I am about to commit and have a few questions

[PeruvianSkies]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

a few years worth of Muay Thai training.

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

[Mr Peabody]

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]

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]

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]

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]

[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

[jim goulding]

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]

What site? I'd be glad too. Where is it?

[GMichael]

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

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]

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]

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]

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

[timmre]

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]

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