Naim AV1

I thought the AV1 was designed to provide an alternative to Dolby Surround Sound only. Things have moved on so much with Dolby Digital and DTS. Now if Naim brought out a real world A/V processor...

Kevin

However, all this said i picked up a new price list from the show and the AV1 was'nt there (?) discountinued ???

naheed...

Naim has always contended that the DD and DTS sound screws up the music. Their surround sound doesn't adhere to this. It just manages to surround you with music without screwing too badly with the typical Naim attributes.

If you don't care that you aren't hearing what the filmmaker intended, and are happy with simple surround, then I suppose the AV1 could satisfy you. In my case, though, I want to hear it the way the creators of the work intended. That's why my house will have two separate rooms: one for two-channel audio with Naim gear, and the other with typical mass market gear (Sony or something similar). Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Vuk.

The sonics for most movies are quite acceptable through my two-channel system. However, if the flick is an eye/ear-candy extravaganza, then I want to experience it in its full glory.

I realize you don't appreciate the importance of this, with your 12" TV. We all have our priorities. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Priorities? I love film as much as music. You don't need a big, grainy TV to appreciate a good film. In fact, when I visit my parents, after just a few minutes, I am no longer distracted by the lines I can see on their 27" monster (which are not present on my 13 incher) and simply go on to enjoy what I'm watching.

BTW--have I also been mistaken in avoiding all those Harlequin Romance novels you can buy at the supermarket checkout? Do I need to look more carefully at the air-brushed scenes with Fabio on the cover to appreciate the artistic intent and quality of these books?

Snobio.

P.S. Loewe make excellent largish TVs and I do appreciate the "V" part of AV, the "A" part seems to be for teenage boys into explosions (and for Joe Petrik and I, now that we have been converted by the experts in cinema at our old audio shop).

P.P.S. I know you'd rarther fantasise about visiting all the convenience stores in Toronto, but you may want to tune into Olympic women's beach volley-ball for some proper "eye-candy" (the only other person I have ever heard use that expression is Steve Sanders on Bev Hills 90210). Apperently, there is a regulation mandating the angle of the cut of those teeny hot-shorts, to make the sport more popular for viewers. Now that's feminism!

There are many types of "good film". Some of these films are purely cerebral, making the quality of the picture and sound superfluous. Then there's the big-budget roller-coaster-rides that Hollywood churns out, where visual and sonic effects are the crux of the film. Neither of these is "better" than the other; they just satisfy different desires. Some of us like them and some of them don't. (For the record, I don't like Harlequin romances either.)

The term "eye candy" has crept into the general jargon of the day. As far as Beverly Hills 90210 goes, I've seen it only once. (It wasn't really my cup of tea either.)

I've always been a big fan of volleyball. (Believe it or not, I was the assistant coach of a team for a couple of years.) I enjoyed watching both the men and women a few days back. I haven't seen any of the beach variety yet, and maybe I'll catch some in passing. (I'm not interested enough to go looking for it.)

Loewe does make beautiful TVs, although they don't make anything really big (probably because they can't get it to look good enough). My next TV will be at least 50" and HDTV capable. Until that time, 32" will do me just fine. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

I keep hoping that one day you will will look at relativism the way you now do upon your once-cherished "speaker first" theory. At the very least, I pray you'll discover that it's primary contibution to human discourse has has been to allow snotty 18 year-old English lit majors to dismiss anything value-laden that anyone else, apart from their goth friends, has to say.

Vuk.
--who can tell that Mozart is better than Michael Bolton but can't be bothered to write the book it would take to prove it to some people

An important factor is personal experience. Since you live alone, you are rarely required to compromise your taste. You can listen to the "best", and eschew the "worst" to your heart's content.

In contrast, I live with a person who doesn't have the same breadth of musical appreciation as I do. She knows what she likes, and as far as she's concerned, her music is far more palatible than mine. Am I so conceited that I might think I'm right and she's wrong? Or do I merely recognize that we each have our likes and dislikes, and we must compromise to get along? It makes for a happy world, with both of us getting a turn at the wheel. Besides, it's just music!

Anyone who steadfastly adheres to the concept of absolutism is ultimately close-minded. Because of this attitude, we have religious wars, etc. If everyone merely accepted that we won't always agree, the world would be a much better place.

Note that I'm not suggesting that we always agree on everything, but that we recognize that it's OK to disagree. As long as we understand and accept each others viewpoints, we'll have fun discussing it and no one's feelings will be hurt. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Mike.

I hope you don't think I am so stupid that I needed a lecture on relativism. The participants here generally have good taste and, as with their choice of audio gear, have discovered many of the "better" things in life. Hence, when Mick informs us about Le Creuset pots or Matthew Robinson warns us of the dangers of prog rock, we know what they mean and don't embark on a sophmoric dissection of epistemology.

I hate home theatre for two reasons. First off, it has little to do with the essence of cinema and is best suited to the most forgettable of movies. Second, just as consumer choice in audio is generally dictated by bass bloat (a desire for it), so video is driven by "big" (who cares that it looks like shit and you can see lines)--these people have no taste and are destroying high end audio in the process by diverting money from the two channel market and creating an illusion among novices that a great hi-fi is to do with surround sound.

Pointing out to me at every turn that my illiterate, vulgar, CB-radio-user accross the street has an equally valid opinion beause it is not simple for me to demonstrate what precisely constitutes reality or subtract the enormous unclarity that the use of language imposes not only on the expression of my ideas but the very way my mind formulates arguments is not the sort of thing that makes human interaction worthwhile.

Trying hard to make Mike take offense ,
Vuk

If you're at all interested in hearing how 'good' surround is executed, try Peter Jackson's 'The Frighteners'. Ok, the storyline is a bit naff, but much of the speialeffects were state-of-the-art on release... and it has the best surround soundtrack I've ever experienced. Or rather, not noticed. And Michael J Fox is rather good. For overblown, try Die Hard 4, Ronin etc... all great action movies, but suffering from overdone soundtracks.

Other than that, I can't get serious about surround - other than a very un-serious pro-logic receiver in storage for the AV room - I prefer good stereo to poorly executed surround.

Oh, and I think every movie should have a compulsory giant octopus or squid in it.

Rico - musichead

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Joe Petrik's trouble logging in continues, but he did e-mail me this insightful snippet when I asked him to recall the title of the octopus movie:

"Can't remember the blockbuster that had the octopus in it, but it struck me afterward that all multi-million dollar Hollywood movies ought to have one... and a helicopter scene... and, of course, a fight scene where the right hooks have more bass thud than a thermonuclear explosion."

Long live Joe Petrik (who now has a pair of trained monkeys to move his Sorcerers all over the room during helicopter scenes; they are also fully adaptable all future types of surround encoding).

Vuk.

Is there any such product in the pipeline ?
Is it self contained (integrated amp just the processor as the AV1)?
How much would it cost ?

Either that or i'll end up going to Richer, perish the thought.

naheed...

Paul Stephenson said a good while ago on the old conference that an AV-2 was in the pipeline and would do much more in the way of supporting the major new digital formats.

cheers, Martin

On another note how is the cds2 demo going ...

IS it doing IT for YOU or not ???

naheed...

My system at present is a 2-speaker setup. I had a four-speaker surround thingie a while back. The whole image is in front of you and sounds coming from the sides etc. was odd and would happen so rarely that it was distracting. It was also harder to just get into whatever was on. But the extra detail, ambiance, and sense of space is nice and I get this in a non-distracting way with the two speaker setup.

It's great when Bart and Homer run off-screen right and my system lets us hear them running out of the living room

- GregB
Wondering how much FCP's (Forum Credibility Points) he's lost for watching The Simpsons

I don't think any one should lose any FCP's its one of the best shows on the box. Its got some of the best lines like the one said by Fat Tonys side kick about Troy McClure (who is romantically attached to marine life)
"I thought you said he was dead"
Fat Tony "No, I said he sleeps with the fishes".

pete

quote:

---

- GregB
Wondering how much FCP's (Forum Credibility Points) he's lost for watching The Simpsons

---

Greg,

You lose all your FEPs if you don't watch the Simpsons in my book. The Simpsons is so good that not owning a TV is not even a good excuse for not watching it, I mean name me some other TV shows imortalised in Arab Strap songs?

Kevin.

[This message was edited by Kevin Hughes on THURSDAY 05 October 2000 at 16:15.]

:::snif:::

- Greg "Why You Little..." B

thanks for your interest. The CDS-II dem has been converted to another few thousand pounds on the credit card. Unfortunately, this is just at the same time as the shares I was going to sell have dropped about 20% of their value. Arrgh!!

David Hughes is currently helping the run-in process along.

The CDS-II/CDPS does some things which are so far beyond the wildest ambitions of the CDX that I was quite taken aback.

After exactly seven days running in it's still sounding rather laid back, but I know this will go away after about four or five weeks. The Hammersmith show also proved to me that the CDS-II doesn't have the full sound that I've heard in another system (when compared to CDX/XPS). This was a concern to me as I have a bit of a problem with bass in my room anyway.

cheers, Martin