🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <58q2ke$dun$1@aggedor.rmit.edu.au>,
   rnuto@minyos.its.rmit.EDU.AU (Tim O'Connor) wrote:
>Can anyone explain to me the difference in quality between a standard 50
>Hz PAL TV and the so-called 100Hz models, like the Loewe 100 Hz Calida Vs
>the 50 Hz Calida?

For some of us (sensitive?) souls that suffer responses ranging from mild 
discomfort all the way to disorientation due to the flicker of 50Hz. units, 
100Hz units are a pleasure to watch. The best way I can discribe it is in 
aural terms - you know when you listen to a CD that has a track that is either 
ADD or AAD, followed by one that is DDD - one doesn't actully perceive the 
tape noise while involved in listening to the music, but when the track stops 
relief is felt!! If you have experienced this you know what I mean.

Well, for some of us there is a similar effect experienced in watching a 100Hz 
t.v. Comparing a low distortion audio setup with a high(er) distortion one 
gives a similar effect - listener fatigue, perhaps? Philips were the first to 
introduce the 100Hz units with their first widescreen t.v.'s a few years ago, 
now their 'Matchline' units are all 100Hz. ( I think!) Beyond that I can't 
perceive any visual benefits accruing from the technology, but others might 
tell a different story.

>
>Are there any drawbacks to such technology?

None that I'm aware of!
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>~   Timothy O'Connor, Multimedia programmer for the Faculty of Nursing,  ~
>~   RMIT.  All opinions expressed are my own, and do not represent RMIT. ~
>~                Home page: http://toc.nu.rmit.edu.au                    ~
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
regards

Patrick Scully
Fremantle, Western Australia