Questions About HT

[bigaudiofanatic]

A few questions about home theater.

On older receivers "like 6 years ago" your only option for audio was rca red and white cables. How did anything get true surround sound that way?

New tv's are wide screen but why are our BR movies still having black lines? Why would they need to be stretched to be full screen?

Why do some BR's look better than others even though all were put out around the same time?

[gtu2004]

i think for the 2nd question, because widescreen movies are actually 2.35:1 ratio. Normal widescreen TVs are usually of 16:9 ratio. Why? I dont know...

[BlueFox]

A few questions about home theater.

On older receivers "like 6 years ago" your only option for audio was rca red and white cables. How did anything get true surround sound that way?

True surround sound???? Are you infering that only HDMI supports surround sound?

The DVD player decodes the audio on the DVD and sends it out the analog (RCA) ports. There are two for the front (L/R), two for the rear surround (L/R), and one for the center. They attach to the five corresponding ports on the AVR and you have "true surround sound". There is also a sub output for those that need it.

[BeRad]

For some reason it is putting a big space in here and I can't figure out why, but below is the list of aspect ratios with uses. More info at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect_ratio_(image)
Taken from Wikipedia.

Aspect ratio	Description
1.33:1	35 mm original silent film ratio, commonly known in TV and video as 4:3. Also standard ratio for MPEG-2 video compression. This format is still used in most personal video cameras today. It is the standard 16 mm and Super 35mm ratio.
1.37:1	35 mm full-screen sound film image, nearly universal in movies between 1932 and 1953. Officially adopted as the Academy ratio in 1932 by AMPAS. Rarely used in theatrical context nowadays, but occasionally used for other context.
1.43:1	IMAX format. Imax productions use 70 mm wide film (the same as used for 70 mm feature films), but the film runs through the camera and projector sideways. This allows for a physically larger area for each image.
1.50:1	The aspect ratio of 35 mm film used for still photography when 8 perforations are exposed. Usually called 3:2. Also the native aspect ratio of VistaVision.
1.56:1	Widescreen aspect ratio 14:9. Often used in shooting commercials etc. as a compromise format between 4:3 (12:9) and 16:9, especially when the output will be used in both standard TV and widescreen. When converted to a 16:9 frame, there is slight pillarboxing, while conversion to 4:3 creates slight letterboxing.
1.66:1	35 mm Originally a flat ratio invented by Paramount Pictures, now a standard among several European countries; native Super 16 mm frame ratio. (5:3, sometimes expressed more accurately as "1.67".)
1.75:1	Early 35 mm widescreen ratio, primarily used by MGM and Warner Bros. between 1953 and 1955, and since abandoned.
1.78:1	Video widescreen standard (16:9), used in high-definition television, one of three ratios specified for MPEG-2 video compression. Also used in some personal video cameras.
1.85:1	35 mm US and UK widescreen standard for theatrical film. Introduced by Universal Pictures in May, 1953. Projects approximately 3 perforations ("perfs") of image space per 4 perf frame; films can be shot in 3-perf to save cost of film stock.
2.00:1	Original SuperScope ratio, also used in Univisium. Used as a flat ratio for some American studios in the 1950s, abandoned in the 1960s, but recently popularized by the Red One camera system.
2.20:1	70 mm standard. Originally developed for Todd-AO in the 1950s. 2.21:1 is specified for MPEG-2 but not used.
2.35:1	35 mm anamorphic prior to 1970, used by CinemaScope ("'Scope") and early Panavision. The anamorphic standard has subtly changed so that modern anamorphic productions are actually 2.39,[1] but often referred to as 2.35 anyway, due to old convention. (Note that anamorphic refers to the compression of the image on film to maximize an area slightly taller than standard 4-perf Academy aperture, but presents the widest of aspect ratios.)
2.39:1	35 mm anamorphic from 1970 onwards. Sometimes rounded up to 2.40:1[1] Often commercially branded as Panavision format or 'Scope.
2.55:1	Original aspect ratio of CinemaScope before optical sound was added to the film in 1954. This was also the aspect ratio of CinemaScope 55.
2.59:1	Cinerama at full height (three specially captured 35 mm images projected side-by-side into one composite widescreen image).
2.66:1	Full frame output from Super 16 mm negative when an anamorphic lens system has been used. Effectively, an image that is of the ratio 2.66:1 is squashed onto the native 15:9 aspect ratio of a Super 16 mm negative.
2.76:1	MGM Camera 65 (65 mm with 1.25x anamorphic squeeze). Used only on a handful of films between 1956 and 1964, such as Ben-Hur (1959).
4.00:1	Rare use of Polyvision, three 35 mm 1.33 images projected side by side. First used on Abel Gance's Napoléon (1927).

[jflail2]

Why do some BR's look better than others even though all were put out around the same time?

Check out AVS for more information than you'd ever want/need on the subject, as well as rankings:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1168342

[jflail2]

Great info by the way BeRad. I'm printing that off for future reference...

[bigaudiofanatic]

True surround sound???? Are you infering that only HDMI supports surround sound?

The DVD player decodes the audio on the DVD and sends it out the analog (RCA) ports. There are two for the front (L/R), two for the rear surround (L/R), and one for the center. They attach to the five corresponding ports on the AVR and you have "true surround sound". There is also a sub output for those that need it.

No this is way before hdmi, before fiber optic before coaxial. When all it was was two rca's going from like a vcr or dvd player to a receiver. I am not referring to the 6 inputs you have now.

[bigaudiofanatic]

i think for the 2nd question, because widescreen movies are actually 2.35:1 ratio. Normal widescreen TVs are usually of 16:9 ratio. Why? I dont know...

Ya that is what I am trying to figure out. Why did we change our tv format if it is not going to fill the entire screen. I understand there are many different formats. By now they should be standard 16:9

[tonyb]

That was alot longer than 6 years ago my friend.

[bigaudiofanatic]

LOL ya now that I think about it shoot it was more like 10 years or longer than that actually. My fault

[tonyb]

LOL ya now that I think about it shoot it was more like 10 years or longer than that actually. My fault

Memory...the first to go. No sweat,I can't friggin' remember my own phone number at times.

[bigaudiofanatic]

LOL I hope you remember it more than you forget it.

[BlueFox]

No this is way before hdmi, before fiber optic before coaxial. When all it was was two rca's going from like a vcr or dvd player to a receiver. I am not referring to the 6 inputs you have now.

Then you are not talking about surround sound. You are talking about stereo. DVD has supported 5.1 sound from the beginning. I guess it is possible some manufacturers made dirt cheap models with only 2 outputs. I do not think VCR ever supported surround sound.

[bigaudiofanatic]

I am talking about surround sound. My neighbor has a older sony receiver it is a 5.1 dolby one. The only connections you can make on the back were rcas red and white that was it.

[everpress]

Then you are not talking about surround sound. You are talking about stereo. DVD has supported 5.1 sound from the beginning. I guess it is possible some manufacturers made dirt cheap models with only 2 outputs. I do not think VCR ever supported surround sound.

I think he is saying on receivers, there are oonly two inputs... Not outputs.
I have an old HK receiver that is like this; it supports optical as well, but the analogue input is just RCA cables... EDIT: And my HK is a 5.1 capable receiver from that 2 cable source, just to clarify.

How does 5 channels translate across from a two cable source?

I think it's magic.

[bigaudiofanatic]

Yes that is what I was asking. How? lol

[concealer404]

I bet it's just splitting signal, and not outputting exactly what was really on the DVD.

Much like you CAN play 2-channel music signals through all channels of a 7.1 setup if you wanted to. But that doesn't mean it's 7.1 surround.

[bigaudiofanatic]

Got ya that is what I was trying to figure out. So it was never really real surround sound.

[concealer404]

Got ya that is what I was trying to figure out. So it was never really real surround sound.

That's what i think... of course, i COULD be wrong, since i wasn't big into HT back then, but unless it's a digital signal, you're going to need one lead for each output.

[bigaudiofanatic]

As for the other questions.

[concealer404]

The second question was answered...

The third question, was kindof answered.

My spin on it: For the same reason some cds sound better than others. ;)

[gtu2004]

Ya that is what I am trying to figure out. Why did we change our tv format if it is not going to fill the entire screen. I understand there are many different formats. By now they should be standard 16:9

the only explanation (at least to me) is that most of the cable broadcasted channels are done in 4:3, and if a screen has the ratio of 2.35:1, we'd now have "vertical bars" on both sides that would take up to like half or even more than half of the TV size...

[bigaudiofanatic]

The second question was answered...

The third question, was kindof answered.

My spin on it: For the same reason some cds sound better than others. ;)

Ya but a movie like public enemies looked snowy while another movie like star trek, batman the dark night, and xmen wolverine all look fantastic. They where all in BR as well.

[concealer404]

Just how well they were transferred. Some are done better than others. Different people doing the process using different programs and electronics etc etgc etc.

[TroyD]

If there are just two inputs L/R...then it's 2 channel. Period.

Now, if there are 6 inputs(L,R,C,SR,SL and sub out)...that is, indeed, surround sound. Probably a Dolby Pro Logic (you guys remember that??)

Here is how it worked. Now, you all know that there is, at some point, digital to analog conversion. Back in the day, the receivers were 'digital ready' or whatever because they had the analog inputs for all the channels. The actual decoding was done by the DVD player (if it was equiped with the decoder) and you hooked up all the analog channels from the DVD player to the receiver. As time went by, all receivers had DD/DTS decoders. I did this for a long time.

Now, yes, you can take any 2 channel source, put it into the stereo inputs and get Dolby Pro Logic surround. Geeze, don't you guys know anything about Dolby Digital?? We used to have HUGE debates about this...and DTS and so forth.

BDT

[bigaudiofanatic]

Yes but before that all there was was just left and right even on receivers that say Dolby digital and surround sound. When I was younger I saw a lot of them.

[Zeros]

This link can explain the anamorphic ratio (2.35:1), black bars and all that goodness:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/articl...reenorama.html

[TroyD]

Yes but before that all there was was just left and right even on receivers that say Dolby digital and surround sound. When I was younger I saw a lot of them.

Okay, if there were only L/R inputs...you didn't have Dolby Digital. Dolby Digital 5.1 meant there is 6 discrete channels. Decoded digitally. Again, this could be done by the receiver or the DVD player. Now, your receiver would still have 2ch inputs for TV/VCR/Tuna...just as they do now.

If it was a L/R (2 channel) input (TV/VCR...etc)....yes, Dolby Surround or Dolby Pro Logic. It used an analog algorithim to extract the rear/center channels. Surround: Yes. Dolby Digital: No.

BDT

[bigaudiofanatic]

Thanks zero that is a lot easier to understand.

[TroyD]

Picture aspect and the sound have nothing to do with each other....which were you asking about??

BDT