Home Theater View

Happy New Year

Everyone else is doing retrospectives at the end of the year...

Ten years ago, I was single, living in an apartment, and my home theater consisted of a 27" CRT TV, Dolby Pro Logic receiver, HiFi VHS VCR, and a cobbled-together surround speaker system from Acoustic Research, Yamaha, and an AudioSource subwoofer.  Despite non-discrete surround sound and letterboxed VHS -- probably the lowest resolution format for movies of all time -- it rocked!  Other than the lack of a laserdisc player, it was reasonably cutting edge. DVD, digital front projectors, HDTV, home THX, Dolby Digital EX, automatic room callibration, DLP and LCOS... none of that existed ten years ago.

Still, I suspect if you played a video on that system with a bunch of today's kids they'd eat popcorn and enjoy the flick.  Apparently, the same can't be said for video games (despite nostalgia and my long-held assumption that game play was better back when designers couldn't rely on graphics to carry the game).  Electronic Games Monthly did their own retrospective on gaming by gathering a group of today's kids, having them play classic video games, and recording their comments. This year's version (Part II) is here; incredibly funny stuff.  If possible, the original (Part I) is even funnier, if only because they had the kids try out Pong and ET: The Extra Terrestrial.

Happy New Year,

-avi

SED: Time to memorize a new acronym?

A blog quoting a Japanese source suggests that Toshiba is abandoning LCD and plasma and instead putting its display R&D into yet another display technology: SED.  SED stands for Surface-Conduction Electron-emitter Display, which, if I understand it correctly - and I probably don't - is an array of millions of tiny tube TV sets.  Advantages include many of the same claims made for another technology working its way through the labs, OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode - don't you just love these terms?):

• really really thin
• incredibly bright, sharp images
• more energy efficient than plasma
• a technology that [insert Korean or Japanese competitor here] doesn't already have locked up

I'm convinced that performance is almost irrelevant: whichever technology is cheapest and can be manufactured in volume will win.  Consumers have shown that they have absolutely no understanding of the technologies, and retailers have shown absoultely no capability of explaining the differences between them.  Resolution and picture quality doesn't even seem to matter much - consumers are snapping up EDTV panels at far higher rates than HD-capable displays. As such, consumers are basically buying these things based on depth and price. 

I'm sure that next week at CES we'll see gigantic LCD displays, enormous plasmas, and ever-larger OLED prototypes, and that we'll all be falling over ourselves discussing why LCD is better than plasma or vice versa.  But thus far, the bottom line has been: is it thin enough not to overwhelm a room, and, if so, how much does it cost?

-avi

Workable PC Convergence Demands More Convergence, Less PC

I was interviewing a custom installer about using PCs as video scalers, and he said something that applies, more or less, to any serious use of PCs for home theaters: the only way to have a reliable PC-based A/V system is to have a PC dedicated solely to A/V.  I've had several XP Media Center Edition systems in over the past couple of years, and that's certainly one way to do it.  The downside to Media Center PCs is that they're pricey if you don't need the full suite of functionality, and though they've gotten much better, they are still more complicated than a standalone ReplayTV/TiVo/iPod/DVD player.

But dealing with regular XP on my test PC has been a nightmare lately, proving the basic truth to the dedicate-it-and-forget-it ethos. Logitech was kind enough to send over a Z-5500 THX approved multimedia speaker system last month, so I felt obligated to review it at some point, rather than have the large box just sit in the corner, unloved.  But before I installed it, I wanted to run my regular audio tests on the competition - Klipsch's ProMedia 5.1 system, another THX multimedia system I've had for the past year or two.  I barely got started. 

Preventing me from getting consistent, accurate multichannel audio:

• Unreliable audio drivers for my aftermarket 7.1 audio card.  Even for just stereo listening I needed to set the bass redirection control manually three times.
• Random system slowdowns when playing back DVDs (it appears to skip a frame every second or so).
• Poor software design, specifically the bizzare placement of audio settings enabling 5.1 DVD playback buried four levels deep in one of the media player software's most obscure menu trees.

True, much of this is my fault.  It's a test box, after all, and I've put countless versions of video rendering software, media playback software, aspect ratio control doodads, music device sync software, DVD-Audio and DTS decoding engines, etc. on it. I also use the box for web surfing, finance, photo editing, vector graphics, children's software - you name it.  Somewhere along the way, the basic audio drivers and system performance got warped.  Given enough time and PC expertise, I can fix it.  But it's a clear reminder that the flexibility of PC-based systems can be in direct conflict with ease of use and reliability.

-avi

Are Furniture Vendors In Too Deep?

It's right before CES, and I'm inundated with press releases.  Bell'O sent over a preview of their 2005 lineup, and I noticed something that struck a nerve: like all furniture vendors, they claim that their stands are ideal for hot selling rear projection TVs using digital technologies (DLP, LCD, and LCOS).  They even go so far as to list a few specific models such as Sony's 60" Grand WEGA LCD TV.  Except that the stand doesn't match the TV's depth.  None of them do.  All the stands are at least 19" deep, and most are 21" - 24", while the new TVs range from 6.75" deep for new DLP sets from RCA and InFocus to 14 - 17" deep sets from nearly everyone else. 

This isn't unique to Bell'O - when I went to buy a stand for my shiny new LCOS-based HDTV I couldn't find any stands that were the right depth (I ended up making a short term compromise and just getting something super-cheap at IKEA, but that stand will eventually be replaced).

Consumers are willing to spend more money on shallow non-CRT HDTVs precisely because they don't stick out and dominate the room as much.  Why would they want furniture that negates the shallow depth they paid extra for?

-avi

DLP Ideal Display for Gamers

Joe Wilcox saw Samsung's DLP promotional tie-in with Halo2 for XBox and liked the notion but asks whether it could be more than just marketing.  Samsung does note that their sets offer easy A/V hookup for video game consoles (like nearly every TV on the market today) and digital image processing. But Samsung and TI, the makers of DLP technology, have really dropped the ball here, because it turns out that DLPs may be the ideal display technology for videogames, and I've yet to see any marketing pushing that message.

Here's what they should be saying:

• DLP sets are big -- the smallest DLP is in the 40" range -- providing an immersive experience.  You haven't played Halo2 until you've lived Halo2, and for that you need a display that occupies your peripheral vision.  A 25" set just isn't going to cut it.
• Even compared to CRT (tube) -based HDTV sets, DLP provides extremely sharp, well defined images.  For movies, some videophiles prefer slightly softer, more filmlike images you get from CRT or LCOS (aka JVC D-ILA and Sony SXRD).  But for video games, it's perfect.
• Unlike plasmas and CRTs, DLP sets do not suffer from static image burn in.  Playing a video game with a static image on screen (life meter, corporate logo, outlines of a car or spaceship "window") is the surest way to ruin that multi-thousand dollar plasma. 
• The other way to burn in a CRT set is to turn the brightness way up.  However, many games seem to demand insanely high brightness levels (try playing Star Wars: Rogue Squadron on a properly calibrated TV - the TIE fighters blend right into the Death Star background). DLP sets are blazingly bright with no fear of overdriving the set.
• Unlike LCD sets - which aren't currently as big as DLP sets - DLP has no problems displaying fast motion.  However, DLP "rainbows" are worse/more visible on video games than standard video programming.  Rainbows are where you see color fringes around fast moving objects due to the way DLP creates persistence of vision. Innovations in color wheel technology have helped alleviate the issue considerably, but TI can and should do more.   

People definitely make big $ hardware buying decisions based on gaming opportunities.  I remember dropping $3,500 on an early PC system back in college just to play the first version of Wing Commander (and that was almost 15 years ago).  VooDoo and AlienWare (and Dell's XPS division) sell gaming PCs in that price range today.  It doesn't seem too far fetched to pitch a $3,500 HDTV as a gaming display - or at least as a secondary reason behind watching DVDs or HDTV.  DLP may be the perfect display technology for video gamers, but somebody needs to get the word out. TI?  Samsung?  Anyone?

-avi

Secrets Debunks Its Own Review: No Audible Differences Among Power Cables

Here's an experiment/article that's going to echo throughout the audiophile world and possibly hurt sales of high end accessories. 

The online magazine Secrets of Home Theater is renowned for taking a geeky enthusiast's view of home theater and audio; they're best known for publicizing the DVD chroma bug, an obscure problem in some DVD players that makes bright colors in certain scenes bleed slightly into the next color. (I like to think my reviews and articles for Secrets have been a bit more accessible). Lately, Jason Serinius has been writing glowing reviews of CD demagnetizers and aftermarket power cables for Secrets, and the email and forum backlash has been palpable.  It's one thing to get worked up about minor issues that are clearly visible if only you look for it in certain scenes (enthusiasts like to get worked up about that sort of thing).  It's another thing entirely to ascribe audible powers to products that arguably cannot possibly produce those effects in any scientifically measurable way (enthusiasts like to argue about that sort of thing).

In a tremendously courageous move, Jason decided to take on the critics directly: he got two groups of volunteers, and, together with the Bay Area Audiophile Society, created a well organized, reasonably scientific double blind test of the expensive power cord he'd reviewed so positively.  Before he gets to the test results,

• Lots of HTML is used in a preamble that references Galileo, Quantum physics, psychoacoustic principles, and perception/reality constructs.
• Lots of HTML is used to describe the (solid) credentials of those who created the test.
• Lots of HTML is used to describe the test environment, how the test was conducted, and how things could have been better.

Bottom line: nobody could tell the difference between generic power cords and Nordost's $2,500 Valhalla cables.  Nobody even scored above 50%...

-avi

RTI Focused on Dealer Training

RTI makes complicated programmable remote controls, and they've hit upon a winning strategy - focus on their customers.  Brilliant!  (It should be obvious, right?) Well, there is a twist - one that many CE companies selling to the CEDIA (custom install) channel haven't quite figured out: RTI's customers are not end users, but the custom installers who buy the remotes and program them for the end users. 

The whole purpose of a custom programmed remote control is the programming, and this is an area where RTI can stand out (more on this later).  Therefore, RTI announced online training earlier this year.  Last week they sent me a new press release (curiously absent from their site) that they now have an entire downloable video course for their dealers.  I have no idea how good/bad/effective their course is, but it's a great way to reach the small, geographically dispersed custom installation community.

RTI doesn't have much choice - the remote control market is surprisingly competitive.  At the low end, there are literally hundreds of offerings sold direct to consumers.  At the high end of the consumer market, Philips lucked into the lead with their Pronto line, which are almost infinitely configurable and have generated a devoted cult over at http://www.remotecentral.com despite the convoluted programming interface.  Logitech is trying to broaden the consumer market with Harmony remote controls (Logitech bought Intrigue Technologies earlier this year) by providing the flexibility of a custom remote without the programming; users fill out an online questionnaire, and the remote programs itself. So what is left for custom installers?

At the high end, Crestron and others provide expensive solutions suitable for high end home theaters, boardrooms, and whole house automation.  For more affordable solutions, custom installers can turn to the high end of the consumer market - where the vendors are focused on the end customer - or RTI - where the vendor is focused on the custom installer.  Brilliant!

-avi

New Ways to Listen To Music

Musicmatch is one of several music playback programs for PCs, along with offerings from Microsoft, Real, Apple.  With a good multimedia sound system -- I'm working on reviews of THX systems from Klipsch and Logitech -- you can use these programs to listen to music at your PC.  The programs also allow you to transfer music to portable devices, or stream music around your house with various add-on gadgets (though access to copy-protected music is usually not available in that scenario). The programs now also offer access to online music stores for purchasing music (by track or by album) or renting it (subscription access to the entire library).

Musicmatch 10 is now out, and by combining their On-Demand subscription service with the remarkable new iteration of their AutoDJ feature, you almost end up with a new way to listen to music.  I'm sure I'm leaving a few things out, but here's my hierarchy of music listening options:

• Terrestrial Radio - several programmed channels in broad commercial categories
• Satellite Radio - dozens or hundreds of programmed channels grouped by mood, genre, or programmer's taste including a few relatively obscure niches
• Internet Radio - thousands of programmed channels grouped by any number of categories including geography, but difficult to quickly scan through the options
• CD - 10 - 20 songs pre-grouped together you purchase
• CD jukebox - multiple CDs you have purchased, but difficult/slow to jump to individual songs or create playlists
• MP3 CD/DVD - more songs you've chosen dumped on to a single disc. Shuffle mode works well, but playlists are generally not possible.
• MP3 library (on PC or portable MP3 player) - enormous library of songs and albums you've chosen.  To manage the volume, can create playlists, play music by category (artists, genre, etc.), or shuffle mode.
• Online music subscription - the equivalent of an even larger MP3 library. Like online music stores, there are various ways of drilling down through the library for music discovery.

Musicmatch's new OnDemand AutoDJ combines the best of having a large library of music files that you own with access to a subscription library.  It automatically creating playlists combining music it selects from your MP3 library with music it selects from the OnDemand library based on some fairly simple inputs.  You provide a quick list of artists (you drag and drop a few songs into the list to give it a starting point), it does the rest.  In my experience, it managed to create surprisingly good playlists of songs I wanted to hear, songs I didn't know I wanted to hear, and songs I'd never heard before but have now added to my rotation.  And this was with a fairly eclectic mix - movie score music (Elfman, Williams), blues rock (Delbert McClinton, Kenny Wayne Shepherd), Top 10 women-power pop (Kylie, Britney, Dido), and 70's singer/songwriter rock (Jackson Browne, JT). I didn't ask for Rolling Stones or Dire Straights, but it knew! It knew! Simple slider controls are provided for controlling the mix of your library with OnDemand, and how popular/obscure you want the selections to be. Fabulous stuff. 

[Update: Subsequent playlists also gave me a lot of Bob Dylan.  There should be a way to tag stuff you don't ever want to hear again, and it should learn from every time you hit the "track skip" button...]

Musicmatch admits that OnDemand users actually end up buying more paid downloads (to be able to move to a portable player, or just for permanence).  They can't prove a causal relationship - it's possible that subscribers are simply more likely to pay for anything.  Still, from my experience you can make a reasonable argument that subscription services are basically giant music discovery services.

-avi

NY Times Does the Impossible

The New York Times today reviewed upsampling DVD players.  What I found remarkable was the balance between making a somewhat difficult concept easy to understand for non-enthusiasts, while still being technically accurate.  As a bonus, it was a reasonably vigorous review, and even offered clear conclusions.  But this exception to the rule highlights just how bad a job the consumer electronics industry has done complicating the products and the jargon.  Even efforts to simplify things on a practical and technical level come in acronym form with compatibility notes back to other acronyms (think HDMI and DVI).

The industry as a whole needs to do a much better job of demystifying this stuff.  My brother, apparently, reads Home Theater View; his feedback on the column on Intel's LCOS fiasco/TI's direct-to-consumer DLP advertising?  What the heck is DLP, LCOS, and OLED?  Clearly, some of his confusion is my fault (and the expected readership of this site).  Still, my brother's a smart guy, but he can't possibly know from a discussion on microdisplays to buy one of these TVs if he doesn't know that TVs are the subject of the discussion...

-avi

Purpose-built HDTV antenna slightly better

In a completely unscientific test, Gemini/Zenith's high tech HDTV antenna slightly beat out Jensen's adjustable loop antenna in my basement.  With proper windowsill placement, both can pick up seven over the air HDTV channels, and neither can pick up NBC no matter what I do.  Neither of them get perfect reception: despite what you've heard about the "cliff effect" (the signal is either there or not there, as if dropping off a cliff), HDTV is not an all or nothing affair in my house.  Perhaps it's the grade of my street, the angle to the Empire State Building, or the fact that it's in a basement, but both antennas suffer from audio dropouts and blocky digital artifacts. Both antennas perform better in clear weather.

The edge goes to the Zenith for three reasons:

1. While actual tuning performance is roughly the same, the signal stregnth meter generally reads higher on the Zenith than the Jensen. It would be nice if that translated to more consistently artifact-free reception, but it doesn't.
2. It's easier to adjust the Zenith.  The Jensen tilts and rotates and has a variable gain control - a lot of adjustments, but it's impossible to know whether they're helping or hurting the signal and how they interrelate, so the extra features just add complexity.  The Zenith can be oriented horizontally or vertically - that's it.
3. The Zenith looks cool.  Let's face it, when you've got a nice big fancy silverish slim HDTV, loops and rabbit ears are visually out of place.

-avi

TI Taking Over Where Intel Left Off?

I was wandering through IKEA yesterday and noticed that Philips appears to have an exclusive on all the A/V display props; an interesting product placement ploy.  Even more interesting were the sheer number of plasmas sitting on top of $79 build-it-yourself furniture.  Plasmas and LCDs may win on decor friendliness, but not on budget, where microdisplays offer a reasonable compromise between the size of the unit and the size of your wallet.

Usually, microdisplays means DLP or LCD, but I've always been a fan of LCOS, which can offer the resolution of a digital technology and the fatigue-free experience of a three chip technology, without adding overly-sharp, hard edges to the picture. Having worked at Intel in a past life, I was wondering just what got them to pull out of the LCOS game after making such a big splash (promising, among other things, to bring street prices of large screen TVs down below $1,000).  Insight Media, a CE research firm I never heard of until I just Googled it, backs up Intel's official, "there isn't enough money in it," claim with some interesting backstory.  But the New York Times reports that it's all about chip yield - Intel expected 90% rates and was getting well under 10% - the same problems everybody else trying to build LCOS chips has had.  Well, not everyone:  JVC has teamed up with a smaller company to make the silicon backplane, dubbed this LCOS variant "D-ILA" and are the only ones to have a mass market product, and a good one - I have been impressed with their 52" HD-52Z575.  Philips also has an LCOS RPTV on the market, but it's a one-chip+rotating prism affair, and doesn't offer the same level of performance. Sony's take on LCOS, "SXRD," is extremely impressive, but for the moment they're only using it in their high price, low volume Qualia line, which would mask any yield problems they could conceivably have. 

Which leaves Texas Instruments, the sole supplier of DLP chips, in a great position, at least until plasmas or LCDs get cheaper to manucture or OLED or some other new technology is commercialized. BusinessWeek (subscription required) this week has a profile of TI's marketing efforts, as TI is planning a DLP branding campaign where they will reach out directly to consumers for the first time in a long, long while.  Like any "branding the technology inside" ploy, comparisons are immediately made to Intel's "Intel Inside" program.  But here's where BW gets kudos: they correctly point out that the success of Intel's program was based not on Intel's own ad budget, but on the comarketing dollars they spread around (and the tight program control they imposed on those dollars).  TI is not doing this - nobody's handing Samsung millions of dollars to push DLP as a technology.  So while I look forward to TI's Super Bowl commercial and note that DLP does have a lot to recommend itself to consumers, I'm also fairly certain that the branding campaign will not have an Intel Inside-sized impact on the market.

-avi