Poll: Should Sony use DTS-HD Master Audio or Dolby TrueHD?

[Monkey]

Interesting, thank you for sharing your definition.

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by blujacket

Audiophiles don't have much interest in home theater. 2 channel,vinyl,and tube amps are their cup of tea.

WOW - you couldn't be more wrong blujacket. I recommend a visit to a local Hifi shop so you can see what's out there...

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

A serious audiophile would invest more on hardware than on software because it's the hardware which impacts sound quality.

even though I agree that HW impacts AQ, the rest is nonsense, what value is expensive gear if you don’t watch/listen to anything. A true audiophile/HT enthusiast will have both lots of content and good gear any one interested in one without the other is just a poser. I would not consider some one an audiophile if he has 20k audio gear but never plays any audio on it but just says "look how awesome and expensive it looks" nor someone with a cheap set-up and listens to over compressed MP3 from his collection of 10,000 audio examples (be it songs/movies/albums….).


PS blujacket is right, audiophile tends to be used for people that are into music, more then people that are in HT with an interest in audio.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

To put it simply Monkey...

A serious audiophile would invest more on hardware than on software because it's the hardware which impacts sound quality.


If someone spent $3,000 so far on blu-rays, and their HT gear cost $1,500, then he is NOT considered an audiophile...he is considered a movie enthusiast/collector.

BUT, If the same guy had spent $500 so far on blu-rays, and his HT cost $4000, he WOULD be considerd an audiophile.

I know a couple people who could spend all the money in the world on an audio system, yet not be able to hear much different than they would on a a sub-10k setup, so . . . price really has nothing to do with it, aside from just throwing around how much you spent, which you seem to love to allude to.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BStecke

price really has nothing to do with it, aside from just throwing around how much you spent, which you seem to love to allude to.

which is funny when he says 4k$ for an HT

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

which is funny when he says 4k$ for an HT

Exactly. Internet forum ballers are the coolest.

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

even though I agree that HW impacts AQ, the rest is nonsense, what value is expensive gear if you don’t watch/listen to anything. A true audiophile/HT enthusiast will have both lots of content and good gear any one interested in one without the other is just a poser.

I can see you are deeply confused. I NEVER said that an audiophile would spend $0 on media.....I simply said they would invest more on the equipment than on the music.

So if I spent 10,000 on my HT and only a fraction of this on software, it makes me a poser? Please explain your rationale...

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by BStecke

I know a couple people who could spend all the money in the world on an audio system, yet not be able to hear much different than they would on a a sub-10k setup, so . . . price really has nothing to do with it, aside from just throwing around how much you spent, which you seem to love to allude to.

That's great...I'm sure those people you know are tone deaf. That's the only explanation if they can't discern a $5k system from a $50k system.

Price has nothing to do with it?? That's a jealous statement and a smack in the face to those who invested a great deal of time and money on their theater.

I'm sure others will agree...

[neo_reloaded]

I don't see what cost of equipment vs. cost of media has to do with anything. By your definition, if I spend $15,000 on equipment and $1,000 on BD movies or music or whatever, I'm an audiophile. But if, with the same equipment, I have $30,000 worth of software (double the equipment's cost), I'm not a serious audiophile?

Presumably, people who really care about sound would also really love music or love movie audio or whatever - so they'd have a lot of content to play. If the equipment and their own knowledge is up to snuff, I don't see what other dollar factors have to do with anything.

[cembros]

come on guys lets not get sidetracked here, this thread serves a purpose lets stick to that

[Tok]

Originally Posted by cembros

come on guys lets not get sidetracked here, this thread serves a purpose lets stick to that

I think this thread has run its course. Not much left to be said and much of what was said recently has disappeared.

All you need to know if sourced from the same master at the same sampling rate and bit-depth dts-HDMA = TrueHD = same PCM output.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

That's great...I'm sure those people you know are tone deaf. That's the only explanation if they can't discern a $5k system from a $50k system.

Price has nothing to do with it?? That's a jealous statement and a smack in the face to those who invested a great deal of time and money on their theater.

I'm sure others will agree...

Smack in the face? You should try reading your own posts sometime. I'm not saying price had nothing to do with quality, but that your "logic" regarding the proportional cost of media vs. equipment is pretty ridiculous.

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by BStecke

Smack in the face? You should try reading your own posts sometime. I'm not saying price had nothing to do with quality, but that your "logic" regarding the proportional cost of media vs. equipment is pretty ridiculous.

Ridiculous to who?

The proportional cost of media vs equipment which I presented earlier was to establish a difference in spending habits of an audiophile Vs. the typical movie enthusiast. I can see it's pretty clear which category you fall in...

let me guess, the best amp you have ever owned is an EMOTIVA? LOL

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by neo_reloaded

Presumably, people who really care about sound would also really love music or love movie audio or whatever - so they'd have a lot of content to play. If the equipment and their own knowledge is up to snuff, I don't see what other dollar factors have to do with anything.

Well, oddly enough one "skirmish" from the lossy DD/DTS war was the fact that when level matched on higher-end equipment, people couldn't readily discern between the two.

/cue NBC's "The More You Know"...

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

Ridiculous to who?

The proportional cost of media vs equipment which I presented earlier was to establish a difference in spending habits of an audiophile Vs. the typical movie enthusiast. I can see it's pretty clear which category you fall in...

let me guess, the best amp you have ever owned is an EMOTIVA? LOL

Audiophiles and people without limiltess resources aren't mutually exclusive as you seem to believe.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

I can see you are deeply confused. I NEVER said that an audiophile would spend $0 on media.....I simply said they would invest more on the equipment than on the music.

So if I spent 10,000 on my HT and only a fraction of this on software, it makes me a poser? Please explain your rationale...

easy, most philes, means friend, an audiophile likes to listen to stuff a videophile likes to watch stuff. I agree an audiophile will spend an abnormal amount on the audio aspect and a video phile on video, but in the end be you an audiophile, videophile, cinephile or just plain HT enthusiast then you probably spend an abnormal amount of time wathching or listening to stuff in your HT. That means that you will also have a lot of content. If someone is an videophile and spends his spare time watching movies then chances are they will have a ton of BDs. With audio it is more tricky, someone could be only into music or mostly into music, but if they are into movies then they would have many of them because that is what they enjoy doing in their spare time.

I don't know if it will be more, much more, even or less. It also does not make any sense, you buy new gear gear jumps by a lot, but you don't upgrade gear every day, week, month or even year. But chances are that any audiophile (or videophile) probably buys content every week.

I don't consider myself an audiophile, I have a big music colection but I think (at least for movies) you need a balanced approach to gear, but I do try to have the best audio and video I can afford.This is the problem to what you said. I have over 500 BDs now and my guess I buy around 200 a year, if we use 25$ each (hey some like the ST 6 pack, x-men trilogy,TV series.... make up for the ones that where cheaper) that turns out to be 5k a year, using the numbers you posted, that would mean that if I were an audiophile I would have to spend 40k a year to be in the right ratio.

You also talked about HT gear, I don't know what is included in that but if you mean all gear then how do you know if someone is a videophile or an audiophile or balanced? and what is included, is it just equipment (player, display, speakers, receiver, amps, preamps...) or does it include other stuff (seating, sound proofing, design, labour...) even though some of these don't fit the traditional term of gear, they can affect what things sound like and how it is used and an audiophile will take them into consideration, you want good sound proofing or else you might need to limit what you can do (need to use DRC because others are sleeping or neighbours complaining) , and you don’t want sounds coming from outside interfering with what you are listening to. Audio does not care about the colour, but the shape of the room, what materials you use, how much and where you add sound absorbing material will change the audio you hear (bad nodes, too dead….) and seating, not only do you want something comfortable if you spend a lot of time in there, but if there is a headrest that ends up between your ears and the rear speakers then it blocks the sound coming from them. so let’s assume we have two families, they both get the same equipment, One of them, the guy is a DIY and spends 20k on the room but went with the best idea for everything and got an expert to come in and analyse the audio to put up sound absorbing material where needed, the second one went with a fancy designer/construction team that spends 50k but the designer decided to cover up and hide the speakers, use large wingback chairs because it looks cool, will that second family be more of an audiophile then the first. Even if we are talking gear with the traditional sense, would someone that has a 30k projector and a 500$ HTIB be more of an audiophile then someone that spend 20k on audio but has a 500$ TV? It is what aspect someone thinks is important and how important it is to them. If someone makes 30k a year and spends 4k on movies and has 4k in audio and 1k in video then chances are they are audiophiles on the other hand if that was for someone makes 1M a year chances are they are not.

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't consider myself an audiophile, I have a big music colection but I think (at least for movies) you need a balanced approach to gear, but I do try to have the best audio and video I can afford.This is the problem to what you said. I have over 500 BDs now and my guess I buy around 200 a year, if we use 25$ each (hey some like the ST 6 pack, x-men trilogy,TV series.... make up for the ones that where cheaper) that turns out to be 5k a year, using the numbers you posted, that would mean that if I were an audiophile I would have to spend 40k a year to be in the right ratio.

I can see you are a serious Blu-ray collector. I'm not sure I know of many people who buy a movie every other day of the week, but that's cool.

By the end of 2011 you'll have 1000 movies in your library...worth around $25,000. That's a very impressive number...far more than average. Being that your are in the top .006% of Blu-Ray owners within this community, my ratio couldn't possibly relate to such an extreme example.

I'm curious as to how much you have spent on equipment and what you are currently using. ( speakers,amps,sub, etc ) Hopefully you are taking full advantage of Lossless audio,... with such a huge amount of titles at your disposal it'd be a shame not to have a decent rig.

I say it'd be a shame because you obviously have the budget for a fanatastic setup.

[Polyh3dron]

I spent about $2000 on my audio setup yet have about 400 BDs and I would consider myself an audiophile.

[Krelldog1977]

Originally Posted by Polyh3dron

I spent about $2000 on my audio setup yet have about 400 BDs and I would consider myself an audiophile.

I would not consider you an audiophile for a few reasons...here's one:

You spent over $8000 on blu-rays so far...yet you are using a $350 subwoofer? That's no where near audiophile grade. It's apparent you can afford so much better...

I'm not saying spend $2000 on a sub.....but double what you spent will get you to the next level.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Krelldog1977

I can see you are a serious Blu-ray collector. I'm not sure I know of many people who buy a movie every other day of the week, but that's cool.

I usually just buy once a week but often it is not just one title, and then there are times when there are good sales when I buy a bit, I think the largest number in a day was 20

By the end of 2011 you'll have 1000 movies in your library...

probably more, you don't want to know how many DVDs I own. I don't have an unlimited budget, so when there will be 5$ BD bins I will most likely buy more a year then I do now. There are to many good movies not to buy more.

worth around $25,000.

who cares, it is not about the $ but the enjoyment.

far more than average.

average for what? I know many people that don't own any movies, they don't care about them, that is not their hobby and passion. HT is mine, I don't have a car (bus and feet are good enough), I don't take fancy vacations every year.... my money goes to AV

Being that your are in the top .006% of Blu-Ray owners within this community, my ratio couldn't possibly relate to such an extreme example.

but audiophiles (or videophiles) will by definition be extreme examples.

I'm curious as to how much you have spent on equipment

a small fortune, I usually upgrade something every year (but not always in the HT), my equipment in the HT has been averaging 3-4 years and after that it is moved into a different room.

and what you are currently using. ( speakers,amps,sub, etc ) Hopefully you are taking full advantage of Lossless audio,... with such a huge amount of titles at your disposal it'd be a shame not to have a decent rig.

yes I do take full advantage of lossless and my rig/room is decent