Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2014 July 10

= July 10 =

TV audio accessory recommendation
I just bought a Sony Bravia LED 48' hi-def TV (KDL-48W600B; cnet specs). Good hi-def picture but just shit audio. Tinny. Awful. It makes me so mad. They do it on purpose of course, so they can sell their "sound bars", which appear to be an incredible ripoff. Anyway, anyone have a suggestion for how to make my audio match my picture? I live in a relatively small one-bedroom and can't fit any large speakers. Budget is about $200 (I'm in the U.S., if that's relevant). Oh, and if relevant, please advise what types of cables I will need to purchase for whatever you recommend. Thanks!--108.46.97.218 (talk) 04:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Personally, I would get something like a creative 2.1 computer speaker set (two speakers and a bass unit) and use this. Perfectly adequate sound at a lower cost than the Sony sound bars. Zzubnik (talk) 09:40, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's what I was going to suggest. You can get such a system for maybe $30.  That does mean you will have wires, though, and if you spread the speakers out, for optimal sound, they could get in the way (this somewhat depends on the layout of the room).  Wireless speakers are a solution to ugly wires, but those systems are more prone to interference (although wired systems can sometimes pick up interference from cell phones, so keep those a few feet away from each other).


 * Also, such systems typically aren't good at extreme volume (either they won't go loud or will be damaged if they do). So, if you want a loud system, you will need to pay more.


 * You won't need any cables beyond what comes with the speakers, but you might need a converter jack depending on what audio outputs your TV has. Those 2.1 systems are typically set up to plug into a single headphone jack.  If instead of that you have L and R audio output jacks on your TV, then you will need a converter to combine those into a single jack (maybe $5).  Also note that if you have a cable box or analog-to-digital converter box feeding the signal to the TV, you may have audio outputs directly on that.


 * If you own a good set of headphones, you could also plug those into the TV. I'm not suggesting this as a permanent solution, but this will give you an idea for how much better the audio could sound with good speakers.  It's always possible that it's not just the speakers, but that the audio processing itself is crap, in which case new speakers won't help much, unless you can bypass the TV and plug in directly to the cable box or digital-to-audio converter.


 * Oh, and a note on the bass on those 2.1 units: it can be impressive, but can also keep people up at night. So, if others are trying to sleep while you watch TV, you will need to turn the bass down.  BTW, if you haven't already done so, try turning the bass to max and treble to minimum on your TV, and see if that helps any.  You would think the presets would be set to make it sound as good as possible, but maybe not if they want to sell you better audio.  (Also, to the ears of the Chinese who presumably built it, high pitch may sound better.) StuRat (talk) 15:05, 10 July 2014 (UTC)


 * As of 2008, at least, Bravias are mainly made in Slovakia. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * European ones, anyway. Japan serves Asia, and Mexico for North America. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Television sets are sold in such a wide variety of screen sizes and types that a degree of responsibility is demanded of the buyer who has only themself to blame if their choice is a bad one. Comfortable viewing distance is proportional to screen size; a 48-inch diagonal screen is comfortably viewed sitting at 12 feet from the screen, which is an ungainly dimension for a small bedroom. For good audio reproduction, absolute size is important. CRT sets with excellent sound are cheap now and a used Panasonic or Philips 32-inch set (with a huge cabinet that will occupy a corner of the room) should satisfy most ears, without the distraction of disparate picture and sound locations. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

363rd USAAF STAPLEHURST AIRFIELD 1943 TO 1944
HI I SAW AN ARTICAL ON THE ABOVE HEADLINE,I AM TRYINGING TO FIND OUT WHAT GROUND CREW WAS ATACHED TO THEM COULD YOU HELP ME WITH A REGIMENT NAME AT THIS TIME AT THR AIRFIELD BEFORE THEY MOVED TO FRANCE MANY THANKS MELVYN EXCELL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.187.59 (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Pre-Normandy Invasion secrecy would have hidden the purpose of RAF Staplehurst as a prototype for temporary Advanced Landing Grounds built in France after D-Day. Compare the airfield's appearance 2 weeks before D-Day 21 May 1944 with what little is there today; it's been disused since 1944. There is a forum sharing information on the 363rd Fighter Group in Staplehurst that may find the info you seek. For more research, the [www.abct.org.uk] Airfields of Britain Conservation Trust website notes that units present at Staplehurst included No. 126 Airfield, the 363rd FG and Squadrons 401, 411 and 412. 84.209.89.214 (talk) 18:12, 10 July 2014 (UTC)