Silicon Optix Announces the Realta Chip -- Bringing Teranex's $60k HQV to the Home - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 425 Old 09-19-2004, 08:30 PM
Member
 
bluevision's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by Robert2413
I have to disagree with the "very expensive" part. Once the audio has been digitized, delaying it by 1/3-second requires about 768 kilobytes of RAM assuming six channels (5.1), 96 kHz sample frequency, and 32-bit floating point words. This is only required if we assume that the receiver has provisions for 6 channels of uncompressed domain. Otherwise, the Dolby or DTS-encoded stream can be delayed before the decoder, which reduces the memory requirement very substantially. In any event, this amount of RAM is not expensive at all if implemented in a receiver that has a digital architecture, as every mid to high-end receiver now does.
Hi Robert,

My 'very expensive' comment was relative to 3K-8K consumer grade LCD-TVs where the BOM for the electronics board is between $200-$300 for the entire system. I would agree with your statement that if this is targeting a mid to high-end receiver that the cost adder for the audio delay wouldn't be as substantial.

I think that we're both on the same page. Sorry for the confusion.
bluevision is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 425 Old 09-19-2004, 11:49 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
few comments (Although Ray beat me to it...):

Some people have gotten the delay part wrong - we're talking about a 7 FIELD delay (around 3.5 frames) that Terranex's algorithms use. This is used to match non-standard cadences.

That's 116ms for NTSC and 140ms for PAL. That's quite a lot.

Human tolerance ranges from +30ms to -90ms (some say that it's between +45ms and -125ms, but I'm taking the safe route). Note that hearing is more tolerant of lipsync where the audio is ahead of the video (125ms).

That means that if we keep a constant delay of around 130ms, we're safe regardless of PAL/NTSC/HD.

I believe all the new A/V receivers and preprocessors now will support such a lipsync delay.

Robert,

Convergence is a good thing. However, will you accept less PQ for a higher price simply because an A/V receiver manufacturer bundled it into a strong A/V receiver? Of course not (or you wouldn't be in this forum...).

A strong A/V receiver that has strong processing will cost monumental amounts of money. I wish, just as you do, to see the technology properly integrated into A/V receivers and preprocessors - but as you can see this change over will take some time and the VP side of things is obviously still way ahead of the curve.

You also have to keep in mind that high end users prefer to break functionality into discrete parts - A/V receivers are shifting towards dedicated preprocessors and separate amps.

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #93 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 01:01 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 600
Ofer. I do not think you are saying that "AV receivers are shifting toward" but rather that high end users are shifting toward separates. If that is what you are saying, I would not agree. High end users never went the receiver route in the first place. But I would agree that separates can indeed out perform integrateds.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #94 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 01:43 AM
Senior Member
 
Elliot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I can't think of very many standard AV receievrs touting Lipsync delay in those sort of quantities. Most seem to get to about 40 - 60ms and cap it at that, it will be hard work getting them all to change over to a 150ms one!! ( i had an uphill battle gettng Tag McLaren to implement it, however theres was changed to 300ms :))

As a good example look at the Lexicon MC12, only 60 ms delay (from memory).......

There are external solutions however, take a look here:
Lip Sync unit

Support the british engineers :)
Elliot is offline  
post #95 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 06:28 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Mark,

I mean to say that more and more people are shifting towards that route.

Elliot,

Good point. Just checked and my own (brand new Onkyo) receiver supports up to 74ms of delay. That's only a bit shorter than the minimal lipsync delay (if you add the tolerance, I'm still about 20ms shy of success).

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #96 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 07:37 AM
Advanced Member
 
Jase H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: España
Posts: 576
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Some Denon's have 0-200ms (per input) so should be ok. :) This is a very interesting thread with some great info. Can't wait to see this stuff appear on the market.
Jase H is offline  
post #97 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 08:08 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Looks like more companies are coming out with high lipsync delays: Immersiv'es Simmetry DVP provides 0-300ms delay with 7 SPDIF inputs!

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #98 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 08:28 AM
Member
 
Ray Lego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Saint Cloud, FL
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As we move into 'the golden age of video processing' (I firmly believe this) I think the receiver manufacturers will rise to the occasion and place delays into their systems. Heck, within 2 years you'll probably see it in garden variety equipment at Best Buy.

For the basic consumer they would select from a list of video displays and/or processors when setting up the receiver. Dial up "HQV" on the receiver's 'video processor type' menu, 'enter', - and you're done! Perfect delay for all channels referenced to the display.

Assuming that the receiver will probably route video into the display, an 'autodetect video processor type' in the receiver with feedback from the display/projector would be sweet, no guesswork. Audio would ALWAYS be in sync, even switching to different formats that might have different delays. You could always have optimal video and the audio would dynamically track delay-wise. Plug N' Play baby!
Ray Lego is offline  
post #99 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 02:35 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 3,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Hi Ray,

All that tech talk sounds nice in an engineer's dream of a perfect world. However, just in case on of those machines or their firmware got mixed up, it would be sweet to have some sort of manual over-ride.

Regarding this chip making it into garden variety equipment at Best Buy, this does seem to respond to the pricing premium concerns of folks in the AVS Plasma forum, who think that it might create a hefty price tag on already expensive Plasma panels. Personally, without knowledge of your marketing strategy but having an inkling of the market dynamics for Plasma panels and hindsight of Faroudja/Sage's groundbreaking initiative to bring professional/broadcast image processing into mainstream consumer products, I'll wager that their adoption will grow like wildfire: there's a huge potential demand plus many second tier manufacturers needing competitive edge to move their products, especially high margin items such as Plasma panels and other digital displays. Volume sales can be yours for the asking, as long as you practice reasonable pricing to ensure that your solution becomes not just "the best", but a household word meaning QUALITY. This is indeed a great opportunity to build Brand Equity which will be transferable to future products and reflected in your longer term profitability and share valuation.

Cheers,

Brett
Brett is offline  
post #100 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 03:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kromkamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Toronto,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 4,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally posted by bluevision
To follow up on Ray's point, if you do the processing right... you don't need to add any noise reduction and/or detail enhancement. It's only when the processing is sub-par that you need to apply detail enhancement to make the image sharper... (Brett's point).
I dont think thats true. Its more a function of the source material (particularly in the case of noise reduction).

BTW The teranex deinterlacing algorithm requires 4 fields of input to be able to precisely lock onto the different cadences and sort out video from film. the algorithm also has 1 field of output latency. Add in various sub-field latencies in the rest of the chip and you should see around 100ms of latency for the Realta in full-processing mode. There is also a game mode where re-syncing the audio just wont do, since you need a tight loop from the game controller to visual feedback. In this case different de-interlacing is performed to greatly reduce the latency.

The Realta chip also has 4 stereo-pairs of audio delay built-in.

Andy K.
kromkamp is offline  
post #101 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 03:23 PM
AVS Special Member
 
kromkamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Toronto,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 4,411
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Ofer LaOr, if you compensated 75ms in your receiver I would practically guarantee you would not notice the remaining latency. (Note this is not a money-back, SiOptix-approved guarantee :D )

Andy K.
kromkamp is offline  
post #102 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 07:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mark haflich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: brookeville, maryland, usa
Posts: 20,275
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 650 Post(s)
Liked: 600
It is patently obvious that the correct word would be "residual" latency rather than "remaining" latency.

Mark Haflich
markhaflich@yahoo.com
call me at: 240 876 2536
mark haflich is offline  
post #103 of 425 Old 09-20-2004, 09:41 PM
Advanced Member
 
Robert2413's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Belmont CA U.S.A.
Posts: 605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally posted by oferlaor
few comments (Although Ray beat me to it...):

Robert,

Convergence is a good thing. However, will you accept less PQ for a higher price simply because an A/V receiver manufacturer bundled it into a strong A/V receiver? Of course not (or you wouldn't be in this forum...).

A strong A/V receiver that has strong processing will cost monumental amounts of money. I wish, just as you do, to see the technology properly integrated into A/V receivers and preprocessors - but as you can see this change over will take some time and the VP side of things is obviously still way ahead of the curve.

You also have to keep in mind that high end users prefer to break functionality into discrete parts - A/V receivers are shifting towards dedicated preprocessors and separate amps.
I'm an old, hardcore audiophile (had Quad ESL 57's when I was still in high school, lo these many moons ago). But I must confess to being fed up with the complexity necessary to get a multichannel setup to work properly these days. Right now, my home theater setup has an absolutely irritating number of wires in it, considering that the system presently contains two DVD players (an SDI-moded DVD-A Technics [with 8 audio wires going between it and the receiver] and a Denon with Faroudja processing for video and anime), a DVD recorder, an S-video distribution amplifier (to allow the single S-video output of my HD TiVo to feed the DVD recorder, an S-VHS tape machine, and the receiver), a Vigatec Dune scaler/video switcher, and an old Pioneer Laserdisc player. All of these are tangled up with a Denon AVR-5800 receiver; if I had a separate preamp and power amp, there would be even _more_ wires.

Sheesh!

It's hard to keep track of the wiring (I use adhesive-backed numbers that have a bad habit of falling off when the adhesive gets old, supplemented by a I/O chart that I keep on my computer), and it's a royal pain in the butt to change anything.

So even though I'm fully capable, intellectually, of dealing with all of this, emotionally, I think it's ridiculous.

Denon has made some important strides in the right direction since the 5800, which has no lipsync delay and doesn't transcode video -- two omissions that mean that mine will be replaced sometime in the future. But I can visualize a receiver that would reduce the complexity of the wiring in my system AND greatly ease controllability issues -- no more need to make complicated macros for the remote control just to switch sources! The Denon's audio quality is quite good enough for my aging ears, and high-end receivers seem only to be getting better. Given that Denon just announced a new behemoth receiver listing for around $6000 (at 12" high, too big for my shelf, alas) and having full video switching and transcoding (with Faroudja deinterlacing), I don't think that it's a big stretch to imagine that to a next-generation Denon (or Marantz, or whatever) receiver could evolve into something with the HQV processor and a built-in optical drive (and no, I don't believe that optical drives have a "sound of their own").

In short, I am willing to sacrifice versatility for a slickly integrated, all-in-one unit. I think that the audio quality of high-end receivers will only continue to improve, until there is very little argument to be made for separates unless one prefers components (like single-ended triode amplifiers) that are purposely colored. But for mainstream users like me, "uncolored" does just fine, thank you.
Robert2413 is offline  
post #104 of 425 Old 09-21-2004, 01:10 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Robert,

You're not just losing versatility, it's also PQ that you're losing out on.

If you're looking for a complete all-in-one system, take a peak at immersive's site (www.immersiveinc.com).

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #105 of 425 Old 09-21-2004, 02:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brandon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: LA lalalalala
Posts: 3,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
So here's a question. If you have SDI modded a DVD deck, and normally the video would be going though some of the deck's limited processing and coming out the component jack perfectly (one would hope) in sync with the SPDIF output, does this mean you've picked up ANY slack by jumping straight to SDI out, and getting the scaler even marginally ahead of the game?

BB
Brandon B is offline  
post #106 of 425 Old 09-21-2004, 10:04 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Brandon B,

The slack is so small (basically speed of light through the DAC circuitry...) that it won't amount to much...

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #107 of 425 Old 09-21-2004, 10:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brandon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: LA lalalalala
Posts: 3,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I was assuming a de-interlacer too (progressive scan), but OK.
Brandon B is offline  
post #108 of 425 Old 09-22-2004, 12:17 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Brandon,

If you're skipping the DAC portion, you're not going through a deinterlacer on the DVD anyway, so it doesn't add or detract from the delay.

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #109 of 425 Old 09-22-2004, 03:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhafner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally posted by Ray Lego
Take the HQV, watch the 5th Element DVD with a DPI HD-35 DLP projector on a 30 foot screen at 1080p60 and you WILL believe!
You did that? Watch the 5th Element DVD with HQV?
If yes, tell me, how does Gary Oldman's vest look in the scene where he demonstrates the weapons to the mercenary aliens? Does anything change if you activate noise reduction?
mhafner is offline  
post #110 of 425 Old 09-22-2004, 03:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhafner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 4,612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally posted by sspears

You could argue that what you watch on DVD is not true since the source it came from was 10-bit 4:2:2 at one point and is now 8-bit 4:2:0. The interpolation filter your DVD player will use is most likely not an inverse of the low pass filter used to get you to 4:2:0.
It can't be on principle since the low pass filter destroys information. If it does not you get aliasing when discarding the extra samples, and from the remaining samples again the original can't be reconstructed, no matter what 'inverse' filter you use. Only if your chroma is so soft to begin with that there is no HF content lost at half sampling rate you have a chance. But that's a poor quality master to begin with.
Distinguishing between true and not true is a rather slippery concept. Was the HD master true?
Was the film element true? Both do not show reality as is.
mhafner is offline  
post #111 of 425 Old 09-22-2004, 08:42 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brandon B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: LA lalalalala
Posts: 3,974
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally posted by oferlaor
If you're skipping the DAC portion, you're not going through a deinterlacer on the DVD anyway, so it doesn't add or detract from the delay.
Right. NOT going through the deinterlacer was where I thought you might pick up a tiny bit of time. Because I assumed they would correct for that on the DVD player's digital audio out.

BB
Brandon B is offline  
post #112 of 425 Old 09-23-2004, 08:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 3,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally posted by Ray Lego
As we move into 'the golden age of video processing' (I firmly believe this) ... [ ] ... Assuming that the receiver will probably route video into the display, an 'autodetect video processor type' in the receiver with feedback from the display/projector would be sweet, no guesswork....
Hi Ray,

I realize that you guys are bringing us into the Golden Age of video processing. But high powered fully integrated extremely complex processing might give rise to some folks concerns. According to Business Week, there is a move to integrate "Monitoring Devices" into all digital TVs. Is this something which has been future proofed in the Realta chip, or will manufacturers have to implement this forthcoming requirement through other devices? After all, a single solution providing both video processing and reporting back to the Networks what your viewing behavior is seems like a far more streamlined and elegant engineering proposal.

Thanks for expounding, I'm sure the display device manufacturers who may soon become good customers of yours will be interested if such an implementation is already part of your product offering.

Brett
Brett is offline  
post #113 of 425 Old 09-24-2004, 06:29 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Brandon,

Ahh.. OK, I understand your point now. I don't think most companies bother with adding lipsync delay in their players to compensate for deinterlacing.

Brett,

I don't know of a single processor that is connected to the outside world. Do you think the monitoring reports will be transferred during firmware updates? Sounds a bit on the paranoid side...

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #114 of 425 Old 09-24-2004, 09:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Brett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 3,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally posted by oferlaor
Brett,

I don't know of a single processor that is connected to the outside world. Do you think the monitoring reports will be transferred during firmware updates? Sounds a bit on the paranoid side...
Hi Ofer,

May I first congratulate you on your status as Moderator of this forum - I hadn't had a chance to chat with you since hanging out over the years in the Plasma forum. I'll read this forum with renewed interest knowing that your candor and sometimes even cool "inside information" from private sources will put us in the know before the news breaks officially. :cool:

Regarding your comment which I have quoted above, I could indeed be construed as paranoid if I had raised issues of profiling specific individuals to classify them in specific categories, which I don't think is really what the Media is purpose built to do. As usual, please correct me if I'm wrong. ;)

I heard of the move to require monitoring devices on future receivers as well as in "all-in-one" display devices from the mainstream media. You may consider Business Week to be an unreliable source of news, it possibly is in some people's estimation. But I've often paid attention to its serious reporting of news which tends to affect the American business community.

Your reaction makes me wonder why you would think that a move to monitor our viewing would be necessarily motivated by a plot to spy on us or to control our lives. Having private information about people can be construed as legitimate. After all, some folks carry cards showing their blood type in their wallet for use if they have an accident. Most will agree that this isn't an unacceptable intrusion into their privacy since it is only used to help them. The real issue raised by your comment is not whether monitoring can or will occur (it does in countless ways), but what is done with the information obtained. Is it really be used to help you, or for some other purpose?

People who fear an abuse of such information might be labeled "paranoid" by imagining that corporations, special interest groups, or even their respective governments, in efforts to curtail terrorism or for whatever other reason, would unjustifiably infringe upon their citizens fundamental freedoms and personal privacy. I don't know what things are like in this regard in Israel which has its own set of region-specific problems, but in France there are laws which strictly protect individual privacy which I hope will be carried over to European law during judicial unification.

I imagine that monitoring isn't readily feasible when people use satellite reception, unless there's some technology out there of which I'm ignorant. Here in Paris my cable box is required by contract, similarly to Sky in the UK, to be continuously hooked up to a phone line at all times, and my cable box dials the content provider daily (at my expense) with whatever information they desire, limited in all likelihood to my cable viewing behavior. I imagine that they are duty bound to their advertisers and content providers to get feedback about customer viewing patterns - if for no other reason than to help them improve their channel offerings and better meet consumer demand.

This is why I think that such a feature is not paranoid, but is an important feature for professionals in the broadcast industry: no more hooking up boxes to phone lines, cheaper phone bills for customers, and countless information processing integrated into powerful on-board chips - it could make the industry's task a heck of lot easier.

So I do believe that it is most legitimate to inquire about various potentialities of new technologies when they trickle down into broad consumer usage. For example, built-in monitoring would be great if a content provider would use your viewing habits to make tailor made commercial offers of special deals on channels which you are likely to enjoy. Also, it could serve to automatically open piped channels of a type you prefer amongst a large offering, where cable transmission bandwidth precludes you from receiving all possible channels.

While we are each entitled to our own opinion, please note for the record that I did not make any paranoid suppositions in this thread. While simple business models can sometimes be imagined by some folks as plots just because they entail an invasion of privacy, this does not prove that the industry has evil motives. I honestly don't find it objective on your behalf to label me as "paranoid" for asking a simple technical question, especially when such a friendly and insightful product developer as Ray from Silicon Optix offers to generously explain to us what their proprietary technology can provide.

As this is indeed an innovative revolutionary single chip processing solution which will be apparently be placed both in stand alone TVs and in media Receivers, asking what features are included seems to be a pertinent and legitimate question of interest to the entire broadcast industry, I'm sure Ray will concur and be most happy help us better understand the technological potential of the HQV Realta chip.

Cheers,

Brett
Brett is offline  
post #115 of 425 Old 09-24-2004, 10:00 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
oferlaor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Modiin, Israel
Posts: 8,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi Brett,

Thanks :) Been a moderator here for quite some time now.

I really don't want to hijack the topic, so here's my quick comments about this. My remark refers specifically to processors. There are plenty of areas today where you are being tracked down with or without your knowledge and the video processor seems like a silly place to worry about this. Your phone bill, cc bill, TV watching habits, internet traffic, phone call log & location can all be tracked. You are constantly being photographed without your knowledge.

If you would like to proceed this discussion, you can create an OT thread. Let me know and I'll split this section of the discussion into an alternate thread.

Lets stick to the topic at hand :)

Cheers,
Ofer LaOr
www.hometheater.co.il
oferlaor is offline  
post #116 of 425 Old 09-24-2004, 02:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 3,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Ofer,

I just asked Ray, in passing, whether their chip with supercomputing capabilities had any extras for manufacturers to consider when installing them. From your own statements, and I know you have a superior grasp of the field, this is not a likely place to put such a device, although a processor could be pre-programmed for shape recognition of our non-broadcast input sources such as home movies, etc. :eek:

Just kidding, I doubt even one's Big Brother would have use for more information about our independent (non broadcast reception) use of our display and projection media. I apologize if my asking Ray for details about the HQV chip seemed off topic. I will comply and won't press the matter further.

Cheers,

Brett
Brett is offline  
post #117 of 425 Old 09-25-2004, 04:09 PM
Member
 
Ray Lego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Saint Cloud, FL
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just a quick note to finish this up. The Realta is pure processing. Any viewer 'monitoring' and reporting would have to be another device within the display. I was referring to a comm link between the receiver and the display so the receiver might autodetect the delay through the Realta processor and compensate accordingly - no user intervention required, lipsync is perfect (of course, that's assuming the SOURCE is perfect <grin>)

Now back to boarding up my windows for hurricane Jeanne. These hurricanes are starting to piss me off...
Ray Lego is offline  
post #118 of 425 Old 09-28-2004, 07:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DaveN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: TN
Posts: 1,818
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I checked the Theta CB has a 100msec delay max. Another contender.
DaveN is offline  
post #119 of 425 Old 09-28-2004, 08:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mburnstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Bloomfield Twp., MI
Posts: 1,858
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Any analogue audio input delay devices that have more than one stereo input?

mark

Top Home Theater's I hope to see: The Bland's
Art's and my buddy Steve Bruzonsky! And Oneobgyn if I ever make it to NorCal!
mburnstein is offline  
post #120 of 425 Old 09-29-2004, 01:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 3,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Off Topic

Hi Ray,

Didn't realize that Saint Cloud was way North of Palm Beach in Osceola County - you've been hit by just about every single big one - ouch!
I sure hope you didn't suffer too much from the wind and rain, according to this map you're in one of the most Hurricane intensive areas in history:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/media/gr...9/14192953.gif

Funny coincidence, last Saturday night I was at a Birthday party in Saint Cloud (France) on a hillside bordering Paris. The mansion had a nice view of the city and the Eiffel Tower, plus the Champagne was the real stuff, but they didn't have a Home Theater and didn't realize what they're missing. ;)

Back On Topic

Regarding home theater use of your HQV technology, I was wondering if once the Realta chip can be found inside an external scaler, if it might not have another great use: improving poor quality distorted or badly aging family movies by processing them prior to archiving on a digital medium?

I imagine that some of you guys working on those mighty Teranex supercomputers might have been tempted over the years to give it a try with old home movies or whatnot. What are the pros and cons of using it for processing older videos?

Thanks in advance,

Brett
Brett is offline  
Closed Thread Video Processors

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