Sony G90 User Manual

Page 5

Advertising
background image

I: Can All That Counts Be Counted?

A Forum Begins

We are running Charles Hansen’s response to Issue 24 as the
beginning of a forum in which we explore how we will blend
the observational and the empirical (tests and measurement
programs) in our video and audio sections. Our aim is not to
overwhelm the reader with our expertise at the test bench or
with our skill in the obfuscatory use of High End jargon – but
to produce the clearest, most comprehensible and useful
examination of the hardware we review and the concepts
behind that hardware. Every reader should understand every
line of text and every graph, no matter which he uses most to
help him make his own judgments. If one serious reader does
not understand, we believe we must simply learn to explain
b e t t e r. Over time, we will.

The editors will respond next issue.

E d i t o r :
Congratulations on the rebirth of The Perfect Vi s i o n, a superb
new beginning to an intriguing journal. As I was reading the
first issue, I was struck by at least one marked similarity to T h e
Absolute Sound

, namely the satisfying richness of content that

requires multiple readings to digest fully.

One thing that also struck me was the dichotomy between

the methods used to review the video and audio performance
of a component:

1) Objective observational methods are the only accept-
able means to review audio equipment, whereas labora-
tory measurements must be relied upon to judge video
e q u i p m e n t .
2) Long-term listening tests are much more sensitive in
discerning meaningful differences in audio equipment,
while instantaneous A/B switching is favored for com-
paring video equipment.
3) Any sort of signal manipulation has been traditional-
ly frowned upon in the realm of High End audio, but in
video “clever electronic prestidigitation” is able to cre-
ate “unprecedented picture quality. ”

This last point is particularly interesting, as it appears to

contradict item one. If I read the review of the Pioneer DV-
09 correctly, the measurements performed were unable to
identify the source of the sharpness enhancement, instead
requiring the use of objective observational methods. (By
the way, the service guide for the Pioneer player describes
the sharpness enhancement feature as selectively modifying
the luminance signal with a non-linear gain element. A simi-
lar technique used in an audio component would be unac-
ceptable to the High End community. )

As I consider these two different reviewing approaches for

audio and video components, three distinct possibilities come
to mind on the reasons for their need:

a) The human brain processes audio and video informa-
tion in completely different ways, and therefore differ-
ent methods must be used to evaluate audio and video
equipment; or,
b) While analog audio has always had arbitrarily high-
resolution capability, video has had format-prescribed
resolution limits. This limited resolution may require dif-
ferent evaluation methods; or,
c) In this early stage of video equipment, there are gross
differences (and defects) in measurable performance
parameters, just as in audio equipment of the 1950s. As
these measurable defects are corrected (thanks to the
feedback provided by the measurement capabilities of

Convergence Labs), meaningful differences in the
observed performance of video equipment may or may
not still exist.

At this point, I lean toward the last possibility as most

l i k e l y. This view would seem to be supported by
Jonathan Va l i n ’s comments on the Theta Voyager [Issue
24], in which he noted improvements in the following
areas: video noise and grain; gradations of the gray
scale; sharpness of image; focus of background sub-
jects; depth of field.

Can all of these observed improvements in image quality be

correlated with improved performance on the test bench? It
seems unlikely, although I suppose we will have a partial
answer in the next issue, when the Voyager is placed under the
scrutiny of Convergence Labs’ battery of tests [see Issue 25]. (I
say “partial answer” because the correlative results from one
unit do not necessarily apply to all models.)

I look forward to future issues, as these and other topics

are explored in depth.

CHARLES HANSEN

AYRE ACOUSTICS, INC.

II: Janet’s Index

And now a footnote to our interview last issue with Phillip Byrd
and Janet Shapiro, producers of classical music television
broadcasts. Janet talked about a terrific show she’d just fin-
ished, called C a n ’t Stop Singing, a documentary about the 60th
annual convention and contests of the Society for the Preser-
vation and Encouragement of Barber Shop Quartet Singing in
America, held this year in Atlanta, at the Georgia Dome. A few
days ago, she sent me some statistics she’d prepared for the
o r g a n i z a t i o n ’s board, to show them what goes into her work. I
asked her if she’d share them here, and she agreed, provided I
let her say the following:

“Although the show is a documentary, it contains a lot of
straight performance as well. It exists in two forms: an
81-minute version for pledge time on PBS stations,
which airs nationwide on PBS beginning August 11, and
also in a slightly longer version that will air at an unspec-
ified time after August without pledge breaks. [It’s an
h o n o r, she’d explained, for a pledge show to be picked
for national distribution outside those special weeks.]

“There will be a home video version. My role in the

production was Producer and Editor, and I’ve poured
my heart and soul into this show. I want people to
watch it!!!

Which they should – it’s engaging from beginning to end

and the quartets look and sound pretty fabulous.

J a n e t ’s stats, for her 87-minute show:

• Number of field crews: 4 (each with its own producer,
s h o o t e r, audio tech, and PA )
• Number of field tapes: 86 30-minute tapes
• Amount of time needed to log and transcribe said field
tapes: 2 months
• Number of pages of logs and transcriptions: 591
• Number of cameras at the Georgia Dome: 5
• Number of contest tapes: 67 90-minute tapes
• Amount of time to edit finished program: 2 1/2 months
• Number of video edits in finished program: 662
• Number of audio edits in finished program: 361
• Number of e-mails in my Barbershop folder when I last
looked: 202

GREG SANDOW

E D I T O R I A L N O T E S

Advertising