The Avengers 3D (Blu-ray) Official AVSForum Review - Page 2

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

Ok, so a follow up to my earlier post. My viewing last night was primarily a video viewing as it was not in my theater room so I can't speak to sound. However, the video impact of The Avengers is...as I said before, Wow! I often found myself focusing on details apart from the movie, like the details in Loki's cloak or Furry's beard among many other things. I said earlier it was almost a distraction and this is what I was referring to. But what really stood out for me was how everything looked almost like a stage production. It was a really interesting effect, one that I have never experienced before. I don't say this to suggest that things looked fake necessarily, just not a normal studio film look. I felt it really brought me into the movie and they did a great job giving it a comic book look but not in a flamboyant way, if that makes sense. Anyone else with this feel?

Originally Posted by dan4081 

Yes, almost exactly!
Youre post really hit a nerve because that is the same feeling I got and didnt really know how to describe it.
All in all an impressive movie.

Originally Posted by Ralph Potts 

Greetings,
Gentlemen, fear not, the video quality is excellent and essentially representative of what I saw in the theater. There were no egregious deductions. Besides the difference between a 90 and reference quality on my rating scale is minmial
Sit back and enjoy one of the best Blu-ray release of the year..
Regards,

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

I suggest giving it a viewing before putting too much weight on the video rating. Maybe it's just me, my eyes and my equipment but there is nothing to me remotely disappointing video-wise with this release.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

I suggest giving it a viewing before putting too much weight on the video rating. Maybe it's just me, my eyes and my equipment but there is nothing to me remotely disappointing video-wise with this release.

Originally Posted by pokekevin 

Audio wasn't bad. Definitely good but not great imho.

Originally Posted by pokekevin 

Audio wasn't bad. Definitely good but not great imho.

Originally Posted by Toe 

Agreed. Even without seeing the nasty 30hz filter in the charts, I could tell the extension was not there on this track in relation to other tracks I have heard in my room like Battle LA, Tron, WotW, Cloverfield, TIH, Hannah, etc.......A lot of the LFE was very similar as well and this might also be the by-product of the 30hz filter. My subs and Buttkickers were just not pushed with the Avengers like they are with the better and best LFE tracks out there like the ones mentioned above. I watched Cabin in the Woods right after Avengers yesterday and that LFE track had noticeably better extension, output and variety. TIH is a natural comparison as well considering the Hulk is in this movie and there is no contest there.....TIH kills this track in every aspect as far as LFE is concerned (and otherwise). Having said that, I still enjoyed this track a lot from a LFE perspective and otherwise. This movie is loaded with bass and it hits pretty hard as well. Would love to hear it without the filter!
The rest of the track was very good as well, but not quite reference IMO. Reference surround work are tracks like Avatar, TIH, Hellboy 2, Transformers Dark of the Moon, etc......Avengers was a notch below these type tracks, but again still very good if not quite reference IMO.
I thought the 2d video was reference however and I was very impressed from that perspective! This was the first movie I watched with a Darbee in the chain though, so that might have something to do with it.
Next watch I will check out the 3d. Hope my RS45 does not ghost to badly with it.

Originally Posted by UGAd13 

got the 2D blu-ray on Tuesday in the mail from Netflix... can't wait to watch it this weekend!!! I didn't see it in the theaters so I'm stoked.
great review, as always.

Originally Posted by wingnut4772 

I agree the audio was good but not reference and not 100 in my book. Still a very enjoyable movie.

Originally Posted by gbaby 

It really depends upon the frequency response of your sub. I was at a friend's home last night and he pop in the movie, but due to his weak sub, I felt I was missing more than 50% of the low frequency material.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

No worries. This is what it sounded like......
BOOOOOOOMMMMMMM
Except for Widow's gun, which sounded like.....
Pop pop pop pop

Originally Posted by gbaby 

It really depends upon the frequency response of your sub. I was at a friend's home last night and he pop in the movie, but due to his weak sub, I felt I was missing more than 50% of the low frequency material.

Originally Posted by TMcG 

I don't understand how Ralph can get an accurate impression of the audio quality when his room completely lacks any acoustic treatment and the positioning of the front channel speakers is mediocre at best - the left and right speakers are far too close together and actually encroach on the screen's viewing area. The center channel is very low, not angled and the upper frequency drivers are not on the same plane as the tower speakers. And if you have two subwoofers I have seen many, many professional recommendations to put one sub dead center on the front wall and a second dead center on the rear wall OR to put the subs on either side of the center channel speaker. In Ralph's setup one is in the front left corner and the other is in the back rear.
I trust that there are good, solid production values in this highly anticipated disc but quite frankly don't understand how the quality of the sound can be identified let alone graded for publication given the extreme limitations of the room and the setup.

Originally Posted by Closet Geek 

Ears don't lie. Regardless of room dynamics, I would think that "sounds good" is "sounds good" by any measure. And in my room, this BD measured against other rated BD's in my library fares well against Ralph's ratings IMO. Perhaps if actual measurements are involved then perhaps that would entail a different level of discussion but clarity, bass extension and surround envelopment are pretty easily identifiable IMO.

Originally Posted by TMcG 

I think this is clearly a case of "you don't know what you don't know". Would you not agree you can have identical systems in two separate rooms that can sound COMPLETELY different because one has been acoustically tuned / treated and professionally calibrated to yield flat response and the other is just painted drywall and tuning by ear until it "sounds good". You could say that the untreated room sounds good....but until you hear how good the equipment can sound in a properly treated and calibrated room, you don't know what you don't know. It is well-established fact that the room has the largest impact on sound. You could have the best system in the world, but if you don't set up the room properly and have the equipment calibrated for optimal performance, you are doomed with poor quality sound right from the start because of the room - and no amount of room correction software can fix the problem. Video calibration is relatively straightforward. Audio calibration in a complex acoustic environment is not.
If his front speakers are too close together, how can he speak effectively on imaging and the movement of sound from one side of the screen to the other? If his room emphasizes certain low harmonics would Ralph call the output "muddy", though it is no fault of the recording. Since his room suffers from a complete lack of acoustic treatments, does the room emphasize or de-emphasize certain frequencies that make dialog less intelligible, sound effects less realistic and give a harsher sound to the audio portion of the disc? How am I to gleen any serious information from this review when I know the system setup is doomed from the start? Not that Ralph's write-ups influence my decision even the slightest bit . . . but is it even worth reading knowing the status of the room. Would take seriously a review on the quality of a projector's picture quality if you knew there was a halogen light set up just a few feet away from the screen? Of course not. The same holds true for audio.
Just as Ralph shouldn't claim that his front projection picture looks washed out and lacks contrast with the lights on, so to should he not make claims on the audio quality in what is an untreated and uncalibrated room. Until that time he is just another guy who says it "sounds good".

Originally Posted by Ralph Potts 

Greetings,
In general readers gauge my evaluations based upon their own experience with the same titles. When they tend to find similar experiences a bond of reliance/trust forms and they return when I comment on a title they are interested in.

Originally Posted by gbaby 

I am one of those readers, and I concur; Avengers warrants a 100 audio rating based upon what I hear from my Infinity Composition Preludes P-FR and my Velodyne HGS-18 sub.