Is there a point?

[Paul McNeil]

Streaming limited, when all that gear is no longer relevant?

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Streaming service
choice is limited
gear plays music
- a (terrible) haiku by BoredSysadmin

Or in other words - WTH are you asking?

 

[Paul McNeil]

Streaming limited, when all that gear is no longer relevant?

Oh, well, was thinking of internet broadcast stuff (such as Netflix) which claims Atmos-level sound but does not provide, OMI. But some channels do, such as Apple.

And, I bought gear, so I care!

 

[Paul McNeil]

Streaming service
choice is limited
gear plays music
- a (terrible) haiku by BoredSysadmin

Or in other words - WTH are you asking?

'WTH are you asking?"

Please excuse, can you explain how this is polite?

 

[Paul McNeil]

Oh, well, was thinking of internet broadcast stuff (such as Netflix) which claims Atmos-level sound but does not provide, OMI. But some channels do, such as Apple.

And, I bought gear, so I care!

Well, I should also say regarding my post, I've noticed the difference between BluRay and any streaming format, and I know the streamers cheat. Or do they, do we know?

 

[Paul McNeil]

You got my old ass off this, for sure!

 

[Paul McNeil]

“You will not be punished for your anger, you will be punished by your anger.” - Buddha

Thanks!

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Oh, well, was thinking of internet broadcast stuff (such as Netflix) which claims Atmos-level sound but does not provide, OMI. But some channels do, such as Apple.

And, I bought gear, so I care!

Dolby Atmos is a standard/tech for surround sound with more accurate sound positioning. It doesn't necessarily improve sound quality. Streaming services are all about convenience—the convenience of not needing to buy 4K Bluray disks, which currently provide the highest video and sound experience, at least at home.
There is a usage case for both content sources.

 

[Paul McNeil]

Dolby Atmos is a standard/tech for surround sound with more accurate sound positioning. It doesn't necessarily improve sound quality. Streaming services are all about convenience—the convenience of not needing to buy 4K Bluray disks, which currently provide the highest video and sound experience, at least at home.
There is a usage case for both content sources.

Yes, I understand what 'surround sound' is about, and about business efficiency. What I was asking is, When limited by streaming quality, when we rely on this, should we invest in to gear? Simple question, which I think you ignored, from the beginning. If not I apologize.

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

Yes, I understand what 'surround sound' is about, and about business efficiency. What I was asking is, When limited by streaming quality, when we rely on this, should we invest in to gear? Simple question, which I think you ignored, from the beginning. If not I apologize.

I don't get paid to post answers here. I can't read your mind and if you expect to get sensible answers, start with sensible questions. As far as your question, I did answer it indirectly - The point of high-end gear is to provide the best possible experience at home. If you feel that highly compressed streaming from services like Netflix doesn't fully stretch your A/V system, then by all means - buy or rent 4k BluRay disks.

I think this thread went long enough and I'm signing out. Have fun.

 

[Paul McNeil]

I don't get paid to post answers here. I can't read your mind and if you expect to get sensible answers, start with sensible questions. As far as your question, I did answer it indirectly - The point of high-end gear is to provide the best possible experience at home. If you feel that highly compressed streaming from services like Netflix doesn't fully stretch your A/V system, then by all means - buy or rent 4k BluRay disks.

I think this thread went long enough and I'm signing out. Have fun.

I appreciate your reply, of course. I was thinking that this was a forum for discussion not repression. I may have been wrong.

 

[Paul McNeil]

This could be heaven or hell! This data thing, with accurate accounting...

 

[everettT]

Oh, well, was thinking of internet broadcast stuff (such as Netflix) which claims Atmos-level sound but does not provide, OMI. But some channels do, such as Apple.

And, I bought gear, so I care!

If you want the highest bit rate)best quality, Blu-ray or Kaleidescape are really the only two options and then lower level gear won't fully cut it. For most it doesn't matter, but YMMV.

 

[isolar8001]

"Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra when the walls fell " is the best solution to this.

 

[Paul McNeil]

If you want the highest bit rate)best quality, Blu-ray or Kaleidescape are really the only two options and then lower level gear won't fully cut it. For most it doesn't matter, but YMMV.
[/QUOTE

Soo....oooo helpful! Thanks. BluRay! but ok "YMMV"!!!!

 

[isolar8001]

Not only is streaming Atmos of much lesser quality (bitrate), it's usually much quieter after going through dialog normalizations that are not applied to disc audio tracks.
On top of that, many films on streaming have a different audio mix than their disc counterparts.

Best way to hear what your gear can really do is go with disc.

 

[Paul McNeil]

Not only is streaming Atmos of much lesser quality (bitrate), it's usually much quieter after going through dialog normalizations that are not applied to disc audio tracks.
On top of that, many films on streaming have a different audio mix than their disc counterparts.

Best way to hear what your gear can really do is go with disc.
[/QUOT

Well, 'Isolar', well that's what I thought, but 'going on disc' is not easy, to say the least, and how to fight back. I think it is an ongoing assault. Who will notice?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

When limited by streaming quality, when we rely on this, should we invest in to gear?

You mean should we spend a lot of money (like $7K, $10K, $20K) on the state of the art electronics (AVP, AVR, Amps, etc.) and speakers if all we do is use streaming media?

I think the short answer is "Yes, we should still own HIGH QUALITY HT equipment even if all we do is stream media".

But I don't think we should spend the MOST money on any electronics regardless of the media.

The salient thing we should focus on include:

1. Diminishing Returns. Why spend $5K-$10K more on ANYTHING (audio or video) if we really can't tell a SIGNIFICANT difference?

2. Pride of ownership. To me, there's no POINT of owning anything if I'm not proud and completely happy with what I own at the end of the day regardless of how much money I save.

 

[Paul McNeil]

You mean should we spend a lot of money (like $7K, $10K, $20K) on the state of the art electronics (AVP, AVR, Amps, etc.) and speakers if all we do is use streaming media?

I don't think we should spend the MOST money on any electronics regardless of the media.

The salient thing we should focus on include:

1. Diminishing Returns. Why spend $5K-$10K more on ANYTHING (audio or video) if we really can't tell a SIGNIFICANT difference?

2. Pride of ownership. To me, there's no POINT of owning anything if I'm not proud and completely happy with what I own at the end of the day regardless of how much money I save.

Well 'MOST', what should I, could I, make of that? I'm asking if accurate bandwidth, via internet, limits investment in hifi gear? I think it's a great question for this forum, that promotes high end gear, and of course others as well. That's all.

 

[isolar8001]

Well 'MOST', what should I, could I, make of that? I'm asking if accurate bandwidth, via internet, limits investment in hifi gear? I think it's a great question for this forum, that promotes high end gear, and of course others as well. That's all.

I see your point...
I get a good laugh over on AVS when users sweat bullets over buying a television with the best possible specs, only to watch nothing but garbage quality streaming on it.
Makes zero sense to me.
So no, there is no point. (in that case at least)