Originally Posted by Morbius
This doesn't make any sense.
Maybe because you can't wrap your gigantic ego around the possibility that someone else might understand something you don't. You'd look like far less of a gigantic ass if you actually asked questions in a civil manner rather than attacking people you don't like.
So an interlaced signal has the scan lines ordered: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9......2, 4, 6, 8, 10, ....
A progressive signal has the scan lines ordered: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10......
These two orderings are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE!!!
What you don't understand is that there's a big difference between a progressive signal and progressive content. There is a difference between reformatting and de-interlacing. Do you want to figure it out on your own or do you want me to explain it to you? I'll give you a hint. When a standard def is carried on a high-definition signal, is it standard definition or high-definition?
Why don't you find out what technical terms MEAN before you use them.
Maybe you should learn how to *apply* those terms before assuming that other people are "WRONG!!!"
For those that actually are following along, it appears to me that "progressive" output on the Linn reformats rather than de-interlaces. We had this issue with early DLP projectors. They output a progressive image, but did not de-interlace, so it looked like a conventional TV without an add-on de-interlacer. I also didn't think the Linn, on second look, had a very good MPEG decoder compared to the NAD and Meridians.
My point with regard to the Linn in general is not that it needs to do good video to do good audio *but* that, if they can take that kind of short cut on the video section when good decoders and de-interlacers are *dirt cheap* and common, what other short cuts are they taking? Having looked in a few Linn pieces for curiousity, there's almost nothing of *any* expense inside. No proprietary, expensive circuitry or chips that I could see. If Linn were really serious, I'd have told them to drop all the video and digital output circuitry completely and make it only for audio and that *almost* could make me understand the player as it is.
IOW, if you like the sound, go for it, but don't buy it to play DVDs for sure and don't count out the possibility that there is a universal player for WAY less money that is just as good or better. The marketing on this machine is basically "Linn makes good turntables, so their disc players are very 'analog' and 'musical' because they understand vinyl". That's like saying Greg is great with words because he is a math whiz and well.......