for $4.99/month.

[mostapha]

That sucks.

[dj matt blaze]

You know literally nothing about what you're saying. I was there. I set my monitor's resolution higher than I've seen any consumer LCD go. I am a photographer. I'm dating a girl who actually works in TV. I appreciate a legitimate dynamic range in my screen, and I like the color black. I'm not big on LCDs, but I've made my peace with them. HD video is something I'll never pay for.

HD video is the mp3 of the video world. It fucking blows, but it's marginally better than the cable tv we grew up with, so we're happy to have it.

The only difference is that video files at 30MP/frame and 24 frames/sec are legitimately too big to stream over the Internet. FLAC isn't.

Your numbers are little off. I spent 14 years in television and worked extensively every day with pro HD. SD is 480i 29.97fps. HD is basically 3 different resolutions, there are more but are rarely used. 720p 59.94fps, 1080i 59.94fps, 1080p 23.98fps. There is a significant difference between 480 lines of resolution interlaced at 4:3 aspect ratio compared to 1080 lines of resolution interlaced or progressive at 16:9. If you can't see that, time for some new glasses. To say that HD is only marginally better than SD is way off. There is also the matter of the chroma subsampling of 4:4:4 or 4:2:2 and it records at 440mbps standard or 880mbps high. Broadcast HD is recorded on tape. CRT is high resolution but definitely not better than LCD, (its that old thing with your brain playing tricks on you) and not even close to the capability of maximum resolution of LCD.

[mostapha]

CRT is high resolution but definitely not better than LCD, (its that old thing with your brain playing tricks on you) and not even close to the capability of maximum resolution of LCD.

I think you're the blind one. I can see pixels from a reasonable viewing distance on every single LCD I've ever used except my iPhone at arm's length. I couldn't see pixels on my Trinitron. And it actually made black instead of that weird glowing whiteish black that doesn't even look like gray.

1080p looks great when the diagonal size of the screen is about 8". Any bigger and the dot pitch gets so fucking big that it's just as ugly as anything else on LCDs.

So, congrats. You're probably part of the problem. Shoving HD down consumers throats and telling us it's better when yes, technically, it is better…but it's still ugly as fuck.

I'll wait for the next standard and maybe end up with graphics quality that I got out of desktop backgrounds and video games at the turn of the century.

[dj matt blaze]

I think you're the blind one. I can see pixels from a reasonable viewing distance on every single LCD I've ever used except my iPhone at arm's length. I couldn't see pixels on my Trinitron. And it actually made black instead of that weird glowing whiteish black that doesn't even look like gray.

1080p looks great when the diagonal size of the screen is about 8". Any bigger and the dot pitch gets so fucking big that it's just as ugly as anything else on LCDs.

So, congrats. You're probably part of the problem. Shoving HD down consumers throats and telling us it's better when yes, technically, it is better…but it's still ugly as fuck.

I'll wait for the next standard and maybe end up with graphics quality that I got out of desktop backgrounds and video games at the turn of the century.

Seriously?? I have worked with television engineers, broadcast technicians, professionals in this field that live and breathe this stuff and not ever has anyone ever said that HD sucks and looks like shit. Your opinion is your opinion but reallly, it doesn't take a genius to see its better. You sound like the old guys who refused to get a color tv because the black and white one is the same thing. I never worked at best buy, I worked in broadcast television. The only thing I see that is shoved down consumers throats and is nonsense is that 1080p HD is pure HD top quality when you can't tell the difference between 1080p, 1080i, or 720p. Those who say they can see a difference are the same ones that say they can tell the difference between a 320 mp3 and a wav. Its all in the mind.

[MrPopinjay]

The only thing I see that is shoved down consumers throats and is nonsense is that 1080p HD is pure HD top quality when you can't tell the difference between 1080p, 1080i, or 720p. Those who say they can see a difference are the same ones that say they can tell the difference between a 320 mp3 and a wav. Its all in the mind.

Surely it depends on the equipment you're viewing with? The larger the resolution the more obvious the flaws become? Or am I misunderstanding what these numbers mean?

[SirReal]

@djmattblaze. I'm one of those people that can hear a difference between 320 mp3 and wav and I disaggree with your statement wholeheartedly that it's "all in the mind" I also think Mr Popinjay has a very good point about image size and quality of a soundsystem for easily telling the difference.

[dj matt blaze]

Surely it depends on the equipment you're viewing with? The larger the resolution the more obvious the flaws become? Or am I misunderstanding what these numbers mean?

Kinda the opposite. The 1080 number is the number of lines. The more lines the clearer the picture will be. The letter i or p represents interlaced or progressive which means how those lines are scanned. A single frame is made up of 2 pictures of video called fields. Standard def is 480i. 480 lines scanned interlaced meaing it scans all the odd lines first and then goes back and scans all the even lines. Now this done in a 60th of a second. 29.97 frames of video per second which people round up to 30. HD has 1080 lines and scans at 59.94 frames per second giving you a crisper cleaner clearer picture. 1080p scans those lines progressively at a slightly slower frame rate of 23.98 which is the same rate as film. Progressive meaning its scans them in order twice, not like interlaced that does odd then even giving you an even clearer picture technically. To your eye though, you can't tell the difference, its too fast.

[dj matt blaze]

@djmattblaze. I'm one of those people that can hear a difference between 320 mp3 and wav and I disaggree with your statement wholeheartedly that it's "all in the mind" I also think Mr Popinjay has a very good point about image size and quality of a soundsystem for easily telling the difference.

Well the end result of your sound is only as good as your speakers. Its been said a few times about doing the blind test. The reason I say its in the mind is because you know its technically inferior therefore you think you hear a difference. I said this in an earlier post that I have literally had people complain to me about the quality of something and I tell them I did it over when I did nothing at all and they then said, oh you see, thats much better. I kid you not, I wouldn't change a thing, I just told them I did but because they thought they were gettting something better they believed it was better.