ARCHIVED FORUM -- March 2012 to February 2022READ ONLY FORUM
This is the second Archived Forum which was active between 1st March 2012 and 23rd February 2022
Hi everyone,
Article #5 on the TrueImage upmixing algorithm in the BeoVision 11 / BeoSystem 4 / BeoPlay V1 is now public at
http://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/
Have a nice weekend!
Cheers
-geoff
Thanks!
MM
There is a tv - and there is a BV
A great article, made me change my mind about a V1 as a replacement TV in the future.
Its a shame that the B&O website does not contain more information on the upscalling / down scalling properties of the TVs, it would make for better marketting to have what the TVs are capable of, and really make them stand out from the crowd. i know you could get this information from a dealer, but how many people go into a shop to ask when the normal first port of call for many is teh internet.
Keep up the good work Geoff.
Hi geoff,
A quick question about the TrueImage in the V1.
When I have a 5.1 source and outputs it to my Beolab 14.4 with the V1 acting as center speaker, and the mixer is set to TrueImage, then the sound isn't seperated for the left and right surround channel. I.e. sound from either left or right surround channel are played in both speaker.
If the mixer is changed to 1:1 then the sound is played correctly. All settings are set to default, so in theory the TrueImage should let the sound pass through unchanged.
Can you explain this behavior?
Beovision Eclipse gen2 (GX) w/ floorstand, Beolab 14.2, 4 speaker Shape and ATV4/Chromecast.
Beoplay A9mk4 GVA, Beosound 1 GVA, H2, H3, H8, E6, Beoplay EQ
MikaelHansen:If the mixer is changed to 1:1 then the sound is played correctly. All settings are set to default, so in theory the TrueImage should let the sound pass through unchanged.
Hi,
In theory, you are correct. The issue you describe just came to my attention earlier this week. I would like it if you could check to see if DOWNMIX behaves correctly. It would also be helpful if you could send me a beoworld email with your software version number, if you would be willing to do so.
Geoff Martin: Hi everyone, Article #5 on the TrueImage upmixing algorithm in the BeoVision 11 / BeoSystem 4 / BeoPlay V1 is now public at http://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/ Have a nice weekend! Cheers -geoff
Hi Geoff, is this 'part1' of the #5?
There must be more to tell about TrueImage
Millemissen:There must be more to tell about TrueImage
I wasn't thinking of a Part 2... Are you looking for something in particular?
Article #6 is now online.
I also posted a little thing on some high resolution recordings.
Geoff Martin: Hi, Article #6 is now online. I also posted a little thing on some high resolution recordings. Cheers -geoff
Thanks Geoff. Just a slight issue.
BeoLab 3 (which is 4″ in diameter) would have to move 14 times less than a woofer from a BeoLab 5 (15″ woofer) to produce the same output.
Ban boring signatures!
Oops. Thanks! Nice to have an editor!
It would also be interesting, for remastered releases, to find out the bandwidths of the microphones etc. used for recording, together with the bandwidth of the multitrack recording machine etc.
Puncher:It would also be interesting, for remastered releases, to find out the bandwidths of the microphones etc. used for recording, together with the bandwidth of the multitrack recording machine etc. Ban boring signatures!
BeoNut since '75
elephant:Might start a whole new debate !
I hope that it will re-open an old debate... :-)
elephant:And are ribbon mics the best ?
There is no such thing as "the best" microphone. One philosophy that is not mine, but which I firmly believe in is the concept that a music recording is more like a painting than a photograph. That means a microphone is like a paintbrush. You use the best one to suit your needs for the given application in a given recording. So, a ribbon mic might be good for some applications, but not others...
Geoff Martin: There is no such thing as "the best" microphone. One philosophy that is not mine, but which I firmly believe in is the concept that a music recording is more like a painting than a photograph. That means a microphone is like a paintbrush. You use the best one to suit your needs for the given application in a given recording. So, a ribbon mic might be good for some applications, but not others...
True, and therein lies a big problem that a lot of audiophiles don't like to think about. Arguing over whether 16 or 24 bits is better is like arguing over whether hanging the painting on the right or left wall is best or what kind of wire to use to hang the frame with. Inconsequential changes, when the lack of recording expertise is often the issue. What we would like is for recording to be very cut and dried, you always do it this way and you always get good results, when due to the fact it's impossible to actually capture a live performance perfectly with available mic and recording techniques makes it a subjective artistic endeavor, not a technical scientific one. Technology informs and improves things, but it's still a human centered activity and the artistry, or lack thereof, of the recordist matters a lot.
And even imperfect recordings can be amazing depending on the music. Miles Davis' Kind Of Blue is a horribly recorded album, it's hard to fathom why someone would buy a gold CD specially mastered one as the original tapes have so much distortion and obvious gain riding, but still the music and performance captured in this recording is so magical you overlook the obvious flaws.
Jeff
I'm afraid I'm recovering from the BeoVirus.