Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Ken_McAlinden, Aug 29, 2019.
IIRC, it was free.
I'm not sure I'd go with a no-name brand for $20 but for £50, you can get a nice/well respected Samsung which works perfectly (I've had one of these for a few years now for all my ripping (works on Linux too, if that's important to you (it is for me ))).
As far as I'm concerned, a show may be properly lit (as Floyd ones were) for the audience but not necessarily for video shooting. Usually when a band or artist records a show for a future release or for a tv broadcast, they add some extra lightning.
If the shoot was only a far from stage view, the usual show lightning would be the proper one. But if you want to see the musicians in action and get some close-ups, you need something more or all you get would be a bunch of grain (and nowadays digital noise).
I think that the Venice show is a good example of this. Between the stage and the standing crowd in the square, there was a big black void. They got the best video quality when filming a musician while doing a solo lit by a spotlight
Are you suggesting that the ambient light from the crowd made the difference in video quality between Venice and Knebworth? I don't see any ambient light coming from the Knebworth crowd.
Maybe if the camera had a telephoto lens and was zoomed in. The Venice close ups are far from being grainy. There shouldn't be a difference if the cameras at each show were in the same proximity of the performers.
For what it's worth I don't find a significant difference in video quality between them. I do know that with Venice that had to take what they could get where Knebworth had more room for improvement (especially on the audio side).
Not really. Might be I'm not a native english speaker. That was just an example of one of the many things that made the Venice video worst than Knebworth.
Like you, I also think that the cameras quality made a difference too. And probably the format (Venice looks like U-matic to me)
They did a great job with Venice if it was sourced from a U-matic tape! But that was one of my earlier thoughts as well. The tape format could have made a difference in quality. I don't have an issue with either one being too dark or washed out. The difference, to me, is more in the details of the image. But it's fun to guess.
By the way, since I watched the Floyd Knebworth bluray, I'm dreaming with a future bluray release of the wonderful Genesis Knebworth concert back in 1992....... If they achieve the same video quality, I'd be happily first in line to buy it
Hopefully, the blu-ray contents on this box will at least let more people see that, actually, SD video on blu-ray is not a stupid idea.
Agreed. It's frustrating to me that people instantly dismiss it because all they care about is the resolution. There's much more to it than just that. It seems that from what has been posted here, when compared to the original Pulse DVD release the blu ray looks quite a bit better (as it should). That DVD was horribly compressed. I don't think I've read any comparisons of the original DVD to the one in TLY though. If the new DVD is done right even it should also look better than the original.
It's only slightly better, like an 8-10% improvement in detail. But I'll take that over the DVD any day.
The Pulse DVD looks better to me. But unfortunately, the sound is way way out of sync of the video, which is quite a bit of a pain. On VLC I can adjust the delay but, to my knowledge not on a DVD player plugged into a TV, or even on my computer's stock DVD player. I asked previously in the forum, but barely anybody responded (and those that did said they also had the issue, so I'm assuming it's not a unique problem).
I have a feeling that the lack of response may be that many of us never bother with the DVDs. I've never even bothered to look at the discs. Hope you resolve your issue.
When I say "looks quite a bit better" I'm not just taking into consideration the detail though. The original DVD was plagued with digital artifacts. The blu ray fixes that issue because there's less compression on the video.
If you mean compression artifacts, like blocking, staircasing, ringing, et cetera, that's exactly why it looks slightly better. Less compression = improved picture detail on the BR.
Cheers, ThirdBowl, but in the related items lists there, I can only see CD/DVD drives (I already have one of those) for the $20–40. The cheapest Blu-ray drive there is $58.99 (but rated with just one star), another for $69.99 (rated 3 stars), with all the others in the $80–90+ range (getting 4 and 5-star ratings).
Thanks, Mutant Matt, but that link takes me to a Samsung SE-208DB/TSBS external USB 2.0 DVDRW, which is described as reading and writing CDs and DVDs, but there is no mention of Blu-ray reading and writing capability in the description no the product name.
I wonder if this is a PAL/NTSC problem, the source (disc) being one, the screen being the other, and the frames per second being mismatched.
You might want to try ebay, as I scored an LG branded blu ray external burner for about $40 iirc. It's been about a few years but I'm sure there's still some floating around there. Just make sure it's been tested and whatnot.
It would appear that Samsung have got out of the portable BlueRay drive market, as the actual one I have seems to be no longer available (I just dug out my order details). It seems that the prices are going up on the alternatives too (so "don't delay, buy today" ).
I guess I'd go for this one now:
or one from this list (or similar):
5 Best External Blu-Ray Drives Reviews of 2020 in the UK - BestAdvisers.co.uk
I don't even bother anymore to spin up new discs in my player connected to the TV, I rip them first and use Kodi for all video and music content "consumption" (as once it's ripped, I can choose the device and location I want to "consume" it).
Thanks for the links Matt, but I was interested in the $40 blu-ray drive mentioned earlier and possibly the £50 one you have. The ones you link to are all 80 to 100 quid, so about four times the price of the one mentioned by ThirdBowl and about twice the price of the one you mentioned, neither of which can probably be bought now.
A question with the Pulse sync issue. Is it only on BluRay/DVD on USA versions or is the issue also noticeable on the UK version?
I don't know about the UK version, but there is no sync issue on the US Blu Ray, just the US DVD.
Good catch, I guess I didn't look that closely. FYI the one I got is branded as "COOLEAD" but under the covers it is actually a Pioneer device. Have had it 3+ years now, and use it regularly. Still going strong (knock on wood)
Anyone know why the Live 8 footage of the reunited Floyd with Roger wasn't included?
Because of the “with roger” part I’m sure
Separate names with a comma.