NHT (aka Now Hear This) has been a respected mid-tier speaker manufacturer based in the U.S. since 1986, but as the recession hit earlier this year, they chose to shut down product development and manufacturing, take some time off, and approach the market fresh. They weren't bankrupt - at least not yet - they just saw their distribution channel erode as independent dealers and custom installers went out of business, and their price points crept up to the point where they were out of line with economic realities. Some of this was driven by rising commodity prices, some by a disconnect with changing consumer priorities.
Somehow I missed this story. Anyway, after just a few months off, they're back.
They've shrunk their product line nearly in half, and are selling and distributing online-only. If this sounds similar to the Outlaw model, it is, only NHT isn't just selling direct, you can buy from amazon, Audio Advisor, OneCall, and a few others. This eliminates dealer reps, salespeople, and lots of shipping, so prices are down 20% as well. They're killing all print ads because the goal of print ads was to drive prospects to the dealers, though they will do online advertising because they need to drive sales somehow.
I'm in charge of Consumer Devices at Current Analysis, which is actually composed of two separate groups: Mobile Devices and Digital Home. I've been in charge of the devices portion of our Digital Home service since the beginning of this year, and while I intend to continue posting here about home theater, I thought I'd plug noteworthy Digital Home reports on this blog as well. This year's E3 (the electronic gaming show) crossed over both of my coverage areas. I stayed home this year - I'm on the road a lot as it is - but Bruce McGregor, our Senior Analyst, Digital Home was there live. This isn't a new console year, but there were multiple announcements around new services, and Bruce wrote up announcements from Microsoft and Sony, while I covered the PSPgo.
(The report links require paid access to Current Analysis' syndicated research service; journalists who need free access should contact me and we'll get an account set up for you.)
Yesterday's WSJ had an article (subscription required) on how regional consumer electronics stores are thriving despite the economy. The keys to success seem to be a) taking advantage of the demise of Circuit City, and b) the use of a trained, commissioned sales force. I can't help but point out that one big reason that Circuit City died was the move away from its own trained, commissioned sales force to lower paid, non-commissioned shift workers. Of course, Wal~Mart's spokesperson is quick to point out the flip side: many consumers are doing their research online and hate pushy commissioned retail salespeople.
The Journal doesn't talk about the smaller, specialty A/V retailer, but based solely on the number of local stores that have gone out of business over the past year (Rabson's, I'll miss you), that segment of the business isn't going to pick up any Circuit City leftovers. So how will the remaining stores survive? One way is to hold special events to drive traffic to the store. Frankly, I'm surprised this is the first time I'm seeing this: one of the local high end A/V stores is having three manufacturer reps come to do a dog-and-pony show (this link is to a similar past event) and is advertising it by buying email lists from one of the home theater magazines. Will this be enough? I hope so.
As usual, I attended CES 2009 and spent a lot more time talking with mobile devices vendors (my day job) than home theater. This was a good strategy for anyone this year because the Palm pre stole the show, but there were still plenty of thin LCD TVs, 3D TV, mobile TV, and a few speakers and receivers sprinkled throughout the sprawling show floor. I didn't make it to the Hilton, where most of the high end audio was housed, at all. Still, it's hard to avoid home theater when you have to attend press conferences from Sony, Samsung, LG, Toshiba, etc. and walk the show floor.
After talking to the Dolby Mobile folks, I was pressed into sitting through a terrific demo of Dolby IIz, which adds a (derived, not native) height channel. I've been using Yamaha receivers for years that perform the same trick, so I could certainly appreciate the notion - Dolby seems to be going more for sound placement (i.e., making it sound like the helicopter is hovering above you), while Yamaha is intended for room augmentation (i.e., making it sound like your room is bigger). The 9 minute demo certainly sounded great, but if I listened to my own home theater at those volume levels I'd be deaf before the end of the movie.
I also saw the latest generation of DLP in both super-large format (Optoma's HD8200 projector) and small (TI-powered pico projectors for use with cellphones were everywhere). I stopped by the Optoma booth to see the pico projector, and stayed for a short demo of the HD8200 on a 2:35 screen in a completely dark room. They were playing a clip from I Am Legend, a movie I have only seen in projector demos, so I know the clip well. Contrast ratio and black levels were insanely good, but there was weird artifacting that appeared just before fast motion content that drove me crazy. It could be an issue with the setup, the source, or a bug in a preproduction demo unit, but if I had bought that system, I'd be returning it.
Finally, at the Sony press conference the swag was an eco-friendly bamboo fiber bag, which feels like silk and is apparently intended to be used (and reused) for grocery shopping. Or something. When I unpacked it after the show, I noticed that the care tag is unintentionally poetic and hilarious, a sort of bad translation haiku:
CAUTION Do not close to fire Only for shipping bag Hand wash Washing will shirink slightly Only non-chlorine blench Wet dark cloth will fadeing The color will fading under sunlight or fluorescence for long time
Avi, We want to buy a 37" LCD TV. Is there a significant
difference between 720P and 1080P?
Yes, there is a significant difference between 720p and 1080p –
though it depends on what you’re watching on it, and even then you may not be
able to see the difference. The bottom line is that you can almost always
get away with buying a 720p set and saving the money, but nobody seems to
believe this answer, so here’s a slightly more involved one:
First, two quick definitions:
1.the
“p” in 1080P or 720P = progressive, where the signal has information in every
horizontal line, just like a computer monitor.
2.the
“i” in 1080i = interlaced, where the signal alternates horizontal lines
similar to the way an analog TV works – the information alternates fast enough
that you usually can’t tell the difference.
Now you need to answer two questions:
What are you watching? (You want to be able to display all the
information that your signal contains, but how much information is actually in
that signal?)
·If you’re watching a DVD, it’s 480p. So even a 720p TV is
overkill – either the TV or the DVD player will do some magic to “fill in” the
extra pixels it has to make up the picture.* A 1080p set has to fill in even
more pixels with guesswork.
·If you’re watching HDTV, it’s either 720p or 1080i. Some channels
use one resolution (for example, NBC uses 1080i) and some use the other (for
example, Fox uses 720p) – this happens behind the scenes when you change
channels; you don’t have to do anything. 720p and 1080i both have about the
same amount of picture information (720p tends to look better for fast motion
like sports, while 1080i tends to look better for scenes without much motion,
like dramas), both count as real HDTV, and both look spectacular when displayed
properly on an HDTV.
oWhen you watch a 720p channel on a 720p TV, you’re seeing
everything that’s there.
oWhen you watch a 1080i channel on a 720p TV, first it fills in
the interlacing by guessing what the missing line ought to be, and then drops a
bit of the resolution.
oWhen you watch a 720p channel on a 1080p TV, it does some magic
to “fill in” the extra pixels.
oWhen you watch a 1080i channel on a 1080p TV, it fills in the
interlacing by guessing what the missing line ought to be.
·If you’re watching a Blu-ray disc, congratulations, you’re
watching the only consumer format capable of displaying full 1080p.
oA 720p set throws out some of that resolution; it usually still
looks better than a DVD.
oA 1080p set displays all the information on there without any
changes.
Now, let’s assume you are going to watch Blu-ray discs 100% of
the time. Question two: can you actually see the difference between 720p and
1080p?
This will depend on several factors:
·How good is your eyesight? Seriously.
·How big is the TV, and how far away are you sitting? In smaller screen
sizes it usually doesn’t matter if you’re cramming one or two million pixels
into the set; unless you’re sitting two feet away you won’t be able to see the
difference. Higher resolution allows you to sit closer to the set and does
nothing for you if you’re farther back. For example, if you’re sitting ten to
twelve feet back from a 50” TV you literally cannot see the difference between
720p and 1080p. Some people want to get the higher resolution anyway. I am not
one of those people. My couch is about 12 feet away from my displays, and my
50” plasma is a 720p model. My projector, on the other hand, projects onto an
8’ screen that comes down in front of the plasma; the projector is a 1080p
model because when the images are projected that large, the difference between
720p and 1080p is quite obvious.
Conclusion: unless you plan to sit awfully close to that 37” set
and watch a lot of Blu-ray discs, there’s no reason to spend more on a 1080p
version. If you insist on spending money for something you can’t see, I won’t
stop you. But you’ll be much happier if you put the extra money into a good
surround sound system.
Does the upcoming change in broadcasting frequency have any
impact on the reception?
It depends. If you’re getting your TV shows from cable or
satellite, the analog/digital switchover will make no difference whatsoever.
None. You do not need to do anything at all.
If you’re getting your TV shows from an antenna, then you’ll
need either a new HDTV with a digital tuner built in, or a new tuner/converter
box. Your reception will either get much better or much worse, and it will vary
by channel, how far away you are from the station, and (in some cases) your
physical location (i.e., if you’re at the bottom of a hill or sandwiched
between big buildings). Digital channels do not degrade gradually. A rough rule
of thumb is that if you get a reasonably clear channel today, you’ll probably
get an even better looking version of it on digital. On the other hand, if you
have a snowy channel that’s just sort of watchable today, once it goes digital
you probably won’t get it at all.
Hope this helps,
-avi
*720x480 progressive, or about 350,000 pixels of actual
information per frame. This is a gross oversimplification, but it provides a good
basis for comparison. 1280 x 720 = around 900,000 pixels. Incidentally, this is
why watching analog TV channels or VHS video on an HDTV usually looks much,
much worse than it did on your old analog TV; the new TV is trying to take very
little information (VHS is roughly 240i, or 480x240 every other frame, or the
equivalent of about 60,000 pixels) and displaying it on something expecting
more than ten times that information to create the picture. Without much to go
on, the TV fudges, which, instead of looking soft and fuzzy like an analog set,
looks blocky and horrible.
Blogging is strange. I can't tell you how many times I get asked to provide links or link exchanges or even the occasional "please review our stuff and we'll pay you for placement." Now, if this were about my day job (Research Director for Mobile Devices), it would be somewhat understandable - I am quoted by the press, and it's my job to influence industry decision makers. But Home Theater View? Who reads this? Coverage here basically just influences my brother - my mother doesn't even read this! Perhaps all they're trying to do is up their Google rankings.
So, here is a link to an article I was asked to highlight on home theater seating. I didn't write it, I don't know the people who did, and I couldn't even tell you if they've sat in all the chairs they write about. But the pictures are definitely fun to look at. No money changed hands for my inclusion of this link in this post. Enjoy your link, boys.
Next up, an electronics review site, TestFreaks. They offered to pay me for reviewing the site. I never agreed to anything, but since it makes for an interesting post about home theater blogging, here goes. I don't like the site at all. It aggregates reviews from all over the Internet - sort of a Rotten Tomatoes for A/V gear and gadgets. That part might be useful if you couldn't just Google the product name and get the same information. Where it could still be interesting is if there was some editorial judgement applied to the rankings so you'd see a decent list of speakers or receivers to start a comparison shopping exercise. Nope, it's all automated, and the results appear to be completely random.
Logitech announced today that it is buying high end earbud vendor Ultimate Ears. UE is best known for $1000+ custom headphones for professional musicians, but it also has a line of consumer headphones in the $40 - $400 range. Its business model is incredibly similar to Shure - both come from professional audio (initially microphones in Shure's case) and branched out into the consumer space. In contrast, etymotic's background was in hearing aids, and V-MODA seems to have come from the fashion world.
Without the custom business, Ultimate Ears is just another headset vendor, and its brand differentiation will be difficult for Logitech to maintain. But if Logitech leaves the core custom business alone, it can definitely build up the consumer side - Ultimate Ears could definitely use better distribution and broader consumer awareness; Logitech excels in these areas - just look at what they did with Harmony (speaking of which, I just got in a Harmony One remote control; a review will follow shortly).
In terms of how Ultimate Ears actually sound, I have no idea. I have tested most of the competition - Shure, etymotic, Sennheiser, Sony, v-moda, and Bose, to name a few. I should be getting in some Ultimate Ears product soon for comparison.
A bunch of big companies are getting together to standardize wireless home HDTV transmission. Again. The AP reports the details here. Most of the commentary I've seen has been fairly positive, though everyone points out that several of the big players backing WHDI are separately supporting WirelessHD as well. Could we have a standards war here?
WHDI products aren't expected to hit the market for at least a year or two
Testing this stuff will take forever
Even if it just adds $100 to the cost of products, the rise of brands like Vizio proves that many consumers are primarily driven by price
In the short term, he's right. Nobody is going to put off buying a new TV today because in 2 - 5 years a wireless version will be available. Those who need a wireless solution today -- in the home theater industry, installers will always run into problem rooms -- will be willing to pay for expensive proprietary add-on gadgets that solve the particular problem. Longer term, though, it does make sense for there to be wireless options that work across vendors. At one time, wireless PC standards (ex: WiFi) were supposed to take over in the A/V world, but the bandwidth to pass HDTV unaltered on those doesn't exist outside the lab. I wonder whether any of these consortiums will get something to market that actually works in a reasonable timeframe - I've seen demos of this stuff at trade shows for years now. Because even once TVs and set top boxes have such a standard built in, you'll need to buy a new TV AND a new set top box to see the benefit. So for the forseeable future, nothing changes, which explains why Sony and Samsung are backing multiple standards, and why Jeremy can't bring himself to care.
If you're in the Wall Street area next Thursday, I'll be moderating a panel at Digital Downtown on Flat Panel TV Trends:
Plasma and LCD TVs are the center of any digital home. The category's
success is driven by the produts' fashion appeal and picture quality as
well as the DTV transition. Listen to our panel of industry experts
discuss the current trends affecting the flat panel TV market and where
it's heading.
The session is free to financial analysts, press, and "invited guests." You can register here.
GizmodoGate really bothered me. I was at that Motorola press conference. This was Moto's first time talking to press/analysts in the post-Zander era, and they kept starting and stopping and starting and stopping. It was annoying for me to watch, and very hard for them to tell a smooth story.
If Gizmodo had characterized this as a prank gone badly wrong and apologized, it might have been forgivable (after all, some of us do have a sense of humor). Instead, Gizmodo's unrepentent response left a really bad taste in my mouth. I've been a marketing professional in the past and now I'm on the analyst side of the table; I consider both worthy of respect. Not nearly as much respect as teachers or firefighters or Alzheimer's researchers, but marketing, analysis, and journalism are jobs that need to be done and are worth doing well. If Gizmodo doesn't respect these professions (or my time) and insists on acting like 14 year old boys, that's fine, but they should get the same access as 14 year old boys get to CES and press conferences: none. Let the pros at engadget get the coverage and ad revenues.
