Digital TV without Progressive Scan?

[Breezer88888]

My Sony 36KV310 was the best digital flat screen TV without going HD almost 2 years ago. But the best picture production is at 480 interlaced. I've confirmed with Sony that Progressive Scan DVD players would mean nothing to my TV. I refuse to be led to believe that I did not pay attention to this huge detail. Then again I was pretty jazzed up by the TV's great picture and sound at the time. So, are all non-HD TVs not capable of Progressive Scan? Why are there so many progressive scan DVD players out there? Anyone else frustrated? Don't even get me started on upconversion...

[edtyct]

A TV must be digital to accept a progressive signal, but it doesn't technically have to be HD. Enhanced-definition plasmas and LCDs, which have to downscale HD programming to their native 480p resolution, are tailor-made for progressive-scan DVD players. I'm not aware of any tube TVs that were ever capable of 480p but not 1080i (interlaced), which is HD. The upper limit of an analog CRT (yours?) is 480i, which is incompatible with progressive scanning. ("Flat screen" is not synomymous with "digital."). The reason why progressive-scan DVD players now dominate the market, from top to bottom, is twofold: (1) the technology is no longer new and expensive, and (2) enhanced-definition and high-definition TVs now rule the world. Those who have analog TVs can still use these DVD players; they just have to run them as interlaced. By the way, a DVD player's progressive scanning isn't always an improvement over the interlaced option. Sometimes, though not often, the display device does a better job of de-interlacing the signal than the DVD player at hand.

Ed

[Breezer88888]

Hi Ed,
Thanks for the quick response. I figured as much, but glad to have your confirmation of this. Another question, and I doubt if it deserves a fresh post out there b/c it has to do with video tape performance. Do you know about JVC's Progressive VHS? In vcr/dvd combo players, and in their new dvd recorder combo, it passes the video tape signal thru the component video connection for a "progressive" transmittal. I like the theory of having the cleanest transmission, but as you know, my TV does not support 480p and this might be a waste of money for me. Also, I suspect JVC is probably using the term Progressive loosely when they refer to tape performance, but if you know this product, I'd like your opinion.
Thanks
Breezer

[edtyct]

Breezer,

I've heard of these progressive-scan VHS/DVD players, but never had reason to try one. Although they are undoubtedly a convenience for people who are committed to both tape and DVD video, I personally wouldn't jump to buy one solely on the basis of the progressive, component VHS capability. VHS tape is by nature an interlaced format, unlike DVD. Any conversion of a low-resolution VHS signal to 480p could be fraught with visible disturbances that might well send someone with a digital TV back to interlaced in a hurry. To me, it seems like a gimmick. If the progressive DVD section were not already included in the unit, the VHS section would have no reason to go progressive. IMO, given your current TV, although the combination of VHS and DVD might be a genuine convenience for you, the progressive feature for DVD would be an obvious waste, and the VHS progressive feature might not be of much value even if your TV were digital. JVC may not be using the term "progressive" loosely when linking it with VHS, but any claim of a benefit beyond bread-and-butter-utility ought to be taken with a grain of salt. Also, be forewarned: If you are contemplating one of these decks to use with a future digital TV, I have it in my head that they do not, at this point, include 2:3 pulldown, which is the proper manner of deinterlacing film content on DVD with minimal artifacts (some versions being better than others).

Ed

[Breezer88888]

Hi Ed,

Good post. I've come across some of your posts to other people and I appreciate the informative and balanced writing style. I am now 95% sure that I will seek out JVC's discontinued SVHS/DVD combo which has an S-Video in and out connection. Sounds like SVHS will serve me better than Progressive VHS. I'll save my component video cables for a near future upgrade to HD.

Thanks again,
Breezer

[edtyct]

Breezer,

Seems like a good move. But, just so there's no misunderstanding, a component feed from a DVD player need not be progressive. In other words, an interlaced component signal works on an analog TV, and it is an improvement over S-video and composite. But even if progressive scanning on the JVC can be disabled through component, I still think that the deck is overkill for you at this point. When you do upgrade to HDTV, your options will legitimately increase, and you'll probably have plenty of opportunities to indulge yourself in higher technology. But now probably isn't the right time, and the JVC probably isn't the right excuse. By the way, thanks for the kind words.

Ed

[s dog]

Breezer,

Seems like a good move. But, just so there's no misunderstanding, a component feed from a DVD player need not be progressive. In other words, an interlaced component signal works on an analog TV, and it is an improvement over S-video and composite. But even if progressive scanning on the JVC can be disabled through component, I still think that the deck is overkill for you at this point. When you do upgrade to HDTV, your options will legitimately increase, and you'll probably have plenty of opportunities to indulge yourself in higher technology. But now probably isn't the right time, and the JVC probably isn't the right excuse. By the way, thanks for the kind words.

Ed I have a 4 year old 50'' analog toshiba tv i moved upstairs to the bedroom when i got my new HD tv . I hooked a dvd- vhs combo i got from wal-mart that i paid $99.00 for . I hooked it up to the analog toshiba with component cables and the picture looked alot better than the s-video.