Video Asylum

Posted by Joe Murphy Jr (A) on January 28, 2003 at 13:31:09

In Reply to: which mags? posted by TA on January 28, 2003 at 11:03:47:

Who shall remain nameless, once said, "Well, I read alot.". But seldom magazines (they're for the pictures!).

:-)

There's usually more video discussion over at avsforum.com and the increased load times seem to indicate this (and I'm using DSL!).

There are several subsections to that site and one can quickly develop favorites due to the specific nature of those forums. There is also more manufacturer participation there, also. Often they will establish "guest" appearances so that you can ask questions directly to a representative of the company whose product(s) you may be interested in. There's plenty of info available and avsforum has a good deal of it. Just remember that moderation sometimes comes in the form of a stiff hand -- unlike here. I'm NOT knocking here or over there -- I'm just letting you know that what goes on at HI-REZ Highway and DVD-Audiobahn would not fly for more than a post or two. Sometimes that's good -- other times it's not.

CAUTION: RANT BELOW

When I "read" any of the mags (audio or video), I usually skip the non-technical stuff. I like to see pictures of the equipment, measurements, details, etc (sort of like Playboy).

:-)

That doesn't mean that I believe measurements tell the whole story -- but they do tell an important part of it. The other part comes from "your" ears/eyes in "your" system or similar one. Last time I checked, men and women were only made with two ears and two eyes that "they" could call their own. I don't think Mother Nature has changed this, except maybe near a nuclear waste disposal site.

:-)

I know some people are going to take this personal, but everyone is entitled to their opinion -- as am I. My opinion of "paid" reviewers is that 95% of them SUCK. All too many times I've looked at responses from *** plots (frequency response peaks and valleys + and - 5dB and more) and read the "highest recommendation/mortgage the house/sell your soul" review. How accurate are those *** going to sound in most people's listening/living room? Or how about a reviewer that said the violins played through this megabuck *** player were never "etchy". Did he ever hear a real violin? What good is the information from a "video" magazine when the reviewer doesn't have the facilities to test the progressive outputs of the *** player under review? How can a *** player get such a favorable review in one magazine when the same *** player fails or stumbles on the majority of technical video tests? Makes you think, doesn't it? And please remember, I didn't say that ALL reviewers suck -- just 95% of them.

:-)

I do realise that some people can't easily audition everything they might want before the purchase. My advice? If that purchase is an important or expensive one -- you define important/expensive -- is to either look for an acceptable audition/return policy or force yourself to get to an audition site that has the same or similar gear as you do (pack up the family if you have to, make a vacation out of it, have fun -- Fun in audio/video? What's that?). By the way, Disneyland/Disneyworld/the in-laws in North Dakota (North Dakota?!) make "wonderful" fronts for clandestine audio/video operations. Suit up! Move out! Uh, I mean... gee, I can't wait to see Mickey/grandma Martha... again... this year...

:-)

More often than not, if you make the honest effort, you will be rewarded with years of pleasure from that investment in time and money. And isn't that what audio/video is about?

* Please be advised that the :-) were inserted so that our HUMOR deficient readers will know when a smile/chuckle/laugh should be expressed (as excruciating as it might be for some of them).

:-)