Comments
Dear Gary:
A few of my comments for what they are worth:
1) I feel your product reviews are way too long. Have shorter reviews with a rating system.
2) I read a magazine because I want to read a magazine and the magazine should have the info in it. I get really annoyed when told to go to a Web site.
3) I feel you are doing a disservice to DVD owners; the vast majority of sales are still DVD so why keep pushing a format that keeps changing the standards and requires one has to have an Internet connection to keep upgrading the players?
4) I will not upgrade to Blu-ray for another reason that few mention––I do not need all that overkill crap––I just want to watch the movie...no how-toos...no comments...no this, no that. Just want to watch the movie...period.
5) If you read your own reviews on most of the Blu-ray titles, what do you see? Soft details, no huge difference, soft and poorly defined blacks, clipped shadows, etc. etc.
6) If the quality was there, standardized, without the need for upgrades, etc., I still would not upgrade because I feel this technology will not last long until it becomes obsolete.
The reason I do not upgrade equipment or movies any longer is because it has become so damn confusing that it is just not worth the irritation, annoyance, and frustration to even try. And all this foolishness about hanging a TV on the wall is absurd. I want to look eye level at a screen––not have my neck cocked up at an angle––very poor viewing position.
I could make many more comments but by now I am sure you just don’t care what I have to say, and that is the problem today with the manufacturers of all this stuff.
Marshall Stephens
editorgary@widescreenreview.com
Editor-In-Chief and Publisher Gary Reber Comments:
Thanks for taking the time to direct your important comments to us.
1) Good point. In particular cases of groundbreaking product reviews, we do tend to write more. A rating system is difficult because each reviewer’s thinking is different and rating systems, except by the same reviewer, really can’t be faithfully compared.
2) When there is so much more information to be digested and it is unfeasible for us to publish a larger magazine, we often have no choice but to refer our readers to our Web site. The Internet, whether we like it or not, is now and will continue to be a significant communication medium.
3) We believe in Blu-ray Disc as offering “the best that it can be” in picture and sound performance. That is why we advocate the format. The Internet has become so very much a part of the American lifestyle, and the Blu-ray Disc format is designed to work with a broadband Internet service.
4) The so-called “overkill crap” is an option, not a requirement to view on Blu-ray Discs.
5) You are correct in your assessment, and sadly, far too many movies brought to all media for viewing continue to exhibit poor production, poor transfers, and poor telecine preparation for release. But then there are an increasing number of titles that exhibit exceptional picture and sound quality that set a new reference benchmark.
6) It will be a very long time before extensive broadband capability will be available and affordable or demanded by consumers in their homes. The Blu-ray Disc format offers the very best performance now and well into the future.
I agree that home theatre operation has become unnecessarily complicated, especially in electronic processors. People are working on technologies to simplify operation.
As for your comment regarding the “foolishness about hanging a TV on the wall,” this is not required for a “best that it can be” home theatre experience (excepting projection).
We are here to listen and provide guidance.
You can E-mail Widescreen Review @ editorgary@widescreenreview.com