| Author |
Message |
NunYa Bidness
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Nov 08, 2005 6:55 pm Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:15:01 GMT, bv@wjv.com (Bill Vermillion) Gave
us:
| Quote: | In article <icqtm1pt9haq7nmjs56g5lrmer2tdo1oj9@4ax.com>,
NunYa Bidness <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote:
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 19:09:06 -0800, Randy
no_spam_please@my_address.com> Gave us:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005 23:18:06 -0500, "pezoids" <pezoids@hotmail.com
wrote:
Most people are slaves to the industry and will submit to whatever new
format emerges next.
I see dvds going strong until a cheaper and more pewerful version of video
I-pod emerges. One that can hold terabytes of data and can still fit in your
pocket and can be plugged into any TV or PC. Something that can easily hold
every movie and every cd you own with room to spare and easy to uprade.
Until then, I'm a dvd man...
This thread got kinda out of control.
As if a Usenet poster could judge such a thing.
I still want highest quality possible.
No shit.
From what I understand Ipod is
a lossy format, which I hope the public will drop.
There is a lot of lossy conversion taking place. The fault of Ipod
is that they want a subscription fee.
And who wants to
watch anything on less than 52" screen?
A bit biased.
But you know how marketing
plays into this...
You are about to make an opinion... I can smell it.
Betamax was better than VHS, but look what
happened.
VHS was better as it relates to price/value/performance.
The high price of Sony's crap is what caused it to fail. It is really
that simple. Price point is everything.
I think this boils down too is "education" ,
Better get started then.
we must help
educate the world so they don't fall into the VHS trap.
You're an idiot. VHS was not a trap. It was an affordable form
factor. Beta was a high priced, if not even overtly overpriced pile.
Had Sony set the price point right, they would have won the battle.
Prices for VHS were only about $100 less than Beta and when you
talk at $1000+ that is not a big difference.
|
The tapes were twice the price... blank, much less with content.
| Quote: | My SL7200 Beta cost
me $1495. The VHS units - then just coming on the market as Beta
had over 95% share - were at least $1295. Then the prices started
falling, but the Beta equipment was built better, and the Faroudja
circuits in the better Betas made them the choice if you wanted
great video.
However a vast majority of people didn't know what great video
|
A lot did.
| Quote: | looked like and used RF connections - while most of the Beta people
used composite.
|
And extremely expensive monitors as well. Curtis Mathis and Sony
were among the few that had composite inputs.
| Quote: |
I got my Beta in March of 1977.
I can hardly wait for HD DVD, and willing to pay for it.
Oh boy, you're right up on the video realm.
Don't buy CRAP, and they won't sell it.
No shit. Consumers have always driven the market and survival of a
given product. Look at the example above to see proof.
Don't spew crap, and we won't pick it apart.
And through the course of 'home entertainment' each new version
lasted about 1 generation - as many people didn't want to change.
|
Lately it is more technology based. Back then there was but a
handful of consumer goods. Stereos, TVs CBs, two meter... not a
whole lot else. When CCDs came into being, they were also expensive
for most average joe consumers.
| Quote: | That has not held true as much now - but the revolutionary products
almost always had a bigger impact than the evolutionary productcs.
|
The electronics industry as a whole has made huge advances since
then. Things mutate and advance much quicker than in the past.
| Quote: | The first phongraphs were accoustic and windup. In the late 1920's
electric recording and players - running at 78 RPM became popular.
And 25 years later the LP and 45 came in replacing the 78s. Those
was first introduced in 1949.
|
The reason was mainly advances in plastics technology. Softer vinyl
sounds better, and can be slowed down, yet still contain much audio
BW. We couldn't slow down the harder mediums.
| Quote: | Philips made a dictating machine using a small cassette that became
the main music medium replacing the 45's and LPs - something that
4-track and 8-track never did.
|
The reason that 8-track died is due to the fact that it is a flawed
mechanism. Tapes stretch, break, get caught, etc. Bad for the
audiophile.
| Quote: | By the 1980s CDs came out - and the compact size and the novlety of
shiny silver disks made them take off like nothing ever had before.
|
They took off because of size and audio quality. They were so good
that they even revealed flaws and noise in the audio masters used in
the studios for making the vinyl pressings.
| Quote: | When DVD came out in about 3 years everyone saw how much better it
was to be able to skip to chapters, take something out and put it
back without rewinding, etc.
|
Laser disc was around for at least a decade before DVD ushered in.
Once it did, it took less than 3 years for mass acceptance.
| Quote: | Each of those were revolutionary. The SACD was evolutionary and
never really took off.
|
Cost. of manufacture... and ownership. CD audio is already at the
max price. Nobody wants to pay even more for a small gain in dynamic
range. Priced the same or less than regular CD's, and they would have
taken off.
| Quote: | The HD and Blu-Ray are evolutionary so
there won't be the great rush among the average users to go
to those.
|
If the difference is a lot more than current DVD quality, it will due
to the fact that monitors got better, and were embraced.
| Quote: | I say that based on looking at the history of home
entertainment for the past 100 years.
|
Yet, the industry has learned some important lessons in the past ten
years. Look how quick movies go to DVD now. Look how the TV series
DVD releases have taken hold, albeit slightly overpriced.
| Quote: | If the often predicted 'movie on a chip' or 'cube' something so
small that you could carry several in your shirt pocket [for those
who have shirts with pockets] that would be revolutionary and
would gain widespread adoption.
|
There are millions of laptop hard drives out there in the "last
year's goods" market. Someone should make a "player" that has a port
for switching them out. Then, we could put whatever media we wanted on
them, from books to films, and collect a library of scratch free, high
reliability temporary storage devices. That would fit on my shelf
nicely.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:40 pm Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:15:01 GMT, bv@wjv.com (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
| Quote: | I got my Beta in March of 1977.
|
That must be a record for Early Adopter. Is it in Guinness?
I thought the issue that caused VHS to win was the recording length of
the tape.
I had Beta and it would not record any 6 hours. That was my first
experience with Sony and it has only gotten worse over the years.
If there has ever been one company that goes out of its way to make
people hate it, it is Sony.
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy!"
--Ben Franklin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WinField
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 08, 2005 9:38 pm Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
Bill, I always enjoy reading your posts. We can all quibble about
historical details and free-will versus fate as technology evolved, but
your experiences and memories shine through.
Hi-Definition DVD is fascinating to think about. At the moment, I still
can't decide whether to see it's impact/performance as 4-channel
quadraphonic -- or as a winning new format [re: chromium-dioxide cassete
tapes obsoleting 8-track format as the music medium of choice].
Back to the future - Regards,
Winfield
Bill Vermillion wrote:
{Editor Winf: give me the scissors, Max! SNIP-snip ...}
| Quote: | When DVD came out in about 3 years everyone saw how much better it
was to be able to skip to chapters, take something out and put it
back without rewinding, etc.
Each of those were revolutionary. The SACD was evolutionary and
never really took off. The HD and Blu-Ray are evolutionary so
there won't be the great rush among the average users to go
to those. I say that based on looking at the history of home
entertainment for the past 100 years.
If the often predicted 'movie on a chip' or 'cube' something so
small that you could carry several in your shirt pocket [for those
who have shirts with pockets] that would be revolutionary and
would gain widespread adoption.
Bill |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NunYa Bidness
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 08:38:20 -0700, WinField <doghouse@operamail.com>
Gave us:
| Quote: | [re: chromium-dioxide cassete
tapes obsoleting 8-track format as the music medium of choice].
|
Bull.
8-track died because the mechanism itself sucked. Its audio
BW/quality was worse than standard cassettes already. Had it been a
viable mechanism, it could have easily adopted metal tape as well.
The other reason it puked is there weren't many recorders made. It
was meant to be a playback device as they already knew it had problems
with wow and flutter, as well as tape stretching and other seriously
detrimental problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NunYa Bidness
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 13:40:21 GMT, spam@uce.gov (Bob) Gave us:
| Quote: |
I had Beta and it would not record any 6 hours. That was my first
experience with Sony and it has only gotten worse over the years.
If there has ever been one company that goes out of its way to make
people hate it, it is Sony.
|
I too do not like them much either.
The ONE product I bought from them that IS a good bargain and good
product is their 5 disc DVD changer. Nice and thin, Progressive scan
(or not) with 5.1 out too, and DTS, etc. Plays MP3 discs, and has
five disc position memories that do not go away. Al for less than
$130.
My first player was a Pioneer (whom I like a lot) at 3 discs and no
Progressive, 5.1 out though. It was $300 at Costco. Got the Sony at
Fry's. I have noticed they make good optical disc readers. My first
CD player was a sony portable where the battery pack option was bigger
than the entire player was... hehehe that was a cool little player
though. It was pretty expensive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Vermillion
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
In article <1571n15fgbvomu1b5vp6m51qjig18eorov@4ax.com>,
NunYa Bidness <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:15:01 GMT, bv@wjv.com (Bill Vermillion) Gave
us:
In article <icqtm1pt9haq7nmjs56g5lrmer2tdo1oj9@4ax.com>,
NunYa Bidness <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote:
|
[lot of extraneous stuff deleted - wjv]
| Quote: | You're an idiot. VHS was not a trap. It was an affordable form
factor. Beta was a high priced, if not even overtly overpriced pile.
Had Sony set the price point right, they would have won the battle.
Prices for VHS were only about $100 less than Beta and when you
talk at $1000+ that is not a big difference.
The tapes were twice the price... blank, much less with content.
|
Not when I got mine. 1 hour Beta tapes were $18.00. 2-hour VHS
tapes were $23 each. But the price per hour was cheaper on the
VHS.
What I did have was the 'auto-loader' that Sony sent out for a free
90-day trial, and then let everyone keep them. It was a mechanical
device with a spring and when Sony developed an electric device
they sold it and let us keep the old one.
That meant I could record 4 hours in a row on Beta I - the only
speed on the 7200 - with only about an 8 second gap when it
changed.
It was funny to watch. When the end of the tape was reached the
lever for the record came up, tripped a finger on the device, which
pushed down a lever to eject the tape, which came out and slid down
and a tape from above slid into the top load slot, and another arm
pushed the tray down and then pressed the play and record buttons
simultaneously. I got as much entertainment out of watching it
work than I did recording long things.
| Quote: | My SL7200 Beta cost
me $1495. The VHS units - then just coming on the market as Beta
had over 95% share - were at least $1295. Then the prices started
falling, but the Beta equipment was built better, and the Faroudja
circuits in the better Betas made them the choice if you wanted
great video.
However a vast majority of people didn't know what great video
A lot did.
looked like and used RF connections - while most of the Beta people
used composite.
And extremely expensive monitors as well. Curtis Mathis and Sony
were among the few that had composite inputs.
|
And the interesting thing on the 7200 was that it only had
composite outputs. The 7200A - the next model - had composite in
and out. And the timer was an external electric clock that powered
the machine up when the time came, after you had loaded the tape
and pushed down the play and record buttons.
| Quote: | I got my Beta in March of 1977.
I can hardly wait for HD DVD, and willing to pay for it.
Oh boy, you're right up on the video realm.
Don't buy CRAP, and they won't sell it.
No shit. Consumers have always driven the market and survival of a
given product. Look at the example above to see proof.
Don't spew crap, and we won't pick it apart.
And through the course of 'home entertainment' each new version
lasted about 1 generation - as many people didn't want to change.
Lately it is more technology based. Back then there was but a
handful of consumer goods. Stereos, TVs CBs, two meter... not a
whole lot else. When CCDs came into being, they were also expensive
for most average joe consumers.
|
Correct. But the technology adoption used to be a generation - as
people didn't want to get rid of their old 'stuff'. Now the
time change is faster.
| Quote: | That has not held true as much now - but the revolutionary products
almost always had a bigger impact than the evolutionary productcs.
The electronics industry as a whole has made huge advances since
then. Things mutate and advance much quicker than in the past.
|
It's getting the people to adopt them. SACD evolved from CD but
so many saw no reason to go with that - but the move from LP and/or
cassette to CD was evident - even to non-technophobes.
| Quote: | The first phongraphs were accoustic and windup. In the late 1920's
electric recording and players - running at 78 RPM became popular.
And 25 years later the LP and 45 came in replacing the 78s. Those
was first introduced in 1949.
The reason was mainly advances in plastics technology. Softer vinyl
sounds better, and can be slowed down, yet still contain much audio
BW. We couldn't slow down the harder mediums.
|
There were vinyl pressings before WWII. Those were 16"
transcriptions for radio stations. But they used a 2.7 mil
cartridge tip so at 33 1/3 RPM they only were good for 1/2 hour.
It was interesting in that when a program was on two 16" disks
the first part started at the outside and part 2 was an inside out
cut that you started from the label.
This was because the frequency response changed as the linear speed
under the needle changed. So making the change from the end of
side 1 to the start of side 2 was not as noticeable. If you started
both on the outside the frequency response change was quite
apparent.
There were EQ devices that changed the EQ during cutting to try to
overcome that, and I think there was a way to attach one to my
RCA 7B cutting lathe [circa 1947] but I never had that nor the
advance ball support to keep the stylus cutting depth constant.
| Quote: | Philips made a dictating machine using a small cassette that became
the main music medium replacing the 45's and LPs - something that
4-track and 8-track never did.
The reason that 8-track died is due to the fact that it is a flawed
mechanism. Tapes stretch, break, get caught, etc. Bad for the
audiophile.
|
The CompactCassette did a good job of killing it too. It was
thought of as a dictating only machine - but the world saw better
uses.
The interesting thing about the CC was it's design for
compatibility. The stereo versions had two-tracks close together
so if you played a mono tape - with it's wider track - you would
get sound out of both channels. The 4-track reel-reel had
interleave track and there were compatibility problems playing
a 2-track tape on a 4-track machine as the center tracks only
covered part of the other channel.
And Philips even had the specs for a quad device - so that quad
tapes would play in stereo on a 2 channel machine and in mono on
a mono machine. But those tracks were very narrow. I don't know if
they ever produced any but they did have the specs for them.
Working as an audio engineer I kept up with a lot of that stuff
then.
| Quote: | By the 1980s CDs came out - and the compact size and the novlety of
shiny silver disks made them take off like nothing ever had before.
They took off because of size and audio quality. They were so good
that they even revealed flaws and noise in the audio masters used in
the studios for making the vinyl pressings.
|
But they captured the imagination. I remember the local TV news
people being fascinated by the shiny silver disks - and that free
advertising helped. I saw my first CD player when Sony and Philips
introduced them to the world at the AES [Audio Engineering Society]
show in NYC - that was probably late 1970s or early 1980s. I got
in to see that as we were a SPARS studio [Society of Professional
Audio Recording Studios - where you had to have TWO multi-track
studios OR a multi-track room and a disk mastering room].
As to flaws you could hear those on master tapes and high-quality
recordings. And I have sone direct-to-disc recordings that were
later on CD. The CDs were made from master tapes cut as safeties
during the DtoD sessions. The LP sounds much better - and that was
because of the problems with analog tape. Disks are a much better
RECORDING medium - but the playback is touch so to get that same
quality in playback you spend gobs of money on equipment and
keepitn things clean.
I was reviewing a test acetate with another engineer in the control
room - and our turntable was hidden underneath the producers desk.
And about 10 minutes in I said "It's hard to believe we are listen
to a disk" He said something like "I'd forgotten we were".
But keeping things sounding great almost requires operating room
cleanliness and the last 10% of quality improvement always seem to
make up 90% of the cost.
| Quote: | When DVD came out in about 3 years everyone saw how much better it
was to be able to skip to chapters, take something out and put it
back without rewinding, etc.
Laser disc was around for at least a decade before DVD ushered in.
Once it did, it took less than 3 years for mass acceptance.
|
The first DVD player were pretty bad. I was astonished at how peole
could put up with the blockiness. It was a lot like the first
DirecTV broadcasts that weren't up to MPEG2 - sort of MPEG 1 1/2.
But in a year or so everyone got them under control. My first laser
player [actually my first two] were top-loaders with a real glass
laser tube. My later players were the solid-state players. And
my LD-WI took 2 disks to play 4 sides with only about 8 seconds for
the side and/or disk change.
| Quote: | Each of those were revolutionary. The SACD was evolutionary and
never really took off.
Cost. of manufacture... and ownership. CD audio is already at the
max price. Nobody wants to pay even more for a small gain in dynamic
range. Priced the same or less than regular CD's, and they would have
taken off.
|
But there was not the great advantage for MOST people of SACD over
CD. On a great system it's impressive. We had a group of about 6
people at a friends house [a great recording engineer and he calls
me his mentor] and a fairly well known DVD pre-mastering engineer.
With all the goodies - and with ugly looking studio monitors - it
was at least a $15K system. And mastering engineer played some
test recording of a new process that is not finished yet but was
amazing.
Digital processing let's you perform 'magic'. This device dried up
the sound. If something had too much reverb you could take it.
Or you could take the existing reverb out and add something better
or different. Audio is just like the movies - you don't know what
is real or what is manipulated by a computer.
And the prices keep falling. A 24-track pro device with SMPTE time
code can give better quality than the $75,000 24-track Studer I had
in the studio.
| Quote: | The HD and Blu-Ray are evolutionary so
there won't be the great rush among the average users to go
to those.
If the difference is a lot more than current DVD quality, it will due
to the fact that monitors got better, and were embraced.
|
As more and more people switch to HD and digital capable systems
they will be added. I see the big uses for Blu-Ray in data storage
as it will hold a lot and be cost competitive with tape. Once you
cross the 100GB threshold though tapes and drives become expensive
and the 500GB/1TB tape devices will set you back a LOT of money.
| Quote: | I say that based on looking at the history of home
entertainment for the past 100 years.
Yet, the industry has learned some important lessons in the past ten
years. Look how quick movies go to DVD now. Look how the TV series
DVD releases have taken hold, albeit slightly overpriced.
|
That's a marketing move. Since movies are now released nationwide
at the same time and then go to the cheaper houses for a few
months, if you bring out the DVD relatively quickly you can
capitilize on the memory that people have of the big TV ad
campaigns when the film was first released. The closer those come
together the more the DVD sales will benefit from the film ads.
But the studio have to decide how close they can get before they
reach the point that people will automatically wait for the DVD.
| Quote: | If the often predicted 'movie on a chip' or 'cube' something so
small that you could carry several in your shirt pocket [for those
who have shirts with pockets] that would be revolutionary and
would gain widespread adoption.
There are millions of laptop hard drives out there in the "last
year's goods" market. Someone should make a "player" that has a port
for switching them out. Then, we could put whatever media we wanted on
them, from books to films, and collect a library of scratch free, high
reliability temporary storage devices. That would fit on my shelf
nicely.
|
Things like that have been predicted for at least the last 25 years
- but only now are we getting closer.
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Vermillion
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
In article <4370aa0a.9056109@news-server.houston.rr.com>,
Bob <spam@uce.gov> wrote:
| Quote: | On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 02:15:01 GMT, bv@wjv.com (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
I got my Beta in March of 1977.
That must be a record for Early Adopter. Is it in Guinness?
|
No - the 7200 came out in 1976 as a stand-alone. Prior to that the
transport was in a wooden console that came with a built-in 19"
Sony color TV. I think that was a $2500 unit. Far out of my price
range. I don't know why Sony's marketing didn't put out a separate
unit earlier. If they had VHS might never had made the grade, as
the only competition for Sony at that time was the Sanyo V-Cord and
the Quasar Great Time Machine - which had cartridges that were more
ungainly than a U-Matic. It had a little 'penthouse' in the middle
of the cartridg as I recall. I haven't seen one of those
cartridges since about 1985 so my memory is a bit hazy on that as I
never owned one.
The Quasar was gone before the time the VHS came out in the US. And I
think the V-cord didn't go away until after the VHS came out.
But for a short while there were 4 formats in the marketplace -
with the old Qusars still on dealers shelves.
The niftiest of that era was in my opnion the Technicolor machine
with the 8MM tape. Kodak also tried 8MM and bowed out before Sony
came on strong with 8MM for the camcorder market.
| Quote: | I thought the issue that caused VHS to win was the recording length of
the tape.
|
That was one. But shortly after Sony introduced their 2 hour
machine VHS had 4 hours. When Sony went to 3 hours - VHS went to
6.
| Quote: | I had Beta and it would not record any 6 hours. That was my first
experience with Sony and it has only gotten worse over the years.
|
You could get 3 hours max - on the later machines - but they were
limited by the size of the cartridge.
| Quote: | If there has ever been one company that goes out of its way to make
people hate it, it is Sony.
|
Actually Sony had many fantastic ideas and had a hard time getting
them accepted as they were so small. They pretty much made
affordable reel-reel tape recorders availing in the US.
For a great history on how it all started - with a couple of people
at Sony and going through the VHS read "Fast Forward (Hollywood,
The Japanese, and the VCR Wars" by James Lardner.
ISBN number 0-393-02389-3. My copy says 'first edition' and was
printed in 1987. I find that the closer to the real event that
history of a technology is written - the more accurate it is.
The history starts in 1945 with The Japanese Instrument Measuring
Company who had wisely moved out of Tokyo and escaped the bombing
raids of Doolittle. And when the war was over Morita joined the
company - and from just a handful it grew to what it is today.
Their management problems didn't help them out in the past 10 years
or so. But all the pro-equipment I used from them - and semi-pro
too has been excellent. There aren't many companies left that
have items to sell from $1.00 to about $500,000. Most have wisely
targeted ranges - as it makes marketing much easier - you choose
between consumer or industrial - but doing both is hard.
If your library doesn't have Fast Forward you'll have to search used
book sources such as abebooks.com or bookfinder.com.
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Vermillion
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:40 am Post subject:
Re: How long till DVD is dead? |
|
|
In article <dB3cf.59956$fE5.33632@fed1read06>,
WinField <doghouse@operamail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Bill, I always enjoy reading your posts. We can all quibble
about historical details and free-will versus fate as technology
evolved, but your experiences and memories shine through.
|
Well I started as a kid taking the tubes out of radios and twisting
screws to see what would happen. And I've been involved with and
worked around tech 'stuff' ever since. I the first audio recording
I made were on a Brush Soundmirror our school had. I was probably
about 12 or 13 at tat time. Later I worked in radio as a DJ,
program director, music director, and was desginated as chief
engineer at a couple of places. I've rebuilt pro-taperecorders
from the ground up. In 1977 we built an $850,000 audio studio -
that would take $3-$4million to duplcate today. Then I got involved
with computers working setting up large Cicso routers [for some
small ISPs] which weighed about 150 pound and stood 3 feet tall.
So with all that - if I haven't learned a bit by now - I'd be in
sad shape. The real trick is to learn something new every day,
always learn more than you forget, and live longer than the other
guy :-). So far I've been successful at all three.
So many people much younger than I have given up - but damn this
world is so much fun. I keep running out of time in a day. Last
night I felt tired and looked and it was 3:30AM. About 2 hours
past my normal bed-time. Got involved in working on some audio and
video editing. My son and his friends often call me with computer
and/or audio problems. It's usually the other way around.
| Quote: | Hi-Definition DVD is fascinating to think about. At the moment,
I still can't decide whether to see it's impact/performance
as 4-channel quadraphonic -- or as a winning new format [re:
chromium-dioxide cassete tapes obsoleting 8-track format as the
music medium of choice].
|
The first time I saw hi-def was at a SIGGRAPH a few years ago.
Truly amazing quality. That was first generation studio quality.
Let's hope nothing gets lost on the way to the consumers house.
Here is a bit of trivia. Chrmomium dioxide was developed so
that it could be used with the big Sony videe-tape PRINTER.
Yup. It had a lower curie point than regular tape. The Curie
point is the temperature where a tape will change magnetism
with whatever magnetic field is in touch with it.
So Sony build mastering recorder that had the helical scan the
reverse of standard VCRs. Then the master tape would be held
oxide to oxide with the chromimum dioxied - passed through rollers
with pressure and heat - and out the far side the chromium dioxide
tape would be a mirror image of the master - which was reversed in
the original machines. Then this would be spooled into
videocassettes.
This was taking a similar approach to the way audio tapes were
duplicated. And I worked in a tape-duplication plant at one time.
The master tape would be on 1 inch wide and would go throuh the bin
at high speed and then there were 10 slave reel-reel machine with
14" pancakes for 1/8" cassette tape. Each line of machines could
duplcate 10,000 cassettes per day.
The finished reel had low-frequency tones between the complete
album so it would wind through and a the tone would be sensed, a
machine would cut the tape and splice it to leader in the cassette,
wind to the next tone and splice the tail in.
I tend to work around things that turn twist flash and blink.
I'm just a big kid at heart.
Thanks for the comment - it makes me feel good that the posts are
read.
| Quote: |
Bill Vermillion wrote:
{Editor Winf: give me the scissors, Max! SNIP-snip ...}
When DVD came out in about 3 years everyone saw how much better it
was to be able to skip to chapters, take something out and put it
back without rewinding, etc.
Each of those were revolutionary. The SACD was evolutionary and
never really took off. The HD and Blu-Ray are evolutionary so
there won't be the great rush among the average users to go
to those. I say that based on looking at the history of home
entertainment for the past 100 years.
If the often predicted 'movie on a chip' or 'cube' something so
small that you could carry several in your shirt pocket [for those
who have shirts with pockets] that would be revolutionary and
would gain widespread adoption.
Bill
|
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in