When will X9s price go down?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Wasn't the CLD-D704 over $1,000 brand new? And now they're $250-$400?
The HLD-X9 has almost been out as long as the D704, yet it still
commands premium prices. When will the prices for those monsters start
coming down?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

On 20 May 2004 16:18:55 -0700, memnon2@ziplip.com (Chris W.) wrote:

>Wasn't the CLD-D704 over $1,000 brand new? And now they're $250-$400?
>The HLD-X9 has almost been out as long as the D704, yet it still
>commands premium prices. When will the prices for those monsters start
>coming down?

I am guessing you are in the USA. Having not been sold here officially
I would say they wont go down but rather up in price. Being driven for
demand. As soon as I can afford one I plan to get one. Whuch might be
never.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

The price has seemed to have gone up since they are now out of production
and this is not a US released unit. In time they'll go down.

Kurtis


<john33907@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eujqa05fs4ppsbonefqmtkbrc8gi2g5fde@4ax.com...
> On 20 May 2004 16:18:55 -0700, memnon2@ziplip.com (Chris W.) wrote:
>
> >Wasn't the CLD-D704 over $1,000 brand new? And now they're $250-$400?
> >The HLD-X9 has almost been out as long as the D704, yet it still
> >commands premium prices. When will the prices for those monsters start
> >coming down?
>
> I am guessing you are in the USA. Having not been sold here officially
> I would say they wont go down but rather up in price. Being driven for
> demand. As soon as I can afford one I plan to get one. Whuch might be
> never.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Kurtis Bahr" <kbahr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2fOdnUlKA6WfETDdRVn-vw@comcast.com...
> The price has seemed to have gone up since they are now out of
production
> and this is not a US released unit. In time they'll go down.

I don't know that they ever will go down. The unit was made in small
production runs, and generally people who buy one hold onto it. You
don't see very many of these on the used market. Hence it is very rare
in the United States, and still highly desireable because of its
reputation. Prices will only come down when supply exceeds demand, which
certainly won't be anytime in the near future.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Joshua Zyber" <jzyber@SPAMMERS-DROP-DEAD.mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<09mrc.23964$KE6.14357@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>...
> "Kurtis Bahr" <kbahr@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:2fOdnUlKA6WfETDdRVn-vw@comcast.com...
> > The price has seemed to have gone up since they are now out of
> production
> > and this is not a US released unit. In time they'll go down.
>
> I don't know that they ever will go down. The unit was made in small
> production runs, and generally people who buy one hold onto it. You
> don't see very many of these on the used market. Hence it is very rare
> in the United States, and still highly desireable because of its
> reputation. Prices will only come down when supply exceeds demand, which
> certainly won't be anytime in the near future.

Yes, that's fer sure.

I have three (yes, 3, of the X9s (don't ask (I was in the right place
at the right time)) and there are many LDs whose sound and/or video far,
far, exceeds that on the comparable DVD release(s) and I will never sell
my X9s (esp. considering how many LDs I have).

Regardless of what "the Cretin" might snipe-in and write, there are many
excellent LDs for which the DVD counterparts pale in comparison. Be that
as it may, I do have some 2000+ DVDs to complement (NOT supplement) my
4000+ LDs (simply due to the (sad) fact LDs haven't been maufactured for
awhile).

Sigh. I've been at a startup for 4-1/2 years now where almost everyone is
1/2 to 1/3 my age and "innocent", yet when they come over for my movie nights
(on LD (natch ) they are simply flabbergasted at the quality, both sound
and video.

Yeah, I know I'm preaching to the choir, but, jeez ...

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>Regardless of what "the Cretin" might snipe-in and write, there are many
excellent LDs for which the DVD counterparts pale in comparison.>

It is common knowledge to any content oriented enthusiast that the number
of LDs that offer a higher integrity presentation of content than the DVD
release is minuscule. It seems that almost daily there are releases on DVD that
were never offered OAR, 5.1, or with extras on LD. Today I will be enjoying the
DVD release of Ralph Bakshi's WIZARDS for the first time in anamorphically
enhanced OAR. The $14.95 MSRP DVD offers an audio commentary, a documentary,
trailers, and more. The LD was bare bones P&S and carried an MSRP of $34.95. I
purchased the WIZARDS DVD for $9.98. No LD ever offered that kind of bang for
the buck. Wishing for the good ol' days of LD, days that were not even that
good, is a fool's errand. I can think of no one that fits that bill better than
the LD foreverist poster to whom I am responding.

>Be that as it may, I do have some 2000+ DVDs to complement (NOT supplement) my
4000+ LDs (simply due to the (sad) fact LDs haven't been maufactured for
awhile).>

Get a tissue for the LDer crybaby. DVD has been a "godsend" for non
format or obsolete technology obsessed enthusiasts. The DVD format routinely
offers much higher A/V performance, far greater value, and worlds better
sophistication and convenience than the LD "VHS disks" loved so much by so few.


>yet when they come over for my movie nights (on LD (natch ) they are
simply flabbergasted at the quality, both sound and video.>

I would love to hear how the poster overcomes the design limitations of
LD to deliver such magical LD performance. It cannot be easy when one starts
out with lower resolution, composite color, chroma noise, and the rest of LD's
cumbersome outdated "features." That must be quite an easy crowd to please.

Along the same lines, I just hosted my 52nd Movie/Film appreciation
class/program, MOVIES 101, for my circle of friends. Not one of them has ever
confused the "state of the art" standard definition 480p performance of DVD for
what LD via my tip top HLD-X9 can muster.
The obsolete LaserDisc format was as severely hampered by its
technological era as the limitations of its specifications. I will never let
format sentimentality prevent me from enjoying the advances of modern and
future A/V delivery systems.

Kraig

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

kamcgann@aol.com (KAMCGANN) wrote in message news:<20040528195358.13612.00000035@mb-m20.aol.com>...
> >Regardless of what "the Cretin" might snipe-in and write, there are many
> excellent LDs for which the DVD counterparts pale in comparison.>
>
> It is common knowledge to any content oriented enthusiast that the number
> of LDs that offer a higher integrity presentation of content than the DVD
> release is minuscule. It seems that almost daily there are releases on DVD that
> were never offered OAR, 5.1, or with extras on LD. Today I will be enjoying the
> DVD release of Ralph Bakshi's WIZARDS for the first time in anamorphically
> enhanced OAR. The $14.95 MSRP DVD offers an audio commentary, a documentary,
> trailers, and more. The LD was bare bones P&S and carried an MSRP of $34.95. I
> purchased the WIZARDS DVD for $9.98. No LD ever offered that kind of bang for
> the buck.

It is true that a year 2000+ DVD offers better bang for buck than a
1980+ technology LD.

But in the same time span, other fields (such as Personal Computers)
have gone from Apple II to Windows XP, and the cost of hardware has
fallen to a fraction of what it used to be.

In this light, i think DVD is a disappointment. The progress over LD
is simply not enough !

If DVD had been skipped altogether, we could possibly have had a world
wide launch of HD DVD by now.

Only HD DVD offers a significant progress over LD justified by 20
years of evolution. Anamorphically enhanced NTSC or PAL is still
unacceptable.

In short, i think DVD is a replacement for VHS (mass market), while HD
DVD will be the true replacement for LD (enthusiast market).

Of course there always will be unreplaceable LDs, the way there are
also LPs, VHSs, VHDs or whatever obsolete format with no better
release. There will be DVDs as well... probably there are already.

Nicolas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>If DVD had been skipped altogether, we could possibly have had a world wide
launch of HD DVD by now.>

Without the unprecedented success of DVD worldwide, there would be the
perception of insufficient demand for any present or future higher performance
A/V formats. DVD demonstrated that a great design, high capability, and an
excellent value, sells. LaserDisc missed on all three counts and nearly proved
that there was no significant enthusiast market.

>Only HD DVD offers a significant progress over LD justified by 20 years of
evolution. Anamorphically enhanced NTSC or PAL is still unacceptable.>

Anamorphically enhanced DVD via component video with 5.1/6.1 sound as
practically a standard feature has been world's better than LD for 7 years. DVD
is only a standard definition format, but it has whetted the appetite of
enthusiasts and consumers for HD. LaserDisc was VHS on a disc that required too
much effort for anybody that was not in love with the quirky limitations of
LD's "old when it was new" design and functionality. LaserDisc was a micro
niche format that was loved very much by very few. Its greatest accomplishment
is that its numerous design, specification, and marketplace challenges were an
inspiration to do a disc format right. I am very thankful for DVD as it has
significantly upgraded my A/V stable and the standard definition contingent of
my content collection.

>In short, i think DVD is a replacement for VHS (mass market), while HD DVD
will be the true replacement for LD (enthusiast market).>

DVD may have been intended to only replace VHS, but the "enthusiasts
market" showed its preference for DVD almost before the format was introduced.
Since DVD's launch, the enthusiast and consumer market alike have chosen DVD as
the reference standard definition format. DVD has made "Widescreen" a household
word and has offered extras abundantly and delivers its A/V wares much more
conveniently than LD did. LaserDisc limped along in obscurity and its only
bragging rights were that it could outperform VHS, but was not offered as a
recordable format and could not even play movies without interruption.

Kraig

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

> In short, i think DVD is a replacement for VHS (mass market), while HD
> DVD will be the true replacement for LD (enthusiast market).

Wouldn't D-VHS more logically be a replacement for VHS, due to them
being similar formats? The true replacement for Laserdisc was probably
Hi-Defintion Laserdisc.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0406021909.32248966@posting.google.com...
> > In short, i think DVD is a replacement for VHS (mass market), while
HD
> > DVD will be the true replacement for LD (enthusiast market).
>
> Wouldn't D-VHS more logically be a replacement for VHS, due to them
> being similar formats? The true replacement for Laserdisc was probably
> Hi-Defintion Laserdisc.

D-VHS at its highest market penetration is an even smaller niche market
than laserdisc was at its lowest point, and D-VHS's extinction is
imminent. I don't think you're getting his point. He's not comparing
tape to tape or disc to disc. He's comparing the mass market formats
against high-end niche formats.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>LaserDisc missed on all three counts and nearly proved
>that there was no significant enthusiast market.

I'm not sure that DVD is proof of the existance of an enthusiast market. It's
simply proof that a realitivly inexpensive replacement for VHS sells. LD's
biggest problem was it's high cost.

>LaserDisc was VHS on a disc that required too
>much effort for anybody that was not in love with the quirky limitations of
>LD's "old when it was new" design and functionality

LD was at least as big an improvement over VHS as DVD has been over LD.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I'm not sure that DVD is proof of the existance of an enthusiast market. It's
simply proof that a realitivly inexpensive replacement for VHS sells. LD's
biggest problem was it's high cost.>

There was certainly a small group of film/movie "enthusiasts" that
supported LD. However, I believe that DVD's unqualified success has created the
enthusiast "market." DVD Special Editions are announced nearly every day and
can sell in the millions. DVD has done far more for enthusiast "causes" than
LD, i.e., the almost routine offering of: OAR, behind the scenes extras,
multiple audio commentaries and soundtracks, greater and more sophisticated
resolution and more accurate sound reproduction. In the LD days, "enthusiasts"
used to get excited about a trailer being included because that made it a
LaserDisc "Special Edition."
If a Special Edition DVD that offers anamorphic enhancement, DTS
and/or higher bit rate Dolby Digital than LD's AC-3 with easy to access extras
is not intended for enthusiasts, then I do not know who they are intended for.
The LaserDisc format never released a Special Edition with DTS or with
Anamorphic Enhancement. Do you still want to go back to the good ol' days of
LD?


>>LaserDisc was VHS on a disc that required too much effort for anybody
that was not in love with the quirky limitations of LD's "old when it was new"
design and functionality.>>

<LD was at least as big an improvement over VHS as DVD has been over LD.>

Except that DVD can do everything that LD could do and more. LD
could not do everything that VHS could do. LD had better audio and video than
VHS, but its players were expensive and high maintenance, did not offer
recording, and could not play movies uninterrupted.

This has been a good week for you, Steve. You learned that LD's DTS
bit rate has always been only 80% of DVD and D-VHS/D-Theater's full bit rate,
that a DVD can indeed store 1509kpbs DTS, that SuperBit DVDs offer only
improved picture along with DD5.1 and DTS 754kbps, and that LD compromised its
dynamic range.

Kraig

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

memnon2@ziplip.com (Chris W.) wrote in message news:<9fecf0b.0406021909.32248966@posting.google.com>...
> > In short, i think DVD is a replacement for VHS (mass market), while HD
> > DVD will be the true replacement for LD (enthusiast market).
>
> Wouldn't D-VHS more logically be a replacement for VHS, due to them
> being similar formats? The true replacement for Laserdisc was probably
> Hi-Defintion Laserdisc.

I'm not sure how much life D-VHS will have. Those who want to record
in HD will purchase recordable HD DVD - which already exists - or
record onto HDD. NTSC can perfectly well be recorded on regular DVD. I
think D-VHS only exists while waiting for HD DVD to spread. In fact i
don't see any future for any tape based system.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

kamcgann@aol.com (KAMCGANN) wrote...
> If a Special Edition DVD that offers anamorphic enhancement, DTS
> and/or higher bit rate Dolby Digital than LD's AC-3...<snip>

I have yet to encounter an AC-3 LD with a lower DD 5.1 bit rate than
the maximum allowable of 448 kbps. If you know of an AC-3 LD that
refutes my albeit limited observation (based upon ca. 30 titles in my
collection), I would appreciate knowing about it.

Otherwise, AFAIK, the bit rate for DVD cannot be higher for DD 5.1
than it was for AC-3 LD. However, the bit rate for DD 5.1 on DVD
*CAN* be lower than 448 kbps (384, 320, 256, and 224 kbps come
immediately to mind).

TIA,

-Junior

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>You learned that LD's DTS
>bit rate has always been only 80% of DVD

But that isn't true. The vast majority of DVDs use half rate DTS making them
output at far below LD level.

>and D-VHS/D-Theater's full bit rate,

I have no idea what the average DTS D-VHS tape is encoded at. Beyond that, how
many D-VHS tapes actually have DTS? It's only in the last few months that JVC
has released a DTS compatible deck.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Steve,

"Don't feed the troll", Kraig won't ever listen to your arguments.

Rgds,
Julien


Steve Grauman wrote:
>>LaserDisc missed on all three counts and nearly proved
>>that there was no significant enthusiast market.
>
>
> I'm not sure that DVD is proof of the existance of an enthusiast market. It's
> simply proof that a realitivly inexpensive replacement for VHS sells. LD's
> biggest problem was it's high cost.
>
>
>>LaserDisc was VHS on a disc that required too
>>much effort for anybody that was not in love with the quirky limitations of
>>LD's "old when it was new" design and functionality
>
>
> LD was at least as big an improvement over VHS as DVD has been over LD.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"unclejr" <watsona@kenyon.edu> wrote in message
news:139de3b3.0406040315.58262be5@posting.google.com...
> I have yet to encounter an AC-3 LD with a lower DD 5.1 bit rate than
> the maximum allowable of 448 kbps. If you know of an AC-3 LD that
> refutes my albeit limited observation (based upon ca. 30 titles in my
> collection), I would appreciate knowing about it.
>
> Otherwise, AFAIK, the bit rate for DVD cannot be higher for DD 5.1
> than it was for AC-3 LD.

You've got the numbers backwards. Laserdisc's bit rate for Dolby Digital
is 384 kb/s. DVD's is variable and can reach up to 448 kb/s.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>>You learned that LD's DTS bit rate has always been only 80% of DVD>>

>But that isn't true. The vast majority of DVDs use half rate DTS making them
output at far below LD level.>

Naughty Naughty Steve. You did not quote my sentence completely. Here is
my sentence without Steve's editing.

"You learned that LD's DTS
bit rate has always been only 80% of DVD and D-VHS/D-Theater's full bit rate"

Though it is true that most DTS DVD's are 754kbps, I never inferred
otherwise and referred specifically to the DVD format's full bit rate of
1509kbps.

Steve is welcome to think that a DTS DVD encoded at 754kbps with full
dynamic range is inferior to a DTS LD with compromised dynamic range. My
experience is clearly not the same as his. I have been quite impressed with DTS
DVDs at both bit rates. A DTS LD is no slouch, but like all of the LD format's
specifications and capabilities, DVD has bettered them.
Kraig

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Joshua Zyber" <jzyber@SPAMMERS-DROP-DEAD.mindspring.com> wrote...
> You've got the numbers backwards. Laserdisc's bit rate for Dolby Digital
> is 384 kb/s. DVD's is variable and can reach up to 448 kb/s.

Okay, Josh. I'll aver to your usual air of authority on these
matters. Unlike your system, I cannot measure the bitrate of LDs
directly. However, EVERY TIME that I capture DD 5.1 from an LD, the
resulting AC3 file is 448 kbps. Weird.

-Junior

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

> Steve is welcome to think that a DTS DVD encoded at 754kbps with full
>dynamic range is inferior to a DTS LD with compromised dynamic range

I've always preferred DTS sound to Dolby Digital. Anytime I have the option of
getting a movie that I want in a package that includes DTS sound, I usually do
so. However, I've been told -and have seen no evidence to the opposite- that
LDs generally carry a higher bit-rate than DVDs where DTS sound is concerned.
In doing an A/B comparison I found DTS sound on an LD to be better than the DVD
counterpart, at least in my limited sample. DVD may be capable of handling a
higher bit-rate than LD, but that capability is sparsely put to use making the
point moot at best. The engine in my car could be tuned to well over 300Hp. But
I have not tuned it as such, so talking about the capability for such power is
pointless.

> A DTS LD is no slouch, but like all of the LD format's
>specifications and capabilities, DVD has bettered them.

But in this case the improvement is moot because it's rarely put to use. If
there are still some LDs with better sound than their DVD counterparts than
it's simply proof that DVD was not a unanimous improvment over LD. DVD
technology carries with it a host of it's own issues and limitations, many of
which LD never suffered from. Hell, DVD wasn't even able to eliminate the
neccesity to change discs. My DVD copies of The Godfather Part II and Once Upon
A Time in America both require 2 discs in order to view the entire movie. And
the disc change with OUATIA is particularly bad, they choose a poor spot to
make the break.