Philips embraces DVD-Audio (sort of) (1 Viewer)

[gene c]

Charles, feel free to rant on Anthony's thread. We're waiting for you. Gene

 

[John Kotches]

Brian,


Nope, everyone doesn't. A superior codec can produce better results with fewer bits. You don't know me very well if you think I believe that the bit rate is the sole determining factor in quality.

I'm concerned with encoding efficiency and minimum introduction of encoder/decoder artifacts. On the toughest materials, by your own admission, MPEG-2 breaks down where WM-9 and MPEG-4 do not. That is (IMO) reason enough.

I also think that red laser @ 9Mbits with WM-9 or MPEG-4 is a good interim solution. With the WM-9 capable players forthcoming, I think it'll be a nice stopgap assuming some titles are made available.

Cheers,

 

[LanceJ]

Will all of this matter to stupid people like me who are still planning on buying a 36" Tau TV set? BTW: I think this 633mHz Compaq is pretty quick (my email loads fast!); power windows in a Cavalier bother me; and I wish Starbucks hadn't replaced their human-operated espresso machines with those computerized versions--my Cafe Americanos taste too watery lots more often now! :frowning:

Anybody know where I can buy a rebuild kit for a hand-cranked telephone? I can only reach as far as the dry goods store lately.

LJ

 

[Brian-W]

Bad compression codec...