my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » Pioneer Elite > to new reciever question (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Pioneer Elite > to new reciever question Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 09-04-2011 07:13 PM                    quote: Jesse Skeen It was such a stupid design to not just put a normal digital output on laserdisc players for the AC3 signal instead of making it be demodulated outside the player. No, it was good design that was better than DTS. DTS used the digital track and then you had no Digital unless you had DTS. Dolby used 1 analog track while the digital track were preserved in case you didnt have AC3  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 09-05-2011 08:32 AM                     I meant that however the sound was put on the disc, they should not have made it so complicated to decode it. With any current receiver you need a demodulator (my first multichannel receiver in 1998 needed one)- it would have been so much easier if the demodulating had been done in the player and had just a standard digital output to connect to any receiver. Would've been even better if they'd made it switchable between the AC3 and PCM/DTS output- I needed to use 2 digital inputs on my first receiver for the laserdisc player, my new receiver won't let me use 2 for the same source so I have a box hooked up which can switch between them and go to one input on the receiver. I thought DTS was better for backwards-compatibility because if you have an older (1986 or earlier) player that can't play the digital tracks at all, you still have the analog stereo tracks. With AC3 you lose the right analog track. Sure you lose the PCM stereo tracks with DTS, but if you have a DTS-capable system that doesn't matter much anyways. The analog tracks still sounded good until you upgraded.  |  IP: Logged Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 09-05-2011 09:53 AM                    quote: Jesse Skeen it would have been so much easier if the demodulating had been done in the player and had just a standard digital output to connect to any receiver. I got ya!  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 09-05-2011 05:48 PM                        quote: Jesse Skeen I needed to use 2 digital inputs on my first receiver for the laserdisc player, my new receiver won't let me use 2 for the same source so I have a box hooked up which can switch between them and go to one input on the receiver. Any of these are MORE than adequate to route any digital signals through. Been doing it this way since, what, 1995? Any of these are far more convenient to use than switching the output on the player which would likely need to be done through a shitty menu.  |  IP: Logged Jeff Kane Film Handler Posts: 74 From: corpus christi, tx Registered: Jun 2011 posted 09-12-2011 10:09 AM                     The AC-3 demodulator would've added significantly to the price of the LD player, and provided no benefit to those without AC-3 capability. Many mid/high end receivers at the time had AC-3 RF inputs, and people who wanted the capability obtained it that way. Incidentally the AC3 bitstream on LDs is likely at a LOWER bitrate than on DVDs. If the LD sounds better? It's 'cause it was mixed better. When all this started? DTS compatible equipment didn't exist as such. Dolby Pro Logic reigned. AC3 compatibility was only starting to trickle down from the high end ($1000+ receivers), and DTS was very much a niche product. The only consumer DTS decoder available was the Millenium 2.4.6 outboard DTS decoder until the end of '97 when the Sherwood R-945 became the first DD/DTS capable receiver (at the bargain price of $1200). Back then you had dedicated ICs for *everything*. Nowadays it's all done in firmware!  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 04-03-2012 04:04 PM                     I wonder how complicated a device an AC3-RF demodulator is. Could someone with some technical skill just build their own? I'm actually a bit surprised no one seems to have done this yet. AJG  |  IP: Logged Jesse Skeen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1517 From: Sacramento, CA Registered: Aug 2000 posted 04-06-2012 07:28 PM                     I'm guessing it's rather complicated, as someone would have done it by now if it weren't. Some people figured out rather quickly how to put an AC-3 output jack on any player, but of course that still requires a demodulator. Wish I'd picked up an extra Kenwood demodulator at Fry's when they were marked down to $49.99, I've only got one that will have to last me for eternity (even if I re-buy a movie on Blu-Ray or whatever super hi-tech format comes out next, I will NEVER get rid of any of my laserdiscs!)  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 04-06-2012 10:26 PM                     Hopefully someone bought those Kenwoods and they aren't just sitting in a land fill. At least they could circulate on eBay. My Sony SDP-E800 still works, but I fear for the day that it dies. I've some titles here and there, but yes, I'll never part with my collection. I'd rather lose all my Blu-rays than my LaserDiscs. It's funny how it still wows guests when they see me put one in the player. AJG  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-07-2012 12:17 AM                        They're probably not "wowing" due to being impressed with LDs, but simply how extremely primitive LDs are and how far technology has come since the caveman days of primitive LaserDiscs.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 04-07-2012 10:31 AM                     And yet many of them still sound better than many DVDs out there. Heck, I'd even argue some look better. The CAV edition of Jurassic Park to my eyes has a better look than the DVD, despite being lower resolution. AJG  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-07-2012 03:38 PM                        The resolution isn't that much lower. The color space, however... well, not that DVD has any to brag about in that regard, either.  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 04-07-2012 03:58 PM                     Watching a 10 foot image now, both formats definitely have their shortcomings. I've grown to hate MPEG2 compression more than dot crawl and analog video noise though. AJG  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-07-2012 04:50 PM                        I'd probably have to agree with you there.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.