Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Why do we seem to be snobs with our ears but not our eyes?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do we seem to be snobs with our ears but not our eyes? - Page 2

post #16 of 65
One advantage the videophiles have is that they can freeze a frame and analyze it to their hearts content. It's easy to spot artifacts and differences in color when you can freeze time like that and evaluate slices of time that way.

Can't really do that in the same way with audio. You can't freeze audio in the air and evaluate it frame by frame. (you can freeze digital representations of audio on a computer screen but that's not quite the same)

It's easier to be a videophile than an audiophile. To be a videophile you just need to point at things on a screen that any fool can clearly see.
post #17 of 65
I clearly don't agree...it takes a lot of ear training to know what you want to hear(opamps/tubes/etc) and a lot of eye training to catch video faults such as LCD shading/vertical banding/misconvergence/judder/video jitter/motion dithering artifacts/poor color calibration/etc etc...also, learning how to make a proper D65/2.4/SMPTE-C color calibration doesn't happen overnight.

these are two very related passions that require the same levels of ear/eye training IMHO.

when you set up a script like GrainFactory3(), believe me...you need a good eye training to know exactly how you want it to look, and what to look for.
post #18 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by sahwnfras View Post
Lol, plasma get around 600hz and have for years
Do they really though? I thought they used some sort of technology that just allows them to boast 600Hz. Like refreshing only certain lines. Google brought up something about sub-fields, but I didn't read all the way into it.
post #19 of 65
The "Hz" rating of a screen is largely irrelevant. You need to know the measured transition time matrix to know what the transition speed will be like, and it isn't a single number. Non-linearities like RTC error also need to be known. Measurements like these: Roundup: New Samsung Touch of Color Series (page 10) - X-bit labs. A single xHz number won't tell you enough.
post #20 of 65
LCD's use sample and hold, DLP does not...just like a genuine cinema projector.

madshi discussed it thoroughly here: technical question: sample-and-hold effect? - AVS Forum

Reclock provides a very stable clock for A/V sync(up to 0.17ppm) on a PC, and getting a clean source is what matters the most...like that m2tech hiface thingie does for S/PDIF.
post #21 of 65
I would personally pick my $3000 gaming computer (including most peripherals) over my audio equipment that tallies up to $3000. Why? Because I love looking at how detailed games like Crysis are. I can personally SEE more differences between different TVs etc than hear differences between headphones and various amps etc. I think this is because I have not trained myself to pick out each little difference in a recording yet. I am a 'snob' with my eyes, but not ears. I personally could not live with anything less than my current graphics card (GTX 285). I had two in SLI, but am upgrading to an ati 5870. Why? Because I have seen the effects of what DX11 does to games and to me it is quite a dam big difference. It also gives more fps in games, so I won't get any lag etc.
post #22 of 65
Well, this forum is about sound not pictures.
So it should not come as a surprise that sound/music is more talked about and appreciated around here, and hence also our ear corresponding to it...
post #23 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by krmathis View Post
Well, this forum is about sound not pictures..
...and that's why I am on here a lot Trying to get the idea of headphones and different DACs and amps to s get an understanding of what they do, how and why each one can affect the sound a lot. I am also reading quite a few reviews to get an understanding of what to listen out for and all those audiophile terms to describe how a specific component (usually headphones) sounds
post #24 of 65
How many fps will be perceived as identical to the continuous nature reality is a very tough question. They'd have to find the physical speed limit of our eye's receptors cells, or of our brain. The only visual abx I'd trust humans to do accurately are colorblindness for colors they can see.
post #25 of 65
I got shafted with HD, bought HD then "true" HD came out. WTF!!! My HD was the "lie" HD. DD 5.1, now HD 7.1 - it never ends. Least 2 ch is stable. I'm gonna pass on "true" HD, the "lie" 3D and settle on "true" 3D when it comes out...no I'll wait till HD3DVR... the "true" one.
post #26 of 65
Gamers have their own placebo, its called input lag.

Input lag as it is for the most part is barely noticeable and not very much within human perception. Of course there are certain effects(ambient occlusion, and vsync) which when combined with a monitors native input lag can become noticeable on slight levels. If it is completely visible chances are the implementation is borked.

Besides that our eyes are more objective than our ears. Put two screens together and what your eyes saw as red for instance might of been completely inaccurate, the problems with various panel technologies are completely apparent and even those who prefer one or the other realize this and don't try to defend it.

Certain things that might be seen as placebo in the audio world, might hold weight in the video world. Bias lighting for instance is just a simple light, but just the right amount can fool our eyes into seeing a deeper contrast as well as provide less strain. It is not opinion, but fact.

We all see the same thing as well, but we all don't hear the same.

When it comes to fighting games 30fps vs 60fps can be the difference between pulling a properly timed combo since combos are frame by frame. At the same time stare at a game in 30fps for an extended period of time and it becomes normal. Move to a 60fps game and the difference in speed is apparent, a game running higher than 60 fps might seem "smoother" but in reality it is just too fast hence why even if you are getting 200fps in a game there is a limiter some where such that your game is not going so much faster than another persons.

Really only movies can get away with <30fps since they employ visual tricks to fool our eyes.
post #27 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by IPodPJ View Post
There's supposedly a newer high-definition format, 4 times the resolution of 1920x1080, but that wouldn't catch on for ages. Look how long it took for everyone to adopt HD. Plus, we don't even have the cable data bandwidth for that kind of resolution.
Right, its called "quad HD" (2160p) 3840x2160 resolution that can be up too 7680 × 4320 (7680p) "Ultra High Definition" by a method, that 16 time bigger than 1080p.

It put the former "HD" to shame, see the size comparative.

Its not quite new it exist in prototype since atleast 2003.

This is the future.
post #28 of 65
That depends on exactly how much input lag you're talking about. I can tell you 50ms is enough to throw off one's aim. Most games these days hide lag though, so it isn't like Quake 2 where you'd have to manually adjust your shot to where the person was going to be in X milliseconds. Also keep in mind the brain is an amazing adaptive machine, and it will work to filter perception of lag since it hinders performance. I.e., perception of an effect doesn't always reflect the effect of that effect on the brain.
post #29 of 65
Head over to AVS Forum, they are worse than Headfi since your wallet gets raped by all forms of audio and video. You will most likely spend 10x more on that forum.

I know this from experience, lol.
post #30 of 65
Keep in mind that a big component of electronics is fashion and exclusivity. People will buy all kinds of unnecessary stuff to one-up others and keep up with the Joneses.

If you want a more realistic approach to electronics, get into DIY. You'll quickly learn wha is and is not important for great performance. More importantly, you'll discover just how inexpensive great performance can be.

Don't pay attention to the marketers and those who hype their purchasers. They don't have your best interests at heart.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Why do we seem to be snobs with our ears but not our eyes?