Broooo, did you just say 500 as if that was cheap? Damn. That’s what a whole ass tv costs.
Expecting for sound volumes to be somewhat balanced in a tv or generic player is not too much to ask, I don’t care if a surround 5.1 or 9.1 system would have it sound right, because stuff shouldn’t be fine-tuned for specialised gear, stuff should be fine-tuned for general usage and specialised gear should have in-house tweaks to make it work well.
You got it backwards and you sound pretty elitist. I get what you mean with general usage audio programs not fine tuning properly, but you are asking 90% of the population or programs to tweaks their systems so that they work for things fine tuned for 5% of the population/systems. You do see how that sounds pretentious, right? That’s how it reads at least.
This is just not how things work on a technical level. The default is how cinemas work because that’s the experience movies are made for; literally every other way to consume movie audio is “general usage audio programs fine tuning” and that’s what needs fixing. That’s my entire thesis. By calling me elitist you’re just inventing things I’m not saying to get mad over.
Yes 500 € is a lot of money. But I will say I bought a good audio setup years before I even had a TV (some parts second hand so it did not actually cost me that much, and a 3.0 setup gets you 80 % of the way there). It’s a markedly better experience to watch a movie on a shitty PC monitor with good audio than on a 55" OLED with built-in speakers, and I will die on that hill. And anecdotally I’ve heard actual filmmakers say as much.
I, too, am sick of everything being dumbed down for the people least invested in something. It’s what a whole ass tv costs because the tv is only half of the system. (Really It’s about a third, the last piece is the room you’re watching stuff in and the furniture it contains. Physical layout matters.)
![Volume [Mr Lovenstein]](https://files.mastodon.social/media_attachments/files/114/579/944/976/646/219/original/e93a9a49d1ddc0df.png){kind=link}
Broooo, did you just say 500 as if that was cheap? Damn. That’s what a whole ass tv costs.
Expecting for sound volumes to be somewhat balanced in a tv or generic player is not too much to ask, I don’t care if a surround 5.1 or 9.1 system would have it sound right, because stuff shouldn’t be fine-tuned for specialised gear, stuff should be fine-tuned for general usage and specialised gear should have in-house tweaks to make it work well.
You got it backwards and you sound pretty elitist. I get what you mean with general usage audio programs not fine tuning properly, but you are asking 90% of the population or programs to tweaks their systems so that they work for things fine tuned for 5% of the population/systems. You do see how that sounds pretentious, right? That’s how it reads at least.
I see that, but that is not what I am saying.
This is just not how things work on a technical level. The default is how cinemas work because that’s the experience movies are made for; literally every other way to consume movie audio is “general usage audio programs fine tuning” and that’s what needs fixing. That’s my entire thesis. By calling me elitist you’re just inventing things I’m not saying to get mad over.
Yes 500 € is a lot of money. But I will say I bought a good audio setup years before I even had a TV (some parts second hand so it did not actually cost me that much, and a 3.0 setup gets you 80 % of the way there). It’s a markedly better experience to watch a movie on a shitty PC monitor with good audio than on a 55" OLED with built-in speakers, and I will die on that hill. And anecdotally I’ve heard actual filmmakers say as much.
I, too, am sick of everything being dumbed down for the people least invested in something. It’s what a whole ass tv costs because the tv is only half of the system. (Really It’s about a third, the last piece is the room you’re watching stuff in and the furniture it contains. Physical layout matters.)