[El Indio]

Anyone sensible into hi-fi soon comes to the conclusion that a mid priced component actually sounds better than a high end component. This is not surprising since mid end components use the best electronics available on the planet, where as high end uses obscure electronics in order to differentiate themselves. The magazines perpetuate the myth that high end sounds better in order to sell copies.


I am getting the impression from reading between the lines of peoples posts that HT projectors run the same way. If you are running non high def material in a light controlled room then the AE100 gives a picture about as good as it gets with todays technology.


DLP projectors suffer many problems like rainbows, temporal dithering, the inability to show smooth fast action, high video noise and filtering - not surprising when you understand how the technology works. BTW. I've seen a film in a DLP cinema and it was crap compared with standard film.


LCOS is the direct equivalent to high end hi-fi. Every normal person who sees them in action think they stink, where as every person stupid enough to believe the myth and buys one, then has to defend their purchase to death with comments like 'yeah well, you never saw it set up properly'


CRT I can believe give the best image quality all things considered (after all, I would not give up my CRT monitor). But why is it that every CRT owner I read is itching to swap across to a digital technology?


Bottom line is this. There is no magical technology out there. The bulb in the AE100 is no different to one in a $4000 pj. The panel, prisms and lens are state of the art manufacturing (resolution excluded). The pj can be fed from a HTPC so the scaler is irrelevant. And there ain't a whole lot more to a PJ.


El

 

[Namlemez]

Definitely NOT.


I've a firm believer that people spend ridiclious amounts on speakers for no good reason.


On the other hand, video projection is a much less refined area than speaker technology. It is supremely easy to see the difference between most any resolution projector.


As you go towards the top-end, I believe you do start getting inefficient in that a dollar doesn't pay you a huge amount. OTOH, I've seen stuff like D-ILA or a Sony G90 and while I can't afford it, I see why it is so much better.

 

[Wireless]

Are you telling me you can't hear the difference between a pair of Paradigm 100s (no offense to Paradigm owners) and a pair of Wilson X-1 Grand Slamms?

 

[JeffDM]

Are you trying to defend the AE-100? It seems that you are doing the very same things that you accuse other "camps" of doing, casting aspersions to other points of view (and even insulting them!) while not being honest about your own.


I don't think anyone is saying that the AE-100s are bad as in poor quality, just that the posts concerning them are multiplying quicker than rabbits, a lot in part to its cost.


You have stated the downside of every projection technology except LCD, certainly didn't note that the screen door can be a significant down side, and that the contrast ratio of LCD isn't as good as other technolgies can get relatively easily.


As for your accusation of LCOS being sucky, have any of those people that thought they stink seen them in a calibrated state? I don't have one and haven't seen one, but if the CR claims of LCOS before and after DILARD are true, then I would think that there is merit to these devices. I don't see why the people that have had then tweaked would consistently lie so much about actual measured numbers,


As for CRT, picture quality isn't everything, but to some enthusiasts are willing to sacrafice a lot to get that picture quality that CRTs are claimed to have.


Right now I have an LCD, someday I would like to try out a DLP, an LCOS and a CRT unit as well. One thing to keep in mind is that a good unit of any particular technology can easily outshine a bad one of any other technology.

 

[mike_decock]

Quote:

Originally posted by El Indio Anyone sensible into hi-fi soon comes to the conclusion that a mid priced component actually sounds better than a high end component. El

Gotta disagree with you here. When it comes to Mid-Fi vs. Hi-Fi, I say you get about 90% of the quality for 10% of the price. Maybe 80/20 is closer, but you know what I mean. It's the laws of diminishing returns. Increasingly smaller improvements for increasingly larger prices.


Now, ignoring the occasions where X component for $2,000 is better than Y component for $5,000, I think the price/performance curve is pretty consistent across manufacturers.


You also have to consider that subjectiveness of what "sounds" better. Mid priced components tend to have overstated bass and rolled-off highs. If you like the sound better, then buy it and be happy with it.


High end components are built with the goal of reproducing as closely as possible the source material. Many people will criticize a high end pair of speakers saying that there's "no bass" and it's "very bright". This may actually be a more accurate reproduction of the source material. If you like that sound better, then buy it and be happy with it.


I don't understand why people attack those willing to pay more for something they believe sounds better.


-Mike...


P.S. I don't own a high end system (by my standards) but would like to own some of the more esoteric equipment out there. It's very pretty .

 

[AnthonyP]

El Indio:
Quote:

I am getting the impression from reading between the lines of peoples posts that HT projectors run the same way.

have you seen any projector or just rambling for no reason?



Jeff, nice post
Quote:

One thing to keep in mind is that a good unit of any particular technology can easily outshine a bad one of any other technology.

I try to make that point every time someone asks what is better DLP or LCD

 

[Namlemez]

I own Paradigms...good choice there Wireless


I'm sure you could tell the difference between a Wilson speaker and a Paradigm. Their non-box shape is a good idea (Norh does it too but at a _little_ lower price) price.


What I meant to say was the difference between projectors is much more noticeable and reasonable. While it isn't an "efficient" upgrade (more bang/$), buying a nicer projector isnt unreasonably more.


On the other hand, going from Paradigms to a Wilson does not give the performance gain vs $ that a say, an AE100 to a D-ILA. At some point maybe the projectors become unreasonably priced and no one buys them for the home (stuff used in the movie theaters.)


It comes down to simple economics.


Home Audio: Luxury products with luxury style marketing and luxury sized MARGINS for the dealers.


Projectors: Much more a supply / demand commodity type market. Businesses don't care about a brand name or "a tighter soundstage." They want something that actually works better and is cheaper, and it shows in the distribution of goods in the market.

 

[Mr.Poindexter]

Let's see here:


Speakers - I own Infinity IRS Betas, which are not anywhere near low end or even mid fi. Retailed for $12,000/pair. I compared them to the Genesis 1.1, which was designed by the same person, Arnie Nudell. I used to think my IRS Betas were amazing, but there is absolutely no comparison between the Betas and the Genesis 1.1 (retail $135,000). I cannot justify spending $135,000 for a new pair of speakers, but would love to pick them up used when they hit my price point, which may or may not ever happen. Still, it was not hard to hear a difference. If somebody cannot hear the difference between a full range speaker with great design work and bookshelf crap, then it is their hearing that is not working right.


Projectors - I had digital - an NEC LT150. I went to CRT with the NEC XG-110LC. The jumps go each way. I will keep the digital for protability and to show outdoor movies, but the CRT is staying for a long time.


El Indio, you are a troll of sorts. You have 3 posts to your credit and I would gather that you probably haven't seen/heard most of what you are bashing. Perhaps you should actually see/hear some of these things prior to bashing them and calling people stupid, which only removes all doubt as to what type of person you are...


I have not seen the AE100, but I have seen an LCD, the Sanyo PLV-60, which is 1366x768, I believe. The lumens were impressive, resolution was great, blacks sucked. DLP blacks were much better, but you can see rainbows. LCD technology is much more mature than DLP, so I feel that there is little improvement to be seen in black level. DLP is much newer technology, so there will still be some major advances in the delivery of that tech that will improve on its faults until it reached a point like the CRT's are in. We will see no improvements in CRT technology now, or if there is, it will be minor tweaks and such. The return for R&D money is not in CRT any longer, but in digital. Still, CRT is the king and will remain there for at least a few years.


OH, and the AE100 will not give you the best picture out there. It merely gives a good picture at a phenomenal price, which makes it a great value. A used CRT will give you a phenomenal picture at a good price, which also makes it a great value.

 

[Pultzar]

High end audio components (amps, CD players, etc) will probably sound about the same as a mid-fi component as long as they are being driven within their usable range. Of course the high end component should be made better.


High end speakers (don't confuse this necessarily with high price) should sound better than mid-fi speakers. Mid-fi makes compromises on build materials, drivers, size, weight etc. A true high end speaker should not make these compromises, and thus the price goes up. A mid-fi speaker with a nice finish does not mean "high end" to me.

 

[Shawn O]

Guys,


I'm closing this thread.It's only going to deteriorate.El Indio,you are casting dispersions which will upset alot of people.


Shawn