DVD picture doesn't fill the screen

[felix]

On 19-January-2016 11:05 AM, felix wrote:

On 19-January-2016 1:30 AM, keithr wrote:
On 18/01/2016 4:59 PM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 4:52 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 9:10 AM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 10:14 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 4:42 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 7:14 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 8:47 PM, keithr wrote:
On 17/01/2016 12:34 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:45 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 9:14 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:08 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 9:39 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:01 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 10:41 AM, Je�us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:32:48 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:

On 16-January-2016 1:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 11:42:28 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:

On 16-January-2016 11:17 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 15/01/2016 6:32 AM, felix wrote:
I suppose you can see a difference when using two
different
brands of
HDMI cables too can you, because it makes just as
much
sense.

well you are completely wrong there because there are
visible
differences between HDMI cables. if you can't see
them,
I can
only
assume you do not have equipment of sufficient quality
You really are a lost cause

Any HDMI cables that are *well made* out of reasonable
quality
materials and are not faulty in some way and of the
same
length
should
produce the same result.

no, you are if you want to argue against what is well
known
among
audiophiles the world over, ie. that interconnect
quality
affects
audio/video quality

LOL. Go to stereo.net and start a thread there on the
topic.
Espouse your theories there. Please do

NB: I see you edited out the rest of my reply (which I
reinstated).
Only reason you'd do that is because you're trolling,
which
I'm
at the
point of being convinced is exactly what you've been
doing
these
past
three weeks or so. Your opinions on everything are just
*too*
ridiculous to be for real.


Agreed.

you must be as stupid as he is



You're trolling

oh really? care to point out the bit that was edited and then
reinstated?

no answer I see

I suggest it's you who's trolling. and you are at least
ignorant if you are unaware that AV interconnects have a
bearing on
performance.
You're ignorant of all the technical details of how a digital
signals
differs

am I? what have I said that's wrong about digital signals?
quote
please..

and you are applying analog signal principles to digital
devices
and
connections.

so according to you, if I connect my Yamaha amp with a $2 HDMI
cable and
then with a $300 monster cable, I will see no difference. it's
not so.
you are aware that some HDMI cables can't handle 1080p for
example, I
suppose? but then.. I suppose not.

http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/finding_right_cable.aspx

and here's more detail about HDMI cable standards and specs..


http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F








Sure your HDMI cable can cause signal drops and errors but
they
don't
manifest in any way shape or form in the way you are
suggesting
with
your silly nonsense.

the silly nonsense that HDMI can affect video and audio
performance?
that silly nonsense? well you're wrong.

So either you are trolling or your a complete dill.



I'm neither. but you're ignorant on this matter.


You are the kind of wood duck that companies like Monster just
love,
they'd go broke without people like you.

Monster Cable Products, Inc is the world's leading
manufacturer of
high
end cables that connect audio/video components for home, car and
professional use. Monster's audio cables have high performance
sound
characteristics that increase the clarity, dynamics and power
of the
audio signals. The video cables give improved picture quality to
television and home theatre systems.

(and I can confirm that is so)

Monster Cable Products, Inc. was started in 1979 by Noel Lee, who
was
then a laser-fusion design engineer at Lawrence-Livermore
Laboratory, as
well as an audiophile and drummer/musician, found that wires of
different constructions produced varying degrees of audio
performance
when hooked up to loudspeakers.

(exactly what I have found and said here and got rubbished for
it)

From this discovery, he crafted a high performance cable. He
named it
Monster Cable, and founded an industry that has since
exploded. The
creation of Monster Cable started a new product category of high
performance audio cables that revolutionised the audio market.

Lee chose the name "Monster" for two reasons. It sounded
strong and
powerful, and the size of the cable was "monstrous" compared to
ordinary
loudspeaker cable. The name was a hit straightaway and now is
sometimes
misused to mean any high performance cable.

Monster offers more than 1000 products, and has become an
indispensable
accessory for music lovers, audiophiles, recording studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts.

More than 2,000 different CDs have given Monster Cable credit
on the
jacket of their recordings and hundreds of feature film sound
tracks and
Foley sound effects have been recorded with Monster Cable.

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ehifi.com.au/brands/monster.aspx

but of course you know better, and it's all nonsense. idiot!



You can believe whatever scam you like,

because it isn't. I have just one question for you.. what
experience do
YOU PERSONALLY have with AV cables and decent AV equipment?


More then you obviously when you can't even grasp the basics of
digital signals.

you're avoiding the question. what testing have YOU personally
done of
AV input/output cables? part of my working career was with a
manufacturer of hi end audio.

Which make your claims even more ludicrous.

still no answer about YOUR experience



why do you think at trade shows they DON'T use cheap cables if it
makes no difference?

Gross profit is why. Selling overpriced cables to numpties like you is
big business.

and other 'numpties' like.. "music lovers, audiophiles, recording
studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts" apparently



but read this and understand why what you think you see is
impossible
with HDMI.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/




http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F







You still don't get it. There are different cables supporting
different data rates and features. What that means is that either
the
cable will work, or it won't. You're not going to see any difference
in image quality between cables (with the possible exception of
sparkling but that's not what you are describing).



no. why do you think HDMI cables are rated according to spec? care to
explain how a 1.2 cable can handle 10.2 Gbps 1080p or 4k
resolution and
16bit colour depth when it can't?


What does that have to do with the image you see and the claims you
make as to being able to see a difference?

if you don't even know the answer to that, there's no point in even
discussing


You haven't posted anything that supports your theory that there is
any difference between cheap and expensive cables of the same
specification in terms of what you see on the screen.

oh, so now it's 'of the same specification' is it..



I suspect you have no practical knowledge of the matter and are only
talking theory. but no point in arguing endlessly. you will not
convince
me, or anyone else with any experience with interconnects, that
I/we do
not see and hear what we do see and hear, or don't, depending on the
cable used.


It's all in the befuddled mess you call your mind.



yeah, keep talkin. saying it's so doesn't make it so. and STILL you
don't say what real practical experience you have with cables which
makes you such an expert. but actually, don't keep talkin. I'm done
with
you..

Speaking as one who has had formal education in electronics and has
spent 50 odd years pushing all sorts of signals through all sorts of
cables, I say that you are talking through your arse.



so then genius, now explain to me please how a HDMI spec 1.1 cable can
perform the same as a HDMI spec 2 cable?

oh and btw.. the discussion is about ALL sorts of cables.. ie, audio,
video, and speaker cables. so if you want to say that NO interconnect
can have any bearing on audio or video performance, I say your degree is
only good for toilet paper

--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/

 

[felix]

On 19-January-2016 6:40 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
On 18-January-2016 8:18 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Je?us <j@invalid.lan> wrote:
On 17 Jan 2016 14:18:25 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
- Using 'DVD shrink' (cite URL) is *not* making a (direct) copy.
Well... it /is/ possible if the original source was from a single
layer disc. Not very common, of course.
I beg to differ. If he's making a direct, i.e. one-to-one copy, there
is no shrinking [1] involved, because a shrunk copy would by definition
be different from the original.
DVD Shrink is used to strip copy protection
So finally - after yet another teeth pulling operation - a *bit* of
detail. You should have said this *upfront*, because just saying that
you used DVD shrink, implies that you shrunk the copies and might have
made a - highly relevant - error there.

But more importantly, note that he never said *what* he copied
DVD movies
'movieS'? Did you copy more than one movie to one DVD?

no, one movie per dvd

and not *how* he copied it.
I did - Asus burner in a PC using DVD Shrink and Nero
Yes, you said only *that*, and I asked for the procedures, settings,
options, etc., and again you failed to give the required info.

it varies according to what I am recording. I am discussing the
recording of DVD's with the ONLY variant being the media, and not one
particular recording

He only said that he burnt (burned?) a movie twice,
once to TDK media, once to LG media. No details about the source, no
details about the format(s) of the source,
DVD movies
See above.

not details about the
procedures/settings of the copy process and no details about the
format(s) of the targets.
what more info do you want? I'm making copies of DVD's
Duh! I (read: we) want (read: require) the info *which I'm asking for*,

Believe it or not, but software like DVD Shrink and Nero doesn't run
itself! So we need to know exactly which operations you performed and
which settings/options/etc., you used.

*If* the visual results of both copies were the same, we would of
course not need this information. But because *you* *claim* they're
different and *you* clearly don't grasp the subject matter at hand, the
information *is* required.

see previous

And then there's - as I mentioned - the different connections of the
two DVD players.
the other DVD player is irrelevant. READ the thread! I'm not going to
repeat it all
Well, if it's irrelevant, then why did you mention it?

like I've said, you were confusing to separate discussions

All-in-all a myriad of possibilities why the visible results could
indeed be different, NOT because of the brands of the media, but because
of other factors which he didn't report, most likely because he doesn't
realize their importance/relevance, but possibly because he's trolling.

[1] I have to say that I find the name 'DVD shrink' rather fitting in
this (non-)discussion.
Bottom line: You're of course free to let this rest and shut up. But
if you keep stamping your feet, continue to utter nonsense

IYNSWO

> and continue to flame/insult people

that's just a lie. of course no one has abused or insulted me have they..

> who clearly know much more than you do

again IYNSWO. NO ONE who has had ANY practical experience with cables
will try to tell you they cannot affect audio or video performance.

- which
isn't a big (t)ask -, you'll get what's coming. Such is life. Time to
get over it.

and if you keep making demands of me and telling me what to do, I'll
ignore you.

(and now I'm wondering why I even bothered to answer this)


--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/

 

[Clocky]

On 18/01/2016 3:01 PM, Je�us wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:52:16 +0800, Clocky <notgonna@happen.com
wrote:

On 18/01/2016 9:10 AM, felix wrote:
because it isn't. I have just one question for you.. what experience do
YOU PERSONALLY have with AV cables and decent AV equipment?


More then you obviously when you can't even grasp the basics of
digital signals.

you're avoiding the question. what testing have YOU personally done of
AV input/output cables? part of my working career was with a
manufacturer of hi end audio.

Which make your claims even more ludicrous.

Of course, he didn't say in what capacity he worked for this 'high
end' audio company. Tea lady perhaps? There has been relevantly few
such companies in Aus over the past few decades, so I wonder which one
it was?

Most likely a sales droid that believed in the bullshit that gets fed to
them as an aid to assist them to up-sell high GP crap to gullible
customers who are just as technically inept as they are.

 

[Clocky]

On 19/01/2016 8:01 AM, felix wrote:

On 19-January-2016 1:34 AM, keithr wrote:
On 18/01/2016 1:28 PM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 1:58 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 17/01/2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 7:14 PM, felix wrote:
You are the kind of wood duck that companies like Monster just love,
they'd go broke without people like you.

Monster Cable Products, Inc is the world's leading manufacturer of
high
end cables that connect audio/video components for home, car and
professional use. Monster's audio cables have high performance sound
characteristics that increase the clarity, dynamics and power of the
audio signals. The video cables give improved picture quality to
television and home theatre systems.

(and I can confirm that is so)

Monster Cable Products, Inc. was started in 1979 by Noel Lee, who was
then a laser-fusion design engineer at Lawrence-Livermore
Laboratory, as
well as an audiophile and drummer/musician, found that wires of
different constructions produced varying degrees of audio performance
when hooked up to loudspeakers.

(exactly what I have found and said here and got rubbished for it)

From this discovery, he crafted a high performance cable. He
named it
Monster Cable, and founded an industry that has since exploded. The
creation of Monster Cable started a new product category of high
performance audio cables that revolutionised the audio market.

Lee chose the name "Monster" for two reasons. It sounded strong and
powerful, and the size of the cable was "monstrous" compared to
ordinary
loudspeaker cable. The name was a hit straightaway and now is
sometimes
misused to mean any high performance cable.

Monster offers more than 1000 products, and has become an
indispensable
accessory for music lovers, audiophiles, recording studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts.

More than 2,000 different CDs have given Monster Cable credit on the
jacket of their recordings and hundreds of feature film sound tracks
and
Foley sound effects have been recorded with Monster Cable.

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ehifi.com.au/brands/monster.aspx

but of course you know better, and it's all nonsense. idiot!



You can believe whatever scam you like, but read this and
understand why
what you think you see is impossible with HDMI.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/


Yes he is a moron,

same to you asshole

however there *ARE* certainly differences between cables of ALL types,
including HDMI. The main difference is mechanical construction
affecting reliability. That usually means the cable either works or
doesn't. Plenty of cheap ones fail, and plenty of really expensive
ones are *massive* rip offs. (of course many dealers sell cheap ones
at high prices too) Also there ARE different HDMI versions that not
all HDMI cables manage. ie. some cheap cables do not allow for ARC or
3D. And many cheap cables do of course. So to claim they are all the
same is simply wrong.

and so now you agree with me. what an idiot!

No he doesn't, of course there are differences, there is cheap shit
that doesn't work well, there is mainstream product giving excellent
results at a reasonable price, and then there is overpriced rubbish
that works no better

right, now tell me that a $5 cable works just as well as a $300 cable,
because you'll be contradicting yourself if you do. even the shielding
is relevant.

but is aimed at wood ducks like you who think that it must be better
because it costs more.


when did I say a cable 'must' be better simply because it costs more?
oh, the answer would be never, asshole

So why wouldn't a $5 cable work as well as a $300 one?

It either works or it doesn't and the difference isn't going to be seen
in the image colours, that much is certain.

 

[Clocky]

On 18/01/2016 2:46 PM, felix wrote:

On 18-January-2016 4:29 PM, Rod Speed wrote:


"felix" <me@nothere.invalid> wrote in message
news:dg34fqF41d8U1@mid.individual.net...
On 18-January-2016 1:58 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 17/01/2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 7:14 PM, felix wrote:
You are the kind of wood duck that companies like Monster just love,
they'd go broke without people like you.

Monster Cable Products, Inc is the world's leading manufacturer of
high
end cables that connect audio/video components for home, car and
professional use. Monster's audio cables have high performance sound
characteristics that increase the clarity, dynamics and power of the
audio signals. The video cables give improved picture quality to
television and home theatre systems.

(and I can confirm that is so)

Monster Cable Products, Inc. was started in 1979 by Noel Lee, who was
then a laser-fusion design engineer at Lawrence-Livermore
Laboratory, as
well as an audiophile and drummer/musician, found that wires of
different constructions produced varying degrees of audio performance
when hooked up to loudspeakers.

(exactly what I have found and said here and got rubbished for it)

From this discovery, he crafted a high performance cable. He
named it
Monster Cable, and founded an industry that has since exploded. The
creation of Monster Cable started a new product category of high
performance audio cables that revolutionised the audio market.

Lee chose the name "Monster" for two reasons. It sounded strong and
powerful, and the size of the cable was "monstrous" compared to
ordinary
loudspeaker cable. The name was a hit straightaway and now is
sometimes
misused to mean any high performance cable.

Monster offers more than 1000 products, and has become an
indispensable
accessory for music lovers, audiophiles, recording studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts.

More than 2,000 different CDs have given Monster Cable credit on the
jacket of their recordings and hundreds of feature film sound
tracks and
Foley sound effects have been recorded with Monster Cable.

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ehifi.com.au/brands/monster.aspx

but of course you know better, and it's all nonsense. idiot!



You can believe whatever scam you like, but read this and
understand why
what you think you see is impossible with HDMI.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/


Yes he is a moron,

same to you asshole

however there *ARE* certainly differences between cables of ALL
types, including HDMI. The main difference is mechanical
construction affecting reliability. That usually means the cable
either works or doesn't. Plenty of cheap ones fail, and plenty of
really expensive ones are *massive* rip offs. (of course many
dealers sell cheap ones at high prices too) Also there ARE
different HDMI versions that not all HDMI cables manage. ie. some
cheap cables do not allow for ARC or 3D. And many cheap cables do of
course. So to claim they are all the same is simply wrong.

and so now you agree with me.

Like hell he does on your stupid pig ignorant claim
that the particularly DIGITAL cable can affect stuff
like the saturation of the colors with a DVD.

he agreed that not all cables are the same. Clocky has been saying they
are.

Bullshit.

I'm comparing like for like, you started comparing apples to oranges.

....and even then you're wrong on what affect it has on the image.

 

[Clocky]

On 19/01/2016 7:48 AM, felix wrote:

On 19-January-2016 6:12 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

[All my comments, including questions which *must* be answered deleted.]

Now when you reply again, give us the *full* picture -)) and
*answer* the questions I raised in *this* response *and* all the
questions I raised in my *previous* response, which you didn't
bother to
answer.
[...]
you're still confused. read back thru the thread
Gigantic amount of dodges duly noted. Refusal to provide *required*
information duly noted.

I don't take orders from usenet 'contributors'

Implicit surrender duly noted.

get your facts right and I'll answer relevant questions

Tell me felix, do you wear a bioflow?

 

[~misfit~]

Once upon a time on usenet Jeßus wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:04:11 +1300, "~misfit~"
shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:

Once upon a time on usenet felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 1:28 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 09:45:10 +0800, Clocky <notgonna@happen.com
wrote:

On 17/01/2016 9:14 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:08 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 9:39 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:01 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 10:41 AM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:32:48 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
On 16-January-2016 1:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 11:42:28 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

On 16-January-2016 11:17 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 15/01/2016 6:32 AM, felix wrote:
I suppose you can see a difference when using two
different brands of
HDMI cables too can you, because it makes just as much
sense.
well you are completely wrong there because there are
visible differences between HDMI cables. if you can't see
them, I can only assume you do not have equipment of
sufficient quality
You really are a lost cause

Any HDMI cables that are *well made* out of reasonable
quality materials and are not faulty in some way and of the
same length should
produce the same result.
no, you are if you want to argue against what is well known
among audiophiles the world over, ie. that interconnect
quality affects audio/video quality
LOL. Go to stereo.net and start a thread there on the topic.
Espouse your theories there. Please do

NB: I see you edited out the rest of my reply (which I
reinstated). Only reason you'd do that is because you're
trolling, which I'm at the point of being convinced is
exactly what you've been doing these past three weeks or so.
Your opinions on everything are just *too* ridiculous to be
for real.
Agreed.
you must be as stupid as he is


You're trolling
oh really? care to point out the bit that was edited and then
reinstated? I suggest it's you who's trolling. and you are at
least ignorant if you are unaware that AV interconnects have a
bearing on performance.

You're ignorant of all the technical details of how a digital
signals differs and you are applying analog signal principles to
digital devices and connections.

Sure your HDMI cable can cause signal drops and errors but they
don't manifest in any way shape or form in the way you are
suggesting with your silly nonsense.
So either you are trolling or your a complete dill.
He's trolling. No longer any doubt about it as far I am concerned.



"Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may
characterize a post as trolling,
while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution
to the discussion,
even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as
an ad hominem attack,
suggesting a negative motivation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

Perjorative? Ad hominem?

I recall you calling two people 'stupid' a couple of posts ago. It's
up there, in the quoted stuff.

You're wasting your time trying to reason with him.

Yeah I'm starting to get that.

I just marked the thread as read - I abhor crossposting anyway.

Cheers,
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)

 

[JW]

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:45:50 +1100 felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote in
Message id: <dg0djeFdgt6U2@mid.individual.net>:

On 17-January-2016 1:19 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 15/01/2016 3:25 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 14/01/2016 9:46 PM, felix wrote:
well you can say what you like about it, but I can see the differences
between the two.

No you can't because it's digital.

Of course he can, his "brain" interprets things differently than
normal people. It's why some HiFi buffs "hear" differences between
mains cables

mains cables?

Yes. Here's a high performance power cable that will improve your audio
experience:

http://www.tweekgeek.com/ct-1-ultimate-reference-helix-power-cord/?gclid=COSC8NLktcoCFYEfHwodCYcHDw

*guffaw!*

 

[Frank Slootweg]

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

On 19-January-2016 6:40 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
On 18-January-2016 8:18 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Je?us <j@invalid.lan> wrote:
On 17 Jan 2016 14:18:25 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
- Using 'DVD shrink' (cite URL) is *not* making a (direct) copy.
Well... it /is/ possible if the original source was from a single
layer disc. Not very common, of course.
I beg to differ. If he's making a direct, i.e. one-to-one copy, there
is no shrinking [1] involved, because a shrunk copy would by definition
be different from the original.
DVD Shrink is used to strip copy protection
So finally - after yet another teeth pulling operation - a *bit* of
detail. You should have said this *upfront*, because just saying that
you used DVD shrink, implies that you shrunk the copies and might have
made a - highly relevant - error there.

But more importantly, note that he never said *what* he copied
DVD movies
'movieS'? Did you copy more than one movie to one DVD?

no, one movie per dvd

So you should say "DVD movie", singular. What you do at *other* times
is irrelevant to your media test and should be left out.

and not *how* he copied it.
I did - Asus burner in a PC using DVD Shrink and Nero
Yes, you said only *that*, and I asked for the procedures, settings,
options, etc., and again you failed to give the required info.

it varies according to what I am recording. I am discussing the
recording of DVD's with the ONLY variant being the media, and not one
particular recording

You keep saying that (i.e. stamping your feet) - but as has been
pointed out to you umpteen times - it is *IMPOSSIBLE* that the pictures
for the two brands of media are different, if that is "the ONLY variant".

It's a *digital* copy of a *digital* source. If the copies are
identical - which you refuse to test - the pictures for the two brands
are the same, period.

So *deliver* - i.e. compare the contents of the two media bit-for-bit
and post the results - or STFU!

He only said that he burnt (burned?) a movie twice,
once to TDK media, once to LG media. No details about the source, no
details about the format(s) of the source,
DVD movies
See above.

not details about the
procedures/settings of the copy process and no details about the
format(s) of the targets.
what more info do you want? I'm making copies of DVD's
Duh! I (read: we) want (read: require) the info *which I'm asking for*,

Believe it or not, but software like DVD Shrink and Nero doesn't run
itself! So we need to know exactly which operations you performed and
which settings/options/etc., you used.

*If* the visual results of both copies were the same, we would of
course not need this information. But because *you* *claim* they're
different and *you* clearly don't grasp the subject matter at hand, the
information *is* required.

see previous

And then there's - as I mentioned - the different connections of the
two DVD players.
the other DVD player is irrelevant. READ the thread! I'm not going to
repeat it all
Well, if it's irrelevant, then why did you mention it?

like I've said, you were confusing to separate discussions

No, I do *not* confuse the two seperate discussions (the - already
long closed - topic mentioned in the Subject: line ("DVD picture doesn't
fill the screen"), and this one - the supposedly different picture from
two different brands of media).

But *you* brought up the (connection of the) Samsung player, so *you*
are confused, because you bring up a point which *you* know/say is
irrelevant.

All-in-all a myriad of possibilities why the visible results could
indeed be different, NOT because of the brands of the media, but because
of other factors which he didn't report, most likely because he doesn't
realize their importance/relevance, but possibly because he's trolling.

[1] I have to say that I find the name 'DVD shrink' rather fitting in
this (non-)discussion.
Bottom line: You're of course free to let this rest and shut up. But
if you keep stamping your feet, continue to utter nonsense

IYNSWO

and continue to flame/insult people

that's just a lie. of course no one has abused or insulted me have they..

No, that's a *fact*. Specifically, you flamed/insulted me after my
*very first* response in this thread, and that response was *not*
inflammatory at all! If you think otherwise, *prove* it (with a cite).

who clearly know much more than you do

again IYNSWO. NO ONE who has had ANY practical experience with cables
will try to tell you they cannot affect audio or video performance.

*Nobody* - except you - is saying that. Everybody - except you - is
sticking to the cable type which is relevant for *this* discussion,
namely a HDMI cable, i.e. a cable for *digital* video/audio. As people
have tried and tried again to ram into your brain, the (non) quality of
an HDMI cable *cannot* affect the quality of the picture as you are
mentioning (i.e. colour seperation and sharpness). A 'bad' quality cable
can give video/audio *interruptions*, i.e. blocks, etc.) or even not
work at all, but it *cannot* affect colour seperation and sharpness.

Of course *if* we were talking about cables for *analog* connections,
it can be a different story, but we are *not* talking about analog
connections, *only* digital ones.

Bottom line: You're confused about digital versus analog (and lots of
other things).

- which
isn't a big (t)ask -, you'll get what's coming. Such is life. Time to
get over it.

and if you keep making demands of me and telling me what to do, I'll
ignore you.

Promises, promises!

> (and now I'm wondering why I even bothered to answer this)

Because you can't handle the fact that people point out your flaws!?

 

[Chris]

On 19/01/2016 10:39 PM, JW wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:45:50 +1100 felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote in
Message id: <dg0djeFdgt6U2@mid.individual.net>:

On 17-January-2016 1:19 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 15/01/2016 3:25 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 14/01/2016 9:46 PM, felix wrote:
well you can say what you like about it, but I can see the differences
between the two.

No you can't because it's digital.

Of course he can, his "brain" interprets things differently than
normal people. It's why some HiFi buffs "hear" differences between
mains cables

mains cables?

Yes. Here's a high performance power cable that will improve your audio
experience:

http://www.tweekgeek.com/ct-1-ultimate-reference-helix-power-cord/?gclid=COSC8NLktcoCFYEfHwodCYcHDw

*guffaw!*

God, the *CRAP* they have on offer boggles the mind!

These are beyond the pale

http://www.tweekgeek.com/tweaks/tweeks-by-brand/steinmusic-e-pad-s/
http://www.tweekgeek.com/bybee-quantum-signal-enhancer/

--
Cheers,
Chris.

 

[felix]

On 20-January-2016 3:19 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
On 19-January-2016 6:40 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
On 18-January-2016 8:18 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Je?us <j@invalid.lan> wrote:
On 17 Jan 2016 14:18:25 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
- Using 'DVD shrink' (cite URL) is *not* making a (direct) copy.
Well... it /is/ possible if the original source was from a single
layer disc. Not very common, of course.
I beg to differ. If he's making a direct, i.e. one-to-one copy, there
is no shrinking [1] involved, because a shrunk copy would by definition
be different from the original.
DVD Shrink is used to strip copy protection
So finally - after yet another teeth pulling operation - a *bit* of
detail. You should have said this *upfront*, because just saying that
you used DVD shrink, implies that you shrunk the copies and might have
made a - highly relevant - error there.

But more importantly, note that he never said *what* he copied
DVD movies
'movieS'? Did you copy more than one movie to one DVD?
no, one movie per dvd
So you should say "DVD movie", singular. What you do at *other* times
is irrelevant to your media test and should be left out.

and not *how* he copied it.
I did - Asus burner in a PC using DVD Shrink and Nero
Yes, you said only *that*, and I asked for the procedures, settings,
options, etc., and again you failed to give the required info.
it varies according to what I am recording. I am discussing the
recording of DVD's with the ONLY variant being the media, and not one
particular recording
You keep saying that (i.e. stamping your feet) - but as has been
pointed out to you umpteen times - it is *IMPOSSIBLE* that the pictures
for the two brands of media are different, if that is "the ONLY variant".

It's a *digital* copy of a *digital* source. If the copies are
identical - which you refuse to test - the pictures for the two brands
are the same, period.

so how is that done? and I've already told you we were not talking about
any DVDs specifically, so I would have to make some copies to compare.

So *deliver* - i.e. compare the contents of the two media bit-for-bit
and post the results - or STFU!

I'm replying to you stupid.

He only said that he burnt (burned?) a movie twice,
once to TDK media, once to LG media. No details about the source, no
details about the format(s) of the source,
DVD movies
See above.

not details about the
procedures/settings of the copy process and no details about the
format(s) of the targets.
what more info do you want? I'm making copies of DVD's
Duh! I (read: we) want (read: require) the info *which I'm asking for*,

Believe it or not, but software like DVD Shrink and Nero doesn't run
itself! So we need to know exactly which operations you performed and
which settings/options/etc., you used.

*If* the visual results of both copies were the same, we would of
course not need this information. But because *you* *claim* they're
different and *you* clearly don't grasp the subject matter at hand, the
information *is* required.
see previous

And then there's - as I mentioned - the different connections of the
two DVD players.
the other DVD player is irrelevant. READ the thread! I'm not going to
repeat it all
Well, if it's irrelevant, then why did you mention it?
like I've said, you were confusing to separate discussions
No, I do *not* confuse the two seperate discussions (the - already
long closed - topic mentioned in the Subject: line ("DVD picture doesn't
fill the screen"), and this one - the supposedly different picture from
two different brands of media).

But *you* brought up the (connection of the) Samsung player, so *you*
are confused, because you bring up a point which *you* know/say is
irrelevant.

no, it's you who are (still) confused or you wouldn't even mention the
Samsung DVD player in relation to the discussion about media. there are
three discussions in the thread
1. DVD picture not filling the screen
2. a disc that would not play
3. variations between DVD media

it was only in relation to (2) that the Samsung was mentioned or was
relevant. I kept telling you to read the thread to clarify your
thoughts. if you had done so you would know that the Samsung is
irrelevant to this discussion.

All-in-all a myriad of possibilities why the visible results could
indeed be different, NOT because of the brands of the media, but because
of other factors which he didn't report, most likely because he doesn't
realize their importance/relevance, but possibly because he's trolling.

[1] I have to say that I find the name 'DVD shrink' rather fitting in
this (non-)discussion.
Bottom line: You're of course free to let this rest and shut up. But
if you keep stamping your feet, continue to utter nonsense
IYNSWO

and continue to flame/insult people
that's just a lie. of course no one has abused or insulted me have they..
No, that's a *fact*. Specifically, you flamed/insulted me after my
*very first* response in this thread, and that response was *not*
inflammatory at all!

how much patience do you think I have? your response came late in the
discussion after I had been called all sorts of things and constantly
accused of trolling, and you pop up with yet another suggestion of lack
of knowledge and trolling. you'll recall I started my response with
"here we go again.."

If you think otherwise, *prove* it (with a cite).

who clearly know much more than you do
again IYNSWO. NO ONE who has had ANY practical experience with cables
will try to tell you they cannot affect audio or video performance.
*Nobody* - except you - is saying that. Everybody - except you - is
sticking to the cable type which is relevant for *this* discussion,
namely a HDMI cable, i.e. a cable for *digital* video/audio. As people
have tried and tried again to ram into your brain, the (non) quality of
an HDMI cable *cannot* affect the quality of the picture as you are
mentioning (i.e. colour seperation and sharpness). A 'bad' quality cable
can give video/audio *interruptions*, i.e. blocks, etc.) or even not
work at all, but it *cannot* affect colour seperation and sharpness.

Of course *if* we were talking about cables for *analog* connections,
it can be a different story, but we are *not* talking about analog
connections, *only* digital ones.

Bottom line: You're confused about digital versus analog

no, the discussion included both types. only later did it move on to a
specific cable type.

> (and lots of other things).

such as?

- which
isn't a big (t)ask -, you'll get what's coming. Such is life. Time to
get over it.
and if you keep making demands of me and telling me what to do, I'll
ignore you.
Promises, promises!

so do you want me to reply to you or not? I'm happy either way. like I
said, if ppl want to discuss some issue that's fine. but many here can't
seem to do that without resorting to personal abuse and insults. then if
I react in kind, I'm criticized more! it's pretty much a case of blaming
the victim.

(and now I'm wondering why I even bothered to answer this)
Because you can't handle the fact that people point out your flaws!?

and why, pray tell, should my 'flaws' (whatever they may be) be a topic
for discussion? the reason I'm so insistent about the difference cables
can make is because I CAN and DO see (and hear) differences between
cables, and no one will ever convince me that I can't see what I do see.
yet another example.. I can swap the cables from the foxtel box with
different grades of monster cable and see a difference. strangely enough
a lower grade monster cable produces the best result. you can believe it
or not, I don't care, since it makes no difference to me personally
whether you do or don't.


--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/

 

[Trevor]

On 18/01/2016 4:54 PM, Clocky wrote:

On 18/01/2016 10:58 AM, Trevor wrote:
You can believe whatever scam you like, but read this and understand why
what you think you see is impossible with HDMI.

http://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/


Yes he is a moron, however there *ARE* certainly differences between
cables of ALL types, including HDMI. The main difference is mechanical
construction affecting reliability. That usually means the cable either
works or doesn't. Plenty of cheap ones fail, and plenty of really
expensive ones are *massive* rip offs.

Plenty of real expensive ones fail before a cheap one will.

Check this out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxfLXH6qe9w

Right, as always price is no indication of quality. But as I said, there
ARE differences between cables despite the claim they are all the same.

Trevor.

 

On 20 Jan 2016 20:19:33 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

mains cables?

Yes, didn't you know!? Mains cables are *the* most important part of
any high quality AV setup!

What makes me laugh is that some people pay ridiculous amounts for an
IEC power cable, yet never think about the quality/condition of the
powerpoint used or the rest of the house wiring

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2016-01-23, Jeßus <j@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 20 Jan 2016 20:19:33 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

mains cables?

Yes, didn't you know!? Mains cables are *the* most important part of
any high quality AV setup!

What makes me laugh is that some people pay ridiculous amounts for an
IEC power cable, yet never think about the quality/condition of the
powerpoint used or the rest of the house wiring

cord probably plugs into some fancy "energy conditioner"

--
\_(ツ)_

 

[news13]

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 09:36:26 +1100, Jeßus wrote:

On 20 Jan 2016 20:19:33 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

mains cables?

Yes, didn't you know!? Mains cables are *the* most important part of
any high quality AV setup!

What makes me laugh is that some people pay ridiculous amounts for an
IEC power cable, yet never think about the quality/condition of the
powerpoint used or the rest of the house wiring

Where are they?
I scrapped about 200 month and probably has as many left.

 

[Trevor]

On 21/01/2016 6:00 AM, Clocky wrote:

On 20/01/2016 7:39 AM, Chris wrote:
On 19/01/2016 10:39 PM, JW wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 13:45:50 +1100 felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote in
Message id: <dg0djeFdgt6U2@mid.individual.net>:
On 17-January-2016 1:19 PM, Trevor wrote:
On 15/01/2016 3:25 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 14/01/2016 9:46 PM, felix wrote:
well you can say what you like about it, but I can see the
differences between the two.

No you can't because it's digital.

Of course he can, his "brain" interprets things differently than
normal people. It's why some HiFi buffs "hear" differences between
mains cables

mains cables?

Yes. Here's a high performance power cable that will improve your audio
experience:

http://www.tweekgeek.com/ct-1-ultimate-reference-helix-power-cord/?gclid=COSC8NLktcoCFYEfHwodCYcHDw



*guffaw!*

God, the *CRAP* they have on offer boggles the mind!

These are beyond the pale

http://www.tweekgeek.com/tweaks/tweeks-by-brand/steinmusic-e-pad-s/
http://www.tweekgeek.com/bybee-quantum-signal-enhancer/


Do people actually buy into this shit?

Seriously?

Yep. People are THAT stupid. Just look at who they vote for! :-(
And of course there is little correlation between wealth and
intelligence. (None between wealth and empathy of course)

Trevor.

 

On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 00:20:11 -0000 (UTC), news13
<newsthirteenspam-spam@woa.com.au> wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 09:36:26 +1100, Jeßus wrote:

On 20 Jan 2016 20:19:33 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

mains cables?

Yes, didn't you know!? Mains cables are *the* most important part of
any high quality AV setup!

What makes me laugh is that some people pay ridiculous amounts for an
IEC power cable, yet never think about the quality/condition of the
powerpoint used or the rest of the house wiring

Where are they?
I scrapped about 200 month and probably has as many left.

I have a box full of them too. But of course, those ones are ordinary
IEC cables. You'd have to add an element of bullshit somehow to make
them audiophool grade cables.

 

On 24 Jan 2016 00:51:49 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:

On 2016-01-23, Jeßus <j@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 20 Jan 2016 20:19:33 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid
wrote:

felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:

mains cables?

Yes, didn't you know!? Mains cables are *the* most important part of
any high quality AV setup!

What makes me laugh is that some people pay ridiculous amounts for an
IEC power cable, yet never think about the quality/condition of the
powerpoint used or the rest of the house wiring

cord probably plugs into some fancy "energy conditioner"

Yes, I'm sure there are some around to waste money on.