1. User Experience and Fatigue

Top on my wish list is of course just the fact that it will be the ultimate gadget from a user experience perspective.  Specifically what I mean by that is comfortable to use in many different situations, easy to carry and store, something that can be tossed around and not get scratched, and something that naturally becomes just as much as appendage as the iPhone has.  I expect nothing less from Apple.

My wife’s been experiencing some arm pain, similar to a carpel tunnel type injury, because of her use of the iPhone touch screen.  In the past I’ve suffered some from playing too many Xbox 360 games.  More recently I was getting sore from playing a game on the Wii.  Any new user input device can come with use-related injuries.  I hope that the new Tablet OS is comfortable to use and doesn’t create too much fatigue.

Example: I actually painfully wrote my first draft of this post in the notes app of my iPhone, in bed, while my wife was asleep beside me. Hopefully I haven’t painted a creepy picture, but night is often when I get inspiration to write and a laptop is simply too large and bulky to take to bed. I always sleep with my iPhone near by.  And lately I’ve been wondering if a 10 inch tablet would be more or less conducive to bedtime work (and typing) than the iPhone.  Ease of typing is a huge concern when considering how one would (or will) use touch screen tablets in the real world.

2. Power Cords / Interface Cable

As silly as it might seem I would love to see the tablet use the same interface connector as the iPhone / iPod touch. I already have so many of these laying around. Already have them in my cars, next to my bed, at my office, and at home.  I don’t want to all the sudden need a new set of cables. Sony kills me wih all their different batteries and power adaptors. Recently I spent 3 hours trying to find a lost power cable for my video camera which is why I did a writen review of the webstation instead of a video review. I did find 3 other Sony power cable and 2 other Sony battery chargers. But they’re all slightly different and incompatible.  Annoying!  So please Apple – keep to your own standard.

3. Powerful Processor.

I felt the iPhone 3gs was a significant improvement over the original iPhone in terms of speed. I hope the tablet will be MacBook pro fast. If it’s going to be more costly than a well equipted netbook it should be more powerful as well.

4. Real Flash Support.

Come on, mobile safari is fine for the iPhone but this thing needs to support hulu, the real YouTube, and flash gaming.  I know that Apple’s MO is to try to ‘encourage’ media buying from and for the device, but I hope it’s not at the expense of blocking hulu or any other media that I might want to play on it.

5. My Cloud / Mobile Me

I’m crossing my fingers for a killer remote desktop / screen sharing app.  Get this concept: if you could use the mac tablet with a mobile me / back to my mac account to access and control your main home mac from anywhere, in a way it would be like being able to take your home computer with you everywhere you go.  In a way it would be just as good (or maybe better) than having the tablet run the full Mac OSX.

I read someone online mention that if the tablet ran the full os it could take sales away from the desktop computer business.  I think it’s safe to say that it won’t “run” the full OS X.  But I think if the tablet acts as a controller or a window to your desktop computer, it actually promotes desktop computer sales.

It also opens up a new possible business for Apple: renting virtual (cloud) Mac OSX computer desktops to tablet users.  Rather than purchasing a $5000 mac pro, purchase a tablet and rent the power of a mac pro that you access via your tablet.  I believe that improvements could be made to the concept of remote desktop that would enable it to be more like actually having that computer inside your tablet.  Things like how files and data are shared between the two devices, and how input data could be recorded at a higher frequency – could make it possible to even use photoshop remotely.  But in this concept the remote computer is in a farm somewhere in the cloud.

6. Remote for Apple TV

The Remote app on the iPhone is one of my favorite apps.  Think of this app but bigger, better and stronger and for Apple TV.  The convergence between the computer and the TV could be solved by using the tablet as an input device for a computer that sits on your TV.  About 4 months ago I saw this (http://www.vimeo.com/6712657) interesting video of the 10/GUI user interface concept.  The basic idea is that the screen is duplicated down to a touch screen where your keyboard would be.  Watch the video.  This concept would work great as an interface for your TV as a computer.  Right now web surfing on a TV is a horrible experience.  Using this MO it could become second nature.  The Apple TV could become a device to visualize your tablet’s screen to your TV and conversely the tablet could be the ultimate remote for the Apple TV.  This marriage could honestly be a game changer.

7. Tablet as a Phone

Ok, I think this is a stretch but it’s possible.  So of course I don’t want to pay for both iPhone connectivity and tablet connectivity.  It’s possible that the tablet could be a ‘phone’ and inlcude a small handset or headset that wirelessly connects to the tablet.  Not bluetooth please but something with a much longer range like wifi.  And the handset would need a small touch screen so you could dial with it and search contacts (like an iPhone Nano).  But all the real work would happen in the tablet.  It’s probably impractical but it’s still made my list.  Another option in this same vein would be for the tablet to get it’s 3G from your iPhone, which is more of a traditional tethering concept.

8. eBook eMag reader – NOT eInk

I’m not much of a book or magazine reader, but this video (http://vimeo.com/8217311) got me excited about what electronic magazines could become.  Still eInk does me no good.  eInk doesn’t emit light except for backlighting models which look about as good as my Newton.  I think if you want an eInk reader that’s easy on the eyes go buy a Kindle or a Nook.  Maybe Apple can have an ebook mode which changes the lighting on the display and makes it easier on the eyes.  Still, it needs to have a beautiful screen for watching movies.  That’s more of a priority for me.

9. Front facing camera

Please.  Everyone knows why and everyone wants this.  And we don’t want to wait for the 4th hardware version.  Just give it to us.  Thanks!

Conclusion

My overall hope for this tablet is that it will have many many real uses.  Not just be a big iPod Touch or another gadget that I’ll buy and carry around and surf the web with.  But be the one device that basically does it all – an honest game changer.  Apple has a huge opportunity to change the way we use computers here.  I just hope that they don’t disappoint us all on Wednesday and just announce a new iLife.

It’s no secret that I have a movie theatre for a television and that we enjoy watching movies at home. But I’m also the parent of a small child and we have a fairly strict policy of what we allow our child to view. Still, we enjoy getting cozy on the couch for a good family movie. So the issue becomes WHAT to watch. The challenge is to find movies that are clean and appropriate for her while at the same time are able to hold my interest.

As I said, we’re careful about what television shows she sees. I’ve even vetoed some Blue’s Clues episodes because of the way they often handle conflict, encourage entitlement, and promote drama and whininess. And don’t even get me started on The Mickey Mouse Clubhouse and how they routinely teach ‘scientific’ principles that defy the laws of physics.

Everything she watches is played off TiVo, giving us the ability to skip over commercials. Although I must admit that it is mostly so we can avoid her falling for kids advertising and wanting every cheap toy that is pushed in her face. So we simply remove the pushing. We also don’t watch any non-kids shows when she is around, which basically amounts to ‘when she is awake.’ And if the TV is playing live-tv, it’s always on the food channel – which has proven to be a completely kid-safe channel.

For movies, as a general rule I believe in the MPAA rating system. G-rated movies are probably fine for her.  PG, or Parental Guidance, means that it might or might not be appropriate – and we need to pre-view the movie to know if it’s cool before she sees it. And I figure she can probably watch PG-13 movies when she’s 13 – but we’ll see when we get there. With only G movies to choose from, the short list gets stale fast. The problem with the PG rating is that it’s too wide a range – movies can be fine for 6 year olds or barely appropriate for 12 year olds. Overall I think there is a serious shortage of good family movies. And it’s a genre that is not target by indie film makers, which is why I have a passion to try to eventually fill that gap.  But I digress…

Every now and then we take “G” to Best Buy to pick out a new movie, but most of the time we leave empty handed – unable to find anything that fits both criteria of A) being something I want to watch AND B) is also appropriate for her to see. For example one day I noticed ‘Honey I Shrunk the Kids’ was on the cheap isle and considered getting it (even though it was DVD and not BD) but didn’t when I saw that it was PG. It’s been a while since I’ve seen it and I just can’t remember much about the content. I knew it was about some kids get who shrunk down, and there’s a giant ant, but couldn’t remember if they used any choice “PG” language that I don’t want her picking up and repeating at her Christian school. So I didn’t buy it.

Then recently I stumbled on Common Sense Media, which is a web site devoted to helping inform parents so they can make decisions about what is and isn’t appropriate for their kids. I’ve seen other sites that do this, but I really like the way that CommonSenseMedia.org handles it. They attempt to give the movie a specific age rating rather than just the general MPAA rating.

Of course any rating system is subjective and depends on the values and standards of the person doing the rating. But their system gets you into a ballpark and give you explanations for why they gave it the rating they did. It also helps to read their page about their ratings.

Every child is different and every parent is going to have a different way at looking at things as well. For us some language is an issue because of the school thing, and we know that scariness can be an issue for our child as well. Looking at their reviews of a few movies I’ve seen and already have opinions about gave me a good idea of how close their system is to OUR reality. Here’s a couple quick examples:

Bolt – Is rated PG and Common Sense gives it a 5. The only issue for us was the fire scene at the end.  They mention it although they don’t stress enough how perilous it is. It makes me wish that they separated their Violence and Scariness section.

Monsters vs Aliens – Is also rated PG  and Common Sense gives it a 7. They peg violence, scariness and language – and I suppose they are correct.

Ice Age 2 – The Meltdown – Also rated PG, Common Sense gives it a 6. I actually stopped this movie early on and didn’t allow my daughter to watch it. This one I think they’re off. They don’t peg language enough and completely miss mentioning the “DAM!” joke and don’t stress the scariness enough. (those underwater monsters are scary.)

Honey I Shrunk the Kids faired well, and now I know that, at least according to Common Sense, language isn’t an issue. Now if the movie will only come out on Bluray I can buy it and watch it with my daughter.

Of course parents should probably watch movies before letting their kids watch them, but at least Common Sense Media is a start to weeding out certain flicks beforehand. And in a case of “Honey…” it jogged my memory about a movie I had already seen.

A new ad starring Ben Stein and Shaq promoting a special price for Comcast Digital Cable totally misses the mark by showing the two handcuffed together and then making a point to emphasize that they’re going to be shaq-led for 12 months.  The idea is supposed to be that Shaq represents “Being the best” and Ben represents being frugal.  But instead all I get is that I’d be locked into the deal for a year.  It doesn’t help that after the two are handcuffed they are shocked to discover the duration of their deal…

Ben – “I know about being smart with my money…”

Shaq – “…and I know about being the best”

Ben – “and we’re being handcuffed together to show the two sides of Comcast’s Offer on digital cable with HBO.”

Shaq – “The best entertainment on demand, whenever you want it.”

Ben – “For just 29.99 a month, a price that you can lock in for…” (shocked) “12 Months!?!”

While it might actually be a decent offer, the ad comes off as sounding like I’m going to be handcuffed to a contract for a year.  Of course the fine print verifies this by saying “Minimun 1-year agreement required. Early termination fee applies.”  Fail!

As you can see in the photo below, there is a decent selection of high def flicks starting at just $14.99.  A few examples are: Replacement Killers for $14.99, Under Siege for $16.99, and Casino Royale or RoboCop for $19.99.

This is probably the most blue tag specials I’ve seen at Best Buy at one time.  Better check it out!

What I set out to do was to test their $200 product against a $30 Dunn Edwards house paint to see if theirs really is any better. The Paint On Screen products start with a silver base, which make them reflect better. Certainly it’s a more professional way to go.  But how well does it work?

Well, the review process got complicated and the result isn’t simple either. Overall I am recommending this product, but it comes with several caveats and some advice. All of which requires some explanation and visual aids to understand. This review has been a grueling month in the making. So grab a red bull and hit the read link for all the gory details…

First, I need to give an honest disclaimer that the guys at Paint On Screen were kind enough to ship me a free sample to review. Because they were so nice I really wanted to do them right and give them the best chance I could for a positive review. But I also have to be honest. In fact, before I allowed them to send me anything I told them to “be sure your product will be better because I will report the truth if it’s not.”  They were confident.  So when I had problems with their original product sample I called them and they sent a different product to try. I took my time collecting data and experimented with different methods. This review covers ALL of my experiences with the product and with the company. It is a complicated mess and my goal is to give any prospective buyer all the facts and options.

Second, this is all very subjective. I trust my eyes most of all. What’s important is ‘how does it look to you?’ You wouldn’t believe how long we all stared at the screen trying to figure out which side is better. This was a really tough one. Overall I believe that Paint On Screen is a good product. It is on my wall now and it’s going to stay there. But you should read this whole review before buying. And be aware that your mileage will vary based on what kind of surface you have and how good your projector is.

Last, where possible I’ve provided a lot of photos. I tried to make the photos look as much like the image does to the naked eye. Click on them to load a larger version. In some cases it’s necessary to load the larger image to see the detail I’m talking about. I also want to say that some of the comparisons were so subtle that they couldn’t be captured with a photo.  But read on…

My Home Theater Setup

An explanation of my setup is important because the setup impacts the effectiveness of the product. The quality of the projector, the amount of ambient light, and the kind of surface you’re painting all have to be considered before selecting which product you’ll want (or not want). I have the Sony Bravia SXRD 1080P VPL HW10.  It’s an excellent projector with an impressive (advertised) 30,000:1 contrast ratio. The screen is about 13 feet across and I sit about 18 feet from it. As for as ambient light, during most movie watching I can cut it down to almost nothing. And my wall surface has a very slight “orange peel” texture.

What I’m comparing the Paint On Screen to is something I selected from Dunn Edwards a few years ago – simply called DECEMBER (SP 4061). That product is part of a now discontinued line called “Galax-z.”  What I looked for when I selected it was a very flat, whiter than white paint that introduced NO COLOR offset.  Any sheen or gloss could cause hot spots. And obviously you don’t want any color to the paint or it will discolor the picture.  DECEMBER is flat white with no added pigments.

Test #1 – Digital Theater White

The first sample they sent was called “Digital Theater White.” We painted the right half of the wall with the sample and left the other half Dunn Edwards. And for the record, my painter is a professional painter with over 25 years experience.

Digital Theater White is a 2 on their whiteness scale which ranges from 1 to 8. It went on darker than I expected and also darker than what I had been using. My contact at Paint On Screen later said that it was the wrong selection for my particular install. Particularly my projector’s high contrast ratio doesn’t need any gray. But the results I found are still significant and should be examined.

The (obsolete?) Gray Screen

I was surprised that a product called Digital Theater White wasn’t very white. But not all screens are pure white. There is a concept in screens where you use a slight gray instead of white. It provides darker blacks and reduces the effects of ambient light. In the dark your eyes adjust and the whitest point becomes ‘white’ to your eyes. What’s important is the amount of contrast between the whitest white and the blackest black. However modern projectors now use technologies like dynamically adjusting iris’ to deliver off-the-chart contrast ratios. If you’ve got one of these projectors and can keep ambient light out (like me), you don’t need a gray screen and should opt for white.

The gray screen might still be right for some older projectors or in a situation where there’s more ambient light. If you’re looking into doing this just ask the guys at Paint On Screen for advice.

Side by Side Comparisons

After painting half the screen with Digital Theater White, we did some split screen tests. The results were very interesting. Check out this photo. At first glance you would think that the right side of the wall is textured and the left side isn’t. But the difference between the two sides is only the paint. Click to enlarge…

The image on the left side (whatever that thing is) appears smooth, while the right side appears rough. The flat paint on the left completely makes the texture disappear under the projected light. Even standing right up on it you can’t see the texture at all. The right half is also a little darker, although not as dark as you’d expect considering how much darker the paint was. What followed was a lot of real world tests (watching lots of moves), followed by some intense debate and deliberation.

This next image you have to view full size to see. I’ve included a very high resolution version here. The BEE face on the left is where the split is. On the right colors are dingy, this is because of the darker base on that particular product. As a side note, when my kitchen light was turned on (ambient light) the Digital Theater White side did look better. If I had a constant ambient light the gray would be an acceptable trade off to get the darker blacks.

But the real problem, which I’m showing here, is the visible wall texture. Because the Paint On Screen is more reflective, the wall texture translates into what looks like grain. If this product was used on a larger screen where the audience sat farther away from the screen, the texture in the wall wouldn’t be an issue.  But at my viewing distance you can subtly see it.

That second issue for me was just that the gray color of the paint made everything dingy. Comparing it to my old screen the whites were appearing more blue. It’s important to note that color balance is very subjective. Stare at a green card for a minute and then look at a white wall and you’ll see a red. Your eyes adjust to color – and so do cameras.  It is possible that the paint on the left side was just warmer in color tone and made the right side appear cooler (bluer) – although this is not my belief. The next sample DOES reflect what it looked like to me in reality – the hot spots of the explosion looks blue and dingy.

It occurred to me that maybe I just needed to get rid of the wall texture. The thought of messing with my wall at that level frightened me. What I had was working fine. As my wife put it, we now had a problem we didn’t have a few days earlier: would it look better with a smooth wall?  So I also did 3-way test, comparing December on a textured wall, Digital Theater White on a textured wall, and Digital Theater White on a piece of smooth Masonite…

As you can see, the bottom shows that even without the wall texture, the whites would be darker than they are with the Dunn Edwards. So obviously this first product sample was not the best for my install. I spoke with the guys at Paint On Screen and they sent me a different product.

Now to be fair, I sent them these photos and they realized that they sent me the wrong product considering the quality of my projector. So the question is, does that make this first product review irrelevant? If it’s the wrong product for my projector why even talk about Digital Theater White? Several reasons: first because I had a lot of photos of it, second to discuss the issue of the gray paint, and third because the wall texture issue didn’t go away with their second product sample.  There’s a lot to learn from those tests. The product’s response to light, it’s reflectivity, how it improves contrast, how it makes the wall texture visible – all are important things to consider.

We painted the wall back to it’s original Dunn Edwards’ December.

Sponsored Ad:


Test #2 – Pure MICA White

When the new product sample arrived we again painted half the screen, this time the left half. Instantly we could see that this paint is whiter than the Dunn Edwards. To be more accurate, it was whiter from direct angles and darker from the extreme side angles. This means that it reflects more of the light towards the audience and less of it towards the sides where you don’t have viewers. This is one of those things that can’t be captured in a photo. It is better seen in context, and I’ve got two samples to show. This first one shows that the image is clearly brighter from the normal viewing angle.  Remember, to confuse things the Paint On Screen is now on the left.

Now suddenly it’s my Dunn Edwards paint the appears dingy. However, you can still see that wall texture. This next picture is again a very high res photo and to really see the issue you have click it and load the larger image. The grain is still there but not as noticeable. Is it better or isn’t it? Which side looks better to you?

Again the debate and deliberation. We watched lots of movies and sometimes couldn’t even tell that there was two different paints.  Paint On Screen’s Pure MICA White is brighter than the Dunn Edwards’ December. The difference is subtle but real. In most shots you can’t see it. Where it really shows is any time the screen is bright – or in animated scenes like Bee Movie where you have large areas of one color. In these scenes the Paint On Screen was brighter – all while leaving the blacks the same.  However the texture still showed through.

The Drywall Skim Coat

I just couldn’t leave that wall texture issue alone. I scheduled a drywall guy to come give the wall a skim coat – parts and materials were $200. Then we painted an undercoat and 2 coats of Paint On Screen’s Pure MICA White. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to check the skim coat before the paint went on. Nor was I able to do a side by side comparison of Dunn Edwards to Paint On Screen on the smooth wall.  However, we know from all the other photos and tests that the Pure MICA White is better on a wall without any texture.

Here’s the problem: it’s IMPOSSIBLE to get a completely perfect smooth wall. There will be some defects, some curves, some scratches, some bumps. That’s why houses generally have textured walls. The texture hides the imperfections in the wall. How smooth the skimcoat gets will depend on how experienced your drywall guy is and how much time he puts into it. My drywall guy did a good job, but there were a few defects left behind that I wasn’t there to catch. This next photo shows some of those defects. I imagine he did this by sanding it too much. Note that the photo was enhanced to highlight the scratches:

With 2 coats of Paint On Screen I could still see some streaks in the paint (which is different than the above photo). In shots where the camera was panning or when your eye would follow an object, you could see something on the wall panning by. Examining the paint job we found that even though my very professional painter applied it evenly, it wasn’t even enough. It seems to be difficult to get on evenly. Ideally we would spray it on, but that would be very impractical inside a furnished house. So I had him apply one more think coat and he took special care to get it as even as possible. The result is that now the streaks are gone and the image appears smooth. I also no longer see the imperfections that are shown in the above photo.

Conclusion – My End Result

At the end of the day I feel that my screen is now brighter than it was before, and the blacks are still black. I estimate that the white’s are probably about 5 to 10 percent brighter.  It also seems that ambient light isn’t as much as an issue as it was before, although we didn’t do any specific tests on ambient light. Here’s a picture of the end result. It’s impossible to show the difference in a photo without the split screen, but I couldn’t leave you without a final photo…

Another thing that I didn’t talk much about is the silver flakes in the paint. This is really what makes the paint more special than house paint. It gives the screen a sparkle and glow at a sub-pixel level. If you get right up to the screen you can see it.  Again, a picture doesn’t do it justice.  I tried to take a photo of it but it can only been seen with your eye.

Do I Recommend Paint On Screen?

The simple answer is yes, overall I do recommend Paint On Screen. If you’re spending 3 or 4 grand on a projector, another $200 to $400 on a screen is very reasonable – especially to get a 13 foot screen. But the recommendation comes with a lot of advice and caveats.

• If you’re going to use Paint On Screen be prepared to paint, test, and paint again.  A $200 gallon is approximately enough to paint a 16′ x 9′ area 5 times. So there should enough to experiment.
• If you already spent every single dime you have on the projector, just go get the flattest whitest paint you can find an use that for now.
• If you’re building a home theater room from scratch (Larry!) you should be able to get a good drywall guy in there for a few hundred. Get the wall as smooth as humanly possible and get some Paint On Screen. Examine the wall before painting (my mistake). In a custom built home theater room you should be able to control light and therefore will want the Pure MICA White. (but consult with the company for the best product for you)
• If you can spray it – spray it!
• If your wall does have a slight texture you might want to leave it be (meaning don’t skim coat it) and roll right over that. The Pure MICA White didn’t show the texture as much as the Digital Theater White.  Depending on how far you sit from the screen you might not be able to see it at all.
• Advice for the painter: Brush edge it first, then go as close to the edge as you can with the roller.  It is difficult to get an even coat. It might take 3 coats to get a good finish.
• If you fix a drip with a brush you’ll see it. Because of the silver particles in the paint, brushing seems to align them differently which makes the light reflect different.  You’ll see it.

]]> http://www.tomorrowland.com/2009/03/03/paint-on-screen-in-depth-review/feed/ 10 http://www.tomorrowland.com/2009/02/11/review-im-enjoying-the-harmankardon-avr254/ http://www.tomorrowland.com/2009/02/11/review-im-enjoying-the-harmankardon-avr254/#comments Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:50:19 +0000 Michael http://www.michaelsmith.tv/?p=906

As I said in my post on Upgrading to 7.1, a few weeks ago I set out to upgrade my amplifier and speakers to 7.1 – hoping to keep it under a grand. Initially the amp I was looking at was the Sony STR-DG820 which retails for $399. I considered Sony because my Projector is a Sony and they were advertised to work well with each other. Luckily, I’m somewhat of an impulsive shopper and when Best Buy didn’t have the Sony on hand, I started looking at alternatives. 30 minutes later I was driving home with the harman/kardon AVR254.

Normally I would probably do a little research before purchasing a piece of home theatre gear. There were several factors in my deliberation that led me to take the leap and buy the AVR instead of looking elsewhere for the Sony:

Against the harman/kardon:

• The number of HDMI ports. The Sony has 4 while the h/k only has 3.
• Out the door it was $100 more expensive than the Sony.

Pro h/k:

• The AVR254 has good stylings – I do like that ring of white light
• It was on sale – while it retails for around $599, Best Buy had it for $499. And you can find it on Amazon for around $389.
• I’ve had good luck with harman/kardon audio in a few cars and it just seemed like a higher end brand. Read on for why..

The other serious factor was a con for the Sony. Earlier in the week I had visited the Sony Style store at the Forum Shops in Las Vegas. The Sony sales people knew nothing about audio components. I’d say they knew less than me. I really got the sense from that visit that Sony is just not a good option for audio components. If the store doesn’t staff trained sales people to convince me to buy it, maybe it’s just not their strong suit.

Of course I had just purchased an amplifier without looking it up online at all. Before opening it I finally did do a bit of research. The AVS Forum has rumblings about firmware and problems. I read about 40 pages of posts on the subject. Then someone asked the question, “given all that you’ve learned since your purchase would you buy it again?” A great question! Everyone on the forum said yes, “Pull the trigger!” So I opened the box…

One of the positives about this amp is all of the inputs. The back has 3 HDMI inputs, 2 component video inputs, and 3 composite/S-video inputs. For audio, there are the 3 HDMI inputs, 2 coax and 2 optical. On the front there’s also another composite/S input, a coax and an optical. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that everything upconverts and is sent out the HDMI out. This means, for example, that while my XBox 360 only has an HD component output, it will still be switched with the amp and show up over HDMI to my projector. This is huge. I no longer have to switch inputs on my projector (TV) and can let the amp do all the switching.

The main reason I purchased the AVR254 was the fact that it both decodes HDMI audio and supports all of the new Blu-ray audio formats such as Dolbly True-HD and DTS-HD Master Audio. As I mentioned in the Upgrading to 7.1 post, these audio formats have too high a bandwidth to go over coax or optical and (unless you have this feature) are downmixed, usually to stereo.

 Sponsored Ad:


HD On Screen Menus

The on-screen menus on the AVR 254 are also impressive. Unlike other amps that I’ve seen, all on-screen information is presented in HD 1080P and is superimposed over top of whatever HD video is playing at the moment. The menus look good. Maybe it shouldn’t matter. It’s just a amp menu. But it was nice to see an HD menu system. One place where it’s useful is that when you change the volume, it is displayed on the screen for 5 seconds, complete with a fade up and down.

On a certain level this superimpose thing worries me a bit. In theory the best signal to present to your projector is one that hasn’t been touched by an intermediate process. Surely the process of superimposing the menu degrades the video quality a bit. Well, I haven’t noticed anything yet. The amp supports Deep Color and HDMI 1.3 and has a Faroudja DCDi Cinema processor that handles the superimposition and transcodes (changes S to component and component to HDMI) the and upscales everything up to 1080p.

Upgrading speakers and adding two more

I won’t bore you with the 5 hour ordeal of trying to fish a single cable underneath 5 feet of hardwood flooring. I’ll just say that it sucked and left me very tired and a little bloody. I will however tell you about my choice of speakers. All the AVS Forum members get ready to cringe… Bose!

Hardcore audiophiles all have an opinion about speakers. I tend to believe that some of that is like the monster cable scam… spending more money on audio cables doesn’t make them better. For speakers I believe that the price you pay is not a direct relationship to the quality of the sound. I don’t disagree that more expensive speakers aren’t going to be better. I just feel that there is a point of diminishing returns. And for most real people, especially in this economy, limited budgets are a reality. I can’t spend thousands on each speaker or even per pair. For me it was about getting the best sound for the money that I had to spend..   So for my front left and right speakers I went with Bose 301′s, which are $295 a pair. For the 4 surround speakers I got the Bose 161′s, which are $142 a pair. I really like the way the 161′s mount to the wall. Integrated, easy to use wall mounts are very important. My total budget ended up being $500 for the amp, $300 for the fronts, and roughly another $300 for 4 surround speakers. Pre-sales tax it totaled around $1100. I’ll still need to purchase a new front center speaker and a sub. But what I have in those two areas has to suffice for now.

One important point… how does it sound?

At first it still sounded very flat. I have a Dolby HD DVD test disc and a DTS Bluray test disc that I got at NAB. Initially all the tests sounded fairly flat. The HD DVD has a speaker identifier which revealed that I was only getting 5.1. Time to check the settings. Next I plugged in the included microphone and ran the self test setup. It did speaker tests on all 8 speakers setting the volume, delay and the tone. It went through several cycles of tests. Here’s a clue.. don’t run a speaker test in the middle of the night while your wife is sleeping. Just a piece of friendly advice. After the speaker setup it sounded better, but still somewhat flat. That was when I finally figured out to look in the Blu-ray player’s audio setup. Everything was set to downmix. Setting both Dolby and DTS to pass through allowed the 7.1 (or 5.1 in most cases) to come through. 7.1 DTS fills the room with sound. As I pointed out the other day, some of my speakers placement isn’t perfect. Some had to be placed where I could mount them and get cable to them. But 7.1 forgives this and honestly surrounds the listener with an audible hologram. Whether it’s the amp or the speakers, I have to say that I’m very happy with the way it sounds.

What about those firmware problems mentioned in the avsforum?

I did not experience any of the problems that were mentioned in those 45 pages of posts. It could be the way I’m using the amp or maybe I just haven’t had it long enough yet. But so far so good. I will say, however, that harman/kardon bungled the firmware upgrade process. The AVR254 has an RS232 serial port on the back. To update the firmware you have to connect that serial port to one on a PC (non-mac) computer. I’m not sure where I’m going to get a 1990′s PC or how I’m going to get it close enough to my amp. Luckily, as I said, I haven’t had any problems that would require me to update the firmware.

Conclusion

I’ve had the harman/kardon AVR 254 for about a month now. I am enjoying the amplifier and the speakers. The amp is well worth the price tag, especially if you pick one up at amazon for under $400. The setup is easy, the on screen graphics rock, and the transcoding from component to HDMI puts all my source switching on one remote. On the downside, the firmware upgrade process is out of the 90′s and I’m not sure I’ll ever be able to do it. But I haven’t had any problems with it so far. And therefore I give it buy recommendation.

Even if you think 7.1 is an over-kill and are happy with 5.1, there is a catch-22 that might prevent you from getting 5.1 unless you upgrade to 7.1.

One area of my home theatre that’s always been lacking has been my sound.  I’ll admit that as a professional film and television editor, I’ve been more of a videophile than an audiophile. But a few weeks ago I set out to upgrade to a total-solution 7.1 system including some new speakers for under a grand. I only went over by a couple hundred dollars. Getting it done around that budget wasn’t an easy task – and neither was some of the wiring. There were several bumps along the way. But the process revealed a lot that I didn’t know about the new audio formats, what it takes to actually hear them, the crap I’ve been settling for, the awesomeness of 7.1 audio, the unfortunate truth about Blu-ray and 7.1 and much more.  Buckle-up because this whole thing can be a bit convoluted.

To put things in context, let’s do a quick review of my home theatre set up. I have a front projector, not a regular TV. That means that my TV has no speakers. But it’s not unlike most setups where the picture goes to the TV and the audio goes to the amp. My previous amp was a Sony 5.1 system with HDMI switching, but it did not decode HDMI audio. Therefore I sent the Bluray picture to the projector via HDMI and sent audio to my amplifier via coax (or optical) cable. I assumed this was at least giving 5.1 audio.  But with Blu-ray it wasn’t.

This fancy illustration sums up my home theater and speaker set up.  The green speakers are what I originally had and the two orange ones are what I recently added to make 7.1.  Although I replaced most of the green speakers with new ones too. My center speaker and sub will be upgraded later.

Next some background on home theatre audio.  DVD has two major high-end audio formats: Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS 5.1. Both have 6 discreet channels of audio which are shown in the 6 green speakers above. Left, Right and Center in the front, a Subwoofer (the dot 1), and two surround speakers in the back (or sides).  With properly placed speakers this allows filmmakers to place sounds in specific spots around your room, just similar to a movie theatre. Both of these formats also contain lossy compressed audio. “Lossy” meaning that the audio is compressed similarly to an mp3 file.

While I’m on the topic of DVD audio let me mention Dolby Pro Logic.  It takes a stereo or surround encoded audio signal and matrixes it out to the 6 speakers.  For example, dialog is usually mono. So in a stereo signal, any frequency that is the same on both the left and right channels is assumed to be dialog and is placed in the center speaker.  While the music or sound effects behind the dialog will still be sent out the left and right channels. Dolby Pro Logic takes a stereo signal and does it’s best to put sounds in the correct speakers.

In DVD days, To get digital 5.1 audio you use a digital audio connector from the DVD player to the amplifier, either coax or optical.  When I got a Blu-ray player I just pulled out my DVD player and moved all the cables over. That’s all I could do, because my old amp didn’t decode HDMI audio.

That’s where they get ya…

First you have to realize that Blu-ray and HD DVD support new, better audio codecs, lossless audio, and more audio tracks. There are now many different flavors of Dolby, DTS, True-this and HD-that. In fact audio on a Bluray even supports 7.1 PCM, which is 8 discreet channels of lossless audio.

As I said in the intro, you’ve bought an HD TV and a Bluray disc player – so why is your sound worse than DVD? Because if you don’t have everything set up just right you won’t hear those new audio formats. Instead you’ll hear a downmixed version of the track.  And it’s probably being downmixed to Dolby Surround.  Remember Dolby Surround?  It’s basically a digital version of VHS audio.  It means stereo – with a single surround channel encoded in the two tracks. When that signal hits your Dolby Pro Logic decoder it matrixes it out to your 6 or 8 speakers, but it’s not going to sound anywhere near the 5.1 or 7.1 of the original source. It’s going to sound very flat.  And this will happen even if you’re only trying to get 5.1.

So how do you make sure that you’re getting the best audio you can?  The issue has two parts, and this is where they get ya. Part one is that both coax cables and optical connections have bandwidth limitations and will not support the higher quality audio formats. But most all Blu-ray discs use the new audio formats, even if only in 5.1. This means that in order to get even the 5.1 channels of Dolby True HD or DTS HD audio you have to use an HDMI connection for the audio.  AND the second part is this that in turn means that you need an amplifier that will A) decode audio over HDMI, and B) support the new audio formats.

The catch-22 is that with most Blu-ray movies, unless your amp decodes HDMI audio, your audio will be downmixed into a less than wonderful format that is lean enough to fit through the narrow pipe of coax (SPDIF) or optical. So in order to hear 5.1 you need an amplifier that decodes HDMI audio, and the only ones that do that are 7.1 systems.  But there’s an even deeper catch – so read on.

Sponsored Ad:


 

What to look for in an amplifier

HDMI Audio Decoding VS 7.1 Support – When I set out to get a 7.1 amp I didn’t realize that I had to get a 7.1 amp in order to even hear 5.1.  7.1 is not the requirement, only decoding HDMI audio is.  But I don’t know of any amps that decode HDMI audio that aren’t also 7.1. If you don’t have space for the extra speakers you can still use the amp in a 5.1 mode.

Lots of HDMI inputs – With Blu-ray, HD DVD, an HD TiVo, an Xbox 360, a Wii, and a Popcorn Hour, even with my new amp I’m out of HDMI inputs.

Audio Format Support – If you’re buying a new amp you want support for every audio format out there. Every Bluray disc on my shelf seems to have a different audio format. Dolby True HD, DTS HD™ Master Audio, Dolby Digital Plus, DTS HD, PCM, and the older formats like Dolby Digital 5.1 and DTS.

HDMI 1.3 Cables

HDMI 1.3 is an update to the standard that supports the higher end video formats, like Deep Color, and the newer fatter audio formats.  I’ll say it – don’t spend $100 per HDMI cable.  You’ll need several for your setup.  Spend that money on a better amp or better speakers.  Buy the cheapest HDMI cables you can find.  I found some at Frys for $19.  B&H has one for $10.  Even these cheap cables are 1.3 compliant.

Blu-ray Player Settings

Once I got my new amp and had my audio going via HDMI it still took me a day to figure out why everything still sounded flat. The default setup in my Sony S350 Blu-ray player was to downmix all audio to Dolby Surround. The screenshot below shows the correct setup, with Dolby Digital set to Dolby Digital (instead of downmixed), DTS set to DTS (instead of downmixed), and PCM set to support the max 96kHz/24bit.

After making this adjustment and popping in my DTS sampler Blu-ray disc the room came alive with awesomeness.

Is 7.1 Better Than 5.1? 

Once I flipped that switch and heard what things were supposed to sound like (in 5.1), I realized that for almost a year I’ve been watching HD movies thinking that I was hearing 5.1, when really I was basically just hearing stereo run through a Dolby Pro Logic decoder.  Audio is also louder when it’s properly coming out of 6 or 8 speakers.  It is such a drastic improvement that it makes me want to watch a bunch of movies over again.

AND I have to say that as vast an improvement 5.1 is over whatever I was hearing before, 7.1 is that much better than 5.1. I’ve had 5.1 in the past. During my early DVD days I had a decent 5.1 setup.  But 7.1 honestly surrounds you with sound.  With 5.1 sounds clearly come from speakers.  But with 7.1 sounds seem to exist everywhere in space around you.  With 5.1 there is a sweet spot in the room where the sound is best.  7.1 is much more forgiving and all seats have good audio.  So I feel like there is a huge difference between the two.

Now For The Bad News…

After getting everything set up I started looking through my Blu-ray collection for 7.1 movies to test out my new system. Surely The Dark Knight is in 7.1 – nope Dolby True-HD 5.1.  Iron Man? – nope Dolby True HD 5.1.  Same for Hancock and Cloverfield.  Live Free or Die Hard is 5.1 DTS Master Audio.  Out of around 35 discs in my collection, only 5 are in 7.1, and they’re not the ones you would expect. WAR with Jet Li and Jason Statham is 7.1 PCM, The Bank Job, another Jason Statham movie is DTS-HD Master Audio 7.1, as is Sleeping Beauty. Other 7.1 movies include Good Luck Chuck and Semi-Pro.

A full list of 7.1 movies can be found with a slick search at Blu-ray.com. There’s a few good titles in there like 3:10 to Yuma and Dark City. But most of them are weird comedies like Disaster Movie and Delta Farce.

I’m not sure why The Dark Knight is only 5.1 while Witless Protection with Larry the Cable Guy is in 7.1 Seems like a waste to me. I suppose the studios are concerned that the average consumer isn’t going to have 7.1, and I they’d be right. But now I suspect the average consumer might not even be hearing 5.1. One problem is that if they put a 7.1 audio track on the disc they have to include another audio track also in case the consumer doesn’t have the equipment to support it. That means more bandwidth being taken up with extra audio formats and less for picture quality and bonus features. Although I’d rather have the choice of 7.1 than some lame BD Live game.

Just be aware that if you do get sucked into upgrading to 7.1, you’re sure to be disappointed by the number of titles that support it.  However, I’m still glad I upgraded. Whether it’s Will Ferrell shooting hoops in 7.1 or giant transforming robots in 5.1, at least now I’m hearing what I’m supposed to.

Tomorrow I’ll unbox and review my new amp, the harman/kardon AVR254, and talk about the speakers I ended up getting.

Around 8pm I noticed that my TiVo was recording the season premier of Chuck - and either my new projector was whacked or the episode was in 3D.  A quick trip to CVS and I was 8 pair of free cardboard 3D glasses richer.

It seems like there’s a new craze to do 3D, but has 3D technology changed much in the last 20 or 30 years?  Not really.  There’s still only 3 or 4 ways to do 3D. And without special equipment (or in every home in america) you’re limited to the red and blue glasses.  Well these glasses were blue and yellow.

I’d say for Chuck the effect worked barely good enough to be watchable.  My wife would probably disagree and say that it wasn’t watchable at all.  But I gave it a fair chance and watched the whole episode.  I am a Chuck fan and would have watched it anyway. They did a few of the standard fun 3D tricks, like having knives thrown towards the camera. And Yvonne Strzechowski in 3-dimensions wasn’t bad either.

The most effective shots were the main title and other graphics.  Overall the 3D glasses made everything dark. And my eyes never got over the everything-blue-in-one-eye-and-everything-yellow-in-the-other effect.

Still it was nice to see some promotion going into the new season of Chuck.

One of the coolest little products I saw at CES was the Webbie HD camera from Sony. While I’m not a fan of the name (the manual calls it the Mobile HD Snap which is much better), this pocket sized tapeless cam shoots 30-frame HD video at either 720P or 1080P. It’s clearly targeted to those wanting to upload clips directly from the memory stick to YouTube. Even the name suggests that it captures web-quality video. But it DOES shoot in HD. So what’s the down side?  What’s the quality really like?

First off, I had planned to shoot the unboxing of a Webbie HD WITH a Webbie HD, but it was too difficult a task to do by myself.  Partially because the camera is surprisingly difficult to handle, and partially because I only have 2 hands. There was also the issue of low light. I have the files if anyone’s interested but they’re hardly worth posting.

Overall, I love the IDEA of this camera.  It is very small and lightweight and super affordable at $200 MSRP.  A 90 min charge will give you 90 minutes of record time.  It records low bandwidth MP4 video on memory sticks and you can store hours of footage on a stick. It’s also very mac compatible. Unlike the Sony HD-RTG1, these clips can be directly copied off the memory stick and played back in quicktime. It’s good to see Sony softening up to the mac a little more.

There is a lot to like about this camera. I think it’s perfect for the parent who wants to keep a tiny camera handy to film the kids, or for the student who wants to film friends and parties, or even for the starving artist film maker who can’t afford a more expensive camera.  However, in only one day’s use of the camera I’ve already compiled a laundry list of shortcomings and complaints. I’ll cover these annoyances while I take you on a tour of the Webbie. As always, click on the photos to see a much larger version:

The Zoom and Photo buttons are on top of the unit, while the navigation rocker, playback button, and Movie record button are on the back. The rocker is dual purpose. It is used to navigate when in a menu, but otherwise provides alternative functions: display, macro, light, and a timer.  The light button turns on a small white light on the front of the camera which does a decent job of adding some fill.  It’s not going to light a distant subject in a dark room but does help illuminate someone closer up. It obviously comes at the cost of reduced battery life.

My beef here is with the placement of the movie record button. It’s primarily a video camera and is a still camera second. The position of the button assumes that the user is going to hold the camera a specific way – overhanded – where you hold the camera hight and your thumb would hits that button.  It’s just not the way I hold a video camera.  Especially one that doesn’t have a eye-viewfinder.  These days I shoot underhanded with the camera lower, looking down on the LCD, so that my thumb rests on the top of the camera.

The LCD panel opens up in the traditional way and of course can be flipped around to film yourself.  The lens appears to be more significant than in smaller point and shoots.  And the microphone is in the front.

One negative thing I noticed, and you might be able to pick up on it as well if you download the samples, is that you can hear the inner workings of the camera being picked up on the mic. Things like motor noises during a zoom.  The other thing is the the mic isn’t very good.  For the money it’s easy to justify all of these shortcomings, but they are still important things to keep in mind.

Under the LCD panel are some buttons. These are fairly self explanitory. The negative on these is that they’re a little too recessed and therefore are difficult to push. You almost need to use a fingernail to get them to click.

On the opposite side is a small panel concealing the Audio/Video interface cable, a mini-USB, and a power jack. I gotta toss out a big “Thank you!” to Sony for using a normal mini-USB and not some proprietary plug. There’s nothing worse than realizing that you don’t have that cable with you on a trip. There’s also a small speaker there.  The only negative with this panel is that it pops open a little too easy. In someone’s purse it’s likely going to get lint and other stuff in the plugs.

Next, on the bottom is a small compartment for the memory stick. We’ve put in 16GB sticks and at 720P it offers an amazing 8 1/2 hours of record time or 6000 still photos. So even with a 4GB stick you’ll be looking at 2 hours of record time – which is longer than the battery will last.

Speaking of the battery, Sony went the Apple route with this product and hard wired the battery internal with no way for the consumer to swap it out. It puts this camera in the category of more of a ‘disposable’ item.

Finally, the lens cover is a tiny piece of plastic that will absolutely get lost. You can use the supplied piece of string to tether it to the camera, but then you have a dangling lens cap. I wish they had built in a lens cover, but I suppose that is reserved for more expensive cameras.  The photo below was taken with the camera with the light on. Click to see the full size 5MP image.

This concludes our tour of the hardware. Now lets talk more about the operation and examine the video quality.

Sponsored Ad:


Operation and Video Qualtiy

Which is better 720P or 1080P? I did a side by side test with one camera in 1080P mode and the other in 720P mode and found something interesting.  720P has a wider lens than 1080P, meaning that Sony is using a different portion of the sensor for each.  Check out this sample. While it’s not that interesting of a shot, it shows the difference in the wide angle. The 1080P shot is zoomed in more, which is the opposite of what I expected.

The next thing to compare is the picture quality. The 1080P shot is 1440 x 1080 at around 6 Mbps VBR. The 720P shot is a full 1280 x 720 at around 4 Mbps VBR. Between those two bandwidths, the 720P gives you a slightly better byte/pixel. The 720P picture also looks better as well from a color response and exposure standpoint.

Here’s a pair of unedited source clips for download. These were shot side by side. The camera work is very shaky because I was holding and zooming two cameras at the same time. On the bright side, this does show how the camera handles shake. Left click the images below and download the samples (Download Linked file). The 720P sample is 18MB, the 1080P sample is 26MB.  If I haven’t made it clear enough yet, I prefer this camera in 720P.

Makes you hungry for In-N-Out doesn’t it?

Focus, Color, Iris and White Balance

These are all set to auto all the time. Sony prosumer video cameras do a very good job in all of these areas when set to auto. This camera does not. The focus floats in and out before settling in on a clear shot. If there’s a lot of motion going on it’s worse. It’s also much worse in 1080P mode than 720P mode, which I believe you can see in the above samples.

Color seems to be washed out a bit, which I suppose is correctable in ‘post.’  White Balance is very off and unstable. Notice in the two shots above, captured at exactly the same moment, that one is more purple. Who knows what’s going on there.

The iris clicks in and out of different steps and isn’t smooth at all.  Again check out the sample above to see these anomalies.

Zoom and Digital Zoom troubles

This model has a 5x optical zoom and a 20x digital zoom. We all know that digital zoom kills your video quality. But the oddity with this camera is that zooming in using the digital zoom is not smooth. It skips and stutters along once you get past the 5x optical.  Here’s a sample of the digital zoom woes, shot at night.  It’s about a 10 MB download:

Summary

This camera is what it is. You get what you pay for.  It’s a low priced, low quality disposable HD camera. The video is highly compressed – but that’s a given. It is what the camera is about.

I want to say this: you can’t fault the camera for the compression part of the picture quality. 720P video compressed into 4Mbps isn’t going to look much better on any camera.  But there are some elements of the poor picture quality that you CAN fault the camera. The always-automatic settings are slow, over responsive and skip around before settling.  The focus, iris, color balance all are in constant flux.  The image sensor is cheap and with any gain at all you can see all it’s defects. One night time shot revealed a burnt pixel, another showed vertical streaking – an indication of over-gaining a cheap image sensor.

But like I said, the camera is what it is. Don’t expect it to be more than a cheap camera to shoot web videos and family picnics. There are many things that I DO like about this camera… here they are in bulleted form:

• It’s very easy to use. There’s not many options so nothing to mess up. I feel like I could give this camera to my 3 year old and she’d be able to use it.
• It turns on when you open the LCD panel, turns off when you close it. Again, this makes it easy to use. When you need to get a quick shot it’s ready to go. Just open the LCD and hit record.
• The camera shoots video in 1080P, 720P and VGA 30P, and photos in 5M, 3:2, 3M, 2M, and VGA. I recommend leaving it in the factory setting of 720P and 5M.
• The light is handy and while not very bright does come in useful in some situations.
• Normal USB port!  Thanks for that!
• Very compatible MP4 files. You can shoot and upload the clip directly to YouTube and it will stay HD on the web.
• Reasonable 5 megapixel resolution.

Considering that the camera is what it is, the main downsides are:

• No integrated lens cover. The plastic one will get lost.
• All the auto settings are in constant flux – iris, color and zoom never seem to settle.
• 1080P has major auto focus problems
• No flash on the still photos. The light helps but not for still photos.
• Bad position of the Movie record button.

Would I buy one?  There is another model coming out in a few months, which is even less expensive.  I think I might pick one of those up for my 3 year old. But for my general needs I’ve got my eye on some Canon cameras.