Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Samsung Finally Launches Its First Tizen Smartphone

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #11
    Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
    It's what I was thinking before getting a 120hz monitor. Going back to the 60hz laptop causes instant eye bleed.
    Yeah, the thing is, the human eye has a frame rate of only about 50hz, so anything above that all gets temporally interpolated by your eyes anyway...

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by dee. View Post
      Yeah, the thing is, the human eye has a frame rate of only about 50hz, so anything above that all gets temporally interpolated by your eyes anyway...
      http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frame...humans_see.htm

      Tests with Air force pilots have shown, that they could identify the plane on a flashed picture that was flashed only for 1/220th of a second.
      Sure, it's not the same as a constant motion, but there is a CLEAR difference between 60 and 120hz, I can guarantee it.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
        Sure, it's not the same as a constant motion, but there is a CLEAR difference between 60 and 120hz, I can guarantee it.
        Yeah... sure, just like you can CLEARLY hear the difference in sound with these authentic, patented, gold-plated HiFi sound cables...

        Comment


        • #14
          To start off, your eye doesn't see in "frames", it pulls in a constant stream of information. Similarly, your eye doesn't have a resolution, parts of your eye see sharper than other parts (and as your eyes wander, your brain turns it all into a single, non-blurry picture for you).

          That being said...

          Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
          Sure, it's not the same as a constant motion, but there is a CLEAR difference between 60 and 120hz, I can guarantee it.
          There is a CLEAR difference between 30fps and 60fps in games because 30fps is _just_ above the level where we need our brains to throw in made-up "frames" to simulate movement (25fps), while 60fps actually has those frames we're making up.
          That said, there's obviously going to be a limit to the amount of information your eye can stream at one time, so maybe between 60 and 80fps (on a 120hz monitor) there is some little noticeable difference, but above 80 there's most likely nothing. That isn't to say that your brain doesn't know the difference between 80 and 100fps, it's just it doesn't see much difference in it.

          Originally posted by dee. View Post
          Yeah... sure, just like you can CLEARLY hear the difference in sound with these authentic, patented, gold-plated HiFi sound cables...
          You can if you have the proper equipment/software to go with it. The human ear is very adapt at noticing changes in sound, so just because you got used to shitty 96kbps mp3s and can't hear "better quality", doesn't mean everybody has

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
            You can if you have the proper equipment/software to go with it. The human ear is very adapt at noticing changes in sound, so just because you got used to shitty 96kbps mp3s and can't hear "better quality", doesn't mean everybody has
            No, actually, you can't. It doesn't matter what the source material is, tests have shown over and over and over and over again that they make no difference whatsoever.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by dee. View Post
              Yeah... sure, just like you can CLEARLY hear the difference in sound with these authentic, patented, gold-plated HiFi sound cables...
              Different strokes different folks. I notice 120 vs 60 like night and day, and I also really notice my eDP laptops variable refresh vs static refresh rates.

              But in music? I have tried it with multiple tracks, including some crazy high BPM screamo and electronic alternate music that is supposed to have huge range and make reduced bit rates apparent, but I still have my entire collection in 128kbps Opus, and even that feels like overkill to me - the only bitrate threshold I hear a difference in is between 64 and 92 kbps. I really don't notice 92 vs 128, but I keep it up just in case because space is cheap.

              I have a "source" collection of tracks in flac / 320kbps mp3, and its 85GB big. My Opus collection at 128kbps, that I put on all my devices, is 20 gig. And I honestly never can tell the difference.

              But there are audiophiles who will swear they notice it. The same way I'll swear to you I know the difference between 60 and 120hz, the same way I notice 200 PPI vs 300 PPI at 12" view distance (for all our Euros, that is 30cm). So I won't debunk them because I don't have their ears, and as long as they have done enough evaluations to be confident about it in some partially scientific way (ie, they don't just say "BIGGER NUMBER BETTER MUST GET", then I'll take their word. It doesn't hurt you if others are pushing the upper bounds of human perception for you in this tech, because the benefits trickle down to even the mid range gear.

              I do really like good speakers, though. Headphones drive me nuts because of no mass. I like a nice subwofer, nothing Earth shaking, but even at 10% volume I can feel the vibrations and they make a huge difference. But then I don't notice anything - so my $250 surround sound set I gave to my Dad, because I really like my $50 2.1 speaker set.

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                You can if you have the proper equipment/software to go with it. The human ear is very adapt at noticing changes in sound,
                Ok, NO. There's a huge market in selling bullshit to "audiophiles" (read: gullible fools) with no scientific or any other kind of evidence backing up any validity behind them. Special speaker wires aren't going to make your sound system sound any better, there's no magic involved in audio systems.

                But hey, feel free to waste your money in "magic speaker wires" and "virus-protected HDMI cables" (yes, those are a thing... I've lost all faith in humanity)...

                so just because you got used to shitty 96kbps mp3s and can't hear "better quality", doesn't mean everybody has
                Well, that's a nice way of making claims about a totally unrelated issue which I've never commented on. Lossy compression is a completely different issue, with a completely dífferent set of problems.

                Comment


                • #18
                  Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
                  That said, there's obviously going to be a limit to the amount of information your eye can stream at one time, so maybe between 60 and 80fps (on a 120hz monitor) there is some little noticeable difference, but above 80 there's most likely nothing. That isn't to say that your brain doesn't know the difference between 80 and 100fps, it's just it doesn't see much difference in it.
                  I just tried switching between 100 and 120 hz and the difference is still noticeable when moving windows for instance

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by zanny View Post
                    I have a "source" collection of tracks in flac / 320kbps mp3, and its 85GB big. My Opus collection at 128kbps, that I put on all my devices, is 20 gig. And I honestly never can tell the difference.
                    With 320kbps vbr you probably won't hear much if any difference. Any lower from that though, especially with cbr, it becomes quite easy to tell if you know what to listen for. Problems with lossy compression become most apparent with high-end noisy sounds (hats, cymbals, high-pitched snares) which easily get noticeable distortion in lossy compression. It's a very easy to spot, zipper-like sound, kind of like a slight out-of-phase sound. Part of this is probably because of the inherent difficulties in compressing noise...

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
                      I just tried switching between 100 and 120 hz and the difference is still noticeable when moving windows for instance
                      Probably because you want to see a difference there. It'd be pretty shitty if you pay extra for a 120hz monitor and can't notice a difference, so you tell yourself "of course I can see a difference"...

                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-pu...ationalization

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X