I just had a question about the runco dtv-947 my parents have one in the home theater room they built 5 or 6 years ago and i was just doing some research on whether or not they should upgrade...

My question is since under those cross reference specs it says the runco can do a max resolution of 1280x1024p and there scaler that came with it says it output 960x540p would it be worth just upgrading the scaler and then u could get true hd-dvds or blu ray showing on it???

I know back when they purchased it was one of the best crts on the market i'm just not quit sure how the if the need a new scaler or a newer projector to enjoy the new hd-dvd or blu-ray formats... thanks...

no one?

You don't say what kind of scaler they have.

If it has a "pass-through" option, there is the possibility that you could simply connect the HD DVD or BluRay player to it and output through the "pass-through" connections. The scaler would then be acting as a transcoder, but at no extra expense to you or them.

If the scaler came with it 6 years ago, it's likely that it accepts only 480i input. Bypass the scaler (with an external switcher if necessary) and just view HD-DVD/BR directly. You (or someone) will need to do another setup on the Runco, with a memory for HD sources.

- Tim

yea it just has the scaler that came with it... which looks like it has a pass through vga type connection... so i guess u could hook up the hd dvd player or blu ray to this???

i read somewhere that this projector has a max resolution of 1280x1024p so i was just wondering what resolution u would output to it from a hd dvd or blu ray and then when u go through pass thru would the projector just scale a 720p or 1080i image to its native resolution??

thanks for all the help

Hi
The DTV 947 is essentially a Barco Cine 7,a nice ES projector.I've installed 4 of these,2 have Lumagens set to 600p,1 has a Runco PFP 7 set to 600p,and the other is using its internal scaler.720p is too soft for this projector,it seems to like frequencies around 40khz,and although I haven't tried it as yet,1080i would seem ideal for this PJ,for HD.If it were me,I,d buy a Lumagen HDQ,(or other suitable scaler),set to 600p or 1080i out,and enjoy.No need to toss this PJ any time soon.
Cheer's Steve.

Steve: He's already got a scaler (probably some Runco one) to upscale to 540p.

I'd just do as Tim mentioned: That is hook up the BR/HD-DVD player directly runnning 1080i. No scaler needed. You may need a switcher though.

Kal

I have a Runco 947. I have been using HD sources at 720p. I still use the Runco video processor set at 540p for regular DVDs. I had my Runco tech recalibrated the machine last summer and it still looks great. I don’t see a need to upgrade at this time. My Runco tech recommended 720p over 1080i. There are sight scan lines visible using Direct TV at 1080i. I I know there is a lot of debate about 720p v. 1080i. But on my Runco 947 the 720p looks better with no scan lines. I am using the Toshiba HD DVD A1 component to a MOOME external box. This goes component to VGA. I have set the Toshiba to 720p. I am also using a Direct TV TIVO HDMI out to DVI cable into the DVI in on the MOME box. I have also set the Direct TV to 720p. The Toshiba firmware 2.0 has some black crush on the HDMI output so component is better.

So you can us a HDM to DVI/VGA cable but you might want a component transcoder to go component to VGA. This might be a cheaper alternative than another video processor. Try both 720p and 1080i. Have a good tech calibrate the machine and it will look great, then you can see which is better.

Kal,I know he's already got a scaler(probably a runco),but thats probably half the reason he thinks he needs to upgrade .The scaler he is running is the weak link IMO.Sure he could just run HD DVD through the passthrough at 1080i,and this would be the cheapest option.But if he upgraded his scaler,he could make all the other sources look so much better and also have the luxury of plugging multiple sources into the one scaler ie:HD DVD,Blu ray,PS3,X box 360,VCR,Sat,LD,DVD,Cable etc.His runco only has 4 inputs including DB15 passthrough.
Just as an aside,I tried a HD-A1(output 1080i) at home at Xmas time on my Runco 930(Nec 6pg xtra)through Lumagen HDP-pro component inputs.I ran it at 1080i 72hz and 720p 60hz.I had a dozen movie titles to look at,and after many hours comparing the 2 resolutions and comparing SD DVD titles to their HD DVD counterparts,I came away with the opinion that 720p looked better(which is what I run my PJ at) than 1080i,IMO,and that SD DVD is not too bad when put through the right scaler.For me,with the Lumagen,I'll not be running out to buy HD any time soon.The picture is certainly sharper,clearer by a whisker,but the sound is garbage.I didn't take any xtra away from the viewing experience with HD than what I do with SD.Once the format wars are over and we get some decent players,this may change.
So,to answer the question,does he need to upgrade.No he doesn't need to upgrade the projector.Yes he does need to upgrade his scaler.
Cheer's Steve.

If it has p16 tubes and works as well as my 708s barco version (the barco it's based on, and I believe it does have p16's) It'll even run 1080p. Mine does and I use 1080p for a lot of games where a slight bit if softness works to my advantage. When I say soft I don't mean anything that looks bad or blurry or out of focus. It's just to the point where maybe you would prefer that to the 1080i visible scanlines or scaling everything to 720p. It's completely watchable at 1080p. 720p is really easy compared to 1080p and certainly no problem.

The only reason to replace it would be if it has had a lot of hours put on it to where the tubes are visibly worn. It accepts component directly so yes all you would need is a switcher. Check the number of hours in the service part of the setup screen and shine a flashlight into the green lens to look for any visible brown wear on the tube face. If they haven't used it much or on too big of a screen it could still be pristine.

It rivals and in some ways even beats some 8" EM focus machines, it's that good.

Troy

Dwien,You need to upgrade your scaler too.The 720p output on the Toshiba is inferior compared to 720p fom the lumagen after the 1080i signal from the Toshiba has been deinterlaced and reprocessed,thats a fact.I've tried 720p on your PJ,and I think if it was EM focus you might just get away with it,but its not,so thats why 600p looks best.Even on the 6pg xtra,going from 720p to 768p yeilds a noticebly softer picture.It's like you guy's have a high performance V8 running on race gas,but feeding it through the wrong carb,(scaler being the carb).
Cheer's Steve.

Just as an aside,I tried a HD-A1(output 1080i) at home at Xmas time on my Runco 930(Nec 6pg xtra)through Lumagen HDP-pro component inputs.I ran it at 1080i 72hz and 720p 60hz.I had a dozen movie titles to look at,and after many hours comparing the 2 resolutions and comparing SD DVD titles to their HD DVD counterparts,I came away with the opinion that 720p looked better(which is what I run my PJ at) than 1080i,IMO,and that SD DVD is not too bad when put through the right scaler.For me,with the Lumagen,I'll not be running out to buy HD any time soon.The picture is certainly sharper,clearer by a whisker,but the sound is garbage.I didn't take any xtra away from the viewing experience with HD than what I do with SD.Once the format wars are over and we get some decent players,this may change.Sorry Steve - we're going to have to disagree on this one.

HD-DVD in it's native 1080i signal should on most discs always look much better than the equivalent SD-DVD running at whatever rez you like unless: (a) you're sitting very far back, or (b) the projector isn't able to resolve much more than 480p to begin with or is poorly set up.

I'm confused as to why you'd mention that the sound (on HD discs) is garbage compared to SD-DVD. The HD discs have a higher bit rate and some even have lossless (uncompressed) audio. Everybody I've talked to and reviews I've read indicate the opposite.

Now there's a range of good vs. bad HD discs - very true. Some HD discs (both BR and HD-DVD) don't look that great and aren't that much of step up from SD-DVD due to poor mastering.

What HD-DVD's did you try?

Kal

P.S. I don't have HD-DVD myself. Just SD-DVD scaled up via HTPC to 720p/72Hz. Looks wonderful, but when I compare to my 1080i feed from my HD-PVR, the difference in picture information is often mind-boggling. Projector's a nearly new Zenith 1200 (Barco Cine 8 Onyx).

P.P.S. You mention 600p and 720p as the perfect rez's... make sure to indicate if you mean on a 4x3 raster or 16x9 as that makes a world of resolving difference too. Ie: Someone with a 4x3 screen may just see scanlines at 720p and therefore may have to back down to 600p or even 480p on a 16x9 screen. Conversely, if 720p gives you *just* visible scanlines on a 16x9 screen, you'll have to likely go up to 800-960p if you switch to a 4x3 screen.

I've seen quite a few NEC PG's and have been always been able to coax scanlines out of them at 720p on a 16x9 screen. To me that's the sweetspot. Correct astig/beam spot shaping is required.

Just as an aside,I tried a HD-A1(output 1080i) at home at Xmas time on my Runco 930(Nec 6pg xtra)through Lumagen HDP-pro component inputs.I ran it at 1080i 72hz and 720p 60hz.

This is your problem. You cannot input analog into a scaler without losing resolution--A/D conversions are far from perfect. So, by doing this, you are automatically downgrading your HD. You really need to use the digital connection to the scaler to get the best performance. If you did this, I bet you would like 1080i/72 or 1080i/96 better.

Another test you could do, get a good transcoder that does it all in the analog domain (for instance Kim's) and compare HD DVDs at 1080i/60 transcoded in the analog domain to 1080i and 720p from the lumagen. It will look better.

I came away with the opinion that 720p looked better(which is what I run my PJ at) than 1080i,IMO,and that SD DVD is not too bad when put through the right scaler.For me,with the Lumagen,I'll not be running out to buy HD any time soon.The picture is certainly sharper,clearer by a whisker,but the sound is garbage.I didn't take any xtra away from the viewing experience with HD than what I do with SD.

Your experience is WAAAAAAAY different that every other person I've talked to with decent equipment. The only time I've seen HD DVDs not look much better is if you ouput 720p from a HD-A1 or HD-XA1 with firmware prior to 2.0. This firmware had a known scaling issue outputting HD at 720p.

I've compared SD DVDs upscaled via a Lumagen to HD DVDs straight out of the HD-A1. The HD DVDs are very clearly superior. In fact, my wife can reliably tell which is the upscaled SD DVD and which is the HD DVD.

Something is wrong in your chain (for instance PJ not well set up), or it is the problem I outlined above, if you don't see a pretty big difference especially on a CRT. SD DVDs should be noticeably softer.

As for the sound, I have no idea what you are talking about. Most HD DVDs have dolby digital plus which is higher bit rate than DD on the SD DVDs. Further, some have TrueHD tracks and once you've heard one of those, there is no going back. It blows away DD or DTS!

Dave

I have a Runco 947. I have been using HD sources at 720p. I still use the Runco video processor set at 540p for regular DVDs. I had my Runco tech recalibrated the machine last summer and it still looks great. I don’t see a need to upgrade at this time. My Runco tech recommended 720p over 1080i. There are sight scan lines visible using Direct TV at 1080i. I I know there is a lot of debate about 720p v. 1080i. But on my Runco 947 the 720p looks better with no scan lines. I am using the Toshiba HD DVD A1 component to a MOOME external box. This goes component to VGA. I have set the Toshiba to 720p. I am also using a Direct TV TIVO HDMI out to DVI cable into the DVI in on the MOME box. I have also set the Direct TV to 720p.

You should try optimizing your spot shape for 1080i. If when doing your astig, you make the spots elliptical with a height to width ratio of about 1.33:1, the appearance of scan lines on 1080i content will diminish and you will increase your horizontal resolution.

the problem with scaling to 720p is most of the broadcast stations are 1080i, therefore, you are using the bad scaler (which just scaled each 540p field to 720p) in the DirecTV box. 1080i should look much better. The same with HD DVDs.

If you can afford a scaler, a Lumagen HDP can output 1080i/96 for film and 1080i/90 for video. This will also diminish the appearance of scan lines due to the higher refresh.

Dave

Kal,Yes all resolutions I referred to were on a 16:9 screen,sorry if there was confusion.

I do a lot of reading on the forums but not a lot of posting.If you search you can usually get the right answer,and my theory is,What is understood does not need to be discussed.

I posted here because I have worked on the Runco947 and Barco Cine7,and I know what makes them look good.The purpose, I believe,with these forums is to get the best possible picture and sound with the equipment you have and are able to afford.Each projector has it's sweet spot to be able to look the best it can,this is something that is understood and no amount of experimenting is going to change it .eg: running 1080p,7" ES PJ,even prescription glasses won't fix that mess and your'e even running the risk of damaging the projector,this is understood.

I can't comment on your 8" PJ Kal,but I bet you have searched for the best resolution for your PJ and tried many,but there is a consensus as to what works best and I bet that's the one your'e running.

Kal I tried King Kong,U571,Training day,Troy,Riddick,Charlie Chocalate and a few others.You are right,they aren't all reference quality,King Kong was superb as was Training day,The others were OK.When I was watching King Kong I had the SD version synced for comparison,As I said HD picture was gorgeous but I ended up watching the rest of the movie in SD because the sound was so much better.

Now on to the sound,YEHAA,I've posted on sound quality before between different DVD players,I even wanted to modify one (RP91) to improve sound quality.Yes there is a difference in sound quality between players when outputting SPDIF 5.1.That's a fact.I don't want to hear from anyone who says he can't hear a difference when trying a Meridian G98 player on his cheapo system using telephone wire to hook everything up,because at the end of the day he won't be able to distinguish any diferrence,that is understood,he won't.

My system comprises Marantz DV9500,Meridian 565,Sunfire cinema grand,M&K S150thx system.The differences between players is substantial.The RP91 and Toshiba HD-A1 sound about the same,they lack depth and width,they are thin sounding and lifeless,boring would be a good word.The Marantz on the other hand is an improvement in sound ,but I bought it because the picture from the SDI output is superb,but it does sound good,alot better than the RP91 and HD-A1.But the sound does not even come close to the meridian G98 or even the 596 for that matter,what you get is a 3 dimensional sound experience,the weight of the sound is incredible,voices(dialogue)sound real and actually come from excatly the actors mouths on screen,has to be seen to be believed,I just wish I could afford one,but I can't so the Marantz will have to do,having said that the picture from the Marantz is better than the Meridian.

I know after I've posted this there will many who will take delight in telling me there is no difference between players from the SPDIF port.If your system comprises components that are equivilent to mine or better and you have tried various DVD players including high end players and you can't distinguish differences between sound of different players,by all means chime in,if not don't bother,it's already been done to death in the past.

This is not a pissing competition,it's taken me 22 years to get me this far and a couple of loans to boot,I started with a VHS copy of Back to the Future running through a HiFi receiver.

Cheer' Steve

Dave,Yes I only tried analog component 1080i out of HD-A1 into Lumagen,I haven't got an HDCP stripper box.My projector is pin sharp and set up correctly,it has even been calibrated using sencore equipment.Yes there is a noticable difference between HD and SD,but I wouldn't call SW episode 3 or Fifth element superbit soft,my image is 3 dimensional and lifelike already,HD just looks even more so.As to the sound,I'm just comparing apples with apples.My 565 can't accept the 6 analog inputs so I was just using the SPDIF optical,and between the players there was a difference.I'm not rubbishing HD or advising anyone away from it,I'm just saying that SD done right doesn't look or sound too bad.I can't wait until they get some other manufacturers on board and make things better,remember the Toshiba 3006 DVD player???
Cheer's Steve.

Yes there is a noticable difference between HD and SD,but I wouldn't call SW episode 3 or Fifth element superbit soft

Yes, these are very good examples and scale quite well. There are no HD DVD versions of these, so you can't compare. Here are the upscaled SD DVD to HD DVDs I have compared:
- Serenity
- Chronicals of Riddick
- Polar Express
- Batman Begins
- Corpse Bride

Even with excellent SD DVDs like Corpse Bride, the HD DVD version looks better.

I have all 6 star wars movies in HD from the Cinemax broadcast and I can tell you, episode 3 looks even better in HD than the scaled SD DVD.

Your point is well taken, but not all SD DVDs are as good as the ones you list.

As to the sound,I'm just comparing apples with apples.My 565 can't accept the 6 analog inputs so I was just using the SPDIF optical,and between the players there was a difference.

This is odd because a bitstream is a bitstream is a bitstream. It does not matter what device sends it. There is nothing that a source can do to change a bitstream other than dropping bits which I'm sure did not happen.

For HD DVDs, you know the HD-A1 can resample the DD+ soundrack to a max rate DTS stream which should sound better than the DD stream on the SD DVD.

Dave

"eg: running 1080p,7" ES PJ,even prescription glasses won't fix that mess "

I used to take this for granted until having this 708s and seeing for myself. If properly set up it doesn't fall anywhere near what one would expect from a 7" ES machine or even an 8" ES like any of the others I've ever had.

These p16's are really amazing tubes. I'd put it right along side a NEC PG in terms of performance and would never guess it was ES focus if it was thrown up in a blind test. (And this one I use has light wear and 6k hours)

As to it blowing up on 1080p, I can't guaratee yours will do as well as mine but I've run over 1000 hours now much of that at 1080p with no issues. However I do have a parts machine so I'm not concerned about pushing my luck. YMMV

As always it is setup dependant as to how well yours will do and since mine is at a zero degree angle, maxed and tweaked well, and running on a small silver torus using super low output I'm certainly pulling more out of this than would normally be possible and my beam spot size is smaller than would be possible running normal gain screens and light output levels, but even before I did a lot to this and got the torus it still surprised me.

Don't ever lump these in with ECP's, 12xx's, or other ES machines in terms of performance though, they just don't belong in that class.

Troy

Barcos don't blow up when fed too high a scan rate..:) They just don't lock to the signal. PLay away.

Troy, I agree, the P16s are the best ES focusing tubes I've seen, but over time they do also defocus..:(

Dave,I concur with the fact that HD is better than SD,especially specs wise .As for sound,if you ever get the chance to try a Meridian DVD player in your system,it will change your notion that digital is digital is digital.As for the Barco Cine7,I really like this PJ and if I didn't have the 6pg xtra,I could quite happily live with one,but the EM focus makes a noticeable difference in sharpness.I'm sure a 9" EM would make a 6pg xtra look soft by comparison too.
Cheer's Steve.

Stevethx: would like your opinion on my setup......

Runco 940 Model B only has 5 gold plated bnc's no other connections. I run a HTPC at 1280 x 720 at 59.94 mhz. I do sense that the picture is a little soft when looking at my Windows desktop. I'm running theatertek with ffdshow x2 resize with some sharpening, etc. All I watch in my theater right now is DVD's no HD. My screen is 16:9 1:78 95" x 53". Should I try an 800 x 600 rez? what frequency should I shoot for at 800 x 600? But will that mess up my aspect ratio? I love this Runco, Quiet, small, picture quality out does my brother-in-laws Runco DLP that he paid $6G's for.....

Thanks........

Scott McDonald

Scott,I'll be perfectly honest,I have never had a PC or HTPC near a CRT PJ before,so I have no experience.What I like about standalone video processors is that you can set your output resolution and scale everything into that window,plug all your sources into the scaler,very conveneiant.The video processors ie Lumagen,DVDO,Crystalio etc,are optimised for HT,not cobbled up from computer add ons.I like the KISS theory,keep it simple stupid.I've looked at a HDCP stripper box but what's the point,HDMI out of HD-A1 is flakey to say the least,in fact HDMI is flakey full stop from what I have read.1280x720 is a 16:9 resolution and as you said it looks a bit soft,but optimised for your 16:9 screen,800x600 is a 4:3 resolution and I don't think it's where you want to be,it would almost be like running 480p on a 16:9 screen,your PJ is capable of better.By my calculations 1068x600 would be best,but I don't know whether it would be possible from a PC?Sorry to be of little help except to say your PJ wants to see 600p or 1080i.
Cheer's Steve

Kal,Yes all resolutions I referred to were on a 16:9 screen,sorry if there was confusion.I do a lot of reading on the forums but not a lot of posting.If you search you can usually get the right answer,and my theory is,What is understood does not need to be discussed.I posted here because I have worked on the Runco947 and Barco Cine7,and I know what makes them look good.The purpose, I believe,with these forums is to get the best possible picture and sound with the equipment you have and are able to afford.Each projector has it's sweet spot to be able to look the best it can,this is something that is understood and no amount of experimenting is going to change it .eg: running 1080p,7" ES PJ,even prescription glasses won't fix that mess and your'e even running the risk of damaging the projector,this is understood.I can't comment on your 8" PJ Kal,but I bet you have searched for the best resolution for your PJ and tried many,but there is a consensus as to what works best and I bet that's the one your'e running.Kal I tried King Kong,U571,Training day,Troy,Riddick,Charlie Chocalate and a few others.You are right,they aren't all reference quality,King Kong was superb as was Training day,The others were OK.When I was watching King Kong I had the SD version synced for comparison,As I said HD picture was gorgeous but I ended up watching the rest of the movie in SD because the sound was so much better.Now on to the sound,YEHAA,I've posted on sound quality before between different DVD players,I even wanted to modify one (RP91) to improve sound quality.Yes there is a difference in sound quality between players when outputting SPDIF 5.1.That's a fact.I don't want to hear from anyone who says he can't hear a difference when trying a Meridian G98 player on his cheapo system using telephone wire to hook everything up,because at the end of the day he won't be able to distinguish any diferrence,that is understood,he won't.My system comprises Marantz DV9500,Meridian 565,Sunfire cinema grand,M&K S150thx system.The differences between players is substantial.The RP91 and Toshiba HD-A1 sound about the same,they lack depth and width,they are thin sounding and lifeless,boring would be a good word.The Marantz on the other hand is an improvement in sound ,but I bought it because the picture from the SDI output is superb,but it does sound good,alot better than the RP91 and HD-A1.But the sound does not even come close to the meridian G98 or even the 596 for that matter,what you get is a 3 dimensional sound experience,the weight of the sound is incredible,voices(dialogue)sound real and actually come from excatly the actors mouths on screen,has to be seen to be believed,I just wish I could afford one,but I can't so the Marantz will have to do,having said that the picture from the Marantz is better than the Meridian.I know after I've posted this there will many who will take delight in telling me there is no difference between players from the SPDIF port.If your system comprises components that are equivilent to mine or better and you have tried various DVD players including high end players and you can't distinguish differences between sound of different players,by all means chime in,if not don't bother,it's already been done to death in the past.This is not a pissing competition,it's taken me 22 years to get me this far and a couple of loans to boot,I started with a VHS copy of Back to the Future running through a HiFi receiver.
Cheer' Steve


I can't read this. Sorry.

How about hitting the ENTER key every couple of sentences? When you bash out one big paragraph like that, it is totally illegible.

Runco 940 Model B only has 5 gold plated bnc's no other connections. I run a HTPC at 1280 x 720 at 59.94 mhz. I do sense that the picture is a little soft when looking at my Windows desktop. I'm running theatertek with ffdshow x2 resize with some sharpening, etc. All I watch in my theater right now is DVD's no HD. My screen is 16:9 1:78 95" x 53". Should I try an 800 x 600 rez? what frequency should I shoot for at 800 x 600? But will that mess up my aspect ratio? I love this Runco, Quiet, small, picture quality out does my brother-in-laws Runco DLP that he paid $6G's for.....

Scott,

Some questions:

- Why 59.94Hz if you have an HTPC? If you're in NTSC land then I would recommend 71.928Hz which is x3 the original framerate of film. This is what most HTPC'ers running NTSC do. IF you're PAL, then you're closer to 75Hz (I don't remember the exact number). 71.928 Hz will give you less (zero) judder as compared to a scaler that only does 60Hz.

Your screen is the same size as mine. If your magnetic (astig/flare) been optimized completely on your setup, you should be able to just see scanlines, maybe not if the tubes are old. How many hours on the tubes?

See here for astig setup: http://www.curtpalme.com/Astig.shtm

I wouldn't try 800x600. At least not 800 as 800 isn't a nice multiple of the original DVD resolution of 720x480 so scaling artifacts may be soon.


1280x720 is a 16:9 resolution and as you said it looks a bit soft,but optimised for your 16:9 screen,800x600 is a 4:3 resolution and I don't think it's where you want to be,it would almost be like running 480p on a 16:9 screen,your PJ is capable of better.By my calculations 1068x600 would be best,but I don't know whether it would be possible from a PC?Sorry to be of little help except to say your PJ wants to see 600p or 1080i.Steve, don't confuse resolution with the screen aspect ratio. The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Pixels do not have to be (and are usually not) square with CRT projectors.

Regardless of what screen aspect ratio someone runs (4x3, or 16x9 or something different), you should always try an optimize scaling based on the native resolution of your source.

Example: 720x480 resolution on DVD means that running a resolution of, say, 1440x960 provides a very clean scaling. Since mostly only high end 9" machines can do 960p, 1440x720p is not a bad choice for 8" machines. It's x2 the horiz rez and x1.5 times the vertical rez of the source.

The screen ratio is irrelevant.

You can run 800x600 on a 16x9 screen just fine by simply squishing down the raster. Though I would recommend going higher in the horiz resolution - 800 is pretty low.

Kal

Dave,I concur with the fact that HD is better than SD,especially specs wise .As for sound,if you ever get the chance to try a Meridian DVD player in your system,it will change your notion that digital is digital is digital.

If you are talking about sending analog from the DVD player, then this is possible. However, you were talking about sending the DD or DTS bitstream, so what you say is definitely not true.

Please explain this in detail. I am in the software field and work with imaging. I understand digital information storage and transmission quite well and hold 4 patents in different areas of digital information routing and caching. What you are saying makes no sense and seems to indicate you have fallen into the "audiophile" trap and very much discredits your position.

Simply put, I can get some binary information and send it all around the world through 50 servers then to you and if no information is lost, it will be EXACTLY the same when you get it as it is on my computer. The only difference will be the device rendering it.

The same is true for bitstreams. The binary data is taken from the disc as sent to the receiver. The receiver decodes and converts it. There will be differences due to DACs and such in the receiver, but there will be no differences in varying the source that sends the stream--there cannot be.

Since the only difference can be a loss of data. Therefore, the only way your claim can be true is if the Meridian loses no data while other transports lose data, but in some magical way that does not result in drop outs, but decreased sound quality. This is objectively verifiable and you can be assured it is not the case.

If you are so sure, I will bet you are very large sum of money that you cannot reliably tell the difference in sound in a signal blind test between your treasured Meridian sending a bitstream and another arbitrary player I pick like an Oppo, or Panny S97, etc. sending the same bitstream.

To assert a difference in bitstreams you either believe the hype or you don't understand digital information and are thinking about it in analog terms.

If you you really want to experiment on your own to see the truth of this, do the single blind test yourself. Have friend play the exact same audio 20 times. Have him play it on each of two devices randomly and you not knowing which one it is being played on. He may play it on on 6 times and the other 14 times or 10 on each--you won't know. Right down which player you think it is each time--you will be amazed at how wrong you are! :)

Dave

800x600 is a 4:3 resolution and I don't think it's where you want to be,i

You are confusing resolution and aspect ratio. The two are not the same.

Here is an easy example to grasp. Do you know the resolution of a DVD? It is 720x480. By your way of thinking, that makes it neither 4:3 (640x480) or 16:9 (854x480). Yet is is either. If the disc is non-anamorphic it is 4:3, if it is anamorphic then it is 16:9.

Dave

The same is true for bitstreams. The binary data is taken from the disc as sent to the receiver. The receiver decodes and converts it. There will be differences due to DACs and such in the receiver, but there will be no differences in varying the source that sends the stream--there cannot be.
While I'm at a loss to explain or understand it entirely myself, most people that argue against "bits are bits" tend to tend to refer to the timing of the signal. Jitter.

Never done any testing myself so I can't comment.

Kal

While I'm at a loss to explain or understand it entirely myself, most people that argue against "bits are bits" tend to tend to refer to the timing of the signal. Jitter.

This would be objectively verifiable. If this were the case, then we need two things:
1) Measurements of the timing in the stream between different equipment.
2) Tests which determine how much timing error is required before a human can hear a difference.

These two would be the best. Lacking these, single blind testing is the best we hobbyists can do.

But, I have to say, this claim (which I've heard) seems very dubious to me as we've gotten very good at making clocks and even cheap chips are pretty darn accurate.

Dave

[QUOTE=kal]Scott,

Some questions:

- Why 59.94Hz if you have an HTPC? If you're in NTSC land then I would recommend 71.928Hz which is x3 the original framerate of film. This is what most HTPC'ers running NTSC do. IF you're PAL, then you're closer to 75Hz (I don't remember the exact number). 71.928 Hz will give you less (zero) judder as compared to a scaler that only does 60Hz.

Your screen is the same size as mine. If your magnetic (astig/flare) been optimized completely on your setup, you should be able to just see scanlines, maybe not if the tubes are old. How many hours on the tubes?

Thanks for the response.....
Last time I tried to go higher than 60 mhz from my HTPC my projector wouldn't sync......and I lost my picture.....I have RGB as my input selected in the menu....And yes I'm in NTSC Land....Salt Lake City, Utah. I'll try again to adjust my scanning frequency....For some reasons I thought my projector wouldn't scan that High.....
Thanks again!
Scott

Mark,sorry about the mess,I've gone back and edited the post to make it more legible,point taken.

Dave,how much money are you willing to front up?I can get a Meridian DVD player here anytime.Would Police supervision be good enough to validate the results.I'm not an audiophile,or even consider myself one,and I won't argue with you regarding specifications and mathematics.I let my eyes and ears do that.BTW it's not my beloved Meridian.At 4 times the price of an excellent DVD player,it's over my budget,I was merely passing on my observations of this particular player.

The first Cine 7 I ever set up was coupled to a FE Quadscan,The picture looked fantastic on a 16:9 screen running XGA 1024x768.I liked the Quadscan so much,I went and bought a used one in anticipation for when the Runco933 (Nec6pgxtra)arrived,unfortunately at that resolution, the picture from the Cine 7 looked better,than what the Runco did.

The picture on the Runco improved so much when using video processors like FE CS 1,Runco PFP 7,Lumagen Vision pro when outputting 720p it was like light and day.

The scaler that the 933 came bundled with which outputs 1024x768 actually looks really good when coupled to a 7" ES PJ,ie Runco 852(Zenith 900),Barco 708,Cine 7.

I stand by what I said earlier,7" ES PJ's like to see frequencies of around 40khz or close to it,1024x768, 600p or 1080i are what I would call ideal.

To the guys with the 947 and 940,try 1024x768 (depending on what scaler your PJ's came bundled with will depend on whether they do 720p or 1024x768)

My Runco/Nec likes to see 45khz,720p,600p72hz.It can do other resolutions like 1080i72hz =41khz,but 720p is where it looks the best .IMO

Sorry for my misunderstanding regarding computer resolutions and how they translate in the CRT world.My understanding is that whatever resolution you run you are aiming for the PJ's sweetspot.I can't understand how 720p 72hz (54khz) isn't going to look soft on an Nec6pg xtra.I've actually tried it and many other combinations on my LumagenHDPpro.

Cheer's Steve

Steve I gotta give you a big thanks......I came home from work and played with my HTPC and tried as close to 600p as I could get using a native NVIDIA resolution....1088 x 612 instead of 1280 x 720.... and I've gotta say my Runco 940 look much brighter...perkier?! My desktop was much sharper than at my old setting....and yes I'm running it at 72mhz.

Watched the Paul McCartney US DVD and it look fabulous......

Thanks again for the suggestions!

Scott McDonald
Salt Lake City, Utah