The Biggest Failures in Consumer Audio/Video Electronics History

[dannyone11]

Great article. I have probably 80% of everything listed here. Also I still use my Panasonic HHD/DVD recorder from time to time to make compilation dvds from programs recorded from my dvr. Triming video and making dvds is a breeze. I remember they released a blu-ray version in Asia but that never made it to the USA forcing me to buy a Haupauge converter that would send the recordings to my iMac . Much more tedious than the easy to use Panasonic.

 

[highfigh]

I just said that.

Anyway, 6ft would probably be plenty for 80% of customers. It's the length that Sony bundled with my 4K BD player.

BTW, one reason that I do not want integrators or retailers putting together TV/cable bundles is that they will invariably bundle Monster HDMI cables or Monster Home Theater Kits or the equivalent.

I can't think of a single integrator who uses Munster crap or ANY kind of theater kit, other than maybe one company and they sell AQ, which I won't touch. They sell AQ because it's wildly profitable and for mo other reason- before they drank the AQ KoolAid, they were the largest single-store dealer for Monster, in the US. They may do that where you are, but if we (integrators) want to have any chance of surviving financially, we need a high level of control over which parts/supplies and accessories we use and when something presents a problem on more than one occasion, it's dead to us.

BTW- the cables most manufacturers include are crap. Don't believe they included it because it meets all of the latest specs for a minute.

In a tight cabinet, a 6' cable will cause the problems I have mentioned many times, regarding stress on the ends and on HDMI ports. It does, however, make wiring equipment easier when it's done from the front of a cabinet.

 

[highfigh]

As for @gene 's article goes, I was mostly interested to see superior patents not catching on, because I remember another debate I had with another member here who firmly poised that manufacturer always has consumers best interest at heart. In my universe, merely repeating this notion sounds so naive I'm having hard time typing it.

Wow! That other member must have a hood over their head if they believe what you wrote about manufacturers.

 

[Fred76]

For Atmos, do you consider that Atmos itself is a failure or that the bouncing Atmos speakers are? Because of the price to get Atmos, I do not think that people will that much go over 5.1.

 

[sholling]

They sell AQ because it's wildly profitable

Yep. Btw, what brand is Geek Squad using? I honestly don't know, but they are the largest chain of installers that I'm aware of and BB is big on Monster.

BTW- the cables most manufacturers include are crap. Don't believe they included it because it meets all of the latest specs for a minute.

I never said that I used the Sony cable that Sony bundled with my BD player. On the other hand, if everyone included cables they'd not only compete on features and quality but be incentivised to use good quality cables to keep their tech support and return costs down. Tech support and returns are huge costs.

In a tight cabinet, a 6' cable will cause the problems I have mentioned many times, regarding stress on the ends and on HDMI ports. It does, however, make wiring equipment easier when it's done from the front of a cabinet.

I don't disagree, however you are thinking about complex and tight installations rather than Walmart TV stands and entertainment centers. Six feet is a nice lowest common denominator length that will work for most average Joes and Janes and get them up and running on with the all the new gear they'll be placing on their new Walmart, BB, or Amazon TV stand as soon as they get their new toys home - without leaving large loops of excess cable. Most of us on here are enthusiasts and prefer to size and select our own cables for the neatest possible installation and best performance, however most (not all) Walmart, Costco, Amazon, and Best Buy customers just want to be able to plug and play on a budget once they get home.

 

[Gunny]

Beta is still going strong in professional settings so I wouldn't call it a failure. 3D may be dead for OLED's but those of us who use projectors are still loving it. I hope UHD and 3D can peacefully coexist.

I really enjoyed this trip down memory lane. Thanks for a great read. I was amazed just how many of these products I was actually around to see. I guess that explains the aches and pains I feel nowadays.

 

[highfigh]

Yep. Btw, what brand is Geek Squad using? I honestly don't know, but they are the largest chain of installers that I'm aware of and BB is big on Monster.


I never said that I used the Sony cable that Sony bundled with my BD player. On the other hand, if everyone included cables they'd not only compete on features and quality but be incentivised to use good quality cables to keep their tech support and return costs down. Tech support and returns are huge costs.


I don't disagree, however you are thinking about complex and tight installations rather than Walmart TV stands and entertainment centers. Six feet is a nice lowest common denominator length that will work for most average Joes and Janes and get them up and running on with the all the new gear they'll be placing on their new Walmart, BB, or Amazon TV stand as soon as they get their new toys home - without leaving large loops of excess cable. Most of us on here are enthusiasts and prefer to size and select our own cables for the neatest possible installation and best performance, however most (not all) Walmart, Costco, Amazon, and Best Buy customers just want to be able to plug and play on a budget once they get home.

Best Buy doesn't do custom and I never consider them when I do what I do. Big difference between what we (Custom Integrators) do and what Best Buy or other chains do.

If you didn't use the Sony-supplied cable, the cost and your expense were wasted. Why, again, should they include cables?

I wired a basement during a remodel- the homeowner had so many BB bonus points that his equipment cost almost nothing and about halfway through, the Geek showed up and asked what the coax next to the speaker cable was for. I said it was for the sub inputs- Def Tech 8060 for the mains and she told the guy the speakers don't need it. I asked her what the sub input on each tower was used for and she said they don't have that. Yeah, they do. The guy at the Magnolia store didn't know what he was doing, either. Had no idea that a subwoofer was playing in the same room as the speakers when I asked if he could turn it off.

Trust me- the electronics manufacturers would never spend money on good cables unless it benefited them and unless they own the cable company, it doesn't- anyone can add the cost of a more expensve cable to the equipment and see that they're getting hosed. Do you know the price of the AQ HDMI cables with batteries? There's no way they would ever be included. Even the mid-line AQ cables are more expensive than most BD players. Noel Lee is far too litigious for an electronics manufacturer to enter in that kind of agreement.

 

[sholling]

I respect your skills but statistically if an average Joe buys a TV, AVR, and BD player, if they hire anybody rather than just DIY it, it's a Geek Squad level installer, which in this case makes BB/Geek Squad the 800lb gorilla of integrators/installers. No they are not on your level, not even close, but they are the 800lb gorilla and they are going to push high profit margin products.

Do manufacturers want to bundle great cables? Nope. Do they want to spend 50 or 100 times the price difference (pennies) between a cheap non or barely functional cable and a non-premium cable that fully meets industry specs and get stuck providing tech support to troubleshoot connection problems for frustrated and angry customers? Oh heck no. We're talking pennies against real dollars. Did your smartphone come with a barely functional charging cable and charger? Heck no because the cost to their reputation and the cost of tech support and parts replacement/returns costs a relative fortune. Fly by night no-name here today gone tomorrow hardware companies might take the risk of bundling not up to minimum spec cables but not big-names - it's just too expensive to bundle junk. Then there are the class action lawsuits. Judge: "What do you mean that you don't have proof that your bundled cables meet all industry specs? Write a big enough check to cover really nice premium cables for all of your 2,000,000+ customers plus massive attorney's fees".

Then again, if they spend the $3-5 that it costs in massive quantities for a fully up to spec 6 foot cable and it sells an extra 10,000 units that's a great deal for the manufacturers. A couple of examples: First in TVs, LG produces a version of their OLED7B65 for BB etc (the B65A) and another for club stores (B65P), the B65P includes Atmos support as a bonus that gets them into club stores without cutting prices to below BB levels. The same with the limited availability Sony BP-UX80 BD player which includes an HDMI cable to eak out a few more sales of an otherwise identical product.

 

[Calypte]

From my perspective, the biggest problem with Dolby Atmos is the near impossibility of hearing a good demo, a demo that leaves you thinking, "I gotta have that!" You'd think Best Buy, for example, would be interested in demoing Atmos, but the stores that are accessible to me not only don't have a Dolby Atmos demo available, but the sales personnel don't even seem to know anything about it.

I finally heard a Dolby Atmos demo at the Los Angeles Audio Show in June 2017. The vaunted ability to create "height" and to hear choppers etc pass overhead was mostly inaudible. Why bother?

 

[sterling shoote]

From my perspective, the biggest problem with Dolby Atmos is the near impossibility of hearing a good demo, a demo that leaves you thinking, "I gotta have that!" You'd think Best Buy, for example, would be interested in demoing Atmos, but the stores that are accessible to me not only don't have a Dolby Atmos demo available, but the sales personnel don't even seem to know anything about it.

I finally heard a Dolby Atmos demo at the Los Angeles Audio Show in June 2017. The vaunted ability to create "height" and to hear choppers etc pass overhead was mostly inaudible. Why bother?

I was in a Best Buys store in Louisville, KY the other day. I walked into one of their HT rooms. On the screen was a video of a thunder shower. A statement scrolled onto the screen which said I was hearing, as I recall, 5.1. Then, the scrolling copy said I was listening to Dolby Atmos. I could easily appreciate Atmos from this demonstration. It made me realize my satisfaction with 5.1 was only because I had not heard Dolby Atmos. BTW, the thunder shower was the ideal subject for the demonstration. I have enjoyed sound effects recording for many years. My favorite topic/subject is thunder showers. Recorded in stereo and played back with 5.1 Dolby Surround sounds really good; but, this Atmos thing is just a very natural feeling emersion. I liked it. I liked it a lot.

 

[MR.MAGOO]

From my perspective, the biggest problem with Dolby Atmos is the near impossibility of hearing a good demo, a demo that leaves you thinking, "I gotta have that!" You'd think Best Buy, for example, would be interested in demoing Atmos, but the stores that are accessible to me not only don't have a Dolby Atmos demo available, but the sales personnel don't even seem to know anything about it.

I finally heard a Dolby Atmos demo at the Los Angeles Audio Show in June 2017. The vaunted ability to create "height" and to hear choppers etc pass overhead was mostly inaudible. Why bother?

There aren't that many movies good enough to make me want to spend $$$$$.$$ on an Atmos setup!
How much Star Wars/Star Trek/Terminator can one stomach?

 

[Auditor55]

Go somewhere and compare from a short distance. Make sure it's someplace other than Best Buy, so you can see a good source and make sure it has lots of motion, diagonals and other shapes.

Did you see a difference between 1080, 2K and 4K?

Do you realize there's an actual limit to human visual acuity? A scientific, objective, fact based limit to human visual acuity. People who are knowledgeable a video display technology, like Dr. Raymond Soneira (Displaymate Technologies) and Joe Kane (Video Essentials), all have agreed. Also, Experts in the field of human eyesight such as ophthalmology, have stated that there are limits to human visual acuity.

Now with that said, as it applies to display resolutions, it is a fact, the science supports it, that 4K resolution on display 65', for example from 10 feet, the typical human cannot tell the difference between 4K and 1080P.

Now I do agree that if you get real close , say 3 feet from a 65 inch you can notice a difference, however most of us will not sit that close, what for, why would we want to sit 3 feet from 65 inch set.

https://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

 

[Auditor55]

I suspect he's referring to noticable differences at normal viewing distances. It wasn't all that long ago that many on here were arguing that at normal living room viewing distances that most people couldn't tell 720 from 1080. The biggest differences that I see between my old 1080P and my new 4K have more to do with LCD vs OLED and non-HDR vs HDR.

I can see an eventual need for for-real streamed 8K once 90" and larger sets start getting super common (20% market penetration) but until then and until half of US homes have the bandwidth to support at least 4 8K streams it just does not make sense for content providers to skip 4K and go right to 8K streaming. What does make sense for now is to build sets over 85 or 100" as 8K and use built-in upconversion.

The only people that claim that they see a difference between 1080p and 720p without taking into account display sizes and viewing distances are fan boys and enthusiasts, not people who are knowledge about display technology and human eyesight.

8K is only need for the commercial cinema and not your home. There is no way humans will be able to discern the differences between 4K and 8K on 90 inch TV, that claim, in all due respects is just preposterous, it doesn't matter if its streaming or not.

What's funny is that you have those so-called golden audiophile that make similar claims in the area of audio, claiming they can hear 24bit/192 KHZ sonic resolution, and that they hear infrasonic bass.

You can fast forward to about 2:30 to hear Joe Kane address 2160p and the viewing distances.

 

[Calypte]

I was in a Best Buys store in Louisville, KY the other day. I walked into one of their HT rooms. On the screen was a video of a thunder shower. A statement scrolled onto the screen which said I was hearing, as I recall, 5.1. Then, the scrolling copy said I was listening to Dolby Atmos. I could easily appreciate Atmos from this demonstration. It made me realize my satisfaction with 5.1 was only because I had not heard Dolby Atmos. BTW, the thunder shower was the ideal subject for the demonstration. I have enjoyed sound effects recording for many years. My favorite topic/subject is thunder showers. Recorded in stereo and played back with 5.1 Dolby Surround sounds really good; but, this Atmos thing is just a very natural feeling emersion. I liked it. I liked it a lot.

Well, I hope someday to hear a good demo. The demo at the L.A. Audio Show was intended to showcase Dolby Atmos and also
some sort of ex post facto processing applied to old movies (the Atmos was with recent movies, of course). The visual resolution and color saturation improvement to a scene from "Lawrence of Arabia" (1962) was astonishing. The Dolby Atmos audio on the other movies, not so much.

 

[sterling shoote]

Do you realize there's an actual limit to human visual acuity? A scientific, objective, fact based limit to human visual acuity. People who are knowledgeable a video display technology, like Dr. Raymond Soneira (Displaymate Technologies) and Joe Kane (Video Essentials), all have agreed. Also, Experts in the field of human eyesight such as ophthalmology, have stated that there are limits to human visual acuity.

Now with that said, as it applies to display resolutions, it is a fact, the science supports it, that 4K resolution on display 65', for example from 10 feet, the typical human cannot tell the difference between 4K and 1080P.

Now I do agree that if you get real close , say 3 feet from a 65 inch you can notice a difference, however most of us will not sit that close, what for, why would we want to sit 3 feet from 65 inch set.

https://carltonbale.com/does-4k-resolution-matter/

It's relative, a bigger screen viewed at closer distance could reveal usefulness or desire for higher resolution. As a professional photographer I am interested in resolution. Some very famous equipment reviewers suggest that unless I produce poster size prints that 12 megapixels is all that I need. That is not the case, as even a 4 by 6 print with no cropping will seem to sparkle when image is produced from a camera delivering in the plus 36 megapixel range. There is no sparkle in 12 megapixel images. Interestingly enough, I think 8k would appeal to photographers who edit viewing detail on large monitors set at desktop depth distance.

 

[KenM10759]

It's relative, a bigger screen viewed at closer distance could reveal usefulness or desire for higher resolution. As a professional photographer I am interested in resolution. Some very famous equipment reviewers suggest that unless I produce poster size prints that 12 megapixels is all that I need. That is not the case, as even a 4 by 6 print with no cropping will seem to sparkle when image is produced from a camera delivering in the plus 36 megapixel range. There is no sparkle in 12 megapixel images. Interestingly enough, I think 8k would appeal to photographers who edit viewing detail on large monitors set at desktop depth distance.

It was 15-18 years ago I was shooting motorcycle race and track day photos with a Nikon D1 (original one, not D1x) and it's a whopping 2.7mp. I sold a LOT of 20x30 inch poster prints and buyers were just fine with them. I knew what they were, and Photoshop was pretty good at smoothing things out. I can go into motorcycle shops today and see those prints on the wall, they still look great.

Even when I was doing that, I understood what was going on. I also shot 4x5 film, several medium formats, and 35mm film. I've also been to my local Worcester Art Museum to see their original print of Ansel Adams "Moonrise, Hernandez 1941" (and many others they have), so I knew what 'high res' 8x10 at 2.5x enlargement looks like from 2 feet away.

I find a lot of parallels in TV and movie screen viewing distances and resolution. I have a 4K TV and know well that I sit WAY too far from it to gain anything. It's still nice to know I can move close and see the benefit if I want.

 

[Auditor55]

It's relative, a bigger screen viewed at closer distance could reveal usefulness or desire for higher resolution. As a professional photographer I am interested in resolution. Some very famous equipment reviewers suggest that unless I produce poster size prints that 12 megapixels is all that I need. That is not the case, as even a 4 by 6 print with no cropping will seem to sparkle when image is produced from a camera delivering in the plus 36 megapixel range. There is no sparkle in 12 megapixel images. Interestingly enough, I think 8k would appeal to photographers who edit viewing detail on large monitors set at desktop depth distance.

Apples and oranges,we're talking about display technology here. 8K would be virtually useless on a 90 inch TV in your home, totally useless, that's my point. Human beings just don't have unlimited visual acuity.

QUOTE FROM SONY FAQ:
HOW CLOSE TO THE TV MUST I SIT TO APPRECIATE 4K?
"THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT BETWEEN 5 AND 6 FT. IS THE IDEAL VIEWING DISTANCE FOR A 55” OR 65” SONY 4K ULTRA HD TV. HOWEVER, ON A 55“, YOU CAN NOW SIT AS CLOSE AS 3.6 FT AND ENJOY A VISIBLY SMOOTHER AND MORE DETAILED PICTURE (E.G YOU WON’T SEE THE INDIVIDUAL PIXELS). ON A 65“ TV, YOU CAN SIT AS CLOSE AS 4.2 FT. TO APPRECIATE 4K.
SOURCE"

 

[Auditor55]

It was 15-18 years ago I was shooting motorcycle race and track day photos with a Nikon D1 (original one, not D1x) and it's a whopping 2.7mp. I sold a LOT of 20x30 inch poster prints and buyers where just fine with them. I knew what they were, and Photoshop was pretty good at smoothing things out. I can go into motorcycle shops today and see those prints on the wall, they still look great.

Even when I was doing that, I understood what was going on. I also shot 4x5 film, several medium formats, and 35mm film. I've also been to my local Worcester Art Museum to see their original print of Ansel Adams "Moonrise, Hernandez 1941" (and many others they have), so I knew what 'high res' 8x10 at 2.5x enlargement looks like from 2 feet away.

I find a lot of parallels in TV and movie screen viewing distances and resolution. I have a 4K TV and know well that I sit WAY too far from it to gain anything. It's still nice to know I can move close and see the benefit if I want.

Do you have a HT system?

 

[KenM10759]

Do you have a HT system?

If you want to call it that. I have a living room with a TV. Also in the room is an AVR, a small subwoofer, and five speakers. It could soon be seven speakers.

I wouldn't call it "home theater" as compared to what a true, dedicated one is. It's OK for watching movies (my wife does) or concert Blu-Ray disks (me.)

 

[Montucky]

For Atmos, do you consider that Atmos itself is a failure or that the bouncing Atmos speakers are? Because of the price to get Atmos, I do not think that people will that much go over 5.1.

I think they meant just the bouncing Atmos speakers. The Atmos and DTS:X technologies are fantastic. Truth is, it really doesn't cost a ton to get into Atmos. Most mid-grade AVRs these days support at least a 5.1.2 setup. So to get your height channels only takes a couple of satellite or in-ceiling speakers to hang up top. Not a significant price difference. Heck, even going full blown 7.2.4 doesn't have to be that big of a deal. I've seen plenty of average consumers spend far more on crappy Bose systems.

I'm a firm believer in these newer object based surround formats. The flexibility is unparalleled and the sound can be fantastic. It's beyond just the height stuff (which is awesome too); it's all about HOW the sound is processed that makes it so great to me.

Now, for those who don't think the overhead stuff is that big of a deal, you need to check out a proper demo. At my store, I had a fantastic 7.2.4 setup and would typically use the Dolby Atmos demo disc that Dolby supplied us with. Some of the demos on there show off what the system's capable of far more effectively than many movies do. Not that a movie is failing at Atmos or anything when it doesn't take more advantage of the heights. It's just that the official Dolby demo EMPHASIZES the capabilities so that it stands out more to the layman. When Atmos is done right on a movie, it's typically just super immersive. Where you will be completely drawn into a movie without even realizing it, until you're interrupted by something outside the movie and realize "Woh! There's rain gently falling overhead," or "Huh, I hear flies buzzing over me!" You were just that sucked in that the outside world totally disappeared. That's what it's all about.