Pics of the 70" XBR2 are below.
For your reference, here are some relevant equipment I have at my disposal:
Toshiba HD-A1 HD-DVD player (via HDMI)
Denon DVD-5910 SD-DVD player (via HDMI)
Hughes HD satellite receiver (via component)
First - I don't observe any of the color uniformity problems that I saw with my 60" A2000 (I had a red blob).
Second- obviously the stand I was using for my A2000 is now too tall and will have to be replaced with something lower.
The TV is HUGE, almost too big for my room but I think this will become less apparent over time and with the lower stand. I moved my couch back even further to accomodate. I though that my 60" was small, hence part of the reason (in addition to the red blob) why I wanted to exchange it for the 70".
SSE/SDE is similar to 60" A2000 which is saying a little because now I have the larger screen so you would think that this should have been more noticeable.
I have implemented the settings provided above (thanks).
I have sampled a few HD-DVDs and SD-DVDs and was generally impressed with what I saw, and did catch myself saying wow a few times - not sure yet if it was totally worthwhile spending the extra $3k. Satellite SD and HD definately looked improved over the A2000, but I don't put much into this until I get an MPEG-4 based sat receiver. I watched a little college football tonight and it seemed to perform much better regarding motion blur. I will know more after sitting and watching NFL all day tomorrow on Sunday ticket.
Anyway, objective tests are probably of more value to you all and I did find something shocking when I went to re-run the Vertrez tests that had run previously with the A2000 (details here
). I was interested in finding how well it did motion adaptive interlacing using Vertrez Motion test. What shocked me here was the top block of lines in this and in the Vertrez (non-motion) test were blinking collectively (please refer to picture from previous test in above link - reference the word HERE in the pic to see what I am talking about).
Does this mean that the set is not doing a proper weave deinterlace when the A2000 showed that it was (all lines within this block were distinct).
I find this very disturbing unless I am misinterpreting something. Up until I ran this test I was convinced (albeit subjectively) that the XBR2 was a definate upgrade over the A2000. So, how can this test fail?
EDIT: apparently the above test behavior depends on the DRC mode. I had had it set to mode 1 per the prior recommendations. I just tried it with DRC off and got the same results as with the A2000. Also, with the DRC mode off, the Vertrez motion test results appeared similar to the A2000 - so it is doing region based adapting instead of per pixel (which I remember reading here before that someone claimed the XBR1 could do - probably not though).