EvilDragon wrote:LOL, what an assumption. I absolutely hate McD...
At least we agree in something, that Macdonalds it's a crap. Unless you tell me it's feeding more people than on Earth than normal food, as it probably made use of meat from animals killed on road and fat from liposuction and tumors from hopital's trash.
EvilDragon wrote:The truth is simple: we're using LCDs because they take up much less space than CRTs and draw much less power, too. It's as simple as that. It's not the first time in history that something not perfect technically has become commonplace (anybody remember VHS vs Betamax?)...
It's not just much the technical fails, but the lies. Media push digital world as cristaline and perfect, but we get crap. IPS is promoted as a perfect for any view angle, but it get dark even if you look only some degrees after front views.
And anoys the fact that nobody talk about the sh... contrast boosting, that killed most details (tonalities) near white tone. And I bet the HDR TVs may have the same probleme, but in smaller degree, cause in part this probleme it's not only fault of poor dynamics range, but also fault of dumb digital adjustments way of work.
In a CRT when you increase contrast you do not just increase the values near White (like Photoshop contrast slider adjust), but you also increase the intensity of the maximum light intensity (pure white) the CRT is delivering, and so the details near white do not get lost as pure white mess, cause the maximum white value was also increased
And in LCD/LED TVs the intensity of the light emited it's the backlight adjustment (LEDs os fluorecent ) and the contrast it's another adjustment. If people who designed such craps had brains they would create a smart adjustment, combining the backlight intensity and the contrast, to reduce such colateral effect of lost of bright tonalities. But appers they like to promote the lustruous look of exagerated contrast adjust, even if it make bright things look like sh... flat white.
EvilDragon wrote:Also I think that 99% of people don't even know what the hell you're talking about, and/or can't see the difference, so...
I made two types test on web, about perception of colors and tonalities. And I got a very good score, perfect score in one type, and in other I tried twice geting near perfect one time and perfect in a second try. The first was like a test for daltonism, but many times more difficult as the colors was much more closer than in a daltonism test (color blindness test). The second type was a test to put in order (like a rainbow) about a hundred of color cubes of different but very close colors.
It was like I had a view for color that 3% or less of people had.
But... To see the lack of tonalities near white it's not necessary to be one of the 3% people with very good chromatic view. How people can ignore a scene on a film, on LCD-LED display, that shows a actor with a white spot shining like was a white paint stain, as result of blow-up of white tones?
Sorry... I think most people are brainwashed to belive someting is great just because marketing hammered that on their heads and because they feel important that finally had aquired something media told people they need to have to feel dignity.
If you push a mono sound with poor frequency, and display it in a case or hack with a appearence of a expansive Hi-end device, and put too pretty girls by each side of the machine, telling it's the latest advancement, people will hear the crap sound and be convinced that's a advance that they need to buy.
Somehow this already happened, as example of the typical mp3 sound files(despite be stereo) poor than a good vinyl recording. And it didn't even required the pretty girls...
Okay, I admit some few MP3 are very well made and with very little compression, and sounds okay.
Piano is of of the few things that consumers knows to judge, like in this forum, really helping making the product each time closer to perfection.
Last edited by Beto-Music (22-06-2016 22:30)
