|
|
-
 A bit of time off work has afforded me the rare opportunity to head to the movies. I don’t often get to go to the real show but this time I set out to see an old Marvel comics favourite of mine brought to the big screen; Fantastic Four. First, I got to see the trailer for another movie I’m looking forward to. Everyone’s favourite goth filmmaker Tim Burton has finally made another puppet animation film in the vein of Nightmare Before Christmas, it’s called “Corpse Bride”. It looks like a hit to me. As a Canadian I have special love for puppets, we grew up on Casey and Finnegan not to mention the Friendly Giant’s squad of talking puppets holding down the castle. We love our puppets up here in Canada and I must say; it’s about time Tim Burton made another puppet movie!
This summer has given us an interesting twist in film culture. There’s a general revolt against the big summer special effects films this year as if somehow the mindless action flicks this summer are worse than any other year. This is evidenced by the mediocre reviews given anything with a healthy dose of CGI. Maybe there will be a Tarantino style revolution as we saw in the 90s when we’ll see smaller budget idea films re-surfacing, that wouldn’t be half bad. I went to the Fantastic Four with low expectations. I heard reviews that explained it was too hurried, confused, too many “powers” not enough story. Poppycock! Let’s get one thing straight, this is a comic movie. The CGI loaded films hitting the mega-plex this decade will be the stuff of late night movies on basic cable TV in another decade and that’s where I think they’ll be viewed with a fondness by the kids seeing them today. I see them as a sort of guilty pleasure, the kind of late night movie that might not have ever made great film, but I can’t turn it off. Movies based on Marvel comics are like old Roger Corman horror movies based on Poe or Lovecraft stories except in those films instead of CGI you get Vincent Price’s penetrating gaze. Like those horror movies of the late 60s I’ll never get sick of watching another Marvel comic given the big budget, big screen treatment. I really think the quality of the current run of comic films is top notch and the Fantastic Four is no exception.
I don’t expect critics like Roger Ebert to understand, he confuses the powers of the FF with that of the X-Men and feels the FF are a kind of a second stringer. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Fantastic Four were Marvel’s first super group. Early FF comics were a marriage between the creative forces of Stand Lee and Jack Kirby. You had Kirby’s way out monsters (the Thing, Mole Man’s minions) and his way out space adventures complete with cosmic rays and Reed’s wacky experiments. But you also had Stan Lee’s humanization of the story the romance of Reed and Sue Storm, the competitive rivalry between Johnny and Ben Grim, the in fighting and bickering of a group of four who don’t always get along. I felt the movie captured these elements with style and grace. If the Fantastic Four had been released before the X-Men or Spiderman, I think the critics would have taken a softer view. That said, X-men/Spiderman have already passed and if you didn’t really like them well needless to say you probably won’t like the FF either.
Every high flying action film tries to deliver something you’ve never seen before and the FF delivers some unique action sequences. A series of events unfolds on a bridge in New York City that escalates in the scene where the Thing stops the truck with his body, you may have seen it on all the adds. I found the bridge scene to be a real nail biter, the first time you see them discovering their powers trying to save innocent bystanders. Of course you get another taste of NY populist unity, Spiderman style. In another scene Dr Doom and the Thing are fighting and crash through the floor of a pool, flooding a hotel floor below. Those scenes are why you want to see the Fantastic Four. Jessica Alba as Sue Storm is every bit as easy to watch in this film as she was in Sin City and the rest of the group hit the mark as their embodiments of earth, air, fire and water (get it…Fantastic Four the original elements found in alchemy).
While it’s not a great film, it’s a good summertime action flick that will be as fun to watch on cable or on DVD in the near future or as it is at the megaplexes today. Oh, and I’ll be on the lookout for Tim Burton’s goth puppet show.
|
-
 The most important DVD to come out this week was Million Dollar Baby, the film that won the Oscars for 2004…all of them. I hadn’t seen the movie until the DVD this week but I didn’t have any critical plot points spoiled for me, although I thought I had. I heard that some religious and politically right leaning people had problems with the film on moral grounds. So, I found myself waiting for the part where Hillary Swank’s character (Maggie Fitzgerald) engages in a lesbian action and gets married in a liberal blue state. Unfortunately there was no such scene and I had no idea what was coming.
The film is narrated by the always likable voice of Morgan Freeman, there’s despondency to the pacing and Freeman’s voice which he does so well. It’s easy to imagine Morgan Freeman doing some gritty Blues. Clint Eastwood, like Sean Connery has that rare ability to carry a film single-handedly, it’s a pleasure to just watch him talk. Of course there is considerable talent here besides Eastwood, not the least of which is the staring actress Hillary Swank an academy award winner herself from 1999’s Boys Don’t Cry.
I won’t get into the meat of this movie because if you haven’t seen it, I won’t spoil anything here. Eastwood is a master director at human stories like Million Dollar Baby, he rarely misses the mark as a story teller and in no way can I bring any criticism to this film. It’s indeed a classic that deserves any kudos it’s received. Ostensibly the movie is about a boxer, but not about boxing per-se. At one point in the film Freeman makes the point that many people die before their time, they’re people who sacrificed their dreams to wash dishes or driving a cab because they never got that one big chance. The big “chance” here is the boxer (Swank) taking on the title. But this could be anything, the underlying story is universal. Since this one’s about boxing it’s filled with exciting boxing sequences and isn’t above Freeman’s commentary about the sport itself, love it or hate it.
DVD
There isn’t anything about the video quality that distracts from the story. The film is comprised of generally gritty scenes in the well worn gym which look rustic. The video quality is conveys this sufficiently without over saturating colors or presenting too much contrast. The soundtrack is laid back, no aggressive surround effects here. The only time I even thought about the soundtrack was during the few times we entered a large stadium experiencing the drum of the audience. The few scenes with accompanying musical scores were memorable but blended perfectly to the story. This isn’t the kind of DVD you’re going to pop into the player to demo your system unless, you have the time to demonstrate a systems transparency then this DVD is perfect.
Extras
I’m almost always disappointed by extras on DVDs because they almost always give you the same old production house masturbatory crap. Million Dollar Baby is no exception. There are two flavors to this release, the two disc or three disc. The three disc includes the soundtrack on CD which might be interesting, the second disc of extras has little offer. There are three documentaries on the extra DVD with one that has anything even remotely interesting. Born to Fight takes a closer look at Lucia Rijker, the woman who played Billie 'The Blue Bear', Maggie Fitzgerald’s opponent for the title of world champion. The documentary gives some interesting tidbits about Swank’s training and some insight into Rijker’s history and how some of her experiences parallel events in the movie. Generally stars like Hillary Swank talking about their film preparations and training is pretty boring stuff, it’s interesting that she worked out, we can see it in the movie she did an amazing job of sculpting her body for the part. It’s the general stroking the egos of everybody else involved I can do without. The others are “James Lipton Takes on Three” and “Producers Round Three”. These two are only remotely interesting if you like to see actors and producers singing the monotonous number: “happy, happy, joy, joy”.
What would have been really interesting? A documentary about Lucia Rijker! How about a piece about women’s boxing in general? These seem like no brainers to me on a so called “extras” DVD for this film. The film delves into the culture of women’s boxing; why not feed back to it by telling us more about it? Lucia Rijker has an interesting past as not only an actress but also a junior welterweight boxing champion of the Women’s International Boxing Federation (WIBF). She had a record of 15-0, 14 by knockout, she really is a bad assed chick! The documentary Born to Fight only alludes to what could have been an interesting story.
|
-
 I've played with a few DVD recorders such as the Sony RDR-GX300. If you’re considering a DVD recorder addition to your HT setup be prepared to spend some serious RTFM time. That is you’ll need to dust off the owners manual read, read and read some more. I found the controls to be very unintuitive, perhaps the next gen DVD Rs will improve but the DVD recorders available last year seemed about as user friendly as a bottle of cod liver oil.
When connecting the DVD recorder to your system there are as many configurations as purposes for your recorder.
A popular option (and who can blame you) is recording all those VHS tapes. It’s best not to use the receiver to pass the video signal through for recording from VHS. Make a direct audio-video connection from the VCR (out) to the DVD recorder's input, use S-Video instead of the yellow RCA video connector if available. Using a direct connect will give you a better quality recording all around and the S-video gives superior picture to the composite RCA connection. Be sure and match the recording time on the DVD-R to that of the VHS tape you’re using for best results. Obviously, like in the VHS realm you have 2, 4, 6 hour settings. The less record time you get out of your DVD-R the better the quality. When setting up your kit that now does a bunch of jobs, recording shows to DVD, and VHS tapes to DVD... you're the engineer with all this gear to get operating. It's important to remember the first rule of engineering: KISS. Keep It Simple, Stupid.
The receiver as a "pass through" is handy for switching between devices with one remote control from the couch. This is great for your regular playback devices IE DVD player. But for special jobs like recording tapes to DVD you probably want to bypass it. If your receiver has a DVD in/out that includes S-video and composite (the yellow RCA cable) remember not to mix them up. If you're using an S-video on the DVD-1 input on the receiver, you must also use the S-video output to the TV (unless the receiver performs the relatively advanced job of conversion) or you'll get no signal at all.
DVDRs with HDD
Many people believe that for editing purposes it’s best to have a DVD-Recorder that includes a Hard Drive built in that records for you so you can commit to disc only portions you want. This means you can edit our commercials and your DVD Recorder doubles as a PVR. This isn't necessarily true on DVD-Rs that are DVD-RW compatible. Many have a list of great editing features. The Sony RDR-GX300 has a feature that allowed me to place an A mark then a B mark (A-B erase) at any point of the recording (as long as it was a DVD-RW) and then I could eliminate from the entire recording anything between point A and point B (IE commercials). A great feature, and easily mastered. Carefully consider the significantly more expensive DVD-R’s with a built in HDD (Hard Disc Drive for recording). They’re going to tack at least an extra $100 to the purchase price, usually much more. The HDD set top box such as TiVo or the many satellite and digital cable boxes out there that come standard with PVR are a handy way to watch TV, the ability to pause at any time or rewind is very handy especially if you have a baby in the house.
When you think about what the PVR adds to your viewing experience I find that I would much rather have it part of my cable box/satellite box and NOT the DVD-Recorder. The PVR is a great idea; stopping or pausing anytime you watch is very cool. Having a little baby around the house made it particularly valuable. I’m leery of keeping your DVD-R ‘on’ to use its HDD while viewing a hockey game. I don't like to have extemporaneous units on and running while viewing (IE I have no intention of recording a hockey or basketball game, but I want the pause rewind features the PVR offers).
The second hesitation I have for the PVR/DVD-R combo is that the signal path of everything I watch has to go through yet another box. The audio from the digital cable box has to be diverted to the dedicated PVR/DVD-R box then to the receiver to "record while watch". Now, using a digital cable terminal/PVR combo is the cat's ass! I can watch/record at will and have the DVD-R (if I still had it) off and only switch it on if I recorded (or even just watched) something I wanted to commit to DVD.
Appologies to any regular readers out there. I am again going away on vacation and will be sent more than a few days. But when I come back I'll have lots to say.
|
-
HD DVD is an optical storage medium developed by Toshiba to replace the DVD. Blu-Ray is a slightly newer optical storage medium also intended to replace DVD developed by Sony. Talk of an impending format war began to subside as the two sides joined in a series of meetings to try to hammer out a mutually beneficial agreement that would release only one of the two standards or at least develop a universal standard.
The latest news in the hi-def optical storage peace is… It’s on baby! Both sides have left the table rolling up their sleeves for an all out format war that will be played out early next year in video retailers near you. This is particularly troubling for anyone hoping for a universal format or for one of the existing formats to give in and endorse the other’s, it’s not going to happen.
The last quarter of this year will see the first HD DVD discs and players on store shelves. HD DVD will be followed closely by the release of the first Blu-Ray offerings from Sony. It’s likely the two formats will sit on store shelves as not much more than a confusing curiosity for the uninitiated. As long as this format war goes unresolved, the cost of the players will likely remain prohibitive to the mainstream audience and the selection of movies available will be low. This all but assures the standard DVD format will remain alive and well for many years to come. You can’t blame manufacturers for wanting a return on the millions they’ve spend in research and development. But I also can’t help but think they’re acting like spoiled children at the expense of the bigger picture. The advancement of HDTV and an optical storage medium that produces HD video will be slowed. Imagine if early next year the general public were presented with a single, simple well developed technology on store shelves at reasonable costs. A true optical HD format giving crisp 720P and even 1080P images with no macroblocking, chroma bugs or other video hiccups that afflict current 480P DVD images. This would certainly advance the cause of HDTV, selling not only the players and media but it would sell more HDTVs. In the long run, this format war can only hurt the very manufacturer’s engaging in it Sony and Toshiba.
|
-
 When even a competent film director gets to make a movie based on personal experiences of historic events a great film is often the result. Oliver Stone made Platoon based on his own experience ‘coming of age’ in the hell of Vietnam where he served as a LRRP. Of all the Stone films, love ‘em or hate ‘em Platoon resonates across the board. The same can be said for Samuel Fuller a cigar chomping “tough guy” of a film director known for his hard boiled film noir and violent westerns. In the Big Red One, Sam Fuller got the chance to make the movie he always wanted about his personal experiences in the Second World War as an infantryman with the Big Red One, the nickname of the US Army’s first infantry division.
The original theatrical release of The Big Red One had been savagely trimmed by producers which broke Fuller’s heart when it was released to theaters in 1980. Despite cutting out many details in the movie it was still one of the classic films of World War II. Sam Fuller died in 1997 and always spoke of restoring his original film, unfortunately he never lived to see it. Last April (2005) we got to see this classic digitally restored on DVD with all the missing bits. Samuel Fuller’s Big Red One The Reconstruction makes this classic war film even better with over 40 minutes of extra scenes. Of course, the first time I saw the film at theaters I was too young to remember much of it, so picking up the Big Red One on DVD was a long awaited revisiting of a classic that would be much like seeing this film for the first time, all over again.
The Big Red One stars Lee Marvin as simply “The Sergeant”, and four young soldiers of a first infantry division rifle squad. Other young soldiers come and go throughout the various episodes of film, but they tend to die before the four get to know their names so by mid way through the film they stop trying. Two of the fours survivors are played by Mark Hamill (easily Hamill's best movie outside of Star Wars) as a sensitive soldier who doesn’t want to have to kill and Robert Carradine is a cigar chomping writer and an overt embodiment of Sam Fuller himself. The movie gives you a sense the wide scope of the war. The squad goes from North Africa, the island of Sicily, Normandy and the forests of Germany. At Normandy the restored footage shows us a D-Day invasion that comes close to portraying the stark terror of the same invasion depicted in Saving Private Ryan.
The other notable factor of this film is the style. This is above all a Sam Fuller movie, who is known for giving us the unexpected. The obvious undertones are that of an anti-war film, but this is no sympathy laden, politically correct picture. When Mark Hamill's character explains to the sergeant he can’t murder anyone for war, Marvin (The Sergeant) explains curtly that they don’t murder, they kill. There are no flowery speeches in this film and that’s one of the things I appreciate. Late in the film when Hamill’s character is overwhelmed by inhumanities he witnesses at the liberation of a concentration camp, he unloads an entire clip of ammo into a German soldier he finds hidden in one of the ovens ready to snipe whoever opens the door. The Sergeant finds Hamill continuing to fire into the already dead soldier even though he’s run out of ammo. In a lesser (perhaps modern) film the Sergeant might have tried to console Hamill, but here, Lee Marvin passes Hamill another clip.
The restoration process is well done, very little artifacts for a restoration of a 25 year old film. The soundtrack is simply amazing, the 5.1 effects are very well done and surprisingly aggressive, used in almost every battle scene to give a sense of chaos. The weapons fire seems very realistic, the crack of those M-1 Garrand rifles sounds like a heavy .30 caliber rifle should, each round eloquently grazes the subwoofer. The musical score was completely restored and much of it recreated from scratch, it sounds fresh and new without being too modern and out of place.
Special features
A secondary factor at best when deciding on a DVD purchase, but this one’s got some good ones. A list of alternate scenes plod through scenes that weren’t used in the reconstruction and they explain why, good insight if you’re interested. The real stand out is the ‘The Men Who Made the Movies” a close up of Sam Fuller’s career made in a true film student approach. This documentary goes through his career and really shows what Fuller made in his life and what he was thinking with many of the important scenes in his work. I haven’t seen a documentary on film this good since watching Martin Scorsese’s Il Mio viaggio in Italia.
- Encoding: Region 1 (U.S. and Canada only.)
- Format: Dolby, Widescreen, Special Edition, Color
- Rated: Unrated
- Studio: Warner Home Video
- DVD Release Date: May 3, 2005
- Run Time: 163
- DVD Features:
- Available subtitles: English, Spanish, French
- Available Audio Tracks: English (Dolby Digital 5.1), French (Dolby Digital 5.1)
- Commentary by reconstruction producer Richard Schickel
- Over 40 minutes of added footage
- Alternate scenes
- Anatomy of a Scene: Watch the director at work and examine the before/after restoration comparisons
- New documentary The Real Glory: Reconstructing The Big One
- Profile: The Men Who Make the Movies: Samuel Fuller
- War department film: The Fighting First
- 1980 promo reel, theatrical trailer, and TV and radio spots
- 2004 reconstruction trailer
- Stills gallery
- Number of discs: 2
|
-
Here's what I've had to say about power conditioners/expensive surge suppressors in the past, it’s still generally good advice. These days at every electronics superstore in North America you can find Monster Cable peddling surge suppressors that may make other bold performance claims like line filtering. Peripherals like surge suppressors, extended warranties and interconnect cables are usually marked up considerably and how the big box stores make money off the sale of very low priced hardware. But do you need surge suppressors or power conditioners?
The quick advice on surge suppression is to that it is a very real factor for electronic equipment. Light strikes near your house and it can send high current through your wiring and can damage equipment. Although relatively rare it can happen. Surge suppression has a rating system in place so a suppressors effectiveness can be measured. Look for their rating in joules; the better they are at shunting a surge to ground the higher the joule rating. If there is no such rating, it’s not a surge suppressor and doesn’t conform to IEEE 587 standards. If you own your house, consider surge suppression on your fuse box to protect everything in your house at once.
As for many of the other claims made of many of these devices, such as line conditioning, voltage or ground stabilizer and noise filter, you must be more than a little skeptical. None of these jobs have a standard (like surge suppression) or a universal rating to measure effectiveness. You must basically trust the manufacturer and in the case of Monster Cables they’ve proven to be quite untrustworthy.
I tend to believe much of the noise about power conditioning is fiction. Consider exactly what job you're looking for and why you need it. Voltage stability can be a problem if you’re suffering frequent brown outs and you have gear that is very sensitive to fluctuations. The owners manual can usually let you know. But most moderately priced electronics gear have power supplies capable of shrugging off minor surges and voltage irregularities.
Keeping your AC pure for better quality audio is the kind of thinking that borders scam and usually is. If your sound is being affected by dirty power and not filtered out by a decent quality power supply, it’s usually in extreme cases only and temporary. Turn your vacuum cleaner on while watching a movie and see what I mean. If the vacuum cleaner is operating in close proximity to your HT hardware the motor’s oscillation will reflect back through the AC line and will likely cause disturbances in your TV’s picture and might even be heard through your audio system. But this is an obvious problem. I get annoyed at the idea that there are minor irregularities on my AC line that I don’t even notice and an expensive power conditioner is going to filter it out and unlock never before heard performance in my audio system.
|
-
NHT is a small speaker company out of California that has been making moderately priced high-end speaker equipment since 1987. NHT stands for ‘Now Hear This’ and people tend to comment on the bold name when they first hear about NHT concluding they’re a bit cocky. But they’re a speaker manufacturer who really tends not to make so much noise, letting their product line literally make sounds for them. Credited with the creation of the worlds first powered sub in 1992, NHT aims at the audiophile who is ready to take that first step beyond the kind of equipment you find at the local big box store and try something truly amazing that will match well with those ‘better than average’ components you’ve been collecting. These are not for your low-budget receiver and stock 20 gauge speaker wire. You’ll need to treat your speakers a little better than that to make the NHT ST-4 really sing.
The ST-4 stands atop NHT’s “Super Audio” series as the only floor standing speaker in the line. The piano lacquer finish and narrow footprint gives the NHT ST-4 an elegant, refined demeanor. This is a three way speaker, with a highly sensitive aluminum dome tweeter, a single midrange and a woofer. The ST-4 can get away with such a narrow face by using a side firing woofer. The narrow design of the ST-4 is common in full sized speakers today, manufacturer’s have gotten away from front firing woofers and mounting them on the side saves valuable space, since the directional effects of low frequency is limited this won’t diminish one’s perception of bass. Another space saving feature is NHT’s claim that these speakers are engineered so as not to require very much toeing in if any at all. Definitely experiment with this when you get them into your living room as results with room acoustics will vary. But I found the sound evenly dispersed culminating in a nice sweet spot when I did not toe in one bit, the sound seems to converge front and center quite nicely without. As refined as this speaker looks, it’s also a smooth operator when it comes to sound. The NHT-ST-4, like the entire “super audio” series specialize in neutrality, trying for neither a bright nor boomy sound. The result is a smooth clarity that sounds well beyond this speaker’s price range.
Be warned however, if you care to venture into the NHT “Super Audio” line they all tend to have high impedance relative to other speakers of their size, power requirements are going to be rather high. A benefit of NHT’s thoughtful design is that they’re bi-ampable. This means I can use a separate two channel amp to power only their woofers and another two channel amp to power the tweeter and midrange. Bi-amping half the of these speaker’s considerable load can be especially helpful when you’re already taxing a multi-channel receiver.
If you’re ready to delve into something on the higher end of the speaker room at Best Buy but don’t have the budget for those electro-stat hybrid’s that cost as much as a car, you might want to consider any of NHT’s lines. The uppscale speakers sold any big box store will surely cost much more than the ST-4s, and some will look bigger and badder. But if you close your eyes and let your ears decide you'll understand why NHT has won over a dedicated following. Complimenting a variety of music, these speakers make the perfect match for a maturing eclectic musical taste. They're just as at home with a bit of jazz or classical as it is with the latest pop sounds and give a transparent home theater performance. It won’t emphasize middle-highs or give hard rock guitar that push it likes, and other speakers will certainly give you more kick and in your face for live performances. The ST-4's strong point is their transparency, a feat only much higher end speakers apsire to. But when a female vocalist is accompanied by minimal instrumentation on a well recorded track, just close your eyes and they'll make the hairs on your arm stand on end.
|
-
 What’s disturbing about the CRTCs slow approval of Satellite Radio in Canada is the mindset of a group dedicated to standing in the way of these kinds of telecommunications technologies ostensibly for “cultural” reasons. Friends of Canadian Broadcasting is opposed to the arrival of satellite radio to Canada (Canadian content regulations and all). Friends’ spokesperson Ian Morrison has this to say: "Today's decision creates a pipeline for U.S. radio programs direct to Canada, with little in return for our country,"
So, demand for US programming isn’t enough? Freedom of information isn’t enough? That we sentient beings here in Canada might actually want some US radio programs doesn’t quite cut it with Ian. There has to be something that Ian Morrison thinks is valuable to Canada or he is going to appeal to federal cabinet in court, these are the threats the Friends’ are making today.
No friends of mine.
Just go to the friends’ site and see the rotating images on their main page title. They’re mostly random images from the old glory days of 50’s and 60’s Canadian broadcasting. A proud history indeed these cultural isolationist, xeno-technophobes have no business citing for their own purposes. The whole image they’re trying to portrait smacks of a National Front-like movement or any movement that draws inspiration from a slanted interpretation of the “good old days”. A Friend to Canadian broadcasting is fine, promote Canadian content is fine. But these people seem more interested in being enemy to progress than friend to any free thinking Canadian.
The Friends of Canadian Broadcasting and the CRTC itself is an affront to the storied, forward thinking and fearless history of Canadian communications technology. “Friends” tries to capture these images of our proud past for their protectionist agenda. This can only lead Canadians to believe our cultural heritage as clever engineers and worldwide telecommunications leaders is something that brings us “demons” from south of the border. In that brave past we were the first to broadcast live events from coast to coast, and not just once to prove it could be done, but regularly to broadcast Hockey Night in Canada every Saturday night to all Canadians. A Scot-Canadian invented the telephone. We helped Marconi send the first signals from one continent to another when he communicated all the way from Newfoundland to Pisa Italy in 1901. American’s invented cable TV, but it was Canadians who perfected it as Canadian MacLean Hunter the giant of the cable industry brought Canadian engineers to teach their American cousins to wire their cities for moving images.
But what about today? Canada is late for new technological advances when the government can possibly have any say over it. The CRTC slows the progress we should be continuing as our birthright. We have yet to broadcast any network in HDTV across our country. We have only just approved the first satellite radio service in Canada and CRTC’s Chairman Charles Dalfen talks about it as if it’s a new and ground breaking even for Canada.
But you can’t blame the CRTC per-se, the CRTC is just a part of the Canadian government you elected. It’s the mindset of groups like Friends of Canadian Broadcasting and any Canadian who buys into the fear-mongering argument that our Canadian culture is so anemic it will simply whither before the onslaught of 50-cent and Kelly Clarkson. This is the ludicrous idea the CRTC is protecting Canadian culture from being swallowed up by the giant south of the border. Fortunately most Canadians don’t buy it. We know that the CRTC’s regulatory constipation of progress is only a thin disguise for social protectionism of the worst order; it’s the last vestige of hope keeping alive the outmoded “Minsitry of Information”.
|
-
 The lumbering wheels of the CRTC (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission) finally got around to approving satellite radio in Canada last Thursday. You know Satellite Radio; that groundbreaking concept in add free digital radio beamed to subscribers by Satellite to small mobile receivers used in either cars or portable radios. The US has had two competing satellite radio companies for years, XM and Sirius. The CRTC licenses are for three competing satellite radio providers to operate in Canada, of course they’ll have to observe strict Canadian content laws.
Chairman of CRTC Charles Dalfen says. "These licenses will harness new technologies for Canadians and give Canadian talent exposure to listeners across Canada and indeed, North America...through new Canadian channels and airplay on U.S. channels,"
The CRTC’s approval had lead to a partnership between CBC (who already provides Galaxy satellite radio to Satellite and digital cable TV subscribers) and Sirius. While Canadian Satellite Radio has partnered with XM. The third service will be run by CHUM and Montreal’s Astral Media. The new satellite radio services will have to observe the following regulation enforced by the CRTC to comply with Broadcasting Act:
- Eight channels produced in Canada. Only nine foreign channels for each Canadian channel.
- 85% of all programming broadcast on the Canadian channels must be Canadian.
- 25% of Canadian channels must be French language channels.
- 25% of musical selections on Canadian channels must be new Canadian musical selections.
- 25% of the selections must be by emerging Canadian artists.
No word yet on when the new satellite radio companies will become available but the cost is said to be about $13 per month to subscribers.
|
-
 Sirius, the alternative satellite radio company has been working overtime to topple it’s competitor XM with controversial celebrity endorsements as well as a new video service.
If Howard Stern jumping over to Sirius to produce his own uncensored show wasn’t controversial enough for you, how about this: Sirius just announced former menace to society Martha Stewart will have her own show on Sirius as well. It’s unclear if Stewart will delve into any trading advice but she is sure to have plenty to say on gardening, cooking and reportedly will include some women’s entertainment in her lineup.
Sirius had announced at CES (Consumer Electronics Show) 2005 a collaboration with Microsoft to use the software giant’s codec, Windows Media Player 9 to produce up to three fully video satellite radio stations. Thus far the intention is to provide kid shows to relieve driving stressed parents by placating the kids with back-seat monitors.
|
-
 Arcam is a British audio manufacturer who specializes in high end and rather pricey CD/DVD players, receivers, surround processors, amplifiers and pre-amps. Arcam’s DVD players are particularly noteworthy as some of the best DVD players available according independent testing by Home Theater Secrets.
If you look into Arcam’s Diva line you’ll find gear that can be considered affordable in the real world. I personally don’t live in the world of most hi-fi reviews who call a $6000 Arcam processor affordable and pretty good for its price range and offer anecdotal comparisons with processors that cost twice that much. The Arcam AVR line of receivers is one way us common folk (you know, mortgage, kids and family to help spend our money) can own something designed by the same team of engineers who design some of the hi-fi equipment we can only dream about. Arcam has struck balance with their AVR line, designed by the same award winning team at their small UK factory but manufactured overseas to meet a price point that puts them in competition with Japanese manufacturer’s you might find at the local big box store.
AVR 200
AVR 250
AVR 300
The AVR200 has recently been replaced by the 250 and 300, both newer models boast a few added features but the basic look, feel and most importantly the attention to detail remains largely the same. My reviews can really only stick to the 200 and 250 models as I’ve been able to hear both intensively and haven’t listened to a 300 yet but I can only conclude it’s more of the same.
When the AVR200 first came out a few years ago it lagged slightly in one particular feature most competing multi-channel receivers included, that is support for the extended 7.1 Dolby Digital EX and DTS ES surround formats. The AVR 200 only supports 5.1 and has 5 discreet amplifiers built in at 70 watts per channel. This shortcoming has been remedied with the AVR250 now with seven separate channels capable of up to 70watts of continuous power and support for extended surround formats. Both receivers offer 70 Watts per channel in multi-channel listening mode but use an alternate two channel amplifier circuit that reaches 90 Watts per channel when listening in stereo or 2.1 (stereo with sub). While 70 Watts may seem slight, in their literature Arcam claims their AVR300 upgrade, at 100Watts per seven channels, is designed for larger rooms and if the two channel 90W circuit is any indication it’s almost as if Arcam is apologetic about the seemingly slight power output of their AVR200/250 models. Considering Watts law, you must double the power output to get a mere three decibels of extra volume from any given amplifier/speaker combination. The power output of the AVR300 would require 140 watts per channel to give three more decibels in any given speaker load. The difference between 70 and 100 watts in an amplifier is negligible. General public’s attraction to the watts output specification and the number 100 seems a purely psychological product of marketing. Remember the old commercial?
“100 Watts per channel, baby!”
More volume can be produced by more efficient speakers; my own experience with the AVR200 is with the remarkably inefficient NHT ST-4 speakers and I never found them wanting for volume in a 30x30’ room. I don’t see where a larger room would be served better with twenty extra watts per channel. Because power output isn’t Arcam’s forte, more emphasis is placed in other areas; and rightly so! The key to a great sounding receiver isn’t the amplifier’s power output but the power supply. A high capacity power supply should be able to draw more than enough current for the output transistors providing gain to the speakers. All the AVR models boast a large heavy Toroidal power transformer in its power supply. The Toroidal transformer is a high current circular style transformer used in some high end equipment and provides much of the weight when you pick it up.
A high quality power supply and high current circuitry, simple circuit design with short paths and not a lot of bells and whistles provides the Spartan performance you expect from components with the Arcam name. When you’re immersed in a movie and the front channels kick in with a musical score that takes you away, it’s not some silly extemporaneous processing chip giving that scene the oomph it needs. It is clean unobstructed power provided to the outputs who in turn can rise to the occasion of lofty peaks in the soundtrack without clipping, giving you every note, every decibel the film’s sound director intended, this is what makes the home theater system.
What about the sound quality of the Arcam AVR receivers? I don’t go for a lot of adjectives to describe the sound produced by an amplifier. Amps provide speakers the ability to do their job, that’s it. I won’t go into a dissertation about the “musicality” of the Arcam AVR200/250, although those that do claim the Arcam receiver is designed as much for music as it is for Home Theater. When using Arcam’s built in DACs for processing CD and DVD through its digital inputs the Arcam puts most CD/DVD players within its price range to shame. With its extra 90W stereo circuit the Arcam AVR has engineered a Home Theater receiver that hasn’t forgotten their company roots in the audiophile quality stereo market. You can be sure that when the soundtrack really kicks in, whichever Arcam AVR you chose will be able to keep up and brings out the true beauty in your speakers.
The AVR 200 has 5.1 channel outputs, labeled S/PDIF ins, which is a bit of nuisance, only so many optic/coax not for each digital input but the good news is there are both coax and optic available, but if you’re relying on all coax or all optical you’ll be disappointed. The AVR 200 has pre outs for every channel allowing you to transfer power duties to another unit or bi-amp your speakers. It also includes 5.1 inputs for high resolution audio formats like DVD-Audio and SACD.
• Five discreet amplifiers at 70W continuous
• Dolby Digital, DTS and Dolby Pro Logic II processing
• Both coax and optic digital inputs
• 5.1 channel analogue inputs for hi-res audio format
• Arcam’s own high quality DACs that produce amazing sound for its price point.
The AVR250 has 7.1 capability and extended surround processing. The same hard labeled s/pdif inputs (you cannot rename their source) but missing on the AVR250 are pre outs for every channel. Only the front L.R has pre-outs and the manual calls this a zone 2 feature. I find this a bit cheesy of Arcam and a slight step backward from the AVR200. One place the 250 makes up lost ground is in bass management, now with the AVR 250 you can manually set the crossover frequency for your small speaker setting. This is a huge improvement from the AVR 200 which has the ambiguous “small” speaker setting with an unpublished crossover. Rumour has it the crossover is 80hz on the AVR 200 if you’re interested. But this isn’t a problem for the AVR 250, you can select from list of crossover frequencies and fine the one that best suits your sub.
• Seven discreet amps at 70 Watts continuous power
• Dolby Digital, DTS, Dolby Pro Logic II and Dolby Digital EX, DTS ES.
• A variety of coax and optical digital inputs, hard labelled
• 5.1 channel analogue inputs for hi-res audio formats
• Arcam’s own high DACs that produce amazing sound for this price point.
• Missing pre-outs for all but the front two channels, you can only bi-amp the front L, R channels. Renders that external five channel amp useless.
|
-
 The purpose of this entry is to set the ground work for future receiver and amp reviews. I’ll probably find an excuse to link to this one. As noted in my last entry the hi-fi industry has long been a playground for pseudo-science and subjective elitism.
We walk a fine line in the realm of hi-fi, how do you describe sound quality without getting just a little “new age”? You can only use the words clean and clear so much and there are other qualities in a sound system like bright, warm or neutral. These qualities are also referred to as coloration and these tonal qualities are primarily created by speakers, the mechanical devices that produce the sound. The space in which speakers play is also a major consideration in creating acoustic coloration. Amplifier’s do not (or should not) add coloration to sound, it’s not the job of the amp to create any sound quality at all, but to power the speakers and provide the audio signal for them to play. Whenever I read about a “bright” sounding amp my BS alarm goes off. An amp can do many things to sound, not the least of which is distortion. Certain kinds of harmonic distortion are actually desirable to the human ear, some can even produce a “warm” sound. The warm sounding tube amp is the result of a form of distortion that can be reproduced by placing resistance on the end of power output. This is no secret and it’s the endeavor of high end Pioneer Elite receivers that use the MOSFET power outputs in an effort to mimic the classic sound of the tube amplifier. Other kinds of distortion aren’t so desirable, clipping peaks off sound waveforms that speakers try to reproduce are the result of an amp being overpowered and simply not able to provide anymore gain. This is common in cheap receivers and amplifiers with poorly made power supplies.
A high current transformer with high capacity filters provides the rest of and amplifier’s circuitry with the current it needs when the soundtrack peaks and will help limit clipping and allow the amplifier’s outputs (transistors) to work. There is no way to mask a good quality power supply, it weighs a lot and should be particularly heavy when you pick it up.
I don’t buy into a lot of adjectives to describe the sound produced by an amplifier. Amps provide speakers the ability to do their job, that’s it. Either the amp is doing that job adequately or it is not able to sustain peaks in the soundtrack, giving a thin sound, or worse the amp might distort causing coloration to the sound quality. The mechanical device that produces sound is a speaker, the amp provides the speaker power. You won’t hear esoteric descriptions of sound colorations and qualities brought on by the amp from me. If the amp isn’t up to the job it’ll cause distortion, if it’s up to the task it’ll fill the speakers with clear, sparkling sound and let you realize the true quality of the speakers you’re listening to.
A quick word on what exactly a “good” amp is and what constitutes a “bad” amp.
It’s easy to pick on the Home Theater in a Box option, especially they downright lie about their statistics to make them sound like they even compete in the component market. The trouble with these systems is they don’t hold a candle to even a cheap component system. If you really want passable sound quality you’re going to have wasted the $300-$500 dollars you spend on a HTIB that you could have spent on a good receiver to anchor the rest of your system.
Consider this add in Best Buy for the JVC THC5 HTIB system for $378. The JVC THC5 boldly claims it’s a 1000W system.
The marketers must have been smoking THC when they named the system. If you scroll down to the product features you’ll see: “Total output: 1000 watts (receiver: 167W x 5 @ 3 ohms, 1kHz, <10% THD; subwoofer: 167W @ 3 ohms, 100Hz, <10%THD)” If you click on Best Buy’s own pop up definition of “total power” they’ll tell you it means peak power. This means each channel can handle 167 watt peaks. This is very poor. Peaks are several times what the “real” continuous power can be. In a decent sized living-room, even 20ftX20ft add a couch and a carpet and this system is going to get swallowed up and offer only thin anemic sound.
For less than the price you paid for the JVCTHC5 you can move within Best Buy’s own website and found the Yamaha HTR-5840BL priced at $300. If I were in the market for a receiver in this price range I’d probably save the $300 keep saving for Yamaha's HTR-5860.
Best Buy claims the HTR-5840BL receiver only offers 600 watts of total power and it has six channels to power instead of five. By Best Buy’s outrageous description it sounds as if the JVC THC5 is far more powerful. But that’s just deceptive marketing BS. The 100 watts per channel offered by this decent Yamaha receiver is continuous power, if we measured the peaks this high current receiver is capable it would likely register into the thousands. This Yamaha unit is sure to anchor out someone’s living-room (of just about any size) for the rest of their life, it’s not likely the kind of component you’re going to seek to replace in a few years, the longevity and solid build Yamaha components are known for makes this a sure bet.
I haven’t listened to any of these units, this is not meant to be a review but a cursory glance at what a major big box store has to offer. We can see how misleading the details of the products can be when you don’t understand that half the time they’re basically lying to you. A system that has to skew the truth about its power output by giving peak power instead of RMS (root means square or continuous) can’t be a good system.
|
-
 There is a long standing conflict between two schools of thought in the hi-fi world, objectivist vs subjective. The war has always existed but today the battle rages over the Home Theater market that has brought new inexpensive digital technologies to the masses. What used to be an exclusive endeavor of the wealthy, building a component audio system for your home, has become inexpensive and spread to just about any home. In the new mass market Home Theater and Hi-Fi scene we’re seeing this struggle play out between the traditional elite audio buffs who follow a highly subjective idea of sound quality and the hi-fi objectivists who want to apply specifications to good sound. A lot can be learned by looking at both sides, I’ll try to break it down as objectively as I can (irony intended).
A hi-fi objectivist is someone who lets numbers, specifications and double blind testing demonstrate what an audio component is capable of. Generally the hi-fi objectivist is uncomfortable with a lot of the adjective laden audio reviews you might see in magazines like Stereophile.
Objectivist +
+ Double blind testing between components to determine which sounds better is the bottom line, make no mistake.
+ Counters the snake oil salesmen who think putting a $500 rock under you amp will make music sound better, not to mention many more scandals.
+ Backs up claims with hard science that cannot be refuted.
Objectivist –
- Often lacks the passion for the hobby, bereft of the desire to find creative ways to make things sound better.
- Too often simply has no appreciation for the sound of music, more interested in specs than music.
- Stats and specifications rarely tell the whole story. We know this if we so much as follow the evening news.
- “Meter Heads” (as they’re affectionately known) often like to getting hung up on certain specs at the expense of the whole picture.
- Taking the extreme Objectivist approach leads to Consumer Reports as the end all review of audio components. If it’s guaranteed to last a lifetime; what else is there?
On the other side is the hi-fi subjectivist. At worst the subjectivist is the poor slob who lives their whole lives sadly believing they’re just that one more $10,000 component or $700 cable away from the “complete” system. They’re subject to unnecessary “upgraditus” in a vain effort to find the fulfillment possibly lacking in other areas of life.
Subjectivist +
+ A bit of snobbery in any serious undertaking is healthy, they’re called standards and they’re good for you, try them in other areas of life and you won’t be disappointed.
+ Closing your eyes and really listening for sound quality and trying to find words to describe the qualities you’re hearing isn’t just an endeavor for the insane, it’s food for your mind.
+ Finding creative ways to make components “sound” better is fun, a part of hi-fi the subjectivist hasn’t forgotten. Often there is scientific reason for a seemingly superstitious improvement, even if it only feels right. Trust your instincts.
Subjectivist –
- Buying into acoustic snake oil is stupid. Selling acoustic snake oil is evil and will adversely affect your chances of making it to heaven.
- Subjectivists often natter to each other about acoustic qualities they supposedly hear in components and it’s rarely consistent. No two subjectivists will tell you what speakers match well with what amp, they’ll always report a variety of reasons and qualities.
- “veiled sound”, “liquid highs”, “slow bass”, “harsh mids” (subjectivists claim to hear) rarely stand up to objective double blind testing and worse still those Stereophile reviews, full of colorful adjectives are just plain dishonest if they don’t give you a full analysis of the room in which they were playing said component and detailing all other components in the system. For this reason, highly subjective “liquid highs” individual component reviews are practically worthless.
That near audiophile sound quality has been made cheaper by digital technologies has only served to exacerbate the age old battle between these two schools of thought. New scams suck in would-be subjectivists are constant; such as expensive replacement power cords made from some exotic material that is supposed to improve the sound from your component… Yes, a freaking power cord that plugs your unit into the wall! Too often the subjectivists unduly take the rap for the scams. Perhaps the worst scam of all is the $30 DVD from WallMart. Whosoever is happy with the performance from a $30 DVD player might as well not have bothered upgrading from VHS, yet they sell like hotcakes.
The controversies between the two schools of thought are endless. Is digitally stored media as pure as their analog forefathers? Can truly high quality sound come from a compressed source? Can transistorized amplifiers create sound as good as tube amps? The debates go on and on.
Suffice it to say there are no awards for taking one side or the other, you get no cookie in the mail for taking sides. I generally consider myself an objectivist in life, so it follows I am a hi-fi objectivist as well. But I have no problem learning what I can by studying at the old master’s (subjectivist) temple in the misty mountains to meditate on the sound of one hand clapping. It’s best to learn from both. The subjective will steer you clear of mass market components and will reason that you should spend as much as you can possibly afford on a hi-fi system, generally sound advice (pun intended). Where you have to draw the line is when subjectivists start talking about superiority of tube amps and high-end cables. Using double blind testing between two sets of cables, no “high-end cable” audiophile has ever been able to identify their cables. Tube amps are an old technology that has been replaced by a superior one. The transistor is so good that it can actually mimic the tube amp (mosfet output transistors found on Pioneer Elite systems) giving the same “warm” qualities sought by aficionados of the tubes.
|
-
 Bass management problems include trying to get your CD player to use your sub, or having way too much bass coming out of your dainty rear speakers when you use DVD-Audio or SACD driving them to Hades.
If your main media player is a DVD player, be sure it’s set to bitstream and not PCM if you want the use of the rear speakers and sub. At least be aware of where this is set and get to know it well. For greater audio fidelity some like to set PCM when listening to two channel sources, it ensures an uncompressed listening experience, but will often do without some of the effects you demand when watching DVD movies.
There are many differences between bitstream and PCM, usually DVD players are capable of both but CD players are generally only capable of PCM. Without delving into bit and sampling rates the short of it is that Dolby Digital and DTS both sample at higher bit and sample rates (than PCM) but then they compress it, which is a sin to the audio purist. PCM is a slightly lower bit/sample rate but uncompressed. DTS uses less compression than Dolby Digital and that's why it's usually considered superior.
To use my favorite analogy FOOD: PCM is a good diner that serves beer. The PCM waitress brings a steaming plate of delicious food and a cold beer. Nothing fancy but it does its job. That's PCM.
Bitstream is if went to a really fancy restaurant, and they bring this amazing culinary delicacy to your table. But before you can eat it, the waiter picks up the food from each dish and grinds it together with his bare hands letting the pieces fall back onto your plate. Then he bids you bon apitite as he walks away. That's bitstream.
What does this mean to you ask? Part of what makes "bitstream" so fancy and certainly a MUST HAVE on your DVD player, is that bitstream audio encoding methods like DD and DTS aren’t just raw music, but carry encoded instructions along with the audio. Commands for when the sub should kick in and when rear speakers should be used are included. PCM is just two channel music, it can only “tell” left speaker/right speaker what to do and when to do it just like stereo has been doing for decades. It’s “pure” but there’s no fancy surrounds or sub being commanded explicitly (discreetly) by the audio signal.
That said, one would expect to get no sub or rear speaker action when listening to two channel PCM CDs. That’s not necessarily true thanks to Dolby ProLogic, Pro Logic II, DTS neo-6 and other methods of creating a multi-channel “matrix” from two channel information. If you notice your rear speakers kicking in while listening to CDs it’s probably has Pro Logic II enabled. This brings us back to bass management.
The typical Home Theater receiver bass management setting is the small speaker/large speaker settings. The DVD player might also have the same setting. With small speaker enabled, you’re setting a crossover, or a crossover frequency, that’s the frequency cutoff to the speaker you’ve set to small. Sounds equal to or less than the crossover frequency will be redirected to the subwoofer. You should only choose one component to handle the bass management, two components setting a crossover will likely cause you to lose some of your bass. Read your documentation to see which component actually publishes their small speaker crossover frequency and then decide which you want to use.
Set your front (main) speakers to “small”. The small speaker setting is admittedly an ambiguous bass management setting but it’s very common on low to middle end quality. High end bass management systems will allow you to set the crossover frequency. On the ambiguous “small speaker” setting a typical crossover is 100hz. That means all parts of the music that are 100hz or lower go to the sub. If the fronts are set to “large” 100hz and less are going to the fronts and nowhere else.
You might have some fine front speakers you’re particularly proud of and would feel ashamed to call them small. But remember, we’re talking about speakers here, not condoms. That 100hz might be replicable by your front speakers, but even big high end fronts can’t reproduce those low freq’s at volumes your sub can. Many bookshelf speakers are rated to 40Hz… SCHYEA! If you look at the freq range of most speakers mapped out on a graph you’ll see that db tails off significantly in the low end.
There are third party solutions for bass management. One of the most popular is the Grand Moff Tarkin of bass management utilities called the Outlaw ICBM. This baby allows you to set explicit crossovers to all speakers in your room. It’s the “ultimate” in bass management. If your receiver is light in the bass management department, and you want the high end way to control bass in your system but don’t want to spend high end money, a dedicated bass management component like Outlaw’s ICBM is the way to go.
|
-
 The Achilles heel of the iPod is decidedly its battery. This “public service announcement” about the iPod battery failure has been circulating since the first generation iPod’s hit the market. It’s a grim warning for consumers about the warranty and Apple’s attitude about battery replacement.
First and second gen iPod owners might have had this frustrating experience, discovering their new mp3 player is a disposable unit that lasts only two years. Maybe backlash such as the dirtysecret site itself helped reshape Apple’s commitment to customer service. Today the built in lithium ion batter is most definitely replaceable by an Apple program for any generation iPod. For $99 you send it in to Apple and they send back your iPod with a brand new battery. $99 may seem a little steep, but this is the cost if it’s out of warranty and is certainly better than the price of a new unit.
If you’re interested in saving some money, particularly if you own a first or second generation iPod that is no longer under warranty you might be brave enough to try and replace the batter yourself using some of these tips.
The task of cracking open the case gets trickier with each new generation of iPod. At the risk of fouling up your iPod $99 bucks might not seem so bad.
Try to keep your iPod’s batter alive by following simple tips to extend the life of the lithium ion battery.
• Turn off the iPod’s clicker
• Turn off that backlight if you don’t need it.
• Use peripherals that make use of the iPod’s line out rather than headphone jack
• Keep the iPod charged at least 20%
• Don’t let your iPod fully discharge
• Store at room temperature, never leave it in the car on a hot summer day.
Here is some more detail on lithium ion from the battery university. It’s said the iPod’s batteries have between 300-500 charges in their life but they also have a two to three year shelf life. The clock is ticking on the lith-io battery even if you’re not using it. In fact, to get the most of your batteries you need to use them. The batteries suffer capacitance loss due to internal resistance caused by oxidation, not necessarily the loss of stored energy inside the battery. This oxidation builds up over time and prevents the battery from delivering its charge, oxidation is the effect you must slow down by keeping the iPod stored in a warm, dry environment. So, keep it out of your car on hot summer days.
Avoid letting your battery fully discharge, try to keep a 20% life as a routine. Keeping lith-io batteries from 60%-80% charged all the time is a sure way to keep them alive longer. Other ways to slow down the rate of charge cycles is to let the batteries do “less” work by doing without the clicker and backlighting whenever possible. You can also stress your batteries less by not using the iPod’s internal amp. If you use your own headphones, especially high-end headphones with a much higher or lower than normal impedance you might want to invest in an external headphone amplifier. An external amp will feed your new headphones plenty of extra current and only requires the line out on your iPod. This frees the iPod from stress to its own amp trying to power the headphones.
|
|
|
|