Current trends in audio
 

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
Bit unfair on des. I used to see him live and most of the time he looked
better than on the screen. I strongly dispute this old thing of the
camera never lies. I think that very much depends on how its adjusted
in the first place.

Or the makeup he used on TV?

--
*IF ONE SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMER DROWNS, DO THE REST DROWN TOO?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Current trends in audio
 

On 22-01-17 12:32, Phil Allison wrote:

** So you did not read my link either.

Of course I did.

** The original ABX system did not allow instant, seamless changeovers.

You are confusing a general test methodology and a specific
implementation of it. There is nothing in the ABX methodology
that prevents instant changeovers, and your device is not the only
one that does instant changeovers.

In any case, your switchover box is irrelevant to the case
of comparing two source formats.

Julf

Current trends in audio
 

But often is not, as one clearly see when the director cuts from one camera to another. In this situation, makeup and lighting are unchanged.

Iain

Current trends in audio
 

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
White balance - and particularly skin tone balance on TV suffered with
the shift from illuminant C (the standard for the delta tube) and
illuminant E which came in with the PIL tube.

But even that is pretty good compared with that of the typical flat
screen.

It's the reason CRT monitors (delta gun) were used in racks long after
LCDs arrived.

Indeed, when I retired some 8 years ago, they were still in use for
location drama, by the lighting director.

But I dunno what is used these days.

--
*Great groups from little icons grow *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Current trends in audio
 

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 22/01/2017 09:52, Iain Churches wrote:
"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
Bit unfair on des. I used to see him live and most of the time he
looked better than on the screen. I strongly dispute this old thing
of the camera never lies. I think that very much depends on how its
adjusted in the first place. Brian

Yes. White balance.


More to do with make-up and lighting, the white balance on the camera
should be neutral.

If the 'white balance' was wrong on the camera, then any other guests in
the same shot would look the same as Des. And of course different cameras
would look different in the same show.

Lining up the cameras correctly was a daily task at the start of the day -
and with the likes of a chat show would be checked once more before the
recording. Modern cameras are of course more stable than once was the case.
But still need setting for the lighting in use.

--
*A plateau is a high form of flattery*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Current trends in audio
 

Johan Helsingius wrote:



** So you did not read my link either.

Of course I did.


** I was being generous to you - what a mistake.



** The original ABX system did not allow instant, seamless changeovers.

You are confusing a general test methodology and a specific
implementation of it.


** What I posted is a simple fact, I am not confused.


There is nothing in the ABX methodology
that prevents instant changeovers,


** So you like posting straw men too.


and your device is not the only
one that does instant changeovers.


** Please do tell.

I have not come across any listening tests carried out the same way as mine, anywhere.



In any case, your switchover box is irrelevant to the case
of comparing two source formats.



** Another straw man fallacy.

You fail completely to appreciate the principle.

In case you have the memory span of a demented chimpanzee - this is what I wrote a little earlier:

" Unless your test operates in a similar way, it has no credibility with or impact on any listener. "

The concept is how best to demonstrate when NO audible difference exists.

Something it pays to think about carefully.



..... Phil

Current trends in audio
 

On 22-01-17 13:15, Phil Allison wrote:

** I was being generous to you - what a mistake.

Likewise. Well, now I know better. Good luck with your device!

Julf

Current trends in audio
 

Iain Churches wrote:

"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
You know increasingly I'm noting that the young uns seem to be listening
to all their music on crap gear.

Interesting post.

It is not just young people, but people of all ages who
listen happily on i-pods etc to music in .mp3 format
the quality of which satisfies them totally.

Such as myself - iPhone output is digital these days, so you're just
looking for a decent DAC on the other end of it. Lossy at 320bps is
indistinguishable from non-lossy: it irritates me a little that the
standard is 256bps, but nothing otherwise.

The encoder does still matter though - the raw AIFF I get when exporting my
music from Logic seems noticeably louder than the resulting AAC after
compression and as far as I know I don't have any of the normalise toys
ticked either on encoding or playback. But lossy vs lossless is literally
mathmatically proved now to be moot at a certain rate.

For speakers I have my car speakers which are pretty good, Jaybird
Bluetooth headphones plus Comply foam which make them excellent, Audio
Technica MT-50x for when mixing my own music, a Space 360 - mono with
multiple speakers facing in different directions - for when walking around,
a JVC £80 iPad dock from years ago acting as a digital radio, and some 20+
years-old Paradigm standing floor speakers with a Cambridge audio centre
speaker driven by a home theatre amp. All fed from iTunes or streaming, no
physical media in use anymore. For computer use I have some Soundstick IIs,
from quite a while ago.

Works well for me.


Cheers,
Ian

Current trends in audio
 

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
On 22/01/2017 09:52, Iain Churches wrote:
"Brian Gaff" wrote in message
...
Bit unfair on des. I used to see him live and most of the time he looked
better than on the screen. I strongly dispute this old thing of the
camera
never lies. I think that very much depends on how its adjusted in the
first place.
Brian

Yes. White balance.


More to do with make-up and lighting, the white balance on the camera
should be neutral.


It should be, but often is not, as one clearly sees
when the director cuts from one camera to another.
In this situation, makeup and lighting are unchanged.

Iain

Current trends in audio
 

On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 12:03:01 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
White balance - and particularly skin tone balance on TV suffered with
the shift from illuminant C (the standard for the delta tube) and
illuminant E which came in with the PIL tube.

But even that is pretty good compared with that of the typical flat
screen.

It's the reason CRT monitors (delta gun) were used in racks long after
LCDs arrived.

Indeed, when I retired some 8 years ago, they were still in use for
location drama, by the lighting director.

But I dunno what is used these days.

I believe there are still delta tubes in use in critical situations.
They remain the standard against which everything must be judged - but
still come up short.

d