DVD recorders with digital tuners are coming! - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 254 Old 11-10-2006, 12:03 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jtbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Clinton, SC
Posts: 3,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I just saw an article, referenced in another forum here, about LG's 2007 product line. It includes:

DR787T - DVD playback (with upconversion via HDMI) and recording, and an NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuner

RC797T - seems to be similar to above, plus VHS playback/recording.

It doesn't look like either of these have hard disks, though.

http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages_b/LGline2007.html
jtbell is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 254 Old 11-10-2006, 06:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nextoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtbell View Post

I just saw an article, referenced in another forum here, about LG's 2007 product line. It includes:

DR787T - DVD playback (with upconversion via HDMI) and recording, and an NTSC/ATSC/QAM tuner

RC797T - seems to be similar to above, plus VHS playback/recording.

It doesn't look like either of these have hard disks, though.

http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages_b/LGline2007.html

From the link"

"For recording, both the DR787T and RC797T down-convert all HD signals to SD resolution, and then bump em to 480p, 720p, or 1080i for playback. There are also plain vanilla versions of both products without the digital/analog TV tuners, known as the DR700N and RC700N, respectively."


Don't be suprised if all of the DVD recorders with digital tuners do this as well.

edit - I'm guessing the down res is because there is no HDD? This pretty much has to be the case because of the recording to a regular DVD. I wonder what the HDD versions will offer?
nextoo is offline  
post #3 of 254 Old 11-10-2006, 08:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
biker19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 3,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The record time would just be too short if they kept full HD resolution. It won't be a great loss - I bet an HD feed downresd to SD will look better than todays recordings using an NTSC tuner. The question then becomes - does this line of LG DVDrs use the new 5th gen tuner? And of course - what will they cost?
biker19 is offline  
post #4 of 254 Old 11-10-2006, 09:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jtbell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Clinton, SC
Posts: 3,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by biker19 View Post

I bet an HD feed downresd to SD will look better than todays recordings using an NTSC tuner.

I've made quite a few recordings of this type using a separate ATSC tuner, via an S-video connection, and they do look very good. I'd expect them to look even better with an integrated tuner because it would eliminate that connection and the associated conversion steps.

Even SD upconverted to HD at the broadcast station, then downrezzed again at the recorder, looks very good if the station does a good job of upconverting. There's a lot of variation from one station to another, around here.
jtbell is offline  
post #5 of 254 Old 11-10-2006, 11:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sivartk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 5,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by nextoo View Post

edit - I'm guessing the down res is because there is no HDD? This pretty much has to be the case because of the recording to a regular DVD. I wonder what the HDD versions will offer?

Ahh...the million dollar question

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it.

My Little Theater
sivartk is offline  
post #6 of 254 Old 11-10-2006, 03:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,467
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 539 Post(s)
Liked: 465
The ideal state for current DVD technology would be to have a large enough HDD to enable recording in the transmitted resolution and then down-rez the digital to SD for burning off onto media. Will they also down-rez the 5.1 audio to 2.0? Could be.

I think such a device will satisfy the vast consumer audience -- especially if the recordings look real good from the clean digital signal -- and make high-density recorders (BR or HD-DVD) into video footnotes. This will also appease the content providers who will still be able to sell their wares in HD format.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #7 of 254 Old 11-12-2006, 06:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ncaahoops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,072
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

The ideal state for current DVD technology would be to have a large enough HDD to enable recording in the transmitted resolution and then down-rez the digital to SD for burning off onto media. Will they also down-rez the 5.1 audio to 2.0? Could be.

I think such a device will satisfy the vast consumer audience -- especially if the recordings look real good from the clean digital signal -- and make high-density recorders (BR or HD-DVD) into video footnotes. This will also appease the content providers who will still be able to sell their wares in HD format.

Also the media price comes into question for the next few years. It will take a while for BluRay/HD-DVD blanks and rewriteables to drop significantly in price. 20c for DVD-R vs $20 for BluRay-R! 40c per DVD-RW/+RW or $1 for DVD-RAM vs $25 for BluRay-RE!

Boldly trying a new DVR: http://moto3416review.blogspot.com/
ncaahoops is offline  
post #8 of 254 Old 11-12-2006, 09:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,467
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 539 Post(s)
Liked: 465
20c/disk?
Weren't you just looking at some 5c media in the other thread.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #9 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 01:17 AM
Advanced Member
 
sunnycrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Troy, MI
Posts: 735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'm glad they will include the QAM tuner. I've been looking at the Vizio TV's just because they have the QAM capable tuner. I can watch the digital cable channels in rooms I don't have the cable box. Most of what I watch in the digital band should be in the clear.

I have seen enough to know I have seen too much. (A League of Their Own)
sunnycrest is offline  
post #10 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 07:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nextoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnycrest View Post

I'm glad they will include the QAM tuner. I've been looking at the Vizio TV's just because they have the QAM capable tuner. I can watch the digital cable channels in rooms I don't have the cable box. Most of what I watch in the digital band should be in the clear.

TWC in my area has the local OTA channels in the clear. The lineup is identical when using the QAM or the ASTC. The advantage to using the QAM tuner is that the reception is more consistent. With the ASTC I was on the fringe of a couple of the OTA's reception areas and the performance was not good. Using QAM in my case doesn't mean I get any more channels that I would using ASTC. Originally I tought I might but it seems cable companies are getting better at managing clear channels.
nextoo is offline  
post #11 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 08:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sivartk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 5,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by nextoo View Post

TWC in my area has the local OTA channels in the clear. The lineup is identical when using the QAM or the ASTC. The advantage to using the QAM tuner is that the reception is more consistent. With the ASTC I was on the fringe of a couple of the OTA's reception areas and the performance was not good. Using QAM in my case doesn't mean I get any more channels that I would using ASTC. Originally I tought I might but it seems cable companies are getting better at managing clear channels.

In my area QAM and OTA are very different. TWC leaves out some of the subchannels and doesn't carry the CW in HD at all. I guess it all depends on your area.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it.

My Little Theater
sivartk is offline  
post #12 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 08:21 AM
Member
 
sgm26's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Be careful what you wish for. The price of the Panasonic DMREX85 is about $700. It has digital and analogue tuners, and they are using it in GB and other countries.

Of course, we would like it to be HD. Considering the price of Blue Ray, players, HD would easily add $1,500 to the price. Recently there was such a machine released in Japan for about $3,000.

So what will the average person pay for they consider a high tech VCR?.
sgm26 is offline  
post #13 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 08:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nextoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivartk View Post

In my area QAM and OTA are very different. TWC leaves out some of the subchannels and doesn't carry the CW in HD at all. I guess it all depends on your area.

I get the sub channels when I use the ASTC or the QAM tuner. You make a good point about the CW. I'll have to check. I get the major networks ABC,CBS,FOX,NBC,PBS and a couple of odd ON-Demand advertising channels that are nothing more than continuous loops being played over and over.
nextoo is offline  
post #14 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 10:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
biker19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 3,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgm26 View Post


So what will the average person pay for they consider a high tech VCR?.

$100-$150 for a current vintage VCR with QAM/ATSC tuner added.

$150-$200 for a DVDr with QAM/ATSC tuner.

$300-$400 for a DVDr w/ HDD with QAM/ATSC tuner.
biker19 is offline  
post #15 of 254 Old 11-13-2006, 10:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Northern NJ
Posts: 2,734
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Liked: 18
funny, there was no mention on whether these LG recorders have component inputs.
NorthJersey is offline  
post #16 of 254 Old 11-15-2006, 09:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DonB2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,468
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I sure wish there was something about these two units on the LG site. Price would be nice to know as well as chip generation before I go out and buy a tuner only Samsung to help me with my ATSC ota multipath issues.

DonB2
DonB2 is offline  
post #17 of 254 Old 11-15-2006, 06:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
doogiehowser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,014
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by biker19 View Post

$100-$150 for a current vintage VCR with QAM/ATSC tuner added.

$150-$200 for a DVDr with QAM/ATSC tuner.

$300-$400 for a DVDr w/ HDD with QAM/ATSC tuner.

I would buy a VCR with ATSC tuner for $100 today. I can't figure out why a ATSC tuner costs so much more than a regular tuner. What makes them so expensive?
doogiehowser is offline  
post #18 of 254 Old 11-15-2006, 06:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nextoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by doogiehowser View Post

I would buy a VCR with ATSC tuner for $100 today. I can't figure out why a ATSC tuner costs so much more than a regular tuner. What makes them so expensive?

It is newer technology that has not hit mass production - yet. Oh and the marketing. There is a price to pay there too.

But in all reality when it comes to recording to DVD it will be down res'd to 480i. So I am still trying to reconcile all of the pent up demand. It will not be that different from what we have now. At least on the recording side.

I have an ASTC/QAM tuner now in my television. It is great. So I have one already.

I do not think the emergence of ATSC/QAM tuners in DVD recorders will be consistent with everybody's expectations when they arrive. Recordings will still be in 480i.
nextoo is offline  
post #19 of 254 Old 11-15-2006, 07:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mattack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: sunnyvale
Posts: 1,604
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think that the pent up demand is because, *with a good signal*, the picture quality can be much better.

Don't get me wrong.. this is not a "digital is always better than analog" statement. Heck, in fact, I think analog is in many ways better than digital --- because it degrades gracefully.

But even I, without digital cable nor an HDTV yet, want a ATSC/QAM tuner -- for the free OTA and QAM broadcasts. It would probably make me upgrade some of my wiring and such, because I never was able to get good signals on all of the channels I had in the few brief periods of digital cable I've had (only on promos where the price was the same or lower than I was already paying for extended basic)... because I have ancient coax & crappy cheap splitters..

But the possibility of getting "free" better signals (ignoring any cabling upgrades), is a plus.
mattack is offline  
post #20 of 254 Old 11-15-2006, 08:25 PM
AVS Special Member
 
nextoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,078
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattack View Post

I think that the pent up demand is because, *with a good signal*, the picture quality can be much better.

Don't get me wrong.. this is not a "digital is always better than analog" statement. Heck, in fact, I think analog is in many ways better than digital --- because it degrades gracefully.

But even I, without digital cable nor an HDTV yet, want a ATSC/QAM tuner -- for the free OTA and QAM broadcasts. It would probably make me upgrade some of my wiring and such, because I never was able to get good signals on all of the channels I had in the few brief periods of digital cable I've had (only on promos where the price was the same or lower than I was already paying for extended basic)... because I have ancient coax & crappy cheap splitters..

But the possibility of getting "free" better signals (ignoring any cabling upgrades), is a plus.

Yes of course.

But what about recording? In my opinion very little will change. Except perhaps one generation. But that will be up to the interpretation of the quality of the tuner.
nextoo is offline  
post #21 of 254 Old 11-15-2006, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
mkjnovak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 314
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nextoo View Post

...I am still trying to reconcile all of the pent up demand. It will not be that different from what we have now...Recordings will still be in 480i.

The demand from my point of view:

Right now I have an NTSC DVDR. I have a TV with ATSC. So, now the TV has to be on and tuned to what you're recording. An ATSC DVDR fixes this.

programmable digital station recording while you're away without the TV on
and
watch one digital while recording another

and note: all this without cable, sat, or tivo costs

I am seriously looking forward to it.

As for the quality, HD to 480 still looks pretty good, and Blu and/or HD recordables aren't going to be common and cheap for a long time.

Mike
mkjnovak is offline  
post #22 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 06:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
biker19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: McLean, VA
Posts: 3,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by nextoo View Post

I do not think the emergence of ATSC/QAM tuners in DVD recorders will be consistent with everybody's expectations when they arrive. Recordings will still be in 480i.

Yes they'll be 480i but that's still noticeably better than VHS or current gen DVDr recordings from NTSC tuners. I think it will be the "good enough" solution (instead of full HD) for many people.
biker19 is offline  
post #23 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 07:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dsmith901's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 8,970
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

The ideal state for current DVD technology would be to have a large enough HDD to enable recording in the transmitted resolution and then down-rez the digital to SD for burning off onto media. Will they also down-rez the 5.1 audio to 2.0? Could be.

I think such a device will satisfy the vast consumer audience -- especially if the recordings look real good from the clean digital signal -- and make high-density recorders (BR or HD-DVD) into video footnotes. This will also appease the content providers who will still be able to sell their wares in HD format.

Such a device already exists (in effect). I record HDTV on a Comcast dual tuner PVR in full HD resolution and 5.1 audio, and I can copy that signal in SD format to a DVD using a Panasonic E80H DVD HDD recorder. A clean HD program copied thusly to a DVD is very close to a pre-recorded DVD in quality. The only drawback is audio is just 2.0.

"The truth is out there!"
dsmith901 is offline  
post #24 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 07:44 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sivartk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 5,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsmith901 View Post

Such a device already exists (in effect). I record HDTV on a Comcast dual tuner PVR in full HD resolution and 5.1 audio, and I can copy that signal in SD format to a DVD using a Panasonic E80H DVD HDD recorder. A clean HD program copied thusly to a DVD is very close to a pre-recorded DVD in quality. The only drawback is audio is just 2.0.

True, but you are dealing with 2 units and an analog transfer between the two. A recorder with this functionality would eliminate a unit and analog transfer. (Theoretically, producing a better picture)

You may also be able to down-rez at faster than real time since the analog transfer isn't involved. This should also eliminate the widescreen flag issue that has been discussed here. Some HD DVR's don't output the flag and some recorders (E80H) won't set the flag, so a PC edit is a necessary step with 2 units. (Fortunately, my Sony HD DVR sends the 16:9 flag to my E80H, however I still must edit on the PC as the recorder loses the flag when recording to DVD-R and maintains the flag when recording to DVD-RAM).

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it.

My Little Theater
sivartk is offline  
post #25 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 10:37 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,467
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 539 Post(s)
Liked: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsmith901 View Post

Such a device already exists (in effect). I record HDTV on a Comcast dual tuner PVR in full HD resolution and 5.1 audio, and I can copy that signal in SD format to a DVD using a Panasonic E80H DVD HDD recorder. A clean HD program copied thusly to a DVD is very close to a pre-recorded DVD in quality. The only drawback is audio is just 2.0.

Such a device does not exist, yet, for those of us who obtain our video OTA. In a couple years my E-85 will become an OTA analog paperweight and I will have to replace it. Hopefully by that time we will have gone through a couple generations of current DVDRs with ATSC/QAM tuners and they will have worked out the initial kinks. For a couple decades, low-res VCR recording was "good enough". I expect a clean 720x480 recording from a down-rez'd HD signal will be more than good enough for most. The recordings would be DVD quality and probably look pretty good when upconverted to 1080 (assuming continuing advances in upconverting circuitry).

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #26 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 12:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
sivartk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Round Rock, TX
Posts: 5,070
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

Such a device does not exist, yet, for those of us who obtain our video OTA.

The dual device setup does exist for OTA only people (like myself, see my "title"). Finding a new device to record OTA HD is becoming harder, but it can be done. I use a Sony DHG-HDD250 (30 hours HD) and a Panny DMR-E80H. The Sony to record and output to the Panny.

I use strictly OTA and love the fact that I can record HD for the shows I may miss when I'm not home There is also the LST-3410A by LG that can do the same as the Sony unit.

At no point in your rambling, incoherent post were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this forum is now dumber for having read it.

My Little Theater
sivartk is offline  
post #27 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 12:03 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Rammitinski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Des Plaines, IL
Posts: 17,437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

Such a device does not exist, yet, for those of us who obtain our video OTA. In a couple years my E-85 will become an OTA analog paperweight and I will have to replace it.

Maybe you can still gat a few bucks for it from someone who who wants it to record from an outboard tuner .

I'll probably try to do that with my E85, but I'll most likely be keepin' my Sony RDR-HX900 - I can record from my Sony HD DVR to it in 16:9 over component. The results are so good that I'm not in any big hurry to have a downconverting unit that will do it all internally.
Rammitinski is offline  
post #28 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 03:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sean Nelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Vancouver BC, Canada
Posts: 3,320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post

In a couple years my E-85 will become an OTA analog paperweight and I will have to replace it.

Well, if you buy an ATSC tuner that can downconvert to S-Video then you're E-85 can continue to earn it's keep. I understand that the federal government is going to give out vouchers towards buying that type of equipment as compensation for snatching the spectrum away...
Sean Nelson is online now  
post #29 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 04:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,467
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 539 Post(s)
Liked: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Nelson View Post

Well, if you buy an ATSC tuner that can downconvert to S-Video then you're E-85 can continue to earn it's keep. I understand that the federal government is going to give out vouchers towards buying that type of equipment as compensation for snatching the spectrum away...

But in order for this to be useful (for me) the converter would have to be able to be controlled by the IR blaster of the E-85. Having said that, I've looked in the usual storage places and can't find the IR blaster that came with the E-85 anywhere in the house. So, it is indeed a paperweight come 2009. That won't be so bad, I'll have gotten 4 years out of it.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #30 of 254 Old 11-16-2006, 04:54 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,467
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 539 Post(s)
Liked: 465
Quote:
Originally Posted by sivartk View Post

The dual device setup does exist for OTA only people (like myself, see my "title"). Finding a new device to record OTA HD is becoming harder, but it can be done. I use a Sony DHG-HDD250 (30 hours HD) and a Panny DMR-E80H. The Sony to record and output to the Panny.

I use strictly OTA and love the fact that I can record HD for the shows I may miss when I'm not home There is also the LST-3410A by LG that can do the same as the Sony unit.

Sorry for my lack of clarity. I was referring to a single box solution (i.e. a DVDR with ATSC) as per my original post. The link you cite was interesting reading but correct me if wrong, it was an announcement of LG products and that DVDR is not available for sale yet. Also, as i read it, it appeared the LG downconverted all HD to SD as it recorded it to the HDD and then upconverted it when played. It would be nicer if it recorded and played as native HD and only down converted when burning to disk.

I suspect that around March we will have a number of DVDR/ATSC offerings.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
Reply DVD Recorders (Standard Def)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off