Not till 2012 at the earliest
www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/84448
Moved this out of the current F1 / motorsport thread as seems to be discussing more along the lines of HD technology than F1 & motorsport
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 15 Jun 10 at 20:25
|
That article confirms what an idiot Ecclestone is (which we already know from so many of his outpourings). More and more people have access to HD and the uptake in increasing dramatically. This current football malarky will increase the appetite for it, as people realise how much better the pictures are. (And, btw, I am not much of a TV watcher).
Coverage of Le Mans was mostly on Eurosport HD. When it switched to normal Eurosport the captions were virtually unreadable,a s they'd used a small font - which was perfectly readable in HD. The pics were noriceably better in HD, despite the quality upscaling that I get from the V+ box.
Even though the Beeb now lagging behind ITV on HD (in that ITV are simulcasting HD whereas the Beeb are still being selective about what they show on their HD channel) Ecclestone is showing a distinct lack of foresight in resisting HD.
He has and always will be be an idiot, albeit a greedy one.
|
He's an idiot who's worth £1.5 billion, and that's after the economic downturn and a divorce. He's waiting for a deal.
Meanwhile back in Britain, and no doubt the rest of the world, we have idiots who buy a HD tv and consequently think they're watching HD. Like Bernie says, you've bought a colour tv but it's still a b&w signal.
And as for the superiority of ITV - don't make me laugh. World Cup? Advert? Goal (missed)? I have heard many comments that much of their "HD" is upscaled SD.
JH
|
>> Meanwhile back in Britain, and no doubt the rest of the world, we have idiots who buy a HD
>> tv and consequently think they're watching HD.
And idiots who think getting Sky+ HD that everything is then HD. Everything that is standard definition is upscaled and only 37 channels (including the movies and sports ones) are actually HD.
I got the Sky+ HD box free but haven't bothered with HD pack as it would be a waste of £10 a month. And we obviously get BBC HD and ITV HD for free anyway.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 14 Jun 10 at 11:52
|
I don't think any of these people are idiots. I blame the industry for making things complex and difficult to understand, even for tech-savvy people. I know highly intelligent people who find it difficult to undertand what digital TV is, what the change from analogue to digital means, and why their old analogue VCR needs a digital signal. Then there is the confusion of that you do not need to replace analogue TV sets to accept digital feeds from digital set top boxes, and then there are digital TV sets which do not have a built in digital tuner. Lot of old folk now stick to watching just one channel because they find the remote control too difficult to understand.
|
A lot of chickens are coming home to roost. All those people who invested in large expensive HD "ready" sets are now finding out exactly what they dont have now its availble. HD.
no-one told them, certainly not the shops.
|
I don't think it requires too much intelligence to understand that you need a HD source (BluRay, aerial, satellite, cable) to feed a HD tv. But marketing, as ever, has got in the way and has complicated matters. The "digital switchover" should be "the analogue switch off" if you want people to understand what is happening. Then we had 2 flavours of HD; 720 & 1080. Basically anything to shift boxes.
JH
|
I bought my HD ready Panasonic last year, the reviews at the time were saying not to buy Full HD unless seriously into films, blu-ray or PS3.
Since I bought it, we now have LED TVs and 3D televisions so when I come to replace in a few years time will be inteesting to see whats available.
With technology items like this, when you buy you either spend a huge amount of money and get everything that is new and untried on it, or you spend less, know its got a bit of built-in obsolesence but let others do the guinea pig testing!
Thats what I do and FWIW, the HD that I have seen, isn't really that "wow" an experience for me.
|
well i spent less, and got the majority of the benefits of the new technology.
I doubt 3d will catch on. No 3d source material, and who the hell wants to watch stuff through glasses.
3d has been pushed since 1952, its still not - nor will it be, mainstream.
|
"3D" is marketing hype. If it were 3D I'd expect something like the hologram of Princess Leia in Star Wars (blah!) where you can walk round the back and see... well, the back side. What we have has been around since 1838 and is known as "Stereoscope".
The Victorian gentleman took out his camera, equipped with two lenses separated by the distance the eyes are apart and took two photos with one press of the button. Or there was a cheaper version where you took one photo, changed the plate, moved the camera along a slider and took the second photo.
But it doesn't sound as sexy or high tech as "3D" does it? Doesn't get the PIN twitching. So it's branded "3D", gets loads of hype and we swallow it. I think it'll fade away. I see that there is already a "cheap" way of faking 3D for films rather than actually using more expensive cameras and processing. Says it all really.
JH
|
If you get a good full HD source that shows off HD properly then it is a wow thing. But we're talking BluRay disks and then not everything is going to benefit that much. Most will watch standard definition most of the time and then some will watch 1080i broadcasts on Sky, Virgin or maybe the few Freeview HD channels. And lets face it most of what is broadcast again doesn't really benefit.
If I was watching football, it's the action I'm interested in. Not the ability to make out blades of grass.
|
And on the sound front there is a report at tinyurl.com/3yw7jqc which I've abbreviated below.
So no "Baby Driver" sound effects either.
"If you've recently invested in a new Freeview HD telly or set-top box, you're probably enjoying the World Cup in high definition.
But while you may be getting HD pictures, you may not be getting Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound.
Why? Because it transpires that not all the Freeview HD TVs and set-top boxes currently on sale are capable of transcoding the multichannel audio signal being broadcast by the BBC on its HD broadcasts.
According to the Beeb, transcoding will only become mandatory in all Freeview HD products after April 2011, which means there may well be confusion for a while to come. "
JH
|
>> Dolby Digital 5.1 surround sound.
But unless you have an external sound system to receive the Dolby Digital 5.1 sound, then you've got nothing to output it on. Most probably have HD TVs but do not have surround sound with it.
Sky+ boxes and Virgin V+ boxes have digital audio output for Dolby Digital. But you need a device capable of processing these sound signals to make use of them. My old Panasonic CRT widescreen (still going strong) had Dolby Digital surround and had a sub-woofer in the TV. Made it very very heavy. And obviously additional speakers for rear channels and centre.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Mon 14 Jun 10 at 20:02
|
True RJT, so you shell out for all of these goodies and you get... stereo. Makes me glad SWMBO won't fill the room up with speakers :-)
JH
|
I now have an HD TV connected to Sky+ HD and the in-built speakers of the Panasonic. I might get surround sound when we sort out the front room in the new house... after broaching the subject with the boss.
But in a semi-detached you cannot turn up the sound enough to benefit from the sub-woofer I suppose.
|
I can tell I am unfashionable here, but I have a home theatre system with digital input fed from my V+, all in a semi. Being a bit mutton I have it up loud enough for me, and I quite like the surround when they broadcast it, which isn't all the time. If I enjoyed footy it'd be good as you can hear the crowd all around you.
And while the V+ upscaling is fab, HD is fabber. Watched many hours of Le Mans 24h at the weekend on it, but they flip flopped between HD and non-HD and their captions were clearly designed for maximum clarity on HD, as they were nearly unreadable on non HD. The night shots in the garages (and from the cars) were very impressive.
Much stuff on HD does seem pretty pointless. I heard they had to completely makeover the Eastenders sets (and actors!) for HD because it showed that they were all getting old and tired. But some nature stuff has been spectacular on HD, and sport seems generally pretty good too.
|
An excellent HD demo if you have V+ is the Blue Planet stuff via on demand. That is very good and I get the BlueRay version is even better.
A lot is pointless. I miss my surround sound in some films. Personally I think the sound can make more of a difference than picture. Imagine say Lord of the Rings without the big sound track... Or Star Wars.... the list goes on.
A good Dolby 5.1 surround system plus SD is better than a big HD picture on an LCD with the poor speakers they come with. I remember when choosing my Panasonic that in John Lewis the latest Samsung's at the time had very poor sound/speakers.
|
>>....the Blue Planet stuff ........ BlueRay version is even better.
>>
My son bought this in the USA quite a while back and it is certainly very impressive.
He was surprised it was available in the USA but not in the UK.
|
>> He's an idiot who's worth £1.5 billion, and that's after the economic downturn and a
>> divorce. He's waiting for a deal.
>>
>> Meanwhile back in Britain, and no doubt the rest of the world, we have idiots
>> who buy a HD tv and consequently think they're watching HD. Like Bernie says, you've
>> bought a colour tv but it's still a b&w signal.
Apparently 1.5 million full HD sets were sold in the UK in the two months preceeding the world cup. Perhaps Bernie is an idiot after all.
|
And how many of them have a HD tuner or other live HD (Sky or V+) input?
1.5 million is small potatoes to Bernie.
JH
|
|
as my post said, 1.5 million FULL HD. So ALL of them had an HD tuner.
|
I am a complete technophobe. I'd been promising myself a surround sound set up for years, so last year bit the bullet and went for it, inc Sky HD...and got a mate at work (younger) to turn up and set it all up. He advised upgrading the t.v. because it was too small to get the full benefit of HD...he was right.
Cost a grand....was it worth it...You bet it was. Listening to F1 cars, it now sounds like they're driving past the house transferring from one speaker to another.
The first film we played (DVD not Bluray) had some unbelievable sound effects (Valkyrie -the scene in the desert when a Spitfire turns up and ruins the Germans morning)..I never thought we could get quality like that in the home...trouble was it woke the boy up, upstairs. Bluray would no doubt be even better quality viewing.
I have no regrets spending that money, wish I'd done it before.
|
MY first widescreen TV (Toshiba) in 1999 was Dolby Digital with extra speakers and sub-woofer. What a difference sound can make ;-) And a proper separate system obviously better.
You'd think someone would cotton on and write scores of classical music for some epic film scenes in Star Wars or Lord of the Rings or something to convince us.
Pictures are important but sound is too. 3D sound anyone?
|
The sound is everything.
One of the few pleasures one gets at 42 is turning the telly on in the morning and wincing at the trill, tinny screeching that is emitted, but then turning on the surround system and muting the tv and listening to that magnificent rich sound as it fills the room even at low volume
|
I'm not interested in 5.1 sound but I would like to hook up a decent pair of speakers to the tv and maybe a sub. Just to get decent sound. The ears aren't what they used to be but they can still pick out the better of two CD players or amps. Watching my first BluRay discs I've notuced that he sound is very "clean", despite the other deficiencies. I believe it's not compressed. The quality does vary from programme to programme with some American programmes in particular being very "muffled".
Trouble is the tv is squashed in a corner between a window and a French door. There's nowhere to put speakers really. The stereo is in the opposite corner, with AM/FM/DAB aerial leads magically snaking their way through the house to appear there. Stereo speaker are one either side of the fireplace, not very convincing with the tv a few feet away to one side. Maybe a sound bar. One day.
JH
|
Althoug designed as 2.1 for a PC, these sound superb. The little tweeters are very small and smart, with a touch volume up and down button. The sub can be sat int he corner behind the set.
www.kikatek.com/product_info.php?products_id=1281&source=froogle
|
Thanks Z. I want a new 2.1 set for the pc, so buy these (or similar) and "try them out" on tv and... :-)
They're not daft though, wives, they know these tricks and they put up with us :-)
TH
|
I've mentioned before about the remarkable Audioengine A2 and A5 speakers - surprisingly good sound from small enclosures.
Intended for MP3 players etc, they are still more than capable of producing TV sound of quality. See:
whathifi.com/Review/Audioengine-A2/
whathifi.com/Review/Audioengine-A5/
Last edited by: Stuartli on Wed 16 Jun 10 at 22:09
|
Thanks Stuart. Bookmarked for future reference.
JH
|
>>He advised upgrading the t.v. because it was too small to get the full benefit of HD...he was right.>>
That's why smaller TVs described as HD Ready feature 720 horizontal lines as there is no obvious benefit from Full HD of (1920x) 1080 in normal use.
|
|
But because many LCD panels are shared with computer LCD display, even some small screens have the full HD 1080 resolution now. I've even seen screens less than 20" like this.
|
>> But because many LCD panels are shared with computer LCD display, even some small screens
>> have the full HD 1080 resolution now. I've even seen screens less than 20" like
>> this.
1920x1080 resolution in PC speak
|
|
But this wasn't the computer thread ;-) And 1920x1080 isn't even a good resolution for general computer work either or to be precise an aspect ration of 16x9.
|
FULL HD does not mean that it has a built in HD tuner, it merely means that it is capable of showing a 1080p picture.
See here for an example of a full HD TV with no HD source included:
www.johnlewis.com/230906901/Product.aspx
Although John Lewis, being the good retailer they are, make this point pretty clear.
|
Richer sounds are very lax with their hd descriptions. you have to check exactly what they are offering.
|
>>(in that ITV are simulcasting HD whereas the Beeb are still being selective about what they show on their HD channel)>>
Not quite true. Quite a bit of it is upscaled.
|
F1 in HD - smokie
