RE: THX and music replay...

["Phillip Harris" <phil@xxxxxxx>]

> It does strike me that the criticism of THX "because it
> sounds pants for music" is a bit like criticising an MPV
> because it doesn't have great torque.

Whoah there Mark ... I have not said that THX sounds pants for music!

What I have said is that THX is a set of specs which is not openly
available and the result is that, in my experience, although a THX set
of speakers sound good for movies they frequently - possibly because of
compliance with the specs - don't sound as good on music whereas a good
music speaker still sounds good for movies. I have not said that THX
sounds pants for music. Do not start a p1ssing contest over this.
 
> THX effectively says "this amplifier has a set of
> characteristics - these characteristics were specially
> developed for one specific purpose - that of watching
> multi-channel movies."

Uh huh - but Lucasfilm *DO NOT* release those specs to the public so how do you know what you're buying into and whether you even *SHOULD* be
buying into THX certified kit. It comes back to listening to the kit and deciding whether it is suitable for your needs. The original question
was relating to the importance of THX certification (originally how THX
certification related to the performance of DVD players) and both Nick
and I have been talking about our thoughts on THX and what it means in
the real world.

> If you take a device specifically designed to do one thing,
> and do it well, it's a bit unfair to use it for something
> completely different and claim that the design is
> fundamentally flawed.

I haven't ... Again, stop assuming that I have made claims and
statements that I haven't. All I have been saying is that THX
certification in itself means and guarantees nothing except that the
equipment complies to an undisclosed set of standards which have little
bearing on real world performance ... My example of two THX certified
amplifiers which sound completely different should have amply
illustrated this as well as firmly identifying that I do not claim THX
compliance to indicate a lack of musicality.

Anyway, how do you come to the conclusion that reproducing a movie
soundtrack and an audio track is funamentally different? Personally I
feel that the two things should be more than able to be served by a
single system - do you feel that the audio requirements for good "musi= c"
and good "movies" are different?

> Why can't people accept that having two different systems -
> one optimised for playing stereo music, one optimised for
> playing surround sound - is no different.

For the same reason that *SOME* people may actually want a "one does all" solution ... For the same reason that some people may want an APS=
camera even though they know there are limitations of the format...

> I have a movie system - it uses a THX processor, and a THX
> power amp for the main channels. It sounds excellent for movies.

Yes, I know the kit that you have and it does sound excellent for movies ... Your processor also sounds very good for music too but then again
your processor retails at =A33k without any amplification and with a quite<= BR> limited number of inputs and so it damn well should do ... I am saying
that *WITHOUT* making or inviting any "value for money" judgement= s.

> I have a music system - it uses a stereo pre-amp, no
> surround, optimised for stereo, and a power amp optimised for
> music. It sounds excellent for music.

Superb ... I'm glad you have enough room to do that. Some of us have
other requirements which may include having one system that serves both
purposes but these points do not relate in any way to the original
question so how about we stick to what bearing THX has on things.

> Now, I realise that budget, and space are constraints for all
> of us, but even if money were no object, then I'd still want
> a separate system using Meridian 800 series stuff for cinema,
> and Chord stero stuff for music. Likewise, if money were no
> object, I'd have Linn Sondek CD12 for playing CDs - ANY DVD
> player in the world sounds "pants" compared to that... but <= BR> > =A312,000 for a CD player is kind of obsessive, considering
> that you could get a might cinema system for that :-)

Again, this doesn't bear any relation to the original question...

Phil

http://www.automatedhome.co.uk 
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx 
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx 
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx 
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
List of UKHA Groups here - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UKHA_Grouplists/

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.