HomeTheaterREview (no relation) is reporting that high end speaker maker Thiel will stop selling exclusively through independent retailers and begin offering some of its entry level products on amazon.com (story here) and indeed, a quick amazon search for Thiel products shows in-walls from $900, and standalone speakers ranging from $1200 - $3,000. Founder Jim Thiel passed away in September, so I'm sure there are some who are saying that Jim must have said, "not over my dead body" and the company waited until that was literally true before making the move. I never interviewed Mr. Thiel, so I don't know what his attitudes or business plans were. However, the company's basic position is pretty simple: the market for high end speakers has always been limited, but audio enthusiasts are aging, the independent dealer channel is shriveling, the recession is tanking custom installers, and competitors are moving design and production to China to lower costs. It would appear that Thiel is suffering from the same maladies as Snell.
The move to a mainstream, online distribution channel like amazon is definitely risky, especially since Thiel didn't take the obvious step of first segmenting its products into distinct lines for the different channels. Thiel will have to sell enough volume on amazon to offset the fallout from angry independent dealers and custom installers. It's not clear if this is a desperation move -- i.e., Thiel's sales are down enough that anything sold online is a plus -- or if this is an attempt to position the company for growth as traditional channels are expected to continue shrinking over time, and the online channel continues to grow. In any case, simply sticking products from a relatively obscure brand up on amazon will not result in sales; Thiel will need to advertise and promote the products through the new channel. I haven't seen any new Thiel ads or promotions, have you?
Not sure where I was when this crossed the wire back in April, but I was saddened - but not surprised - to learn that D&M Holdings shut down both Snell and Escient.
Snell was a high end speaker brand without enough brand recognition. Selling $30,000 speakers in a recession is extremely hard. Selling $30,000 speakers from a brand that only involved enthusiasts have heard of is basically impossible, no matter how terrific they measure and sound (Snell was famous for rigorously achieving ridiculously flat frequency measurements).
I suspect that the recession did in Escient, which made well regarded music servers, as well. Sure, some of Escient's functionality made its way into Windows and iTunes over the years, but the general collapse of the custom installation business was the bigger culprit. That and the rise of Sonos, which is dead simple for regular consumers to install, and considerably less expensive than any custom solution.
The problem with 3DTV - aside from the glasses and the nausea and the total lack of content - is that you need to buy an entirely new equipment chain. It is not enough to replace your TV with a 3D capable set, you will also need a 3D-capable Blu-ray player, and - much to the delight of Monster Cable - you may actually need to upgrade your HDMI cables to handle the increased signal bandwidth. The typical HDMI connection in most devices today is 1.3b, but you'll need to upgrade to HDMI 1.4a for 3D.
This has implications for audio as well. If you want to get the best audio out of your 3D content, you'll need an A/V receiver (or processor and separate amplifier) to process the compressed digital signal, amplify it, and pass it along to your speakers. If your receiver - like nearly all on the market today - does not have HDMI 1.4a inputs, you will need to run a second digital audio cable from your Blu-ray player to the receiver - assuming that your Blu-ray player can simultaneously output video over HDMI and audio over coaxial or Toslink outputs. It probably can. Probably.
There are also an increasing number of 2D devices that connect to your television via HDMI, and most TVs and receivers have a paucity of HDMI inputs of any kind. I have 15 devices with HDMI outputs, including game consoles, digital set top boxes, digital camcorders and several smartphones.
With that background it is entirely unsurprising that electronics manufacturers are rushing to update their lines with new A/V receivers that have multiple HDMI 1.4a inputs. For example, Onkyo just announced three new receivers with 7 HDMI 1.4a inputs a piece, including the 9.2 channel TX-NR1008. Of course, this comes literally three days after I bought Onkyo's current generation receiver with 7 HDMI 1.3 inputs, the TX-NR3007 (pictured). Now, I knew that updated versions were bound to be introduced shortly, and, having sent back all my review units, I needed a new receiver now, not in June ...but I still feel a twinge of regret.
Note: the TX-NR1008 is technically a replacement for the TX-NR1007, not the NR3007 which I purchased. I'm sure the TX-NR3008 will be along shortly, along with a new TX-NR5008 flagship, which is bound to have 8 HDMI 1.4a inputs.
CEPro reportsthat Quixel Research says home-theater front projector sales rebounded in the first
quarter compared to a year earlier, with
a 51% increase in unit sales and 17% increase in revenue. Woo hoo! Then again, sales are down consecutively from last quarter (the overall market
value was $72 million at the end of the first quarter, down from $97 million
in Q4 2009). Q1 sales declines are normal - most people buy projectors for Christmas, not the Super Bowl. Nice to see that the high end of the market is recovering overall.
Just a quick note today: Sonos just started shipping a new software update that adds some new Internet radio options, crossfading between songs, some new language support, new alarm settings, and the ability to use two S5's as a stereo pair. None of the features is critical on its own (though the S5 stereo feature is quite cool; when everything is digital, you can do all sorts of neat things) but Sonos already built the best multi-room component system. I sent back my Sonos review system so I can't test this personally. Sigh.
With the Sonos gone, we've been using Logitech's Squeezebox Boom (OK; needs a better remote, the UI is just "OK," and the Sonos is better for multi-room use). The Squeezebox Touch just showed up, and I'll put that to the test once I get some speakers for it.
HomeTheaterReview - not HomeTheaterVIEW, which is what you're reading right now - has an interesting take on how the home theater sales environment has changed since the recession, and how to cope. It's partly a pitch for online advertising, partly a manifesto. Oddly enough, I agree with the advertising part, but he's missing a few pieces in the manifesto:
Are boutique bricks-and-mortar A/V stores relevant in an amazon.com age? (Short answer: only if they're truly boutiques.)
Is seated home audio relevant in an iPod/dock age? (While there are exceptions -- witness the rebirth of vinyl -- generally speaking the answer here is, "not for anyone younger than 35.")
Are editorial-driven magazines (in print or online) relevant in an age of semi-pro blogs and forums? (If my friends writing for these publications are any indication, probably not.)
I’m thinking about upgrading my receiver. Currently I have a Denon AVR-987. It’s 3- 4 years old and does not have the current technology for blu ray. I’m thinking of going with a Sony STR-DA2400ES receiver. I have a 52” Sony XBR and a Sony BDP S-300 blu ray player. My speakers are Soundworks MC300 front/Soundworks original surrounds and JBL Northridge for the center. Any advice would be appreciated.
It really depends on why you think you need the upgrade, but I
wouldn’t do it.
You’d be surprised, but your current receiver can handle Blu-ray
just fine – rather than upgrade your receiver to a model that can decode Dolby
TrueHD, you just have the Blu-ray player do the decoding and send the bitstream
(PCM) on over to your receiver – it will sound the same whether the player does
the decoding or the receiver. In fact, depending on which Blu-ray player you
have, it may work that way by default. For example, Sony’s Playstation 3 can’t
send unencoded TrueHD to a receiver, you have to go the PCM route (the newer
Playstation 3 Slim can pass an unencoded signal, but, again, there should be no
difference in the sound). In your specific case, the BDP-S300 can decode Dolby TrueHD, but only if you download a firmware update. You should be regularly updating your firmware anyway to ensure that newer discs play on it without incident.
So, is it worth upgrading your receiver? Your Denon has more power than the newer Sony, it has basic room
correction by Audyssey, and it has plenty of inputs/outputs as long as you
don’t need a lot of HDMI switching or video upscaling. While the Sony has all
the latest audio decoders, it doesn’t have the most HDMI inputs, the best video
upscaling, or the best room correction, so I’m not sure it’s enough of an
upgrade even if those were your priorities.
Your biggest bang-for-buck audio upgrade would be to keep the Denon
and upgrade your speakers. At the very least I’d get matching front speakers
(either get another MC300 for the center or get another pair of JBL’s for front
left/right) and a sub.
I'm off to Apple's Special Event tomorrow. Journalists who want to contact me
for comments afterwards can call me at 201 658 7729 or email me at agreengart @
currentanalysis com.
Once Apple madness is behind us, more HTV posts are coming, including a post-CES wrap-up, VUDU review, and an end to my quest for an A/V receiver with enough HDMI inputs to serve as a test center.
Yamaha just announced the YHT-S400, a two piece home theater in a box. The soundbar is par for the course, giving people pseudo surround sound from just a single enclosure you can mount below your flat panel TV. Soundbars are incredibly popular right now, as they match the design of today's televisions (which also don't intrude on the living space) and don't require stringing wires all over the place. The YHT-S400's receiver is unique, in that it has a built-in subwoofer. Oddly enough, it reminds me of the mid-1980's PC, the Coleco Adam, which combined a daisy wheel printer with the PC's power supply - two things that definitely did not ordinarily go together. The reason my mind jumps way back (and yes, I know I'm dating myself) to the Adam is because strange combination designs not only limit upgrade flexibility, it means that if there is a problem with one component, your whole system is shot. Anyone buying the YHT-S400 needs to be aware that a problem with the sub means a problem with the whole system, and that they will not be able to upgrade any part of the system in the future.
Assuming that the sound quality is good - I have not heard a unit - the price seems reasonable ($599). Yamaha is probably thinking that this design will help space-challenged apartment dwellers, but there is another market segment worth exploring: parents of small children who don't want their kids stuffing Matchbox cars into a floor-level subwoofer port. I pulled 22 cars out of one of my subs in the playroom - the subs in my home theater all have floor-facing ports. On purpose.
Well, this is nice: some of us have felt like suckers, buying the same titles over and over as formats have shifted from VHS to letterbox VHS to laserdisc to DVD to special edition DVD to Blu-ray (and I probably missed a few format changes in there). If you've got a bunch of Warner DVDs and feel compelled to upgrade them to Blu-ray, check out this Warner Brothers site: http://www.dvd2blu.com/. You'll have to physically mail in your DVDs, and shipping charges apply if you have less than four to upgrade, but if you have four or more from the list of 55 titles, it should be about $8 per disc. Not free, but not bad, and a nice gesture to loyal customers.
On Tuesday, I, along with a handful of tech journalists, was invited to attend a briefing by Panasonic in New York to show off their latest line of plasma televisions. The emphasis was on the technical capabilities of Panasonic's plasma technology relative to the latest LCD with LED backlighting. Some things I learned:
Never have a Japanese engineer who doesn't speak fluent English give a marketing presentation to journalists. Yes, there was a lot of technical detail included, but the fundamental reason Panasonic was doing the briefing was to spin the technical detail, otherwise they would have just provided a white paper. While the presentation itself was pretty good, it was agonizingly slow going in parts, and key points just weren't made well.
Plasma's burn-in issues are a thing of the past. Non-issue with current sets. Now, the legal guys haven't gotten the message, so you still see a warning in the manual not to allow static images to linger on the screen, but some of the sets are deliberately marketed as better for gaming (which they are). The manuals need to be updated and this issue needs to be taken off the table.
Plasma is actually brighter than LCD over smaller areas. This is irrelevant overall - the sample images on the LCD during most of the presentation jumped out at you in a way that plasma does not. Ergo, consumers prefer LCD at retail. (It's more balanced on calibrated sets in a home environment, but on bright images, LCD is superior, and on dark images, plasma rules.)
Plasma has markedly better color than LCD, especially off-angle. Sadly, this is basically impossible to see in retail environments with uncalibrated televisions.
Maximum energy usage on a plasma is still high if you display white fields all day long, but Plasma and LCD are pretty close in terms of energy consumption on real-world program material. LCD is still better (and has a much better number on the energy use sticker), but it's not a reason to disqualify plasma any more.
Plasma is much, much better for resolving high definition when there is motion in the image. This is a key fact that Panasonic should be marketing hard, especially since the LCD competition charges more for sets that try to compensate by speeding up refresh cycles, and they are still noticeably worse on test patterns and real world content.
How a TV is set up at retail is critical: the LCD set they had on hand for comparison showed more stars in a starfield, and none of us cared that the gamma of that set may have been off - there were far more stars visible on that TV than on the plasmas. And we actually know what gamma is - the average consumer never touches picture controls when they get their TV home.
All in all, I came away with a better understanding of why I still prefer plasma over LCD for most uses, and why most consumers are buying LCD anyway - and are unlikely to change any time soon.
I'm a bit backed up here at Home Theater View, both with posts (they're in my head but haven't quite made their way out of my head and onto the site) and with products to review. Logitech had sent over the Harmony 900 remote control just before it launched, but I first attempted to configure it last night.
The Harmony 900 is essentially an RF version of the IR-only Harmony One. In English, that means that the 900 is a universal remote control that looks nearly identical to another universal remote control in the Harmony line, but instead of just being able to control components line-of-site using infrared (IR), it can also control components that are hidden behind walls/doors/retractable screens using radio frequency (RF) commands that are relayed to the components with little IR blaster pods. The Harmony One lists for $249 (and sells for $182 on amazon) while the Harmony 900 lists for $399 (and sells for $315 on amazon). The added money also gets you a higher resolution touchscreen and a few extra buttons, but the two products look basically the same (a good thing, as I love the Harmony One's button layout), act basically the same (instead of controlling individual devices, the Harmony line is activity-based), and are set up using the same process (using an online database). The Harmony 900's value proposition is pretty simple: most infrared repeater systems cost a lot more than the $150 price delta, and some of them are fairly complicated, while the hallmark of Logitech's Harmony line is simplicity.
As I noted in last year's Holiday Gift Guide, I liked the Harmony One so much that I refused to wait for a review unit and instead simply bought one. I later added the Harmony PlayStation 3 adapter, a $60 add-on that seamlessly integrates the game console into a Harmony system (the PS3 uses Bluetooth, which sounds like a good idea but is completely incompatible with any universal remote control). I also have an infrared repeater system, the Microsmith Hot Link Pro that I am eager to replace with a more elegant and responsive solution (I should note that I can heartily recommend the Hot Link Pro; when all the wires and the receiver eye are placed properly, it works perfectly, and at just $67 on amazon, it is a stone cold bargain). The Harmony 900 should have been perfect.
I have been reviewing remote controls for a long time and have been following the Harmony line since before Intrigue launched it (and well before Logitech bought the company). One of the best things about the product is that setup is done entirely online, the online database grows as users add new devices, and upgrading to a new remote control is a simple matter of telling the online software what you just bought.
Except when it isn't. The first problem I had was that Logitech's site claims that there is no software to download for the Harmony 900. A CD is included in the package, but you always need to download the latest updates anyway, and I had intended to use a netbook to do the setup down in my home theater rather than run back and forth between my office and my home theater. This problem was just an annoyance, but an odd one.
The next problem - and one that only affects people upgrading from earlier Harmony remotes - is that you cannot upgrade from earlier Harmony remotes. Despite the fact that the software is identical and the remotes look nearly identical and they function in nearly identical ways, a new Harmony account is required to use the 900, which meant I needed to go back and log every component in the home theater and re-figure out how they are all connected, which inputs are required, etc. The process is straightforward, but it is a chore I would have gladly done without.
The next problem - and the one that simply stopped me cold - was that much of the work that went into getting the Harmony remote controls working with my components over the years seems to have vanished from Logitech's database. Not only do I need a new account, but apparently I need to re-teach Logitech that the monoprice switcher has more than five inputs, that the TiVo doesn't have a power button, and that I am using Logitech's own accessory to control the PS3. I don't have time to troubleshoot all of this - again - so for now I will continue using the Harmony One/Microsmith combination.
If you are coming to the unit without an existing Harmony account, most of my setup problems won't affect you - you would need to set up your system from scratch anyway. Nonetheless, I'm holding off recommending this product until I have the time and energy to get it working properly.
Among other things, AudioEngine sent over their small PC speakers, and a short review should be posted here soon. First impressions were nothing special, but they are growing on me.
Monster introduced its first in-ear headphones, "turbine," in November 2008. They promised me review units right away (they actually gave out units at their CES press conference, but ran out), but I finally got them last month. At CEDIA last week, Monster announced an even higher end model, "turbine Pro," so I thought I'd better get this review out of the way before the new ones come.
I have to admit, I had really low expectations. Monster claims that the turbines are the best headphones on the market. However, Monster's CEO, Noel Lee, is given to hyperbole and self-congratulation - his press conferences are like revival meetings, complete with applause for minor things like swiveling HDMI adapters. (OK, those were pretty useful, but I'm a professional devices analyst, I'm not clapping like an idiot for your accessories, thank you very much.). My experience with mainstream brands' in-ear headphones has been mixed. Bose's $99 in-ear headphones are just plain awful (the best way to describe the sound is tepid; their over-the-ear noise canceling models are much better), while Apple's are pretty good (not as good as high end models, but a bargain at $79).
I took Monster at its word and tested the $149 turbines both against two similar priced products from Shure and etymotic (Shure's e3c's and etymotic's ER-4P, which are ~$179 each) and two with much higher price tags: Shure's SE530 (~$450), and Ultimate Ears triple.fi 10 pro (~$375).
The turbines have some issues, but overall they hold their own. Compared to my aging Shure e3c's the turbines sound richer and have better bass. They actually made the Shure's sound so thin that I wonder if the Shure's haven't held up to the abuse I've put them through over the years (lawn mowing, gyms, subways, buses, and planes). The etymotics stood up much better to the turbines, but the turbines sound a bit more dynamic, and appear to be more durable. One key that made comparison harder: it appears that the turbines have higher sensitivity than the etymotics. In other words, they play much louder. Louder sounds better (until you go deaf), and it can be hard to level match headphones precisely. Still, I did my best to A/B tracks at the same volume, and while the etymotics are terrific, the Monsters sounded livelier.
Where the turbines fall short is in noise isolation, functional design, and low bass. Shure's SE530's still stand out with the most neutral sound, tapered foam earplugs that do a much better job of blocking outside noise than Monster's flimsy plastic flanges, and a modular design that allows you to adapt the headphones to different cord lengths, microphones, and controls. Ultimate Ears triple.fi 10 pro has much better bass, a similar exciting sound as the turbines with less distortion, and tapered foam earplugs.
So are Monster's turbines [actual quote from their website:] "The World's Best Sounding In-Ear Headphones?" Hardly. But they are definitely one of the better choices at $149. If Monster throws in some foam earplugs in the package and creates a modular cord system, it will have a real winner.
I'll be out at CEDIA this year, but only for the press day and some show floor meetings. (I will also be available for press looking to cover major announcements from Apple and Motorola this week. Busy week!).
Look for a wrap-up post with CEDIA impressions by the end of the week.
Onkyo issued a press release this week for three new connected home theater receivers (by "connected" I mean that they can access Pandora and Rhapsody services via the Ethernet port on the back. That puts them in the list of devices we'd like to cover at Current Analyis).
The top model, the $2,699 Onkyo TX-NR5007 features 8 (yes, 8) HDMI 1.3a inputs (including one on the front panel) and a pair of parallel HDMI 1.3a outputs.
The next model down, the $2,099 Onkyo TX-NR3007, has 7 HDMI 1.3a inputs (including one on the front panel), and a pair of parallel HDMI 1.3a outputs.
Even the entry model in the group, the $1,599 Onkyo TX-NR1007, has 6 HDMI 1.3a inputs (all on the back panel, this time) and a pair of parallel HDMI 1.3a outputs.
None of these are cheap, but they are packed with all the latest buzzwords (Audyssey DSX and Dolby ProLogic IIz), technologies (Audyssey room optimization and 1080p/24 image upscaling by HQV Reon-VX or Faroudja DCDi), and oodles of amplification for up to 9.2 channels on the off chance that you just won the speaker lottery. The dual HDMI outputs across the board is a huge boon for anyone with multiple displays (one TV and one projector, or two TVs in different zones) and eliminates the need for an external matrix switcher (which can either be expensive or a bargain, but a bit of a gamble and in any case is another box in your rack that you don't want). Six to eight HDMI inputs may sound excessive, but I'll take it; literally - I'm asking for a review unit.
Wondering what we've been up to in the Digital Home - Devices research group at Current Analysis? (No? Then now might be a good time to skip to the next post. Thanks anyway!)
Console price drops have dominated the past few weeks, but before that we wrote up a new connected HTIB system, Sonos' new controller, new distribution for VUDU, and a connected Blu-ray player (if you're sensing a theme, yes, our Digital Home coverage focuses on connected devices). Please note: the titles below link to reports behind the firewall for Current Analysis clients; journalists who would like access should contact me for complimentary access:
A reader asks:I’m
thinking of having my Hi Def Sony XBR2 calibrated by Best Buy. Is this
worth the $300.00 or not? Appreciate any advice.
Calibration was an absolute necessity back in the tube days,
but with the advent of digital panels (plasma or LCD), getting – and keeping –
settings accurate (or reasonably close) is much easier to do yourself.
However, an installer can often get into service menus and offer finer level of
control. Is that worth $300? If you’re a perfectionist watching movies,
definitely. If you are a casual viewer watching reality TV shows, definitely
not.
If you plan to go the full calibration route, make
sure that the folks at Best Buy have ISF certification before you agree
to anything; simply getting a tech to your house messing around with
service menus can make things worse rather than better.
If you plan to calibrate your set yourself, you should buy one
of the calibration DVDs on the market ($30 - $50); not only do they provide
instructions on the different settings and how they interact, they are chock full of test patterns designed to make it much easier to see the differences as you
make changes.
If none of that seems worth the hassle, at least page through the different settings your TV comes pre-programmed with. The "Vivid" setting is designed to stand out on a showroom floor in poor lighting, and it will burn your eyes (not literally - I hope) if you watch it that way at home. The "Cinema" or "Movie" mode is usually the most accurate. If that mode seems too dim, leave it there anyway and give yourself a few minutes to adjust your eyes to seeing subtle color differences again.
I was talking with Microsoft about the XBOX 360 earlier this week, and one of the things they said will drive consumers to their console vs. the competition is the integration of multiple features into Live, such as Netflix streaming, gaming, and other content. At Current Analysis our Digital Home service covers game consoles from the perspective of connected services; we treat a PS3, XBOX, or Wii like the fancy set top boxes (that not coincidentally also play games) that they have become. However, I thought we were a bit ahead of the curve - most consumers haven't fully embraced this vision yet. But when FedEx dropped off yet another box here this afternoon, I started thinking: how on Earth am I going to connect this? Is Microsoft right - will consumers buy a game console to access digital services simply because they're out of HDMI inputs on their TV?
Now I know that my situation is not something everyone faces, but how many devices can a consumer reasonably connect to a TV or even a sophisticated A/V receiver? I'm not sure there are enough inputs any more - even on flagship receivers - to connect all the possible devices an early adopter/TV nut might want to. (Some of these offer redundant functionality, but even then there are typically unique functions that could justify their purchase.) Here's a sample list:
TiVo HD (DVR and cable/OTA tuner, Netflix)
Cable box (tuner and VOD, may have integrated DVR)
Satellite Box (tuner, VOD, unique sports programming, may have integrated DVR)
SlingBox (to stream content to PCs and mobile devices)
SlingCatcher (to integrate PC content)
XBOX 360 (some unique game titles, Netflix, DVD playback, streaming PC media)
PlayStation 3 (some unique game titles, Blu-ray playback, DVD playback, streaming PC media)
Wii (many unique game titles)
DVD/Blu-ray player (if you don't have PS3)
AppleTV (iTunes integration)
Roku (for Netflix, but even if you have a TiVo HD or XBOX 360 with Live Gold which also offer Netflix, you still might want a Roku for Major League Baseball access)
I'm trying to integrate about eight or nine of those, and I'm not sure that there is a receiver on the planet that can handle more than about half that list.
I will be attending CEDIA this year, but I won't be hanging
around for very long, so if you're a vendor who wants to meet me,
please contact me ASAP. I'll be covering any Digital Home - Devices news for Current Analysis, and I should have posts here as well.
A few months back Logitech sent over their PS3 Harmony adapter, and I've had a half-finished review sitting in my Typepad queue ever since (it's the sort of device that you set it up once and then forget about - in a very good way). I'm going to get that done and posted soon so I can move on to today's news: the Harmony 900, which is what you get when you refine the Harmony One and add RF capabilities to control devices behind closed doors (or, in my case, behind a motorized screen). I recommended the Harmony One in last year's Holiday Gift Guide, and I have a Harmony 900 in for review and will post my impressions shortly.
I promise something more substantive in a different post ( <-- that's just a writing flourish. No actual promise is intended or implied), but I wanted to pass this along. I get press releases every day about companies introducing new products, changing management, or using technology. Many of them are incomprehensible - it's as if PR people speak a different language. Here's the headline from one that crossed my inbox this morning:
Leading Architectural Audio and Video Supplier Builds on FST GUI Technology for New Streaming Media Product Line
Who? What? After reading the press release a couple of times I think I understand what's going on: SpeakerCraft is branching out from crafting speakers and is building a streaming media system (just the sort of thing I focus on in my Digital Home research service), presumably to get audio to their in-wall speakers. OK. But to do so, they needed a way to quickly create a user interface for their gadget, and they turned to FST.
Here's where things get silly. It seems that the folks at FST are either: 12 year old boys, refugees from movie production companies, or high. FST stands for Fluffy Spider Technologies. FST's flagship product is the FancyPants platform and its Ruthlessly Efficient runtime environment. What the hell?
NHT (aka Now Hear This) has been a respected mid-tier speaker manufacturer based in the U.S. since 1986, but as the recession hit earlier this year, they chose to shut down product development and manufacturing, take some time off, and approach the market fresh. They weren't bankrupt - at least not yet - they just saw their distribution channel erode as independent dealers and custom installers went out of business, and their price points crept up to the point where they were out of line with economic realities. Some of this was driven by rising commodity prices, some by a disconnect with changing consumer priorities.
Somehow I missed this story. Anyway, after just a few months off, they're back.
They've shrunk their product line nearly in half, and are selling and distributing online-only. If this sounds similar to the Outlaw model, it is, only NHT isn't just selling direct, you can buy from amazon, Audio Advisor, OneCall, and a few others. This eliminates dealer reps, salespeople, and lots of shipping, so prices are down 20% as well. They're killing all print ads because the goal of print ads was to drive prospects to the dealers, though they will do online advertising because they need to drive sales somehow.
I'm in charge of Consumer Devices at Current Analysis, which is actually composed of two separate groups: Mobile Devices and Digital Home. I've been in charge of the devices portion of our Digital Home service since the beginning of this year, and while I intend to continue posting here about home theater, I thought I'd plug noteworthy Digital Home reports on this blog as well. This year's E3 (the electronic gaming show) crossed over both of my coverage areas. I stayed home this year - I'm on the road a lot as it is - but Bruce McGregor, our Senior Analyst, Digital Home was there live. This isn't a new console year, but there were multiple announcements around new services, and Bruce wrote up announcements from Microsoft and Sony, while I covered the PSPgo.
(The report links require paid access to Current Analysis' syndicated research service; journalists who need free access should contact me and we'll get an account set up for you.)
Yesterday's WSJ had an article (subscription required) on how regional consumer electronics stores are thriving despite the economy. The keys to success seem to be a) taking advantage of the demise of Circuit City, and b) the use of a trained, commissioned sales force. I can't help but point out that one big reason that Circuit City died was the move away from its own trained, commissioned sales force to lower paid, non-commissioned shift workers. Of course, Wal~Mart's spokesperson is quick to point out the flip side: many consumers are doing their research online and hate pushy commissioned retail salespeople.
The Journal doesn't talk about the smaller, specialty A/V retailer, but based solely on the number of local stores that have gone out of business over the past year (Rabson's, I'll miss you), that segment of the business isn't going to pick up any Circuit City leftovers. So how will the remaining stores survive? One way is to hold special events to drive traffic to the store. Frankly, I'm surprised this is the first time I'm seeing this: one of the local high end A/V stores is having three manufacturer reps come to do a dog-and-pony show (this link is to a similar past event) and is advertising it by buying email lists from one of the home theater magazines. Will this be enough? I hope so.
The New York Times is reporting that Vizio is getting out of the plasma TV business and focusing solely on LCD. That leaves only Samsung, LG, and Panasonic as plasma TV brands in the U.S., and both Samsung and LG have been shifting more of their lines to LCD. Vizio's rationale is clear: consumers prefer LCD. Why do consumers prefer LCD? Because it's the brighter technology on the showroom floor. Of course, the showroom floor is hardly representative of a consumer's home, and every expert agrees that plasma TVs offer better picture quality than LCD. I've yet to find any disagreement on this issue, even from manufacturers of LCD sets: plasma TVs have richer colors and better black levels, both of which factor into a better picture. LCD is brighter, which makes it... brighter.
So what's going on here? The showroom is different from the living room:
In a store, there are lots of TVs vying for attention. In the home, there's usually just one in any room. When consumers look at 12 big screen TVs next to each other, the brightest picture draws the eye. Manufacturers have known this forever - they used to ship all their tube TVs set to insanely bright levels that were completely innappropriate for actual use just so that when a retailer unboxed one to put it on display, that set would "pop."
In a store, the lighting is usually garish flourescent. In a home, the lighting is usually softer. Brighter TVs do perform better than plasma under harsh lighting conditions. Therefore, if you're putting a TV right next to a sunny window without blinds or curtains, an LCD is a better choice than a plasma. (An even better choice would be to buy a window shade.)
Another factor in LCD's rise over plasma was that LCD sets had a short-lived resolution advantage over plasma about three years ago. The sales help at retail often is not capable of properly assessing a customers needs and matching it with a specific product (if they were, they'd be in product development or marketing, not retail). Given the tortured technical jargon vendors use to promote consumer electronics, consumers (and confused retail personnel) are easily enticed by bigger numbers in the specs. 1080p is a much bigger number than 720p, and bigger is better, right? This phenomenon also explains the abundance of 10 and 12 megapixel cameras when, if all else is equal, a 6 megapixel camera actually takes better pictures.
So, are consumers idiots? They're pushing a terrific, less expensive technology off the market in favor of one that's not bad, but costs more and isn't as good. Another way to look at it is that consumers aren't idiots at all - they're accurately evaluating the product in its retail environment. Either way, Vizio is smart. It's building what sells. Now, you would think that this is a pretty basic insight: consumers buy at retail, the retail environment favors technology A over B, therefore, to succeed, focus on technology A. It is basic, but apparently, it's not obvious. I can't tell you how many times I talk to my clients in the mobile device world who simply choose to ignore the retail distribution reality, and suffer becasue of it.
Oh, why is this Sunday different from all other Sundays?
On other Sundays we care about a team playing, on this Sunday we just hope the game is worth watching in the fourth quarter.
On other Sundays we dip only once, on this Sundays we dip wings and chips and salsa and fries and maybe a few veggie sticks and franks n blankets. (Plus hot dogs and hamburgers, but you don't dip those, though you do slather them with condiments.)
On other Sundays we TiVo the commercials to skip them, on this Sunday we TiVo the commercials to rewind them and watch them again.
On other Sundays, a projection system with a screen measured in feet and 2,000 watts of surround sound is an extravagance, on this Sunday, that is why the Super Bowl observance is at your house.
And when the TV broadcaster asks the MVP why he is celebrating, the MVP will respond, "because the God passed over the other team and took me out of this game with a strong arm."
Look, it's a great format, and I certainly try to rent Blu-ray (from Netflix) and buy Blu-ray discs in the rare cases where I'm buying. I'm even upgrading a few discs from DVD to Blu-ray: Groundhog Day is coming out on Blu-ray on January 27! We watch that one at least annually. When Star Wars comes out on Blu-ray, yeah, I'll buy it yet again even though the DVD is pristine. The thing is, even CNET admits that the only reason a consumer would buy Blu-ray is for picture quality, and, I'm sorry, that's not a good reason for most consumers to upgrade. Upsampled DVD looks very good on nearly any television - even big HDTV sets. Move to a projector/screen combination, and the difference becomes obvious -- which is why I'm renting/buying Blu-ray discs myelf -- but no matter how inexpensive 1080p projectors get, that's still a niche market because projectors require setup and light control. DVD player penetration is pretty high (80%), and there's just no reason to upgrade even when you add an HDTV to the equation.
As usual, I attended CES 2009 and spent a lot more time talking with mobile devices vendors (my day job) than home theater. This was a good strategy for anyone this year because the Palm pre stole the show, but there were still plenty of thin LCD TVs, 3D TV, mobile TV, and a few speakers and receivers sprinkled throughout the sprawling show floor. I didn't make it to the Hilton, where most of the high end audio was housed, at all. Still, it's hard to avoid home theater when you have to attend press conferences from Sony, Samsung, LG, Toshiba, etc. and walk the show floor.
After talking to the Dolby Mobile folks, I was pressed into sitting through a terrific demo of Dolby IIz, which adds a (derived, not native) height channel. I've been using Yamaha receivers for years that perform the same trick, so I could certainly appreciate the notion - Dolby seems to be going more for sound placement (i.e., making it sound like the helicopter is hovering above you), while Yamaha is intended for room augmentation (i.e., making it sound like your room is bigger). The 9 minute demo certainly sounded great, but if I listened to my own home theater at those volume levels I'd be deaf before the end of the movie.
I also saw the latest generation of DLP in both super-large format (Optoma's HD8200 projector) and small (TI-powered pico projectors for use with cellphones were everywhere). I stopped by the Optoma booth to see the pico projector, and stayed for a short demo of the HD8200 on a 2:35 screen in a completely dark room. They were playing a clip from I Am Legend, a movie I have only seen in projector demos, so I know the clip well. Contrast ratio and black levels were insanely good, but there was weird artifacting that appeared just before fast motion content that drove me crazy. It could be an issue with the setup, the source, or a bug in a preproduction demo unit, but if I had bought that system, I'd be returning it.
Finally, at the Sony press conference the swag was an eco-friendly bamboo fiber bag, which feels like silk and is apparently intended to be used (and reused) for grocery shopping. Or something. When I unpacked it after the show, I noticed that the care tag is unintentionally poetic and hilarious, a sort of bad translation haiku:
CAUTION Do not close to fire Only for shipping bag Hand wash Washing will shirink slightly Only non-chlorine blench Wet dark cloth will fadeing The color will fading under sunlight or fluorescence for long time
I've been searching for a great sounding speaker system for
computer use (Pc & MacBook Pro in the near future). I mainly want it for
music, it will also be used for movies & games since I have a 40"
connected to my pc. I've heard a bunch of systems, but nothing stands out of
the crowd (I like to hear all sounds in a track as recorded). I ended
up deciding on the (Axiom Audio Audiobytes and EPZero Subwoofer) till I read
your review of them. What is your choice since I do listen to Trance & Hip
Hop and do a little mixing? I noticed you like the Klipsch 2.1. Is that your
favorite choice? I don't mind spending around $500 if the system is well worth
it.
My preferred PC speakers are the
Klipsch ProMedia 5.1, which Klipsch discontinued way back in 2003. I have
tested several systems since then, including the Axiom AudiBytes and Logitech’s
Z5500 5.1 THX system, and I still prefer the old Klipsch. The Klipsch ProMedia
2.1 system looks similar to the 5.1 in photos, but it is not even close in terms of
specifications. The speakers have different frequency response ranges,
different maximum output levels, and different materials. The 2.1 subwoofer is
much smaller and has a completely different configuration. As soon as I find a
speaker system that beats the Klipsch I’ll write about them – and probably ask
to buy the review samples – but thus far I haven’t.
Avi, We want to buy a 37" LCD TV. Is there a significant
difference between 720P and 1080P?
Yes, there is a significant difference between 720p and 1080p –
though it depends on what you’re watching on it, and even then you may not be
able to see the difference. The bottom line is that you can almost always
get away with buying a 720p set and saving the money, but nobody seems to
believe this answer, so here’s a slightly more involved one:
First, two quick definitions:
1.the
“p” in 1080P or 720P = progressive, where the signal has information in every
horizontal line, just like a computer monitor.
2.the
“i” in 1080i = interlaced, where the signal alternates horizontal lines
similar to the way an analog TV works – the information alternates fast enough
that you usually can’t tell the difference.
Now you need to answer two questions:
What are you watching? (You want to be able to display all the
information that your signal contains, but how much information is actually in
that signal?)
·If you’re watching a DVD, it’s 480p. So even a 720p TV is
overkill – either the TV or the DVD player will do some magic to “fill in” the
extra pixels it has to make up the picture.* A 1080p set has to fill in even
more pixels with guesswork.
·If you’re watching HDTV, it’s either 720p or 1080i. Some channels
use one resolution (for example, NBC uses 1080i) and some use the other (for
example, Fox uses 720p) – this happens behind the scenes when you change
channels; you don’t have to do anything. 720p and 1080i both have about the
same amount of picture information (720p tends to look better for fast motion
like sports, while 1080i tends to look better for scenes without much motion,
like dramas), both count as real HDTV, and both look spectacular when displayed
properly on an HDTV.
oWhen you watch a 720p channel on a 720p TV, you’re seeing
everything that’s there.
oWhen you watch a 1080i channel on a 720p TV, first it fills in
the interlacing by guessing what the missing line ought to be, and then drops a
bit of the resolution.
oWhen you watch a 720p channel on a 1080p TV, it does some magic
to “fill in” the extra pixels.
oWhen you watch a 1080i channel on a 1080p TV, it fills in the
interlacing by guessing what the missing line ought to be.
·If you’re watching a Blu-ray disc, congratulations, you’re
watching the only consumer format capable of displaying full 1080p.
oA 720p set throws out some of that resolution; it usually still
looks better than a DVD.
oA 1080p set displays all the information on there without any
changes.
Now, let’s assume you are going to watch Blu-ray discs 100% of
the time. Question two: can you actually see the difference between 720p and
1080p?
This will depend on several factors:
·How good is your eyesight? Seriously.
·How big is the TV, and how far away are you sitting? In smaller screen
sizes it usually doesn’t matter if you’re cramming one or two million pixels
into the set; unless you’re sitting two feet away you won’t be able to see the
difference. Higher resolution allows you to sit closer to the set and does
nothing for you if you’re farther back. For example, if you’re sitting ten to
twelve feet back from a 50” TV you literally cannot see the difference between
720p and 1080p. Some people want to get the higher resolution anyway. I am not
one of those people. My couch is about 12 feet away from my displays, and my
50” plasma is a 720p model. My projector, on the other hand, projects onto an
8’ screen that comes down in front of the plasma; the projector is a 1080p
model because when the images are projected that large, the difference between
720p and 1080p is quite obvious.
Conclusion: unless you plan to sit awfully close to that 37” set
and watch a lot of Blu-ray discs, there’s no reason to spend more on a 1080p
version. If you insist on spending money for something you can’t see, I won’t
stop you. But you’ll be much happier if you put the extra money into a good
surround sound system.
Does the upcoming change in broadcasting frequency have any
impact on the reception?
It depends. If you’re getting your TV shows from cable or
satellite, the analog/digital switchover will make no difference whatsoever.
None. You do not need to do anything at all.
If you’re getting your TV shows from an antenna, then you’ll
need either a new HDTV with a digital tuner built in, or a new tuner/converter
box. Your reception will either get much better or much worse, and it will vary
by channel, how far away you are from the station, and (in some cases) your
physical location (i.e., if you’re at the bottom of a hill or sandwiched
between big buildings). Digital channels do not degrade gradually. A rough rule
of thumb is that if you get a reasonably clear channel today, you’ll probably
get an even better looking version of it on digital. On the other hand, if you
have a snowy channel that’s just sort of watchable today, once it goes digital
you probably won’t get it at all.
Hope this helps,
-avi
*720x480 progressive, or about 350,000 pixels of actual
information per frame. This is a gross oversimplification, but it provides a good
basis for comparison. 1280 x 720 = around 900,000 pixels. Incidentally, this is
why watching analog TV channels or VHS video on an HDTV usually looks much,
much worse than it did on your old analog TV; the new TV is trying to take very
little information (VHS is roughly 240i, or 480x240 every other frame, or the
equivalent of about 60,000 pixels) and displaying it on something expecting
more than ten times that information to create the picture. Without much to go
on, the TV fudges, which, instead of looking soft and fuzzy like an analog set,
looks blocky and horrible.
I was talking to my wife this evening, telling her about the new SlingCatcher (her term for these conversations is "lectures"), and she pointed out that my terminology, "wicked cool," is really, really old. Sad thing, I'm really really old. I have no idea what current slang for that would be. Tight? Sweet? Five by five? (That last one was on Buffy. Which has been off the air for years now, sadly.) Any help appreciated.
Oh, and the SlingCatcher is now shipping. The "wicked cool" feature I was trying to describe to my wife - before she so rudely interrupted the lecture - is the ability to take anything on your laptop and send it to your TV. Anything. You use something that works like a cropping tool to select whatever you want to see on the big screen - YouTube video, Hulu TV shows, Word documents, embedded video of a dubious nature, a Facebook page, whatever, and SlingCatcher broadcasts just that portion of the screen - nicely scaled - to your TV. That's not all the SlingCatcher can do; you can also use a SlingCatcher as a "receiver" for a SlingBox elsewhere in the house, or for the more traditional PC-to-TV media uses, like playing music or viewing photos from a PC. But the screen broadcast feature is wicked cool.
I should have a review unit in shortly; I have a SlingBox HD in for review as well.
Logitech sent over Z-5 Omnidirectional notebook speakers. They're not going
to put my Klipsch THX speakers of business (not by a long shot), but you need to remember that they're powered
entirely via USB and don't take up too much desk space. Simplicity is clearly the goal here; the last USB-powered speakers I looked at, Altec Lansing's XT1's were designed with portability in mind. Compared to the XT1's, Logitech's Z-5's play extremely loud and sound
extraordinary. They should make a great holiday gift for the notebook user who listens to music through fuzzy notebook speakers.
Logitech also sent over triple.fi 10 pro's from their recent Ultimate Ears
acquisition, and I had them on hand at the recent Apple "Let's Rock" event, where I pitted them up
against Apple's upcoming $79 in-ear headphones.
You get what you pay for - on
both ends of the price spectrum. For $79, the Apple headphones sounded great -
easily competitive with the low end of Shure and etymotic's range, and they blow
away Bose's in-ear efforts (I can't comment on UE's entry level headphones, as I
haven't listened to them). But they couldn't hold a candle - on bass or midrange
- with the $399 UE's triple.fi 10 pro's. I was also annoyed that the Apple
headphones are not fully compatible with the iPhone, just the iPod touch and new
nano. (That new nano needs to be felt to be believed - it is vanishingly thin and the colors are gorgeous. Apple did a really nice job with this one.)
I'm really enjoying the triple.fi headphones, and finally had a chance to do some quick listening tests vs. one of their main competitors: Shure's $499 SE530. For natural, neutral sound quality, the
SE530's are incredible, as well they should be at that price. The UE triple.fi 10 pro is a bit less neutral and seems
to amp up the body of bass and warmth of the lower midrange - which is often
lacking on headphones. Both are equally revealing, but I would describe the
sound of the UE's as more "fun. Which is better? It's a matter of taste. While I suspect the Shure's are more accurate, listening to rock and pop with the UE's is more involving.
But my favorite headphones for the iPhone (and any phone with a 3.5mm jack, which includes most new RIM BlackBerries, Nokia's XpressMusic line, and select LG and Samsung phones) are still Shure's SE530's with the Shure iPhone microphone adapter, pictured below. They sound great
with the compressed music you have on an iPhone, have the most comfortable
shaped foam earplugs in the industry, and the modular design allows you to swap
out various cord lengths or accessories.
Blogging is strange. I can't tell you how many times I get asked to provide links or link exchanges or even the occasional "please review our stuff and we'll pay you for placement." Now, if this were about my day job (Research Director for Mobile Devices), it would be somewhat understandable - I am quoted by the press, and it's my job to influence industry decision makers. But Home Theater View? Who reads this? Coverage here basically just influences my brother - my mother doesn't even read this! Perhaps all they're trying to do is up their Google rankings.
So, here is a link to an article I was asked to highlight on home theater seating. I didn't write it, I don't know the people who did, and I couldn't even tell you if they've sat in all the chairs they write about. But the pictures are definitely fun to look at. No money changed hands for my inclusion of this link in this post. Enjoy your link, boys.
Next up, an electronics review site, TestFreaks. They offered to pay me for reviewing the site. I never agreed to anything, but since it makes for an interesting post about home theater blogging, here goes. I don't like the site at all. It aggregates reviews from all over the Internet - sort of a Rotten Tomatoes for A/V gear and gadgets. That part might be useful if you couldn't just Google the product name and get the same information. Where it could still be interesting is if there was some editorial judgement applied to the rankings so you'd see a decent list of speakers or receivers to start a comparison shopping exercise. Nope, it's all automated, and the results appear to be completely random.
CEDIA and IFA news is filling up my inbox, but one press release jumped out at me. I've seen similar features from other manufacturers (Onkyo immediately comes to mind), but the emphasis on digital media features in a new receiver from Yamaha was a big enough shift for me to write about it. Here's the headline:
NEW YAMAHA RX-Z7 7.1 CHANNEL HOME THEATER RECEIVER EXPANDS ON YAMAHA’S HIGHLY ACCLAIMED Z-SERIES, OFFERING SOPHISTICATED HOME ENTERTAINMENT AND BEST-IN-CLASS HD PERFORMANCE
Well that sounds like any other high end super receiver. But wait, here's the subhead:
Following the Lead of the Company’s Flagship RX-Z11; The RX-Z7 Integrates iPod, Bluetooth, HDRadio, Satellite and Internet Radio, and Rhapsody Playback with Pure HD Sound and Picture in a Versatile Multi-Zone Digital Media Hub
If this makes it seem like Yamaha is not trying to differentiate the receiver with amplifier channels or surround sound decoding -- the traditional reasons to buy a receiver -- you'd be right. Here's the third paragraph of the release:
Offering DLNA support and compatibility with Windows Vista, the RX-Z7 can stream music files (WAV, Mp3, WMA, AAC) stored on locally networked PCs and other devices, as well as Internet radio streams (Mp3, WMA). In addition to supporting SIRIUS Internet Radio*, the unit offers full compatibility with Rhapsody, giving users unrestricted, on-demand access to the subscription music service’s enormous selection of content spanning virtually every genre, style and taste. The RX-Z7 also integrates with Yamaha’s MusicCAST system, providing access to as many as 40,000 songs that can be stored on that system. The AV receiver can display album artwork through its GUI to take user engagement to a new level.
That sounds like a PC media extender, not a receiver. The fifth paragraph really takes it above and beyond:
The RX-Z7 is the ultimate AV receiver for iPod users. It easily connects to Apple iPods via the optional iPod docking station (Yamaha YDS-11; MSRP $99.95). Once docked, the iPod can be operated via the receiver’s remote controls. A one cable connection allows users to view the iPod’s operating status (song title, artist, album with cover art), as well as video and pictures on a television monitor. Docked iPods charge automatically, so they’re always ready for a road trip. Giving users even more ways to access their music, the RX-Z7 boasts two USB ports that adhere to the Media Transfer Protocol (MTP) for playback of Mp3, WMA, WAV and AAC audio files from a portable player or USB drive.
For those who keep music stored on their phones or other Bluetooth-enabled devices, the RX-Z7 is compatible with Yamaha’s optional YBA-10 Bluetooth Wireless Audio Receiver (SRP $129.95), which enables wirelessly streaming audio to the AV receiver.
... The RX-Z7 also supports iTunes tagging, so when users hear a favorite song on HD Radio, they can instantly bookmark it to their iTunes account.
XM Radio and HD Radio support are also on board, as are multiple channels of amplification, video scaling, HDMI switching, and multi-room support. Still, the differentiating features are all about managing PC-derived digital media.
High end receivers have always been about offering lots of features and flexibility. But when you emphasize streaming media, Vista support, Bluetooth, and extensive iPod integration, it sure sounds like a PC to me. Why not just put an HDMI switch and amplification unit in a PC? All the digital media management is already on there as is video scaling and surround sound decoding. Yes, the inside of a PC is an electrically noisy place, and putting amps inside would require a different power supply. But these are design issues that can be (and already have been) overcome in other contexts.
Logitech announced today that it is buying high end earbud vendor Ultimate Ears. UE is best known for $1000+ custom headphones for professional musicians, but it also has a line of consumer headphones in the $40 - $400 range. Its business model is incredibly similar to Shure - both come from professional audio (initially microphones in Shure's case) and branched out into the consumer space. In contrast, etymotic's background was in hearing aids, and V-MODA seems to have come from the fashion world.
Without the custom business, Ultimate Ears is just another headset vendor, and its brand differentiation will be difficult for Logitech to maintain. But if Logitech leaves the core custom business alone, it can definitely build up the consumer side - Ultimate Ears could definitely use better distribution and broader consumer awareness; Logitech excels in these areas - just look at what they did with Harmony (speaking of which, I just got in a Harmony One remote control; a review will follow shortly).
In terms of how Ultimate Ears actually sound, I have no idea. I have tested most of the competition - Shure, etymotic, Sennheiser, Sony, v-moda, and Bose, to name a few. I should be getting in some Ultimate Ears product soon for comparison.
I have long respected Brent's reviews and personal integrity, and he's listened to nearly every high end system on the market and somehow remains grounded in the real world. He stays true to form here, testing Cinepro's speakers with the loudest demo material in his repetoire (as befits a system mated with Cinepro amplifiers) but notes that no sane person will ever reach the speakers' limits in real world home theaters.
Of course, that's probably the point. There is a class of buyer at the high end of the market who isn't looking for something that's "good enough" or a great value. No, they're looking for something that will always have performance to spare, even if they're using it in a modest size room well below reference level on family movie night, and, in fact, never push it to its limits. Come to think of it, that describes the ultra high end of the automotive market as well - nobody is going to drive a Lamborghini 200 miles an hour outside a test track, but the excess sure feels good when driving 2 miles an hour and handing the keys to the valet. (At least I imagine it does.)
Sonos announced several upgrades today to its whole-house audio system (my review of the original system is here).
The receiver modules have shrunk in size, have been upgraded with an upgraded version of Sonos' proprietary wireless mesh networking technology, and the one with an internal amplifier (the ZonePlayer 120) has gotten more power. The software has been upgraded, and it now supports ridiculously large music collections (65,000 songs), OS X Leopard, and NAS devices (networked hard drives, which means you can listen to your own songs without turning on your PC).
What hasn't changed:
The Controller 100 ($399) gets no upgrades. It was well designed to begin with, though it is a bit bulky. It also no longer has quite the same wow factor, as it mimics Apple's last generation of music devices (the clickwheel iPods), rather than the current touchscreen models.
A separate charging cradle ($39.99) for the Controller is an essential add-on that Sonos released a while back, but there are still no in-wall versions of the cradle.
There is still no boombox option; the ZonePlayer 90 assumes you're hooking it up to a stereo system, iPod dock, or powered speakers, while the ZonePlayer 120 assumes you have a spare pair of speakers lying around. Sonos sells a pair of inexpensive, very high quality speakers for use with the ZonePlayer 120, but I've always thought that Sonos ought to build self-contained units for use in kitchens, home offices, and bathrooms.
There is still no weatherproof outdoors option.
A complete Sonos system is incredibly cost effective when compared to custom installed wired multi-room alternatives. But it is still pricey overkill for filling just one or two rooms with sound; two iPods and two iPod docks runs less than half the cost of a Sonos. The direct competition is starting to catch up; Logitech's Squeezebox Duet (pictured here on the right) undercuts Sonos on price and has a similar scroll wheel controller (the Duet costs $399 and includes a receiver; the equivalent Sonos Controller + ZP90 combo costs $748). One major difference is in ease of setup - Sonos wins hands down, in part because Sonos doesn't require a PC or a wireless network. I have tested Logitech's predecessor, the Squeezebox, and found its basic remote and user interface nearly unusable; I plan to test the Duet and future products in Logitech's line shortly.
A bunch of big companies are getting together to standardize wireless home HDTV transmission. Again. The AP reports the details here. Most of the commentary I've seen has been fairly positive, though everyone points out that several of the big players backing WHDI are separately supporting WirelessHD as well. Could we have a standards war here?
WHDI products aren't expected to hit the market for at least a year or two
Testing this stuff will take forever
Even if it just adds $100 to the cost of products, the rise of brands like Vizio proves that many consumers are primarily driven by price
In the short term, he's right. Nobody is going to put off buying a new TV today because in 2 - 5 years a wireless version will be available. Those who need a wireless solution today -- in the home theater industry, installers will always run into problem rooms -- will be willing to pay for expensive proprietary add-on gadgets that solve the particular problem. Longer term, though, it does make sense for there to be wireless options that work across vendors. At one time, wireless PC standards (ex: WiFi) were supposed to take over in the A/V world, but the bandwidth to pass HDTV unaltered on those doesn't exist outside the lab. I wonder whether any of these consortiums will get something to market that actually works in a reasonable timeframe - I've seen demos of this stuff at trade shows for years now. Because even once TVs and set top boxes have such a standard built in, you'll need to buy a new TV AND a new set top box to see the benefit. So for the forseeable future, nothing changes, which explains why Sony and Samsung are backing multiple standards, and why Jeremy can't bring himself to care.
Well, the first unit turned on, but didn't do much more than that. The box was attractive and well packed - from a packaging perspective it inspired confidence. But it didn't work. I could force it to manually switch between displays by turning one display off, the other on, and then unplugging/replugging the switch - not exactly what it is supposed to do.
I called monoprice's customer service line and got a live human being within three rings who apologized and sent out a new unit right away. At no point did I reveal any industry/blogging credentials, and this is a company that is selling a product roughly 1/4 the price of the competition, so top notch service is really extraordinary.
The replacement unit worked the first time out of the box. The remote control is ugly and does not have a powerful IR emitter, but it has eight discrete buttons for every switching contingency (Input 1 to Output A, Input 2 to Output A, Input 3 to Output A, Input 4 to Output A, Input 1 to Output B, Input 2 to Output B, Input 3 to Output B, Input 4 to Output B). This makes programming a universal remote child's play, or at least it would have if the Logitech Harmony 880 worked properly with the monoprice codes. After downloading and redownloading and creating my own codes from scratch, I still couldn't get the Harmony to finish the update/synchronization process. Eventually, I gave up and emailed Logitech. Here, too, customer service saved the day: within two days of my email to Logitech's Harmony folks, they figured out and resolved whatever was the problem was and sent me a note to "try it again now." Problem solved.
In three months of use, I have had no significant issues with the second monoprice unit. I have noticed, however, that on its own site, monoprice does seem to have generated a lot of complaints about dead or incompatible HDMI switching units, and this particular swtich has been refreshed several times; it is now up to version "2.5." Some of this is undoubtedly due to the inherent iffyness (a technical term) of HDMI implementations across a wide range of products. Still, custom installers can be forgiven if they choose to steer clear of the monoprice unit and stick with a proven brand like Gefen as their default. For DIY'ers, though, the monoprice unit is an easy recommendation: its price is insanely low, and monoprice is providing quick service should you have any problems. Even if there is an unusually high failure rate for these units out of the box, it is a gamble worth taking.
If you're in the Wall Street area next Thursday, I'll be moderating a panel at Digital Downtown on Flat Panel TV Trends:
Plasma and LCD TVs are the center of any digital home. The category's
success is driven by the produts' fashion appeal and picture quality as
well as the DTV transition. Listen to our panel of industry experts
discuss the current trends affecting the flat panel TV market and where
it's heading.
The session is free to financial analysts, press, and "invited guests." You can register here.
Axiom has been trying to get me to review a set of speakers from their home theater surround lineup, but I asked to start with something smaller, so they suggested their Audiobytes PC speaker system. I’ve been using what counts as “high end” speaker systems in the PC world on my media center PC for nearly a decade. My primary PC speaker system is a Klipsch THX Pro Media 5.1, which I have pitted against a 5.1 THX setup from Logitech, 2.1 systems from Altec Lansing, and others over the years. Axiom’s Audiobyte system consists of up to four pieces: modest sized left and right speakers and an enormous desktop amplifier/volume control that I struggled to find room for on my desk ($349 for all three); and a subwoofer roughly the same size as a full sized PC desktop case that will almost certainly be placed right next to it ($179). The speakers can be ordered in some fairly exotic enclosure materials (from various types of wood to bold designer colors), which is fairly common in high end audio and home theater, but quite unusual for PC speakers. For review purposes I asked for a set in basic black (pictured to the left; the subwoofer is pictured separately, below).
The system arrived in two large, heavy boxes (large enough that visitors to my office could not believe that they contained a PC speaker system). All the cables required to hook up the system are included. The cables don’t offer the most flexibility in placement, but since most users will just be flanking their computer monitor with the speakers, super-long cables aren’t required. There are small rubber “feet” you can add to the speakers, but no stands. This is a shame, because the speakers will obviously be used on a desk, and in most situations, that will be below ear level; angled stands would be a big help.
The amplifier unit serves all the speakers; the subwoofer does not have its own power supply and amplifier. The amp glows blue around the volume control and never got more than warm after hours of continuous use. The large amp does seem to have an effect on the system’s capabilities, imbuing the Audiobytes with tremendous dynamic range – they can play ridiculously loud without distortion. For example, John Williams’ “Hedwig’s Theme” from Harry Potter goes from quiet to over-the-top brassy; the quiet sections were clear and full, and then – boom, it’s loud! – but without any sibilance on the horns. Some of this power is wasted on a near-field product like a PC system where you have a defined listening position – most listeners will be no more than three feet or so from the speakers at any time. Still, it’s nice to have gobs of power on reserve, even if there’s no way anyone will ever push the amplifier beyond mid-point before going deaf.
The main speakers and amplifier combination is more neutral and analytical than warm. Pianos were rendered realistically, which is quite hard to do and rarely achieved on PC systems. Female vocals were also good, but not great, mostly because the sound is overly localized to the little speaker. Similarly, drum kits were loud and crisp but were still sounded like they emanated from a little box three feet away rather than from a real drum set farther back. In short, they sound better than most PC speakers, but you can’t expect audiophile nirvana for $350.
Still, the system’s clarity is excellent. The mark of a good PC or iPod speaker system – you can easily tell which songs have been recorded at higher bit levels – is achieved here. Better sources sound better. I also found that the added fidelity and ability to raise endlessly raise the volume is useful beyond music when used with a PC – a webcast with poor audio quality was much clearer and easier to follow.
However, despite the big subwoofer, at anything less than ear-bleeding levels, the EPZero generated very little bass. The sub has three setting: “flat,” “half,” and “full.” It badly needs something beyond “full,” say, a “Spinal Tap” setting that takes it to 11. On Rihanna’s “Don’t Stop the Music” her vocals were crystal clear and the bass had wonderful tone – there just wasn’t that much of it. I wasn’t sure what was going on here, so I tried the “full” setting and played an even more bass-heavy dance track, “SOS.” On the Klipsch system played at the same volume level, the room shakes. On the Axiom, the bass is extremely tight – ‘bob your head’ tight, not ‘shake your rear’ tight. It worked well enough for classical and indie rock (Jonathan Coulton never sounded better), but the Axiom system isn’t the best system to listen to house, electronic, or hip hop unless you prefer listening at levels loud enough to damage your hearing.
The lack of bass at reasonable volumes really bothers me, and the high price doesn’t help matter, so I had fully expected to end my review on a negative note. But the longer I listened to music on the Audiobytes, the more I enjoyed them. The main speakers have a very neutral, open, non-fatiguing sound. They sound good. Would I spend $350 for them? Probably not. But I’m quite reluctant to let Axiom know that I’ve completed the review and ask for a shipping account number to use to return them.
Against my parents' wishes, all my aunts and uncles got together and bought me a cheap stereo system as a Bar Mitzvah gift. (My parents would have preferred a set of Talmud, a computer, sports equipment - literally anything that wasn't a stereo system I could use to blast horrible rock and roll and annoy my father. Yes, I grew up in the movie Footloose.) It was a thing of beauty: a Fisher record player/tape deck/am/fm radio and a pair of speakers that were at least three feet tall. Oh, those speakers were huge, and the system could play much louder than my parents would like. I was happy.
It didn't take long before I realized that while the speaker cabinets were huge, there was only a single, mid-sized full range driver in each of those big boxes. Similarly, when I unscrewed the 1/8" particleboard side panels from the stereo component box, I discovered there was mostly air inside. When you turned it up an played it loud (genuinely loud, not the "it's too loud! Turn that horrible music off" level that I was restricted to when my parents were home) it distorted quickly. The system looked impressive, but performed about as well as its price point probably dictated.
They probably won't appreciate the comparison, but after a few months living with mStation's 2.1 Stereo Tower, I have concluded that it is the modern incarnation of my old stereo system. It looks great and takes up a lot of space, but its sound quality -- while much better than that old Fisher -- is limited by its price point.
The mStation is without question one of the largest iPod docks of any kind. The top two columns are the main speakers; thanks to some clever engineering they can be screwed on and rotated slightly outward for some directionality. Unfortunately, the speakers are still too close together to get realistic stereo separation. The main cylinder is a "subwoofer" - a 5" bottom facing driver that generates a fair amount of mid-bass. The bass tends to be boomy, and the driver is still too small to reach truly low bass. Plastic inserts are included to customize the dock to a specific model. Other than the shuffle, every iPod I tried fit, including an iPhone, iPod touch, 1G nano, 2G nano, a 4G iPod, and a current iPod classic. Like many such systems, a remote control is included so that you can control the system from across the room (power, volume up/down, play/pause, FF, RW, and controls to adjust the bass and treble). Unlike a desktop dock, the tower will almost never be within arms reach, so the remote control is extremely useful.
At $299, the mStation 2.1 Stereo Tower can play loud enough to fill a mid-size room with undistorted sound, or a large room if the volume is kept to moderate levels. There are plenty of other choices at the same price point that won't dominate your room, but offer better sound. For example, I pitted the mStation against Logitech's AudioStation ($299, but amazon has it for just $129), and found that the Logitech's sound was richer, with considerably tighter bass. Bose also has a $299 desktop iPod speaker dock with the company's signature sound (boosted midrange and clear highs) that also handily beats the mStation. Of course, neither of those systems double as room furniture. With extensive use of aluminum in the columns, the mStation could be easily
confused for a product from Bang & Olufsen; I expect set
decorators will use it when creating a "bachelor pad" look for CSI Miami. It looks much more expensive than it is, but it sounds more like its price point.
HDMI was supposed to bring the home theater world from the confusing age of multiple cables for audio and video (and sometimes multiple audio cables and multiple video cables) down to just a single cable from each component to your display. If your display doesn’t have enough HDMI inputs for all your sources, you need an HDMI switcher or a receiver which has an HDMI switcher built in. Then you need an HDMI cable from the each source to the switcher or receiver, but just one from there to the display. Fortunately, even some budget receivers now have HDMI switching built in (starting around $400), and there are good inexpensive HDMI switchers on the market like the XTremeMac HD Switcher I reviewed last year.
But what if you have two displays?
At least in terms of receivers, you’re in a completely different price category – no $400 receivers for you. The least expensive receivers I could find with dual HDMI outputs are from Onkyo and Denon. Onkyo’s TX-NR905 has extremely high end video processing, advanced room correction that smooths the sound at multiple seats, a ridiculous amount of amplifier power with THX Ultra2 certification, the dual HDMI outputs we’re looking for, and a price tag that ranges from $1500 - $2000 (assuming that you can find one in stock. It seems that they’ve been selling quite well). Unfortunately, only one HDMI output works at a time, and to change between the two HDMI outputs, you either must physically press a button on the front panel to cycle through the settings, or adjust a setting in the menu. Neither option is conducive to automation by a universal remote control which is a fairly common way to use a product in this price category. Denon sells the AVR-4308CI, which is also chock full of features, as you might expect for a product that sells in the $1800 - $2400 range. On the Denon, the dual HDMI outputs are driven in parallel; there is no way to select them individually. This is fine for some situations, but it means that whatever the source device is outputting had better be perfect for both displays if they’re both turned on at the same time (only one display gets to handshake with the source device through the receiver and tell the device what display resolution, frame rate, etc. it wants).
There are several HDMI switchers on the market with dual HDMI outputs, and they’re a lot less expensive than buying a new $2000 receiver. Accell has sent cables here in the past, and when I saw them at CES this year they were showing off an entire line of reasonably priced HDMI switchers, topping out at a 4x8 switcher – four sources hooked up to eight displays for those times when you want your rec room to look like a NASA shuttle launch. The Accell UltraAV HDMI 4-2 Audio/Video Switch is far more reasonable (4 sources to 2 displays), and lists for a very reasonable $299 when most similar switches start at $500; I asked them to send one over for review.
It wasn't perfect, but overall I liked it: it does one thing (switches HDMI signals) for a reasonable cost, and it does it pretty well, though with some caveats. It’s quite small and I had no trouble installing it. I didn’t have a high definition test pattern disc to use, but video quality on real-world material appeared unchanged by the switcher – Ratatouille on Blu-ray from a PS3 looked just as ridiculously good direct from the PS3 or routed through the Accell. The PS3 and my Panasonic projector often have minor handshaking dropouts when loading a disc and making its way to the menus; the instance of dropouts did seem to increase after adding the switch in the chain, but if so, the difference was minor and – honest – I may have imagined the increase. The switch automatically changes the input to whichever source device is on. Since my TiVo HD is always on, I couldn’t test that fully, but it did default to that input. Accell claims that the switch mirrors the source on both outputs (like Denon’s scheme above), but I didn’t find that always worked in the real world – I could usually only lock onto the source on one display at a time. It’s possible that there was a problem in the switch, but I’m willing to bet that it’s a glitch in the way my TV and projector handle HDMI signals or the difference in resolution between the displays (a Panasonic 720p plasma and a Panasonic 1080p LCD projector). For my intended purpose – watching either the TV or the projector, but not both at the same time – the Accell switch worked perfectly.
A small infrared remote control is included that has discrete buttons – and discrete IR codes for those who want to copy them into a universal remote control – for each individual input, power on, power off, and a toggle switch for selecting between outputs A and B. In a really nice touch, an infrared receiver cable is also included so that the switcher can be secluded behind a cabinet. The switch contains a signal booster for longer HDMI cable runs up to 82ft; I was not able to test this, as my longest run is 25ft. The switch is designed for HDMI version 1.2. HDMI version 1.3 is the latest and greatest iteration of the standard, and adds things like Deep Color which have not been implemented yet in any source material. For most people, there is little practical difference between HDMI 1.3 and 1.2, but if complete futureproofing is an absolute requirement, this iteration of the 4x2 Switch isn’t for you.
Accell isn’t the only 4x2 HDMI switcher on the market; Gefen makes one for $549 that has some additional functionality, such as splitting out the audio signal to a coax output, that could be extremely useful in certain setups. And budget cable outfit monoprice.com has a budget model with HDMI 1.3a compatibility for just $89 – I’ll be testing that one next. For $89, if it just turns on I’ll be impressed.
Evan Powell over at ProjectorCentral has a short article on the massive drop in 1080p projector prices and he notes that this, plus the end of the format war, makes now an ideal time to buy.
He's not kidding. In some cases prices on models introduced just four months ago have fallen by hundreds of dollars as newer models have hit the market. The price on the Panasonic PT-AE2000U I bought at the end of the year seems to be holding steady; I'm not sure whether that means there is higher demand for this model -- certainly a possibility -- or that Panasonic just isn't reacting to changing market conditions quickly enough. I'm used to seeing this sort of competitive pricing dynamic in cellphones (<--pardon the shameless plug), but not in home theater.
It was a better standard in almost every way but capacity (and double layer HD-DVD discs made even that a moot point). Blu-ray can be spectacular, but the specification is still evolving.
HD-DVD died because consumers bought more Blu-ray discs. Consumers bought more Blu-ray discs because there were more Blu-ray players sold. There were more Blu-ray players sold because most of those were Sony Playstation 3's (PS3). Thus, Sony's decision to include a Blu-ray player in the PS3 was the primary factor in the death of HD-DVD.
I also wonder whether the decision to put Blu-ray in the PS3 was worth the cost to Sony's gaming efforts. The PS2 dominated the industry, but the PS3 is struggling with both Microsoft and Nintendo, in part because the PS3 costs more and was launched later due to Blu-ray.
*I have found that the difference between upsampled DVD and a well mastered Blu-ray is marginal on a 50" 720p plasma from 12' away. The difference is easily noticeable on a 1080p projector displayed on a 92" screen at the same distance; that's nice, but hardly mainstream.
Full disclosure: once Warner pulled out of HD-DVD, the format war was effectively over, so I bought a PS3 for use as a Blu-ray player. The Blu-ray standard keeps changing, but Sony seems determined to keep its flagship console updated with regular firmware updates. As such, the PS3 may be the only Blu-ray player on the market today that will still be current a year or two from now. And it's priced about the same as a low end Blu-ray deck. The only downside is that the PS3 uses Bluetooth instead of infrared for controls, which makes integrating it into a home theater system less than ideal. I'm using Nyko's infrared remote control along with a Logitech Harmony system; it works, but won't turn the PS3 on or off.
GizmodoGate really bothered me. I was at that Motorola press conference. This was Moto's first time talking to press/analysts in the post-Zander era, and they kept starting and stopping and starting and stopping. It was annoying for me to watch, and very hard for them to tell a smooth story.
If Gizmodo had characterized this as a prank gone badly wrong and apologized, it might have been forgivable (after all, some of us do have a sense of humor). Instead, Gizmodo's unrepentent response left a really bad taste in my mouth. I've been a marketing professional in the past and now I'm on the analyst side of the table; I consider both worthy of respect. Not nearly as much respect as teachers or firefighters or Alzheimer's researchers, but marketing, analysis, and journalism are jobs that need to be done and are worth doing well. If Gizmodo doesn't respect these professions (or my time) and insists on acting like 14 year old boys, that's fine, but they should get the same access as 14 year old boys get to CES and press conferences: none. Let the pros at engadget get the coverage and ad revenues.
Well, I'm back from Las Vegas, but my body is still on the wrong time zone. There were three main stories at this year's CES:
The death of HD-DVD. With Warner’s announcement that it will no longer sell HD-DVD movies, the high definition disc format war is effectively over with Blu-ray as the victor. Toshiba (one of HD-DVD’s primary backers) offered a weak reaction, saying that it is stunned and upset, but that HD-DVD has been declared dead before. That's true, but formats are only as valuable as the content that they are tied to. With Warner gone, only Paramount and New Line are left in the HD-DVD camp, and even they will probably switch to Blu-ray before the end of the year, once the rumored exclusivity period of their arrangement with HD-DVD is up.
Super-thin flat panel displays. Several vendor showed incredibly thin flat panel televisions – as thin as 9mm (a prototype) to 1.7” (likely to become a production model shortly). You might wonder whether there is a market for slightly thinner displays – after all, how much thinner is 1.7” than a 4” plasma or LCD today? The answer is, a lot thinner. The difference is that a 4” display is still a box you’re putting on the wall, while anything under 2” approaches being part of the wall itself. The prototypes on display looked incredibly good, and will be extremely exciting to interior designers. I expect that super thin displays will make up a significant premium segment of the market in just 1 – 2 years time. The phenomenon of super-large flat panel displays, on the other hand, has limited appeal beyond the super-wealthy, even as prices inevitably drop from the “if you have to ask” range, simply because an 11 foot long flat panel literally cannot fit around a typical home’s layout to the installation site.
Waiting for MacWorld. Last year, CES was completely upstaged by the iPhone at MacWorld the same week. This year, MacWorld is back to the week after CES, but the shadow of Cupertino was palpably draped over Las Vegas this year as well. I have no inside information on what Apple will announce next week, but Apple’s head of PR promised me that Apple’s announcements at MacWorld will be better than anything I’d see at CES. I believe him, and I suspect the rest of the industry does, too.
Other CES trends:
Several systems for moving HD content wirelessly were shown, either as part of the television purchase or as a separate accessory. While wired connections will continue to be the bulk of the market for some time, the availability of wireless options is extremely welcome as a solution to specific installation challenges.
Home storage was another big theme, with solutions that ranged from simple connected hard drives up to enterprise-class servers with friendly user interfaces.
The industry continues to introduce boxes that let you watch PC content on TV. Yawn.
GPS was everywhere at the show, particularly from vendors who either are new to the U.S. market or new to the market generally. Prices are already dropping due to the competition (and ready availability of the components needed to become a PND competitor), and it will be extremely difficult for all these vendors to make money, even if they can avoid being cannibalized by GPS on cellphones. These issues and more were discussed during my CES Education session on GPS Monday afternoon. The panel was well attended and the discussion could have easily continued for an additional hour or two beyond the time allotted.
Due to a hyper travel schedule I will not be in SFO for MacWorld next week, however I will be covering announcements made at the show from afar. Should be interesting!
Sonos announced several upgrades today to its whole-house audio system (my review of the original system is 
Against my parents' wishes, all my aunts and uncles got together and bought me a cheap stereo system as a Bar Mitzvah gift. (My parents would have preferred a set of Talmud, a computer, sports equipment - literally anything that wasn't a stereo system I could use to blast horrible rock and roll and annoy my father. Yes, I grew up in the movie Footloose.) It was a thing of beauty: a Fisher record player/tape deck/am/fm radio and a pair of speakers that were at least three feet tall. Oh, those speakers were huge, and the system could play much louder than my parents would like. I was happy.
Evan Powell over at ProjectorCentral has a short article on 
I'm back from Las Vegas, but my body is still on the wrong time zone. There were three main stories at this year's CES: