Tosh G2 HD-A2 and HD-XA2 information and discussion - Page 22 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #631 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BenDover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 5,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big J View Post

How about their press release?
From Tosh

under important notes:
"HD-XA2 HD DVD content output at 1080p available only as a result of up-conversion"

Plaese don't take this as bashing, it is not intended as such. Toshiba hopes to do it right by the time the XA2 comes out, if they can get the chips, and I really hope they do-nothing would please me more. I have no desire to see Blu-ray win the war. Hence my disappointment with this discovery.
J

When I read that I had the same reaction; seeing it again now, and reading that what they will output is 60p (not 24p, or at least not yet confirmed), there would be no other way to get to 60 without using 3-2 pulldown; but this doesn't mean they have to first go to 1080i60 and then to 1080p60...and going from 24p on disc to 60p output would qualify as "up-conversion" in this context.
BenDover is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #632 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by drhankz View Post

I won't get into any finger pointing matches here.

But as one of the TWO engineers that INVENTED this whole Bit
mapping display technology WAY BACK in 1976 before people even
heard of computers or HD - I can ATTEST to PQ as being degraded
if any technology massages it from its NATIVE format.

As a FIRST-time adopter of HD DVD and one who has sent back his
Blu-ray after only 4 hours of use - I truly look forward to the X2
and I truly hope it is not doing any deinterlacing. If it is - I will
not be buying it.

So you are unequivocally stating that pure digital p->i followed by the reverse digital i->p without any frame rate changes, alters the output signal? I also have an engineering background, please explain.

-- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #633 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bobgpsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

However, 1080p24 is worthless for the vast majority of 1080p displays available

And 1080p/60 out of the player (if it does perfect inverse telecine) only gives a benefit to those 1080p/60 displays that do not do inverse telecine correctly with their 1080i/60 inputs. Do you know of any another performance benefit for film content?

Bob
bobgpsr is offline  
post #634 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Q of BanditZ View Post

Futureproofing?

I agree that it would be desirable to have 1080p24, but the poster said p60 should be disgarded in favor of p24 on the XA2. That's what I'm referring to.

-- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #635 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:42 AM
Advanced Member
 
mfabien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The HD-A1 compares to a $2,500 CD player, and

The HD-XA1 compares to a $3,000 to $6,000 CD player.

I know I've been very impressed with the quality sound when playing a CD but following is the reasons why:

http://www.highdefforum.com/showpost...05&postcount=1

the A1s are thus better than the A2s for CD, if all this makes sense.
mfabien is offline  
post #636 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bobgpsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

I agree that it would be desirable to have 1080p24, but the poster said p60 should be disgarded in favor of p24 on the XA2. That's what I'm referring to.

Maybe I should have said hardly worthwhile. IOW if they are going to add 1080p then please do it right and include 1080p/24 otherwise it appears that only having 1080p/60 is kind of a sales gimmick (to some of us).

Bob
bobgpsr is offline  
post #637 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Big J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,954
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenDover View Post

When I read that I had the same reaction; seeing it again now, and reading that what they will output is 60p (not 24p, or at least not yet confirmed), there would be no other way to get to 60 without using 3-2 pulldown; but this doesn't mean they have to first go to 1080i60 and then to 1080p60...and going from 24p on disc to 60p output would qualify as "up-conversion" in this context.

OK, that makes sense.
J
Big J is offline  
post #638 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobgpsr View Post

And 1080p/60 out of the player (if it does perfect inverse telecine) only gives a benefit to those 1080p/60 displays that do not do inverse telecine correctly with their 1080i/60 inputs. Do you know of any another performance benefit for film content?

Bob

True that it only genuinely benefits displays incapable of performing the inverse-telecine (and that is a real segment). However, performance is not the only consideration unless you happen to live in an ideal and well informed world -- which is not where we actually happen to live.

It can't be ignored that 1080p60 is an important sales tool in this competitive environment.

If 1080p60 were dumped in favor of 1080p24, it would make a very tiny group including yourself happy, but it would cause trouble for most owners of displays capable of 1080p input.

-- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #639 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 10:59 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bitemymac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: City of Urbana, MD
Posts: 1,182
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

I agree that it would be desirable to have 1080p24, but the poster said p60 should be disgarded in favor of p24 on the XA2. That's what I'm referring to.

-- Trevor

Capability of 1080p24 means it can possibly do 1080p24,48,72 and 60 if desired by means of display or external scaler option with least amount of source manipulation. However, 1080p60 only option is most likely from 1080i........ not a good thing for 1080p panel owners with displays that can manage 1080p24. Also, for even non-1080p panel owners will eventually upgrade to 1080p, no?..... It doesn't matter if the inverse telecine reconstructs the original recording or not, source will be contaminated because it's touched.
bitemymac is offline  
post #640 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bobgpsr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

It can't be ignore that 1080p60 is an important sales tool in this competitive environment.

If 1080p60 were dumped in favor of 1080p24, it would make a very tiny group including yourself happy, but it would cause trouble for most owners of displays capable of 1080p input.

Point granted for the "sales tool" impact.

I do not see how it "cause trouble" with the EDID mechanism of HDMI to indicate to the player what the display's input capabilities are. Again granted that having both p/60 and p/24 would give the best flexibility. But for people who have displays that have proper inverse telecine built-in no benefit is gained until they are able to eliminate judder on film with using refresh rate in exact mulitples of 24 fps in both the player and display combined.

Are we arguing about the, amount of/relative importance of, displays with 1080p/60 input & broken inverse telecine

versus

the amount of displays with p/24 input and matching exact multiple output display rate?

Bob
bobgpsr is offline  
post #641 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobgpsr View Post

Point granted for the "sales tool" impact.

I do not see how it "cause trouble" with the EDID mechanism of HDMI to indicate to the player what the display's input capabilities are. Again granted that having both p/60 and p/24 would give the best flexibility. But for people who have displays that have proper inverse telecine built-in no benefit is gained until they are able to eliminate judder on film with using refresh rate in exact mulitples of 24 fps in both the player and display combined.

Are we arguing about the, amount of/relative importance of, displays with 1080p/60 input & broken inverse telecine

versus

the amount of displays with p/24 input and matching exact multiple output display rate?

Bob

You insist on looking at everything from a pure technical perspective. Unfortunately, the reality is that customers also have to be dealt with. If users buy "1080p" players to use with their 1080p displays, and then discover the 1080p "doesn't work" (because the 1080p60 display doesn't accept 1080p24), then trouble results. Major post sales headaches for the dealers and player manufacturer.

-- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #642 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:30 AM
Advanced Member
 
lastxbr960's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Glendale, Wi
Posts: 520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Originally Posted by drhankz
I won't get into any finger pointing matches here.

But as one of the TWO engineers that INVENTED this whole Bit
mapping display technology WAY BACK in 1976 before people even
heard of computers or HD - I can ATTEST to PQ as being degraded
if any technology massages it from its NATIVE format.

As a FIRST-time adopter of HD DVD and one who has sent back his
Blu-ray after only 4 hours of use - I truly look forward to the X2
and I truly hope it is not doing any deinterlacing. If it is - I will
not be buying it.



Congratulations is in order if this engineerinr quote is true is true.
However after 30 years, I would say there have been many advancements and things change all the time in science, engineering and technology.
What really matters is not how it gets to the progressive output, but is that output the same as the 1080P source disc.
I dont care if it is interlaced and deinterlaced a million times before the output, as long as the final result ends up being a copy of the source and is compatable with my and others display.
Just remember how the blueray fanboys ridicued hddvd because it output an interlaced picture, yet all the reviews gave it the #1 PQ.
Let's not get so caught up in the tech aspects and make claims that "if it does not do it the wayI think it should then it is no good and will not work"
Remember these are preproduction and things can and will change, and it might just work fine even though we think it cant by our limited knowledge
lastxbr960 is offline  
post #643 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nightfly13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ranchi, India
Posts: 1,423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfabien View Post

The HD-A1 compares to a $2,500 CD player, and

The HD-XA1 compares to a $3,000 to $6,000 CD player.

I know I've been very impressed with the quality sound when playing a CD but following is the reasons why:

http://www.highdefforum.com/showpost...05&postcount=1

the A1s are thus better than the A2s for CD, if all this makes sense.

Thanks for the link to a great post. Wow, I was 80% leaning towards the A2 (I won't be able to use whatever HD-DVD player I get until January) until I read that article that articulates what I've heard others alluding to about the benefits of superior build quality. I just didn't get it. 'Built like a tank' is good for, you know, railings on stair cases, car suspensions, um.. tanks But I never got the attraction in having that in AV gear, where typically sleek is sexy is the goal. That post helped me get it and now I'm back to 80% leaning back towards the A1 (and yes I realize I'll need to act fast for that). Ironically, I don't own hardly any actual CDs so the thrust of the post is missed on me, but the point resonates soundly.

Interestingly, someone here has a sig. that links to Monster's sales propaganda about the merits of their $100 toslink cable, and it actually sounded similar to this article, talking about slght losses in digital transmission which I thought didn't happen - 'signal gets there or it doesn't' is the wisdom I've relied on using ultra-cheap RCA cable Coax s/pdif connection quite happily... Maybe I should join and post on that forum... any insight?

To summarize, the sleekness and general CE feel of the A2 suggests the use of low-end 'off the shelf' components and less sturdy chasis and whatnot negatively impact the output - is that true with digital output (say, HDMI) also?
nightfly13 is offline  
post #644 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
lastxbr960's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Glendale, Wi
Posts: 520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfabien View Post

The HD-A1 compares to a $2,500 CD player, and

The HD-XA1 compares to a $3,000 to $6,000 CD player.

I know I've been very impressed with the quality sound when playing a CD but following is the reasons why:

http://www.highdefforum.com/showpost...05&postcount=1

the A1s are thus better than the A2s for CD, if all this makes sense.

interesting read, may be true, but we will have to wait for a comparison.
lastxbr960 is offline  
post #645 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by lastxbr960 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by drhankz View Post

I won't get into any finger pointing matches here.

But as one of the TWO engineers that INVENTED this whole Bit
mapping display technology WAY BACK in 1976 before people even
heard of computers or HD - I can ATTEST to PQ as being degraded
if any technology massages it from its NATIVE format.

As a FIRST-time adopter of HD DVD and one who has sent back his
Blu-ray after only 4 hours of use - I truly look forward to the X2
and I truly hope it is not doing any deinterlacing. If it is - I will
not be buying it.
-- Trevor


Congratulations is in order if this engineerinr quote is true is true.
However after 30 years, I would say there have been many advancements and things change all the time in science, engineering and technology.
What really matters is not how it gets to the progressive output, but is that output the same as the 1080P source disc.
I dont care if it is interlaced and deinterlaced a million times before the output, as long as the final result ends up being a copy of the source and is compatable with my and others display.
Just remember how the blueray fanboys ridicued hddvd because it output an interlaced picture, yet all the reviews gave it the #1 PQ.
Let's not get so caught up in the tech aspects and make claims that "if it does not do it the wayI think it should then it is no good and will not work"
Remember these are preproduction and things can and will change, and it might just work fine even though we think it cant by our limited knowledge

I just want to point out that my name is attached at the bottom of the poster's quote, but I had absolutely NOTHING to do with that quote. My position is that as long as the data is processed entirely within the digital domain, there is no inherent reason to suppose damage of any sort to the data. This will only result from a design flaw, one that is avoidable.

-- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #646 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:54 AM
Advanced Member
 
mfabien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly13 View Post

Thanks for the link to a great post. Wow, I was 80% leaning towards the A2 (I won't be able to use whatever HD-DVD player I get until January) until I read that article that articulates what I've heard others alluding to about the benefits of superior build quality. I just didn't get it. 'Built like a tank' is good for, you know, railings on stair cases, car suspensions, um.. tanks But I never got the attraction in having that in AV gear, where typically sleek is sexy is the goal. That post helped me get it and now I'm back to 80% leaning back towards the A1 (and yes I realize I'll need to act fast for that). Ironically, I don't own hardly any actual CDs so the thrust of the post is missed on me, but the point resonates soundly.

Interestingly, someone here has a sig. that links to Monster's sales propaganda about the merits of their $100 toslink cable, and it actually sounded similar to this article, talking about slght losses in digital transmission which I thought didn't happen - 'signal gets there or it doesn't' is the wisdom I've relied on using ultra-cheap RCA cable Coax s/pdif connection quite happily... Maybe I should join and post on that forum... any insight?

To summarize, the sleekness and general CE feel of the A2 suggests the use of low-end 'off the shelf' components and less sturdy chasis and whatnot negatively impact the output - is that true with digital output (say, HDMI) also?

I must say that it's the use of the 5.1 multichannel analogs that impressed me with CDs. And I also played "Everything Must Go" by Steely Dan, a DVD-A by selecting the DTS track (high resolution not available on the HD-A1) and that is one very good example of 5.1 multichannel analog excellence over SPDIF. In fact I doubt it would be much better in High Resolution (I know I risk a lot by saying that...).
mfabien is offline  
post #647 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 11:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
lastxbr960's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Glendale, Wi
Posts: 520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My bad Trevor.

It was a cut and paste error.
Or should I say Progressive-interlaced-progressive 24-60 error,
lastxbr960 is offline  
post #648 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 12:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by lastxbr960 View Post

My bad Trevor.

It was a cut and paste error.
Or should I say Progressive-interlaced-progressive 24-60 error,

It's cool, and thanks for adjusting your post. I just don't want anyone to think that I share the quoted viewpoint.

Thanks again -- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #649 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 12:15 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
rdjam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 9,736
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by drhankz View Post

I won't get into any finger pointing matches here.

But as one of the TWO engineers that INVENTED this whole Bit
mapping display technology WAY BACK in 1976 before people even
heard of computers or HD - I can ATTEST to PQ as being degraded
if any technology massages it from its NATIVE format.

As a FIRST-time adopter of HD DVD and one who has sent back his
Blu-ray after only 4 hours of use - I truly look forward to the X2
and I truly hope it is not doing any deinterlacing. If it is - I will
not be buying it.

Hi Dr hanks

I think I need to explain something here.

When Faroudja started doing his deinterlacing thing, the sources were all "interlaced" material. As a result, there was sometime very significant movement between each and every field (as opposed to frame - there are two "fields" per "frame") which his software had to "make up", in effect.

As a result, deinterlacing material where the source was native interlaced, meant having to "make up" about half of the picture information that would be in the final "progressive" video output.

With the HD DVD players, the situation is entirely different. Since the source is progressive, the two "fields" have no movement between them, and the "frame" is carried whole and unaltered from it's original.

Therefore, "deinterlacing" 1080p24 material cariied as a 1080i60 stream should not really even be called "de-interlacing, technically. It would probably be more accurately termed "re-assembling".

My Vantage HD spits out absolutely line-for-line perfect 1080p from the Toshiba's video signal. If the process of re-assembling the source image is done properly, then there is no loss and nothin to fear.

Hope this helps..
rdjam is offline  
post #650 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 12:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
TrevorS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,232
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly13 View Post

Interestingly, someone here has a sig. that links to Monster's sales propaganda about the merits of their $100 toslink cable, and it actually sounded similar to this article, talking about slght losses in digital transmission which I thought didn't happen - 'signal gets there or it doesn't' is the wisdom I've relied on using ultra-cheap RCA cable Coax s/pdif connection quite happily... Maybe I should join and post on that forum... any insight?

I'll comment, but I'll preface by saying this is a topic that can result in major shout fests, so I'm not willing to do more than comment.

The transmission of digital data itself is highly reliable as a function of signal losses associated with cable length and quality. The problem that can arise is when more than mere digital information is effectively encoded within the transmission. If the actual pacing of the digital data happens to be significant at the receiver end (even if only to a very small degree), then one can say an analog attribute has been added to the digital data stream. At that point, not only is it important to recover the original digital data (not usually a big problem for modest distances), but also the analog information. Therein can lie a problem (due to transmitter inacurracies, cable smearing, reflections, receiver inaccuracies). So I would say the correct answer is -- it depends.

-- Trevor
TrevorS is offline  
post #651 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 12:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
BenDover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 5,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Progressive Segmented Frame...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progres...egmented_Frame

btw, vc-1 can do this...i think avc can as well?
BenDover is offline  
post #652 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 01:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cpcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Vidalia, GA
Posts: 6,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam View Post

With the HD DVD players, the situation is entirely different. Since the source is progressive, the two "fields" have no movement between them, and the "frame" is carried whole and unaltered from it's original.

That's not exactly correct. 1080i60 from a film source requires accurate inverse telecine to recreate the frames. You can't simply recombine the fields or you will end up with combing artifacts. What you are referring to I think is 1080p24sf. With 1080p24sf, the frames are basically carried as 1080i48 with the fields corresponding. To recreate 1080p24 from 1080p24sf, all you need is a simple weave of the fields.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdjam View Post

Therefore, "deinterlacing" 1080p24 material cariied as a 1080i60 stream should not really even be called "de-interlacing, technically. It would probably be more accurately termed "re-assembling".

Actually the correct term is inverse telecine or reverse 3:2 pulldown.
cpcat is offline  
post #653 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 01:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cpcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Vidalia, GA
Posts: 6,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

However, 1080p24 is worthless for the vast majority of 1080p displays available, and so what is the value of your opinion?

-- Trevor

1080p24 output is the native output. If I had to choose, I'd take the native signal over 1080p60. Both would be nice so we have a choice. FYI all the current pio pdp's take 1080p24 (and display at 768p72 or 1080p72). The Sony Pearl also takes 1080p24.
cpcat is offline  
post #654 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 01:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cpcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Vidalia, GA
Posts: 6,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevorS View Post

Robert has been VERY specific in saying the XA2 provides 1080i/60 and 1080p/60.

It has also been stated that A2 goes up to 1080i/60 just like the A1.

What is seen on the generic label plate with a flashlite tells you absolutely nothing about the capabilities of the players (with or without firmware upgrades).

-- Trevor

I think you are reading too fast.

I was referring to the fact that there was no specific confirmation on the mode of 1080p output at this point i.e. whether it was coming straight from the disc as 1080p24 or a product of post-processing of 1080i.

My comment on what's seen on the faceplate of the A1 was more an implication of its generic nature i.e. DVD-A and SACD are on the display and likely neither will ever happen.
cpcat is offline  
post #655 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 01:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vincennes, Indiana
Posts: 1,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfabien View Post

The HD-A1 compares to a $2,500 CD player, and

The HD-XA1 compares to a $3,000 to $6,000 CD player.

I know I've been very impressed with the quality sound when playing a CD but following is the reasons why:

http://www.highdefforum.com/showpost...05&postcount=1

the A1s are thus better than the A2s for CD, if all this makes sense.

Can somebody expand on what exactly makes the HD-XA1 that much better than the HD-A1 for CD playback? Is it simply the build quality or are there better DACs or something in the XA1?

Have an Onkyo 805 receiver and having trouble setting up Audyssey? HERE is a mini how-to.Click HERE to check out my comparison review of 5 different projection screen fabrics.
Chad T is offline  
post #656 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 01:48 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
rdjam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 9,736
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by cpcat View Post

That's not exactly correct. 1080i60 from a film source requires accurate inverse telecine to recreate the frames. You can't simply recombine the fields or you will end up with combing artifacts. What you are referring to I think is 1080p24sf. With 1080p24sf, the frames are basically carried as 1080i48 with the fields corresponding. To recreate 1080p24 from 1080p24sf, all you need is a simple weave of the fields.



Actually the correct term is inverse telecine or reverse 3:2 pulldown.

Yes - I was simplifying for the fella.

The most accurate rendition of what I described would have of course been 24p psf - or 48i.

However, in effect, the loose description fits, except with additional field information slapped in for the pull-down.

In essence, 12 of the 60 "fields" per second are redundant in playback from the HD DVDs.

But to get into that would have boggled the neophytes and made the whole thing a bit complicated.

Please forgive my oversimplification (grovel grovel)
rdjam is offline  
post #657 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 03:29 PM
Advanced Member
 
mfabien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad T View Post

Can somebody expand on what exactly makes the HD-XA1 that much better than the HD-A1 for CD playback? Is it simply the build quality or are there better DACs or something in the XA1?

Double chassis makes the player heavier (translation = stable) and the anti vibration feet under this player is directly linked to this discussion.
mfabien is offline  
post #658 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 04:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Chad T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vincennes, Indiana
Posts: 1,575
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So if I put hockey pucks (makeshift anti vibration feet) under an A1 and a bag of sand on top I should be in the same ballpark?

Have an Onkyo 805 receiver and having trouble setting up Audyssey? HERE is a mini how-to.Click HERE to check out my comparison review of 5 different projection screen fabrics.
Chad T is offline  
post #659 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 04:11 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
joerod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MIDWEST (just outside Chicago)
Posts: 22,129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Liked: 117
That would work!

For my latest Reviews and Stuff google -> Joe Rod Home Theater .Com
Check out my Dolby Atmos/Surround first take:
http://hstrial-jrodriguez996.homeste...=1409517748063
joerod is offline  
post #660 of 4928 Old 09-19-2006, 04:19 PM
Advanced Member
 
mfabien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 795
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad T View Post

So if I put hockey pucks (makeshift anti vibration feet) under an A1 and a bag of sand on top I should be in the same ballpark?

Replace the pucks with 1 inch round pads (smooth underside and padded on top = Home Depot) placed under each foot of the HD-A1 (hey, I will do that myself) but keep the top clear because the player needs the air circulation over the grills. This way we may approach the value of a $3,000 CD player.
mfabien is offline  
Reply HD DVD Players

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