Movie Software make HT a Waste of Resources?

Is there a point to this?

Nanderson, you seem to shift topics everytime someone tries to pin you down. The common part of this thread, as I see it, is that you want to think your keen intellect has forced another cave-dweller into the light of self-introspection. It hasn't and it won't.

In fairness, I will admit that the readability of the thread was not enhanced by the fact that, due presumably to some quirk of people's election to go with in-line HTML or whatever, the fonts seemed to get larger and more colorful with each successive reply. Its hard to read when only two words fit on a line. Esp. when they are violet.

I think your original point was that most modern movies are bad/unwatchable. As with anything, there's a lot of drivel targeted at the lowest common denominator and some good quality stuff around the edges. I like the escapism of movies (even some of the drivel), and find that movies--like books or music--can generate some interesting conversation among friends. Do I need the latest greatest HT to enjoy movies? No. Does HT enhance my enjoyment of movies? Sure.

You then morph into the argument that HT is bad b/c of changing standards/planned obsolesence. Audio has its "flavor of the day" aspects too--CD, HDCD, DVD-A, SACD, MP3 and various sub-religions in component design. Why single out HT for criticism? Given that these marketing tricks also produce design advances, is the purist thing to do to listen to wax impressions on a gramophone or something? No thanks.

I'll skip the stuff about routers. Don't know, don't care.

Then, if I track correctly, the argument seems to go to the "unexamined life not being worth living" with some paranoid conspiracy theory stuff thrown in to boot. The defect seems to be you've lumped A'gon users into a class of people whose lives consist of slaving away for the man to buy the next fix in HT equipment, while blithely ignoring the world's real problems, in order to isolate/insulate ourselves. Bollocks. I remember an A'gon threat where people talked about their other interests--there are every variety of people here, from artists to race car drivers, to kayakers, to parents, etc.

In other words, don't stereotype me or us. I happen to like my HT and some movies made after Citizen Kane. As to the rest of my life, my compromises are different than yours. I'll go as far as saying I think mine are a *better* balance than yours, without knowing or caring what yours are. Guess you think yours are a better balance than mine, without knowing or caring what mine are.

So? Next topic please. Really.

OK, call me a masochist, but I'll bite again.

As to your argument that today's software isn't worth investing in HT; I think we can agree to differ, but maybe you aren't looking in the right places. As with any artistic medium, different strokes for different folks. Its like saying the world of music isn't worth investing in 2CH b/c pop music is populated with inane female teen toy idols and insipid boy bands. Lots of good movies being noted in another HT thread--try watching some of those. Maybe you don't like any of them. Maybe others do, and maybe they believe the ability to see them over and over is worth the HT investment.

As to your argument that HT is a lousy investment, I did a quick scan of some HT gear (surround sound processors) versus 2CH gear (preamps) in the A'gon bluebook, restricting my comparisons to companies that made both in the same year. The trend is that (whoa!) generally, more expensive gear has a greater percentage depreciation. But, your point that HT gear is worth less is wrong--at most a couple of percentage points in the comparisons I did, and in at least one case (Classe), their 2CH preamp (CP-45) fared much worse than their processor of the same year (SSP-1) (45% of value, vs. 58% for the SSP-1).

Given that I see as much on SACD in the 2CH fora as I see about 7.1 in the HT fora, why do you believe HT users are more susceptible to leaping before things become established? Moreover, when your thread implies that I (and other A'gon) users are soft-mindedly being manipulated by mfrs/advertisers to make that leap and we were following like so many sheep, it seemed like an insulting stereotype to me. If that wasn't what you were implying, perhaps you could restate your point.

As far as the ENRON diversion goes, I fail to see what it has to do with HT. And, frankly, I haven't said anything about it, so to be paraphrased by you is, at best, rather disingenuous. If you really want it, I'll lay it out for you, even if it is irrelevant. I, rather cynically, believe that CEOs act in their best interest. Generally that self-interest is also impacted by fiduciary duties to shareholders, so increasing share value (i.e., caring about shareholders) is usually viewed by most CEOs as a good thing. Does it always work? No. Is ENRON a fiasco? Yes. What's the relevance to HT?

Don't congratulate yourself for being slippery. Making unsupported statements and then failing to engage on the merits doesn't make you a forensic genius.

Once more into the breach.

Do you appreciate music more with a high end 2CH rig? I'd guess. Could you still appreciate music even if you didn't have a high end 2CH rig? I hope so. Do you listen to nothing but optimally recorded 2CH taking full advantage of spatial potential and dynamic range? God I hope not. Do I appreciate HT more with a high end HT rig? Sure. Do I have to have a high end rig to appreciate HT? No. Do all movies I see take full advantage of 5CH capabilities? No. Where's the difference?

Look, I did re-read the whole thread. Take your statement:

"birds of a feather flock together and tend not to challenge each other about alternative views. I would rather raise challenging questions about the validity of purchases to the very ones doing the purchases."

If you didn't intend to say A'gon readers are the problem, at least you can see how this could be misinterpreted?

As far as my citation of Classe, its not hand picked or purposefully cited for some nefarious reason. It was just an interesting and glaring difference. I'd hoped to avoid the kind of accusations you raised by sticking to the same company and year--Classe made both the CP-45 and the SST-1. In the 10 min. I wasted in the blue book, it wasn't the only company I looked at--checked ARC, Krell, and some others. Perfect apples to apples comparisons are pretty hard to come by, but at least I tried and didn't selectively edit bad results out--I even said I found HT gear was lower as percentage value by a couple of points or so. But, the difference is not "disposable technology" for HT versus "value long term investment" for 2CH. "Clear evidence" you say, and a "wide range of gear and value." What evidence? What range?

"Upset"? Hardly. At this point "bored" is more like it. It could have been an interesting thread. I'd like to hear what people would have to say about whether the prevalence of HT will change the way movies are made. Maybe 5CH equipment for moviemakers will become less expensive due to volume demand, techniques for 5CH will become better, and there will be more software out there that takes real advantage of the possibilities.