AVS Special Member
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
I'm shocked, I tell you -- shocked! Do you mean to tell us that despite CEDIA show-goers having several whole minutes to compare and contrast the DVP3000 to the Quadscan, that it's quite possible that they underestimated the quality of the DVP3000's image, and its unequaled ability to deliver all-important long term viewing satisfaction. To top it off, the test was somewhat rigged, you say. And not in the Faroudja's favor.
Well, I never.
Seriously: Naturally everyone wants a $20,000 video processor for $2000 (or car, or amplifier, or wardrobe, or watch, or diamond, or home improvement, or...). To the profound regret of all of our savings accounts, it just doesn't work that way.
I read the previous posts with much scepticism, but not having been able to attend myself, I kept my thoughts to myself. So, needless to say, I'm glad a bona fide, highly experienced expert has confirmed what I could only suspect.
Face it all of you Quadscan, Transcan, HTPC, DRC, MSB, and CI owners and aspirants: all of these worthy products are good, sound values for the money. But if you want the best images money can buy, no matter what your source, for now the DVP3000 (and of course the DVP5000) is the only currently commercially available way to go.
Just my one millionth of the cost of a DVP3000 cents.