Prog-Scan DVD Player vs Blu-ray Player - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 6Likes
  • 1 Post By Dr. Spankenstein
  • 2 Post By Floydage
  • 1 Post By Mark12547
  • 1 Post By nathanddrews
  • 1 Post By Mark12547
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 Old 06-02-2017, 10:32 AM - Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Prog-Scan DVD Player vs Blu-ray Player

Which one of these would be best for a 480i/480p/720p/1080i HD-CRT? I've heard that Blu-ray is pointless if you don't have a 1080p or 4K TV.

Last edited by Tom Smith Smith; 07-17-2017 at 12:51 PM.
Tom Smith Smith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 Old 06-02-2017, 10:43 AM
Advanced Member
 
Dr. Spankenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 862
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 101 Post(s)
Liked: 70
It might not be pointless if you have a surround sound system included. Blu ray would then give you access to the high-resolution audio formats.


Even if not, more modern Blu ray players have good upscaling capabilities. CRT benefits from not being constrained by set pixels but rather scan lines and may actually look better than you may think.


Perhaps you have a friend or relative that has a player you can borrow.


Also, you'll need to consider what type of connectivity both your TV and future player will have/require (ie. Component (R,G,B), HDMI, and audio).




That should get you started.
Tom Smith Smith likes this.

JVC X750R, 133" DaLite HP (2.8 gain), OPPO UDP 203
Denon X4300H, DIYSoundGroup Fusion 15 L/C/R, Mirage FS V2 Surround, Mirage Omnisat V1 Surround/Atmos
Dr. Spankenstein is offline  
post #3 of 13 Old 06-02-2017, 12:15 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,857
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked: 70
I'd think a Blu-ray player. Then at least you can play a BR disk for better PQ (no upscaling). And they seem to be more versatile, produce better output quality, and have more bells&whistles than the standard DVD player; plus streaming capability on many.

And kudos to the good doctor's points. Speaking of connectivity, beware that some of the newer stuff has gone to HDMI-only as they looked to cut costs. I saw one that was that way with only a digital audio output extra; I won't buy one of those even if I had HDMI as it becomes electronic recycle fare if the HDMI chip/card goes bad (i.e. can't resort to other output types). HDMI is complex and runs hot so it does have a tendency to go bad independently of the rest of the circuitry.

Now I suppose there are fancier DVD players. At least my DVD Recorders are of that sort having the better qualities but they still have to upscale.

Floydage is offline  
 
post #4 of 13 Old 06-06-2017, 09:34 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark12547's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Salem, Oregon, United States, Earth
Posts: 2,112
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 767 Post(s)
Liked: 526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Smith Smith View Post
Which one of these would be best for a 480p/1080i HD-CRT? I've heard that Blu-ray is pointless if you don't have a 1080p or 4K TV.
A Blu-ray player may be pointless for a 480-line device; but even for a 720-line device a Blu-ray player would provide better resolution on the screen than a DVD player while playing Blu-ray discs, and it seems that a Blu-ray player would be a very good fit for a 1080-line display device.

I have a Blu-ray player connected to my "720 class" 1366x768 TV and if I am looking for detail I can tell if I am playing a DVD or a Blu-ray disc because the main feature on a Blu-ray disc has more detail that can be seen even on my "720 class" TV. But if it is a movie where I want to see the last detail, I use the Blu-ray player connected to my big 1920x1080 TV (no overscan, so it has a 1:1 mapping of the Blu-ray 1920x1080 image to the TV's 1920x1080 pixels) because that TV can display every last pixel that is on the Blu-ray disc!

I might not be as adverse to HDMI ports as Floydage is, but if you decide to buy a Blu-ray player and want or need component video output, you may have to search long and hard since almost all Blu-ray players have done away with component, giving you only HDMI (typical output formats) and composite (480i-only) outputs.

One problem you may find with a Blu-ray player is that many ship with the factory default output resolution of 1080p, so you may have to see if you can use the composite port to configure the Blu-ray player to output 1080i on the HD outputs, or possibly take it to a friend's house to use the HDMI port to configure the HD outputs to 1080i.

If you will be playing only DVDs, and not using any "smart" or "Internet" features of the player, then the only advantage a Blu-ray player would give you is the ability to use the Blu-ray player's scaler to get 480i DVDs upscaled to 1080i for the TV, but that might or might not be an advantage over using the TV's upscaler.

If you decide to go with a DVD player, and if your TV has an available component video port, I would recommend getting a DVD player that can output a progressive signal to the component cables for the TV. At least my first HDTV was a poor upscaler for 480i content but did great for 480p, but that was almost 8 years ago and scalers have improved since then.

If at all possible, avoid using composite video and "RF output" from a DVD player! At best some of the finer detail will be lost, and at worse there could be other video artifacts (dancing color pixels at sharp bright/dark boundaries, or false colors in parts of some pictures, such as someone wearing a herringbone pattern). While these were usually unnoticed while watching a 20-in screen from across the room, larger screens make the lack of fine detail or these artifacts more "in your face".
Tom Smith Smith likes this.

My very humble setup:
Spoiler!
Mark12547 is offline  
post #5 of 13 Old 06-07-2017, 09:16 PM - Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 0
My HD-CRT has 1 HDMI input and 2 component inputs (one says 480i/480p/ and the other says 720p/1080i). So the TV has the inputs covered.
Tom Smith Smith is offline  
post #6 of 13 Old 06-08-2017, 02:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,857
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked: 70
I'm not adverse to HDMI ports, rather HDMI-only devices. HDMI is the king of the heap, although I suspect there are situations where component [analog] is preferred for CRTs (gaming?).

I thought there are upscaling [to 1080p] DVD players, you know HDMI and all. But I'd beware that some may only put out 1080p, at least via HDMI.

The beauty of CRT TVs is their ability to display in native resolution. In fact I didn't know any had upscalers. Of course my HD CRT TV is older than most. And I've yet to hear about one that could natively display 720p. I think it's like 1080p, requires too much power for a CRT (large transformers, cost, etc.). Anyhow in my setup I've found that I like the PQ of displaying 480i in 480i, any upscaling from there just gets foggy (what's the proper video term? I think I've read soap opera affect used). 480i on a flat panel looks like crap IMO.

Floydage is offline  
post #7 of 13 Old 06-08-2017, 03:45 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
nathanddrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,660
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 422 Post(s)
Liked: 358
I have a Sony 34XBR800 34" CRT (1080i over DVI/HDMI) and a Sony Pro plasma (480p over DVI), both of which are connected using Windows PCs. Blu-ray wins hands down, using DVDs vs Blu-rays based upon the same master. Now take into account lossless audio and newer, better Blu-ray discs based upon newer, better transfers and encodes, the picture quality only improves over DVD.
Tom Smith Smith likes this.
nathanddrews is online now  
post #8 of 13 Old 06-08-2017, 08:24 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark12547's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Salem, Oregon, United States, Earth
Posts: 2,112
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 767 Post(s)
Liked: 526
If you allow, please let me state for the record that I have broad ranges of ignorance.

One advantage public boards have is that it gives me time to open mouth, insert other foot, and then learn from those more knowledgeable.

Your (Floydage's) post reminded me that HD CRTs don't have a "native resolution" as such, but instead can drive the electron beam at different sweep rates, so they can display the image in the same resolution as received, no scaler involved, as long as it is one of the resolutions the electronics can recognize and process.

Except that it isn't always so, as I discovered when I tried to disprove what I remembered by spending the afternoon doing some Googling.

It turns out that some models will scale some formats. One forum I came across mentioned various combinations from various posters who had different HD CRT TVs:
  • One person had a TV that can accept 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i. However, 720p would be dowscaled to 480p.
  • Another person had a TV that can accept 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i; 720p would be upscaled to 1080i.
  • Some TVs apparently rescaled 720p to 540p and displayed that same 540-line frame for both odd and even lines to generate (display) 1080i.
  • Another person had a HD CRT TV that upscaled everything to 1080i.

So apparently the old rule that HD CRT TVs always had the cathode beams (electrons) sweep the screen at the same resolution as the input signal is just not true; there was just too much variability over the HD CRT TV years and models.

At least the rule of thumb for Plasma and LCD TVs (and variants) is a whole lot simpler: all supported input formats get rescaled to the TV's native resolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
I thought there are upscaling [to 1080p] DVD players, you know HDMI and all. But I'd beware that some may only put out 1080p, at least via HDMI.
A quick search of the Best Buy site turned up one upscaling DVD player, which can upscale to 1080p, but it has no component output, just composite and HDMI. For $45, I am wondering if this might be dead stock. Apparently the particular model is a shade over five years old, so the scaler isn't as new as in newer TVs. However, I did manage to locate a manual that indicates one can configure different HDMI output resolutions, including 1080i and 720p.

Same search found two DVD players at Best Buy that can output 480p on component cables but had no HDMI connections.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post
The beauty of CRT TVs is their ability to display in native resolution. In fact I didn't know any had upscalers. Of course my HD CRT TV is older than most. And I've yet to hear about one that could natively display 720p. I think it's like 1080p, requires too much power for a CRT (large transformers, cost, etc.). Anyhow in my setup I've found that I like the PQ of displaying 480i in 480i, any upscaling from there just gets foggy (what's the proper video term? ...). 480i on a flat panel looks like crap IMO.
The "foggy" or smeared look might be a need for fine-tune adjustments for HD, or the TV's electron beam might not be able to be focused as sharply as needed for HD. (The "soap opera effect" is where the motion is smooth, not the 24 frames per second judder that some people associate with films so anything smoother just feels wrong to them.)

I don't know if it was normal for multi-frequency CRTs to also adjust electron beam focus so that higher frequencies (higher resolutions) got a narrower beam to get better pixel resolutions and lower frequencies (lower resolutions) to slightly defocus the beam so more phosphors would be illuminated per "pixel" so there would be no gaps between scan lines, which sounds to me like a reasonable way to go but requires more adjustments when calibrating the TV. Otherwise, either one would end up with either a very narrow beam that works great for HD but leaves gaps between scan lines at SD resolutions, or a wider beam that would illuminate phosphors from scan line to next scan line at SD resolutions, but would smear fine details together at HD resolutions.

I managed to miss all that. My "man cave" made the jump from a 480i-only CRT to a 1080p LCD/CCFL (since replaced with a 1080p LCD/LED); and my bedroom made the jump from a 480i-only CRT to a "720 class" (768p) LCD/LED. I have never seen a multi-resolution CRT TV in person, let alone owned one.

As far as 1080p requiring too much power (or too expensive electronics), there may be a point there. I did some thumbnail calculations, simplifying frame rate to 30 or 60 frames per second (instead of 29.97 and 59.94 frames per second):


Code:
Resolution  Resolution  Pixels/Frame  Frame Rate  Pixels/Second
~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SD 480i       704x480i     337,920        30        10,137,600
ED 480p       704x480p     337,920        60        20,275,200
HD 720p      1280x720p     921,600        60        55,296,000
HD 1080i    1920x1080i   2,073,600        30        62,208,000
HD 1080p    1920x1080p   2,073,600        60       124,416,000
The number of horizontal lines that the electron beam would need to sweep on the screen per second would be the lines (480, 720, or 1080) times the frame rate:

Code:
Resolution  Resolution  Frame Rate  Horizontal Sweep Rate
~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SD 480i       704x480i      30             14,400
ED 480p       704x480p      60             28,800
HD 720p      1280x720p      60             43,200
HD 1080i    1920x1080i      30             32,400
HD 1080p    1920x1080p      60             64,800
Looking at the above numbers, it is no wonder why many early HDTVs excluded 1080p60: having to sweep the electron beams 64,800 times per second is far higher than any other resolution! And there would likewise be an increase in how fast the intensity of the electron beams have to change.

Looking at horizontal sweeps per second, it isn't that surprising that a few of the early models of HD CRT TVs could take 1080i (32,400 sweeps per second) but not 720p (43,200 sweeps per second) because of the increased frequencies needed for deflecting the electron beams.

I'm glad my HDTVs have all been able to take 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i, and 1080p.


As far as SD content goes, I found it really depends on the source material. I find that many DVDs look good on my 50-in 1080p60 TV, even though they lack fine detail (Blu-ray: can often see individual hairs; DVD: can see locks and groups of several hairs but not individual hairs on the head), and for old TV shows the common factor seems to be that they were originally filmed on 35mm film. But if the source material was video tape, even though it is transferred to DVD by the studios, it will generally look poor to awful, with even less detail and often with ringing and other video artifacts. (Compare, for example, "Mission: Impossible" TV show from 1966-1973 or Star Trek (the original series), both filmed on 35mm film, to, say, The The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour, which was taped and loaded with ringing artifacts.) The 50-in HDTV screen acts like a microscope to make those video artifacts painfully obvious, but they would have gone unnoticed on a "huge" (for the 1960s) 23-in screen when watched from across the room.

However, my very first HDTV had a quirk: if fed a 480i signal, it did a poor job upscaling to the 46-in 1080p screen; but it did a decent job upscaling 480p once I set the DVD player to output progressive. And when I got my first Blu-ray player, I did some tests of using the TV to upscale to 1080p (by using the DVD player) vs. using the Blu-ray player's upscaler to 1080p, and for various representative scenes I just couldn't tell the difference. But I know some people will find one device upscales better than another, depending on their mix of equipment they have and how good their eyes are.

And, likewise, on my other HDTV (the 32-in 768p connected to the cable box), it is similar types of observations: most SD channels look good for a lot of content and look fairly poor for certain programs, and a couple of channels just look awful. (One local access program has the "Midnight Movie" that always looks awful, and that is because they send video tapes to the local public access studios.) And some DVDs that look awful on the 50-in (due to the DVD very accurately capturing the analog tape video artifacts) look poor (yes, less awful) on the 32-in.

But, where possible, I try to get content in the best format and closest to the original aspect ratio that I can find, be it to buy Blu-ray discs where available (for my rather small collection of discs), or preferring Blu-rays over DVDs from Netflix, or streaming from Netflix instead of watching it on cable, or preferring cable HD channels over cable SD channels. But I am one of those who generally value a story more than the desire for HD, and I have watched a rare horrendously poor video because that was the only place I found that title.

But then my life is rather simple. It is those who have what was once leading edge technology but now on the trailing edge that needs to be connected to modern equipment that have a big challenge.

Case in point: I used to have analog cable feeding a pair of VCRs (yes, those old machines that took blank VHS cassettes) for the purpose of time shifting and a third VCR for watching those programs. I also had a bulk eraser and a VHS cassette rewinder. But when Comcast dropped analog cable on October 9, 2012, instead of getting splitters, DTAs for the VCRs, and a coax switch to pick which VCR feeds a TV that needs replacing, I decided instead to drop all that, get a DVR (rather, rent a Comcast DVR), and replace the aging and orange halo on screen TV with a new HDTV (the 32-in 786p TV), and didn't regret it, other than not having done that earlier. And what I have now is far simpler than even back on the analog days, just cable to DVR to TV. And I kept a VCR connected to one of the TVs only long enough to finish viewing the shows I had time-shifted via VHS cassettes.

But back to the original post of this thread: I would get a Blu-ray player, not a DVD player, because then I would have the option of playing a Blu-ray disc and getting the best video resolution I am capable of viewing on the TV, rather than locking myself into viewing only SD content.

And, at least on my HDTVs, the improvement of Blu-ray over DVD is enough (on both the 32-in 768p TV and the 50-in 1080p TV) that I have already replaced a few DVDs with Blu-ray discs, and my future purchases will be Blu-ray where available.
Tom Smith Smith likes this.

My very humble setup:
Spoiler!
Mark12547 is offline  
post #9 of 13 Old 06-08-2017, 10:23 PM - Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 0
I'm definitely going with a Blu-ray player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post

And I've yet to hear about one that could natively display 720p.
On my HD-CRT, there are several HD channels that get identified as "720p". Also when I set my Scart to HDMI upscaler to 720p to play old game consoles, the TV identifies those games as "720p". Not sure if it's true 720p or not. I just know it's very defined and smooth.
Tom Smith Smith is offline  
post #10 of 13 Old 06-09-2017, 11:50 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,857
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked: 70
Me too (broad ranges of ignorance). A jack of all trades and a master of none.

Yeah I used the term native resolution loosely, meaning they can display the same as the input if scaling is not required. I've come across the broad variations in scaling on this forum. That 540 one is interesting. Yuck to everything upscaled to 1080i. I wish mine could do the 720p to 480p (keeping it all p) for the NFL 'action' on Fox; I'll have to see if setting my HD tuner to convert it will improve the motion without much sacrifice in PQ.

I suspected that DVD players are limited on bells&whistles. My DVD recorder has all the common output connectors (US) and I can select all output types on component and HDMI.

No my TV looks fine with ED and HD inputs, it's the upscaled stuff from my DVDR and HDD/DVDR that get fuzzy.

Speed/power sounds familiar, it's been awhile since I read up on it. I remember an article showing that the flyback transformer, caps, and then of course the sourcing power supply got huge. Massive joules! And then there's the more speedy components required.

Interesting analyses and other info, thanks!

Oh, my Blu-ray player gave me a little better pic (regular and upscaled) than my DVDR so I would play back the DVDs I recorded on the Blu-ray. Of course it could have just been the units themselves rather than a general-ism about the two types (altho DVD players seemed to be on the economy side of things). It didn't seem significant when I acquired the HDD/DVDR, which is a good thing since I didn't have enough component ports to accommodate the Blu-ray player [pre-HDMI TV].

Floydage is offline  
post #11 of 13 Old 06-30-2017, 11:30 AM
Senior Member
 
reds75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Blue -ray seems to have better picture quality to me on my crts than dvd players even using the rca inputs.
reds75 is offline  
post #12 of 13 Old 07-04-2017, 07:04 AM
Super Moderator
 
teachsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Posts: 9,862
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 862 Post(s)
Liked: 1398
Please use the Help Me Choose thread in the Blu-ray forum for player recommendations.

OFFICIAL "HELP ME CHOOSE A PLAYER" THREAD: Can't decide? Start HERE

Please use the report post button to alert staff to problematic posts. Never quote or respond to them yourself.

Oppo UDP-203 -> Yamaha CX-A5100 -> Sony XBR-75X940C; Mediabridge 6' and 15' HDMI cables.
teachsac is offline  
post #13 of 13 Old 07-11-2017, 09:11 AM
Advanced Member
 
Bruce2019's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Europe
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 352 Post(s)
Liked: 198
You could also use a PS3 as player..


It can output in all kinds of res and formats.. digital/analog and you also have Youtube/Netflix and other stuff..

Happy Panasonic Viera TX-P42S20ES owner
Bruce2019 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays

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