I am about to commit and have a few questions [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : I am about to commit and have a few questions



jim goulding
08-17-2007, 05:09 PM
Hi. I am gearing up to buy an HDTV and am thinking Pioneer 42" Plasma. I have some questions for all . .

To take advantage of the resolution available with HDTV, do I need to change my DVD player to one of those that claims to upsample? How is this accomplished? Is it superior to a standard DVD player of high quality?

I listen with stereo speakers with mono block amps and would like to continue doing this. I am able to do this because my present TV has a variable out. Does anyone know if the Pioneer has an equivalant out? In their specifications they list a monitor out. Is that the same thing?

I will most likely opt for the 720p model. I sit approx 9' away. How much, if anything, in your opinion will I be giving up to 1080p on HDTV broadcasts and/or DVD?

Is there some sort of affordable outboard device to throw a quasi surround experience? Can I stay with my mono blocks adding this?

I would really appreciate hearing from those of you with some knowledge and/or experience.

Thank you.

dean_martin
08-17-2007, 06:24 PM
Hey, Jim. I'm at the same place you're at. I'm leaning toward a Panasonic plasma instead of the Pioneer so I can get a 50". My viewing distance is about 9ft. The charts I've seen state that that distance is at the outer limit of, if not a little beyond, the suggested distance for viewing a 42". Pioneer plasmas appear to be the best, but Panasonic is not too far behind and you can get bigger screen size for the money. I'm not trying to persuade you either way. I'm just explaining my own analysis. Anyhow, I'd like to see some of the other regs around here comment on viewing distance and plasmas. I haven't jumped into home theater yet. I'm still using 2 channels and a sub for movie viewing, but I'm inching toward 5.1.

You will need an analog audio output to send an analog audio signal from the Pioneer to your stereo system. From what I've seen, some digital tvs don't have this, but Pioneer has some models that do. For example, the Pioneer that is reviewed by one of the moderators here has analog audio outs. There's a link to the review at the audioreview homepage. If there's not an analog audio output then you will need to get your audio from your cable box/satellite receiver for tv and from your source (dvd player). That's what I've come up with so far, but I don't have my plasma yet (I did get "permission" from the wife to get it this weekend!)

Here's hoping that both of us will be blown away by our new plasma tvs!

Wireworm5
08-17-2007, 10:26 PM
Hi. I am gearing up to buy an HDTV and am thinking Pioneer 42" Plasma. I have some questions for all . .

To take advantage of the resolution available with HDTV, do I need to change my DVD player to one of those that claims to upsample? How is this accomplished? Is it superior to a standard DVD player of high quality?

[ If you do a search you may find the full answer to this question, which I answered previously. Basically all new HDTV's have HDMI inputs.. You need a 1080i input signal for your tv to work in HD mode.
Rather then getting an upsampler, you should get a Blu-ray HD player as these players do upconverstion as well as play HD movies.]

I listen with stereo speakers with mono block amps and would like to continue doing this. I am able to do this because my present TV has a variable out. Does anyone know if the Pioneer has an equivalant out? In their specifications they list a monitor out. Is that the same thing?

[ Dunno, but if your going from the tv to a stereo receiver than I believe you still need to use an HDMI cable in order to access the HD mode and sound of your tv.]

I will most likely opt for the 720p model. I sit approx 9' away. How much, if anything, in your opinion will I be giving up to 1080p on HDTV broadcasts and/or DVD?

[ IMO, if you sit closer than 12' than 1080p is a better option, from what I've read it's after 12' that your eyes can't discern the difference between 720p and 1080p. The source signal still has to be 1080i and your tv will upconvert of down convert to it's native resolution or you can upscale/downscale with your upscale dvd player.]

Is there some sort of affordable outboard device to throw a quasi surround experience? Can I stay with my mono blocks adding this?

[Dunno, maybe a computer soundcard in 5.1 mode.]

I would really appreciate hearing from those of you with some knowledge and/or experience.

Thank you.

Mr Peabody
08-17-2007, 10:58 PM
If your DVD player has "Progressive Scan" and you use component video connection you will get a 480p signal out. You can also use component for HD video. HDMI carry both digital video and audio signals and most DVD or HD disc players will only allow upconverting of standard DVD via the HDMI due to copy protection. I agree that if you are going to replace the DVD player for better rez, go with a HD disc format. The picture is great and the audio improves as well.

I'd say if you are buying new, why not get 1080p. From what I read there isn't much difference between 1080i and 1080p but both are better than 720p. No broadcast will do 1080p. You can only get that good from Blu-ray or HD-DVD. When you look at the HDTV's specs you want the 2nd number to be 1080, (# x 1080). Plasma TV's use odd resolutions in comparison, like 768p is common.

Analog sound from a TV generally isn't that good. You could get an HT receiver with preamp outputs and still use your monoblocks for the main front speakers. Or, if the budget allows, a preamp processor which would require more amps for the center and rear power. A receiver would have that built in but wouldn't be on par with your monoblocks. If adding either of these, you'd want to run your audio from your sources (ie. dvd, satelite/cable box) into the receiver. Only use your TV as a video monitor. I wouldn't get hung up on this HDMI. Just take your video directly to the TV. According to Dolby's website it's very questionable if the HD discs will allow the digital to bypass the internal decoders. Just be sure your receiver has a 5.1 or 7.1 analog audio input which will be the best way to take advantage of the HD audio anyway.

I think Bose and Polk both have speaker systems designed to go with Plasma TV's to create a virtual surround effect but these aren't cheap.

I don't know if I understand your exact set up, but if I do, it's odd that some one would run monoblocks using a TV as the preamp.

DEVO
08-18-2007, 06:59 AM
Every fixed pixel device produced other than the ALiS panel and the DLP are all native #### x 768p. Then they go to #### x 1080p. 720p is a source signal as is 1080i and 1080p.
Now going to the origional question...I would
1. choose the size.
2. I love Pioneer! (it is what I have)
3. upconverting dvd players actually are fine, and are very good values until the war is over.
4. hook up an HDMI straight to tv, send analog audio w/ the HDMI and from all sources, then send audio out to your amps.
5. like Mr. Peabody says...analog sound isn't going to produce dialog very well. Maybe add a Yamaha sound projector for movie night...these are self amplified and pretty straight forward. Here are three to choose from!
http://www.yamaha.com/yec/soundprojectors.html?CTID=5001100&CNTYP=PRODUCT

Mr Peabody
08-18-2007, 08:15 AM
When I was talking about a 1080p TV, I mean one capable of displaying 1080p. A # x 768 won't display 1080p.

Cheap upconverting DVD players usually don't perform very well with the upconversion function, with exception given to the emphamis Oppo 981. Although I tend to lean toward Blu-ray winning the war, the Toshiba HD-DVD is $299.00 with rumors of falling further toward fall. The least expensive BR that I know of is the Samsung BD-P1200 through Amazon.com at $459.00, followed by Sony's s300 at $499.00. The BD-P1200 is lacking in some of the new audio formats but does an incredible job of upconverting standard DVD. The HD disc formats are an upgrade in BOTH audio and video. I guess it just really depends on how much of a videophile you are and how far you actually want to take your audio upgrade.

pixelthis
08-18-2007, 11:51 PM
Mr peabody is mistaken in saying that 1080i is better than 720p, but this is a common misconception, truth is any given progressive format is better than an interlaced format.
Plasmas are nice, but have burn in issues, but only when new, there are a lot of tricks
manufacturers use for this. Also they are heavy, made of glass.
Dont try to mount one yourself, if "couzine ned" put his LCD up with no problem thats because they weigh only 50 lbs or so, a plasma weighs a LOT more.
"Upconverting dvd players dont give extra resolution, but the picture tends to look a
little better, and they are cheap, also a newer player will have HDMI, which is better than componet.
As for sound, Yamaha has something called a "soundbar" that uses sonar to "send"
sounds around the room, it is not an effect, thats where the sound actually comes from!
Use one of these for HT and the monoblocks for music.
FINALLY get a cable HD box or sattelite dish, this is vital for HD, as well as a source
for sound, ignore the tuners on your set, the only decent picture or sound you will get
is digital cable or sat:18:

Mr Peabody
08-19-2007, 09:35 AM
There was a link some one posted in the forums on HD resolution and why there isn't much difference between 1080i & 1080p, it also gave little attention to 720p because both 1080's were better. There is a easily noticeable difference between 480i & 480p but these differences are not as apparent in HD. I thought I saved the link but I can't find it. If I do run across it again, I will post it.

If you are going to call some one wrong, you need to back it up with something. The resolution thing is complex and not even the so called "professionals" seem to be able to agree. So it really depends on who and what material you reference. Logically, you'd think Progressive would always be better but that isn't the fact at this point with HD. The explanation given is way too long and difficult for me to try to reitterate.

Wireworm5
08-19-2007, 10:08 AM
With my new Sony player I can activate 1080p in its dvd menu setup. Otherwise it works at 1080i. Now I played an older movie upscaled to 1080i which exhibits some graininess, but with 1080p the picture is smooth.
Also I dare say it I've copied a few movies using smooth versus sharp resolution and the picture quality comes out as good or better than the original. I mean some of these are so good upscaled I can't imagine true HD as having any improvement over them.
So as far as upscaling is conscerned the picture quality varies considerably from one movie to another, the better filmed the movie the better the picture.

Mr Peabody
08-19-2007, 10:33 AM
Chew on this, Pix

http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/1106gear/

Did he actually say there was no difference?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p#720p_versus_1080i

Uh, did this article actually say 1080i showed more detail and was crisper than 720p, oh my.

You get my point. So can you find anything to the contrary?

jim goulding
08-19-2007, 08:26 PM
I don't mean gone gone. It's been replaced by a new version and the bad news is that the 42" it replaced has sold out. At least it has from Best Buy in Houston. And dig this, they were selling for $1400.00! Heck, man, they're more than that on Ebay. I checked to see if they had just one left in the warehouse for which I would have written a check at that price but I was too late. Bad news, huh Dean_.

I'm thinking 50" Samsung plasma at 768p but I don't know where to find any comparative reviews. Anybody? Does 768p have any practical advantages over 720p?

I sit at 9' to 10' away and the video editor at Home Theater magazine assures readers that you won't see a difference in resolution with 1080p at this distance with anything smaller that 50". Can I get a consensus? Actually, I believe he said 60". Think he means on both on TV broadcasts and DVD?

Samsung specifications say nothing about a variable out so is my plan to go direct to my mono amps from the TV toast? I am not using those amps for anything else and would like to put them to some use. Will "audio out" accomplish the same thing? I didn't see that in the specifications either, come to think of it.

Thanks everyone for your input and Pea in particular for the links. Don't quit on me now.

dean_martin
08-20-2007, 07:44 AM
Jim - there are tons of links to professional reviews at www.ecoustics.com. One thing you might want to search is whether Samsung does better with LCD than with plasma. The last time I checked out Samsung (a couple of years ago), their slimfit tube tvs and DLPs were getting good reviews.

You can search availability online at BestBuy.com, if they still have the discontinued Pioneer model on their website. Type in your zip code and you'll probably get multiple BestBuy locations. It may be worth a day trip to get the exact model you want at the right price. Also, you might try to find a locally owned hometheater/electronics store that carries Pioneer.

Are you using a preamp between your sources and your mono block amps? A preamp should be able to handle the audio out feed from the tv. If you don't have a preamp, then maybe a passive pre/volume control might be what you need. It seems to me that you would want one with a remote and mute function. Creek makes a "passive" preamp with remote volume control. I've also heard of people using attenuators between their source and amp to adjust volume from fixed-level audio outputs. I can't say much more about that, though.

Mr Peabody
08-20-2007, 04:57 PM
Dean, pretty much answered your question. You could also try www.google.com and search with the model number of the Samsung to see what comes up.

What brand are your monoblocks?

SlumpBuster
08-20-2007, 06:01 PM
As for sound, Yamaha has something called a "soundbar" that uses sonar to "send"
sounds around the room, it is not an effect, thats where the sound actually comes from!


WTF!!!! What a maroon! "I think I'll wonder onto the internets today and just make up some random sh!t."

And my amp is nuclear powered, my pre/pro uses a targeting computer, and my speaker towers are some old torpedos!

jim goulding
08-20-2007, 06:44 PM
Kenwood L07M's from back in the day. $300.00 each from Pacific Stereo. 150W each. Drove Acoustat Three's with very short speaker cable.

Any answers to those other questions bout HDTV? Thanks.

Mr Peabody
08-20-2007, 07:43 PM
Kenwood was able to build some nice gear when they wanted to, and those are a good example. They're worth hanging onto in case you ever put a good system together. You'd have to spend quite a bit more money than $600.00 to better them.

I doubt if there is much difference between 768 and 720. As far as a variable audio output, you'd just have to check the feature list, or sometimes websites will give you access to a products owners manual.

PeruvianSkies
08-20-2007, 09:50 PM
Sherwood receivers have the latest in NASA-licensed equipment as well as some of the latest technology regarding infrared and sonar detection systems. The receiver sends out a pulse beacon from each speaker that is connected and that pulse is then transmitted through the receivers receptors and analyzed with high sensitivity fiber-optics and the latest in geo-thermal conductivity in order to ensure the most balanced and coherent sound field. This system is able to measure accurately with both the suns polarity as well as the Earth's natural magnetic pull in order to detect any shifts or anomalies in your soundfield. By doing so you can accurately pin point the exact location with each signal sent from each speaker and the receiver then adapts naturally using heat sensors and micro-sensors to the rooms dimensions as well as the type of furniture that is located in the room and do proper calibration based on what type of flooring, walls, etc etc. It can accurately calibrate to room size, room temperature, as well as geographical location, barometric pressure, and other dynamic seismic shifts.

WARNING:
If you believe anything that was just typed....then you can believe everything that Pixelthis says too!

edit I should also mention that by doing this process you are able to accurately get the 'timber in the voices'.

pixelthis
08-20-2007, 11:16 PM
WTF!!!! What a maroon! "I think I'll wonder onto the internets today and just make up some random sh!t."

And my amp is nuclear powered, my pre/pro uses a targeting computer, and my speaker towers are some old torpedos!
What a moron.
All you have to do is go to yamahas website and check out their new soundbar.
It has fourty small speakers and two larger ones for bass, but a subwoofer is preferred.
IT is base on sonar tecnology, you can take 40 speakers and "beam" a different
program to fourty different people in a room.
The soundbar beams sound to different parts of a room, they bounce off and wind
up in the listening position, giving a true surround experience.
Bose has a three speaker rig, but it uses much less sophisticated "spatial" imaging.
Ihad a 20$ soundcard that did the same thing once, you could hear stuff walking around behind you.
And my receiver has a "phantom " rear center that works quite well.
If Yamaha had a soundbar before I got into this I would have stayed in audio, having a pure audiophile system with a soundbar for surround
As for resolution, Mr peabody there is some disagreement about resolution, I get my info from widescreen review and Joe kane, who knows more about it than most.
Heres a few facts.
On any interlaced format the resolution is cut in half when theres movement.
Most 1080i sets only have 800 or so lines of resolution.
And thats cut is half when theres movement, these are facts.
On a 720 or 768 progressive you get full resolution, not a "con" OF 1080I, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ONLY 540!
A lot said that 1080i wasnt that much better than 480p when it came out, and they were right, the only real advantage was the larger color palete and a few other tecnical features
this is why Joe Kane advocated 720p over 1080i when HD was first getting started,
and his argument was convincing enough that ABC adopted 720p as their standard of choice.
As for 1080p, most of the 1080p sets I have seen are stunning, a combination of highrez and lack of artifacts, certainly better than 1080i, but the difference is more slight than
the difference between 1080i and 768p
Most confuse the resolution of a set with the LINES, both are different animals
But the resolution of progressive formats is a lot closer to the number of lines than interlaced.
This is a complicated subject to be sure, beyoung the format of this forum, but I beleive
I am correct in stating that as a general rule progressive tends to be better,
no interlacing artifacts, etc.
As for peruvian he just enjoys rediculing that which he doesnt understand, whiuch is most everything, besides the nurse in the home probably hasnt changed his diaper yet:crazy:

PeruvianSkies
08-20-2007, 11:21 PM
I have high-class toilet paper that I use...it's called WIDESCREEN REVIEW because that's about all the value that rag has.

pixelthis
08-20-2007, 11:31 PM
Chew on this, Pix

http://www.hometheatermag.com/gearworks/1106gear/

Did he actually say there was no difference?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/720p#720p_versus_1080i

Uh, did this article actually say 1080i showed more detail and was crisper than 720p, oh my.

You get my point. So can you find anything to the contrary?
And mr p, BOTH OF THESE SITES BASICALLY said what I just posted, that 720p is as a general rule better than 1080i.
Now with 1080p you dont get more resolution, because you are just deinterlacing 1080i,
but I beleive the lack of interlacing artifacts is worth the trouble.
My "upconverting" DVD player doesnt add resolution of course, but I beleive the picture is a bit smoother (it will upconvert to 768p, which is the native resolution of my set)
When more true 1080p sources become available, not just deinterlaced 1080i, I beleive you will see a signifigant improvement over most formats
One of the reasons you love your new highdef player Mr p is that your DLP set has a
native resolution of 720p, I imagine the picture is quite good at that resolution

PeruvianSkies
08-21-2007, 01:25 PM
This has to be one of my favorite new threads!

Mr Peabody
08-21-2007, 07:07 PM
PixL, either those links took you somewhere else or your reading comprehension could use some practice.

I don't dispute interlace could possibly show artifacts in action scenes. I didn't see anywhere it said 720p was better than 1080i. You need to pay attention to the article that talks about little or no difference between 1080i and 1080p, where it explains about the 24 frame and 60hz.

pixelthis
08-21-2007, 11:45 PM
PixL, either those links took you somewhere else or your reading comprehension could use some practice.

I don't dispute interlace could possibly show artifacts in action scenes. I didn't see anywhere it said 720p was better than 1080i. You need to pay attention to the article that talks about little or no difference between 1080i and 1080p, where it explains about the 24 frame and 60hz.
Your wikipedia link clearly stated that 720p is better than 1080i, but you can go to any magazine or technical source, most will telll you the same thing.
What do you think the engineers at the ABC networks were thinking when they went
720p?
The native resolution of your set is 720p so you shouldnt be complaining.
As for a sets "refresh rate" that is way out of date, most sets these days are basically
computer monitors, and their resolutions are measured in computer resolutions
(mine is 1366 by 768 with 32 bit color) and the refersh rate is typically 70 MHZ or so.
Computers have almost always had better resolution than Tv but now there is practically no difference, which is why I surf the web on my 37in set.
The resolution and refresh rate make it quite easy to read a webpage
The really exciting thing is that todays 1080p sets can show a 1080p image in what they call "pixel for pixel", when such becomes available it will really be something else:1:

pixelthis
08-21-2007, 11:49 PM
I have high-class toilet paper that I use...it's called WIDESCREEN REVIEW because that's about all the value that rag has.
Not to you probably.
Not enough pictures and too many of them dang words, most with more than four letters!

pixelthis
08-21-2007, 11:54 PM
Another thing, Mr p, DLP, PLASMA, LCD, SXRD (L-COS_) all have native resolutions
that are progressive, even though most media is 1080i
This is because they are computer based, but after converting a 1080i pic to a progressive
format its still better than a 1080i presentation
Dont you think that the world is going progressive for a reason?
Why do you rthink that a 480p piocture is so much better than a 480i?
And what is your DVD player set on?:1:

PeruvianSkies
08-22-2007, 04:07 PM
Not to you probably.
Not enough pictures and too many of them dang words, most with more than four letters!

It's interesting that you are trying to make it sound like I am uneducated when in fact I actually spell words correctly on here, unlike you, and most of them are 4 letter words. So you go on enjoying your TIMBER and Randy Travis on Paradox speakers....speaking of which, where are pictures of your system??? Hmmm.

jim goulding
08-22-2007, 07:26 PM
Fellas, and ladies if any are present- in the big picture, it don't mean s*** anyway but I grant you. it is amusing. God@cosmos.noplace (btw- don't bother with a reply- I'm perpetually out to lunch)

That's your opinion, DAD, I need the advice.

Rich-n-Texas
08-22-2007, 07:42 PM
Sherwood receivers have the latest in NASA-licensed equipment as well as some of the latest technology regarding infrared and sonar detection systems. The receiver sends out a pulse beacon from each speaker that is connected and that pulse is then transmitted through the receivers receptors and analyzed with high sensitivity fiber-optics and the latest in geo-thermal conductivity in order to ensure the most balanced and coherent sound field. This system is able to measure accurately with both the suns polarity as well as the Earth's natural magnetic pull in order to detect any shifts or anomalies in your soundfield. By doing so you can accurately pin point the exact location with each signal sent from each speaker and the receiver then adapts naturally using heat sensors and micro-sensors to the rooms dimensions as well as the type of furniture that is located in the room and do proper calibration based on what type of flooring, walls, etc etc. It can accurately calibrate to room size, room temperature, as well as geographical location, barometric pressure, and other dynamic seismic shifts.
How much? I want one. Even if I have to wear a bio-hazard suit while I'm using it, I don't care, I want one. Pix, if you see one of these the next time you're at Wal-Mart, let PS know and he'll quote you so I can see if it's a go...

Mr Peabody
08-22-2007, 08:12 PM
I read the Wikipedia article again and NO WHERE does is say "720p is better". Upon further research of more articles, I fall back to one of my original posts here where I said, "it depends on which article you read". I found some that say 720p is better and some claiming 1080i is better and some that said it doesn't make a difference. One of the most fascinating articles was written by a MIT professor who predicted in this 1998 article that interlace technology was obsolete. Well we know that's not true yet but the article explained why and it's a lot like the HD disc war or any other technology war, one group does it this way and another does it that way and no one wants to concede. The bottom line is we make our choices and have to live with them. This weekend when I have the time I am going to compare some 720p and 1080i to see if I can tell any difference. My Samsung will allow me to switch the output resolution. One consistency is most articles do hold that there are artifacts introduced by interlacing. But networks such as Discovery HD use 1080i, so I am inclined to believe that the 1080i having more detail is true. This debate was going on long before we were aware of HDTV and that's why there is no standard resolution, today.

Pix you and P Sky need to have a cage match.

PeruvianSkies
08-22-2007, 08:33 PM
I read the Wikipedia article again and NO WHERE does is say "720p is better". Upon further research of more articles, I fall back to one of my original posts here where I said, "it depends on which article you read". I found some that say 720p is better and some claiming 1080i is better and some that said it doesn't make a difference. One of the most fascinating articles was written by a MIT professor who predicted in this 1998 article that interlace technology was obsolete. Well we know that's not true yet but the article explained why and it's a lot like the HD disc war or any other technology war, one group does it this way and another does it that way and no one wants to concede. The bottom line is we make our choices and have to live with them. This weekend when I have the time I am going to compare some 720p and 1080i to see if I can tell any difference. My Samsung will allow me to switch the output resolution. One consistency is most articles do hold that there are artifacts introduced by interlacing. But networks such as Discovery HD use 1080i, so I am inclined to believe that the 1080i having more detail is true. This debate was going on long before we were aware of HDTV and that's why there is no standard resolution, today.

Pix you and P Sky need to have a cage match.

I would LOVE a cage match...anytime, anywhere. I said that on another thread somewhere. I hope he is a good challenge because I have a few years worth of Muay Thai training.

SlumpBuster
08-23-2007, 08:28 AM
a few years worth of Muay Thai training.


I think I've been to that restaurant. They have good Gang Dang.

Mr Peabody
08-23-2007, 07:06 PM
A Muay Thai would be nice but I'm more of a beer man myself. Those umbrella drinks are for women and panzies.

AR used to have a forum called Cage Match but I'm not sure if it's still here or not. If it is, and you all end up there, be sure to let us know so we can go heckel.

jim goulding
08-24-2007, 05:14 PM
I think what I've gathered is that 720p or 768p is more desirable that 1080i. For me, that is. And that true 1080 resolution, if that's the right word, can only be seen in the present tense on a 1080 TV using DVD. HD or BluRay DVD, that is, not regular DVD.

As TV broadcast will be at 1080 in the future, I think, it seems to me that a fool would do better if he had a 1080p set from the git. Except that if you are sitting further away that 9' and using a screen size of 50" or less, in which case it don't make a f*** cause the difference between the two is imperceptible to the naked eye. That about right? So it says in Home & Theater magazine and no one contridicted that, I don't believe.

Upsampling DVD players have merit. Do they upsample to 720? More, or less? And that the newer HDMI connections are the thing to use for both video and audio regardless.

See, I want to buy a 42" 720p because of the price if I'm not leaving any practical resolution on the table. My significant other prefers the larger screen 50". At that point I start to worry bout the difference in p's.

Anybody (everybody)- If you think I've got the basics, or if you think I still need the know a bit more about any of the above, about DVD upsampling or whatever, then come back ten-four and kindly give me a wrap.

Thanks for everyone's participation. It's been emotional. Jim

Mr Peabody
08-24-2007, 08:03 PM
If you are going to use a HT receiver and surround sound, HDMI is not the best. Use the typical Toslink or coaxial digital connection or with HD disc players use multichannel analog, or one of the former mentioned. You can read on Dolby labs website, the HDMI interfacing and compatibility with other gear could be a real issue. HDMI video is the only digital video connection and the only video connection that will allow upsampling generally. This is due to copy protection. Component vs HDMI for picture quality is something you just have to try. With component there is a lot of digital to analog conversion and back but with HDMI there could be artifacts caused by re-clocking. I personally think either of these criticisms would be very difficult to detect with the naked eye. You should usually try to buy good quality cables but be careful with HDMI, the cables that are real heavy are found to sometimes keep the connectors from staying in firmly.

From the various articles I've read on resolution trying to understand it, 720p is better for fast motion but 1080i has a bit better detail on stills. HD discovery uses 1080i. ESPN uses 720p.

If I was buying new today, as you are, I'd get a 1080p capable set.

Upsampling is pretty good done right but to do it right costs money. The Toshiba HD-DVD player which is as cheap as any decent DVD player that may, or may not, have good upsampling, uses a Radeon chip which provides great quality upsampling for standard DVD. The Oppo 981 which is almost legendary for being a budget upsampler that is a giant killer if you want to stay away from the HD-discs until something is settled. In a upsampling of standard DVD shoot out the Samsung BD-P1200 Blu-ray was said to be one of the best at any price. You can get this off Amazon for $459.00. The only draw back is it will not offer the all the latest HD audio formats, but neither will just a SD player with upsampling.

Look if your wife wants a 50" why argue, are you crazy.

You might want to read some articles at www.ezinearticles.com or www.greathometheater.com. There are a lot of sites and unfortunately they don't always agree. You also have to be careful when they were written. Hope some of this helps.

jim goulding
08-25-2007, 12:30 AM
I'm gonna look into that Osso (now. I may not have spelled that right but I haven't figured out how to go back to the post without losing this screen, that and I'm about to finish my third glass of red). Besides, this is a chance to use a favorite quote . . "if that many people like it, it can't be worth a s***!.

Thanks Pea, genuinely, and good nite.

pixelthis
08-25-2007, 12:44 AM
[QUOTE=Mr Peabody]I read the Wikipedia article again and NO WHERE does is say "720p is better". Upon further research of more articles, I fall back to one of my original posts here where I said, "it depends on which article you read". I found some that say 720p is better and some claiming 1080i is better and some that said it doesn't make a difference. One of the most fascinating articles was written by a MIT professor who predicted in this 1998 article that interlace technology was obsolete. Well we know that's not true yet but the article explained why and it's a lot like the HD disc war or any other technology war, one group does it this way and another does it that way and no one wants to concede. The bottom line is we make our choices and have to live with them. This weekend when I have the time I am going to compare some 720p and 1080i to see if I can tell any difference. My Samsung will allow me to switch the output resolution. One consistency is most articles do hold that there are artifacts introduced by interlacing. But networks such as Discovery HD use 1080i, so I am inclined to believe that the 1080i having more detail is true. This debate was going on long before we were aware of HDTV and that's why there is no standard resolution, today.
the first paragraph in the wikipedia article states that "720p provides the highest temporal
resolution available under the atsc format"
At the start of hdtv computer types wanted progressive because of the lack of flicker,
computers use progressive resolutions because the flicker of an interlaced format
makes it hard to read text
http://alvyray.com/default.htm
This site is from ten years ago but the info was sound.
The person who put the site up was a computer type, they wanted 480p as the main format! But a lot of good explaining on this site.
Basically these days it doesnt matter what a broadcaster does, 1080i, 720p, because your
set is going to convert it to its native resolution, which is increasingly a progressive format.
Eventually most broadcast formats will be 1080i because that is easiest to "upconvert"
or deinterlace to 1080p, and most sets will be 1080p
About the only display device left that is interlaced is the CRT,
AND THATS FOR A GOOD REASON.
Once you get used to flicker free tv its hard to go back to a interlaced picture:18:

jim goulding
08-25-2007, 12:51 AM
You seem like a fellow with fine sensibilities and a wee bit of dram, er, I mean knowledge. How about visiting my site and telling me what you think of the language and the background music (I'm not trying to shill on this site anybody, eat a dick, I'm just soliciting an opinion from this man). If you gotta mind to, Pea. If you're cool with that. I'm cool with you, Pixel, too. What's a visio? That a projector?

Pea, on second theought, forget about the language. How about the music? It's different on the back page. Good nite, really.

Jim.

Mr Peabody
08-25-2007, 08:04 AM
What site? I'd be glad too. Where is it?

GMichael
08-25-2007, 08:36 AM
What a moron.
All you have to do is go to yamahas website and check out their new soundbar.
It has fourty small speakers and two larger ones for bass, but a subwoofer is preferred.
IT is base on sonar tecnology, you can take 40 speakers and "beam" a different
program to fourty different people in a room.
The soundbar beams sound to different parts of a room, they bounce off and wind
up in the listening position, giving a true surround experience.
Bose has a three speaker rig, but it uses much less sophisticated "spatial" imaging.
Ihad a 20$ soundcard that did the same thing once, you could hear stuff walking around behind you.
And my receiver has a "phantom " rear center that works quite well.
If Yamaha had a soundbar before I got into this I would have stayed in audio, having a pure audiophile system with a soundbar for surround
As for resolution, Mr peabody there is some disagreement about resolution, I get my info from widescreen review and Joe kane, who knows more about it than most.
Heres a few facts.
On any interlaced format the resolution is cut in half when theres movement.
Most 1080i sets only have 800 or so lines of resolution.
And thats cut is half when theres movement, these are facts.
On a 720 or 768 progressive you get full resolution, not a "con" OF 1080I, WHICH IS ACTUALLY ONLY 540!
A lot said that 1080i wasnt that much better than 480p when it came out, and they were right, the only real advantage was the larger color palete and a few other tecnical features
this is why Joe Kane advocated 720p over 1080i when HD was first getting started,
and his argument was convincing enough that ABC adopted 720p as their standard of choice.
As for 1080p, most of the 1080p sets I have seen are stunning, a combination of highrez and lack of artifacts, certainly better than 1080i, but the difference is more slight than
the difference between 1080i and 768p
Most confuse the resolution of a set with the LINES, both are different animals
But the resolution of progressive formats is a lot closer to the number of lines than interlaced.
This is a complicated subject to be sure, beyoung the format of this forum, but I beleive
I am correct in stating that as a general rule progressive tends to be better,
no interlacing artifacts, etc.
As for peruvian he just enjoys rediculing that which he doesnt understand, whiuch is most everything, besides the nurse in the home probably hasnt changed his diaper yet:crazy:

These are not all that new. Yamaha has had these out for 2 years in one model or another. Also, the sound comes from the speakers in front of you. It may sound likes it's coming from all around you due to reflections. There was a very nice write up on these a couple years back on AH. Seems they don't work so well in rooms that aren't rectangular, or don't have bare ars walls.

720p is nicer than 1080i when watching sports or anything with a lot of action. Otherwise, 1080i has a better picture. When there's a lot of fast movement 1080i becomes more like 540p. When the movement is slower, 1080i can be as nice as 1080p.

OP, I picked out the Samsung 50 Plasma HP-T5054 for my dad. Their rep is not as good as Pioneer or Panasonic, but it did let him get the 50 inches he wanted under the $2k he was willing to spend. It is heavier, 98 ponds instead of 50 for the LCD. No burn in problems with this model though. Even the glare problem has been taken care of. Check out the reviews on many sites through Google. Plasma has better color and black levels than LCD. That was what was importaint to my dad. The drawbacks were weight, burn in, glare and half life. All of which, except the weight, have been taken care of with this model. (60,000 hrs expected) There was a Panasonic that was just as nice but had speakers on the side. That made it too wide for Pops. Also, contrast on the Panasonic was 10,000/1 instead of 15,000/1. For whatever that's worth. Specs can be fudged by any manufacturer.

jim goulding
08-25-2007, 11:01 AM
I must be crazy, logging on here was the second thing I did. Pix and G, I know about the Yamaha sound bar and that it needs like dimensions in a room to do it's thing. Polk has something like this but gets it's result by matrixing the channels or something. I imagine both are pretty cool if your have room restraints or don't want the clutter of extra speakers and wire. The Dolby thing on my present set doesn't seem to do much.

I got the speakers already and like em. You know the Mirage omnisats? Well, before they came out Mirage had a model with a 6.5" mid/bass pointed upwards under the tweeter likewise pointed upward. I bought a close out pair for less that half of retail. They sound horrendous in my audio system- too thin and metallic above the mid bass- but with my tele, they are A OK. One of the reasons might be they are nearer a back wall, dunno.

Thanks for the word on the Samsung 50", G. It's one of the sets I'm lookin at. At 720p, it's pretty affordable, huh.

Pea- My site is a commercial site. Settle down everyone, I won't do this again, You can reply to me privately if you prefer, Pea: diffractionbegone/dot/com. I like the open exchange of the forum. And this has been a pretty good one. Now, I think I need a bowl of menudo (at lease an aspirin). Cheers.

Mr Peabody
08-25-2007, 09:05 PM
Pix, I put in Fantastic Four on Blu-ray and chose the scene where they are snow boarding and the guy flames up. I thought an action scene would best show 720p potential. I had my wife and daughter watch with me. They don't know anything about resolution or which should be better. I just played the sceen first at 1080i because that was where the unit was already set and then again outputting 720p. I really didn't expect much difference. The 1080i output was better. 1080i was brighter and details like the ripples in the snow were easier to see. I suspect despite my TV's #x# that it may be 1080i native. That's the only way I can explain such a difference. I can speculate all night but I'm just not sure why the 1080i was so much better but the outcome is undeniable. I put it in 1080p just to see what would happen, I got a screen that said, "your TV does not support this setting". This type of test would be the best thing for anyone to do in order to be sure they are getting the best picture with their particular set up. The variations could be why no one seems to be able to agree on which resolution is better.

pixelthis
08-26-2007, 01:10 AM
Pix, I put in Fantastic Four on Blu-ray and chose the scene where they are snow boarding and the guy flames up. I thought an action scene would best show 720p potential. I had my wife and daughter watch with me. They don't know anything about resolution or which should be better. I just played the sceen first at 1080i because that was where the unit was already set and then again outputting 720p. I really didn't expect much difference. The 1080i output was better. 1080i was brighter and details like the ripples in the snow were easier to see. I suspect despite my TV's #x# that it may be 1080i native. That's the only way I can explain such a difference. I can speculate all night but I'm just not sure why the 1080i was so much better but the outcome is undeniable. I put it in 1080p just to see what would happen, I got a screen that said, "your TV does not support this setting". This type of test would be the best thing for anyone to do in order to be sure they are getting the best picture with their particular set up. The variations could be why no one seems to be able to agree on which resolution is better.


Most sets wont take a 1080p signal, even the 1080p ones! They upconvert to 1080p.
You're set might seem better at 1080i, but thats probably because it was designed
to handle 1080i, since the designers thought that was the format that was going to be most popular.
But you havta understand, no matter what goes in, 720P comes out.
DLP is a progressive format only type device, it doesn't do interlaced.
Not at all, any interlaced that goes into it will come out progressive.
If you ever get another set, get a 1080p that accepts a 1080p signal, displays it
"pixel for pixel". This will give you a true 2 MILLION PIXEL display when showing a 1080p signal like the one on your player, over twice as sharp as what you're watching now!
Blow ya away, guarenteeee it, yesirebob:1:

timmre
08-29-2007, 05:28 AM
I got a 46" 1080P LCD from Circuit City about a month ago. The set is actually branded Polariod, I think it must be a new product line for them. I didn't know they made TVs at all.

The reason I'm posting is because there was an unadvertised special that I happened upon and I got the TV for $1299. I had to order it online but I was able to drive to the store and pick it up so I didn't have to pay for shipping.

Before I ordered I went to the store and compared it from 5 ft away with the samsung and sony bravia with a blueray source hooked up to them and the image quality was every bit as good. Don't give the contrast number any weight in your decision making as manufacturers do all sorts of things to fudge the number that you would never do in a real-life setting.

I picked an LCD over plasma because I do play some Nintendo Wii and other games and am afraid of burn-in on a plasma. These fears may be unfounded.

I think anyone buying a new set should opt for the 1080p if you plan on keeping the set for a few years. I don't have blueray or hd-dvd yet as I'm waiting for the prices to come down a bit and I don't want to end up with a betamax. My guess is by Christmas '08 there will be a run on the next gen video players with prices under $200.

pixelthis
08-30-2007, 12:02 AM
I got a 46" 1080P LCD from Circuit City about a month ago. The set is actually branded Polariod, I think it must be a new product line for them. I didn't know they made TVs at all.

The reason I'm posting is because there was an unadvertised special that I happened upon and I got the TV for $1299. I had to order it online but I was able to drive to the store and pick it up so I didn't have to pay for shipping.

Before I ordered I went to the store and compared it from 5 ft away with the samsung and sony bravia with a blueray source hooked up to them and the image quality was every bit as good. Don't give the contrast number any weight in your decision making as manufacturers do all sorts of things to fudge the number that you would never do in a real-life setting.

I picked an LCD over plasma because I do play some Nintendo Wii and other games and am afraid of burn-in on a plasma. These fears may be unfounded.

I think anyone buying a new set should opt for the 1080p if you plan on keeping the set for a few years. I don't have blueray or hd-dvd yet as I'm waiting for the prices to come down a bit and I don't want to end up with a betamax. My guess is by Christmas '08 there will be a run on the next gen video players with prices under $200.

Burn in is a problem with Plasma, but most manufacturers claim to have fixed it.
And "polaroid" has nothing to do with the company Edward land founded.
Westinghouse, polaroid, magnavox, all leased out their brand names to "Asian tigers"
(some chinese) in order to make a few bucks, and the asian tigers thought american consumers would go for a "polaroid" before they would go for a weird sounding (to Americans) asian name
Marketers love to buy an established brand name, makes their job a lot easier.
And thats what American industry has become, a shell, with established brands on
the products of companies that have nothing to do with the original:skep: