Denon 3808ci Vs. Onkyo 875 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 105 Old 06-05-2007, 03:34 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
Bustybanshee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just ordered the 875, but found the Denon 3808 thread and now I'm confuse. Price is about the same. Can you guys give me run down on which is the better receiver?
Bustybanshee is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 105 Old 06-05-2007, 03:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Axel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit, MI, USA
Posts: 4,667
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 13
A good start for you would be to read through the respective Denon and Onkyo threads.
____
Axel

Axel is offline  
post #3 of 105 Old 06-05-2007, 03:53 PM
AVS Special Member
 
uzun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The 875 will have better video processing if that's important to you, it also uses higher end DAC's which may or may not indicate better audio processing. Both feature Audysset MultEQ XT which is (in my experience) fantastic. On paper I would give the edge to the Onkyo 875, but the devil is in the details and it might have some issues the Denon does not have. You almost have to use both, or become familiar with the operating characteristics of each and then judge, before you can say for sure, but on paper the 875 seems to hold an edge from what I've read (and I have looked extensively at both threads involving these receivers). There are some issues with people complaining that the lower end Onkyo won't matrix 7.1 from LPCM 5.1, which the older Denon 3806 does do, but I'm not sure if thats really any problem, as long as it can reproduce the rear channels over both sets of rears there's not much difference there. if it won't produce ANY sort of 7.1 out of 5.1 LPCM streams, I would consider that a big negative.

Also if it can't accept linear PCM 7.1 via HDMI that would be a big negative, the 3806 with the latest firmware can do that, you can use a PS3 to test that capability.
uzun is offline  
post #4 of 105 Old 06-27-2007, 07:07 PM
Member
 
jkim90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by uzun View Post

There are some issues with people complaining that the lower end Onkyo won't matrix 7.1 from LPCM 5.1, which the older Denon 3806 does do, but I'm not sure if thats really any problem, as long as it can reproduce the rear channels over both sets of rears there's not much difference there. if it won't produce ANY sort of 7.1 out of 5.1 LPCM streams, I would consider that a big negative.

Also if it can't accept linear PCM 7.1 via HDMI that would be a big negative, the 3806 with the latest firmware can do that, you can use a PS3 to test that capability.

Any information on the 875/905 or 3808 on this? I would have assumed matrix 7.1 (through THX or PLII) and Linear PCM 7.1 would have been standard fare on both these Denon and Onkyos.....

This is going to being an interesting battle for sure.... I almost forgot about HD-DVD vs BR for a minute.
jkim90 is offline  
post #5 of 105 Old 06-27-2007, 07:49 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bfdtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkim90 View Post

Any information on the 875/905 or 3808 on this? I would have assumed matrix 7.1 (through THX or PLII) and Linear PCM 7.1 would have been standard fare on both these Denon and Onkyos.....

Onkyo has that feature on the 805 and above, but not the lower-end 605.
bfdtv is offline  
post #6 of 105 Old 06-28-2007, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
originalsnuffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
This topic is right on.

We are all collectively grappling with an instinctive love for Denon, vs. the (on paper) general feature superiority of the Onkyo.
originalsnuffy is offline  
post #7 of 105 Old 06-28-2007, 09:17 PM
Senior Member
 
ryarber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I'd think the Denon engineers are crapping themselves right now wondering how they let Onkyo achieve (on paper) superiority over them right now. Surely they're burning midnight oil now trying to come up with a plan to regain the upper hand.

Funny that these receivers aren't even out yet and we're all assuming the Onkyo's will be superior. I don't think they've even got a DVD player out now that will upconvert or any other product that would suggest that they know how to properly do video upconversion/upscaling.
ryarber is offline  
post #8 of 105 Old 06-28-2007, 09:23 PM
Senior Member
 
ryarber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Will the 3808 or the 875 do video in zone 2? Even if it is composite.
ryarber is offline  
post #9 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 02:26 AM
XHT
Newbie
 
XHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Just seen the 875 at CEDIA UK.

The Reon HQV appeared to be doing a great job of improving the output of a budget dvd player onto a Sharp 1080P LCD.

The 875 has a composite out to zone 2.

Did not see any new Denon models
XHT is offline  
post #10 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 05:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
originalsnuffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
One observation. In the multiple Denon oriented threads on these forums, there is a common assumption that Onkyo may not implement the video processing chips properly. Has Onkyo messed this up before, or is this a common industry problem?

I'll be the first to admit that I am undergoing what in Psych 1 was called "cognitive dissonance". I want to believe in Denon...I think they can I think they can. And out of the blue, Onkyo pulls a rabbit out of the hat. But as we all know...rabbit usually just tastes like chicken.
originalsnuffy is offline  
post #11 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 06:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bwclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Redwood Empire
Posts: 1,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Already alot of info here in the Shootout Thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=860539
bwclark is offline  
post #12 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 06:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
originalsnuffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
bwclark:

You could argue that the Onkyo discussion at some level is an intruder into a thread devoted to the Denon piece. It really makes more sense to discuss these issues in a separate thread...such as this.
originalsnuffy is offline  
post #13 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 07:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Stephen Hopkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Douglasville, GA
Posts: 3,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
In terms of amplification the 3808ci seems (like the equivalent Pioneer Elite and Yamaha units) to not be as beefy as the Onkyo SR805 and SR875. Also, the SR875 seems to be the SR805 + 1 more HDMI in + Reon Video Processing. Seems to me the SR805 is a much better value, especially if you're starting with HD sources to begin with (I watch HDTV, HD-DVD, BluRay, and DVD exclusively in my theater). The only reason I would consider stepping up to the SR875 is if I were feeding video to a 1080p projector... and even then its video scaling would only be for SD-DVD and 720p/1080i HTDV. Even with a 1080p native direct-view LCD/Plasma or RP LCD/DLP/LCOS/SXRD I'd say the SR875's video scaling abilities would not inprove picture quality noticably considering the smaller screen size. A 720p or 1080i native set would see nearly no improvement given decent sources (almost anything but SDTV).

Stephen Hopkins is offline  
post #14 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 07:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bwclark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Redwood Empire
Posts: 1,803
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bustybanshee View Post

Just ordered the 875, but found the Denon 3808 thread and now I'm confuse. Price is about the same. Can you guys give me run down on which is the better receiver?

Busty,

In addition to the Thread I orginally posted for your review, there is also a great deal of info in this Thread about the pros/cons between the 875 and 3808:

Hope this helps with your decisions!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=801887

Obviously, there is no value in a new thread to discuss all the issues between these AVRs that has already been addressed at length in the threads I have posted.
bwclark is offline  
post #15 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 07:19 AM
Senior Member
 
ryarber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There are still many SD sources out there that I will be using.

D* for instance has many HD channels, but a lot of SD content I'm interested in as well.

Some of my locals only broadcast in digital right now.

The kids still love the gamecube.

Barney the Dinosaur on VHS (uuuuuuuuuugh!!!)
ryarber is offline  
post #16 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
petmic10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by originalsnuffy View Post

One observation. In the multiple Denon oriented threads on these forums, there is a common assumption that Onkyo may not implement the video processing chips properly. Has Onkyo messed this up before, or is this a common industry problem?

I agree that the Reon chip has to be implemented properly but I expect the upconversion to be as good as my Toshiba XA2.

Many loyal Denon fans including myself are trying to make themselves feel better because Onkyo has the better video processor. If Denon had the Reon processor people would be doing cartwheels. I know I would.

Quote:


I'll be the first to admit that I am undergoing what in Psych 1 was called "cognitive dissonance". I want to believe in Denon...I think they can I think they can. And out of the blue, Onkyo pulls a rabbit out of the hat. But as we all know...rabbit usually just tastes like chicken.

I am a current Denon 3805 owner and was all set to upgrade to a 3808 or
4308 but Onkyo has pulled me away and apparently many people feel the
same way I do.

I know paper specs. don't mean anything but judging from the 805 thread
most people are ecstatic with their new receivers.

Display: Pioneer PRO-151 60" Elite
Blu-ray player: OPPO BDP-93, Sony BDP-S1000ES
HD DVD player: Toshiba HD-XA2(2)
Processor: Onkyo PR-SC885
Amplifier: Emotiva IPS-1 150Wx7
Game Console: Xbox 360, PS3
Speakers: Mythos ST(Fronts), Mythos Ten(Center), Mythos One(Rears)

petmic10 is offline  
post #17 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 08:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
originalsnuffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
petmic10--

I really like my 3806 in the upstairs rig. And I still have my DRA 400; which was purchased around 1983. This is for the bedroom stereo. And over the years I have had a 3201 and 2801 receiver. Not to mention the 2900 DVD player, DP11F turntable, and CD changes (360 or some such). And the integrated mini Denon system.

So I qualify as something of a Denon head.

At the same time, the Integra that I'll be replacing in the downtairs rig has some small issues in terms of how it handles some data streams (does not accept DTS audio only CDs ripped to the Tvix 4000) but that may be a function when the unit was designed nobody conceived that a CD signal might come from a jukebox. From a reliablility standpoint (as opposed to capabilities) the Integra has been great. I mention Integra since Integra is the slightly higher end of Onkyo.

But you can guess where I am going...odds are very high that my next toy will be the 875 instead of the 3808. Kind of a surprise winner for me. But you laid it out pretty well. I do want to get more input from actual real-world performance, such as XHT's comment. But I bet in two months the Integra will be swapped for an Onkyo.

BWClark--There is indeed quite a bit of 875 vs. 3808 discussion in the threads you referenced. But based on my experience with how these forums work; very specific trade off discussions such as this do in fact deserve their own threads.
originalsnuffy is offline  
post #18 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 08:29 AM
Senior Member
 
nakenergy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:


One observation. In the multiple Denon oriented threads on these forums, there is a common assumption that Onkyo may not implement the video processing chips properly. Has Onkyo messed this up before, or is this a common industry problem?

Then the Denon oriented people should see this: Onkyo SP1000-
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/cgi-b...deInt=0&mpeg=0

If Samsung can do a turnaround from an ok first generation blu ray player to the
stunning BD-P 1200 with the Reon, why not Onkyo.

Onkyo 875 is the one to buy!
nakenergy is offline  
post #19 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 09:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Stephen Hopkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Douglasville, GA
Posts: 3,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I'm just not seeing the SR875 as worth a $500 premium over the SR805. You're paying $500 more for 1 more HDMI input and Reon scalnig. How many people out there have 4 HDMI devices? I have 3 going through my Pioneer Elite 82TXs and I can't think of a 4th I'd add... Toshiba A1 HD-DVD, Samsung BDP-1000 BluRay, and Motorola 6412 HD-DVR. If I added a PS3 then I'd likely remove the BDP-1000, so no extra input needed there. If I added an XBox 360 Elite or AppleTV then I'd just move the Motorola HD-DVR to component and have it upconverted to HDMI (I had it this way before the Motorola/Comcast firmware update and saw no loss in image-quality). Even the AppleTV or XBox 360 would look just as good over component-transcoded-to-HDMI.

As for Reon being worth $500 I guess it comes down to how much you watch SD sources. Even SD-DVD scaled by a decent DVD, HD-DVD, or BluRay player won't see much if any benefit from Reon, especially on 720p/1080i displays or even 1080p displays that aren't large-screen front-projection. And if you're still watching that much SD programming are you really in the market for a $1500 or even $1000 receiver? And will the kids even notice if Barney or Paper Mario is a little bit crisper?

Stephen Hopkins is offline  
post #20 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 11:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
uzun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
HDMI devices used on my system : Cable box, D-VHS deck, PS3, HD-DVD player, DVD player. The only one that's slightly odd is the D-VHS deck I guess. I would say 4 or more HDMI source devices is not unusual now, and will become more and more common. Some people have an HDMI equipped Xbox 360 as well to add to the list.

Four HDMI inputs is certainly not excessive, and for some not even sufficient.
uzun is offline  
post #21 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 11:21 AM
Senior Member
 
ryarber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think the 4 HDMI slots is as much for future proofing as anything. You may not have 4 HDMI devices now, bit I'd rather pay to have an empty slot now rather than trade up next year when a new device comes out that I just have to have.

My main reservation about the Onkyos is that they don't really have the experience that Denon has in video upscaling. My understanding is that this is like a lot of graphics cards in computers where drivers make all the difference. It can take a long time to get graphics card drivers right (ie. years), it might just take Onkyo a while to get their stuff working like it should.

I'm leaning Denon myself but I want to wait until people start getting them in before I take the plunge. The reasons I'm leaning toward the 3808 ...

Ethernet connection that works with iTunes
Digital sources play over zone 2 and 3 with the Denon (no extra cabling to connect analog audio)
Perceived quality
Probably a better remote (may be moot point as I will probably get a Harmony)
Aesthetics
GUI

Faroudja's don't suck, they're just not perceived to be as good as the Reon. They still give upconversion to 1080p and I'm sure a decent PQ. Maybe my set won't be affected by the macroblocking that has plagued some installations. I haven't really seen a Faroudja or a Reon in action before. Either is likely to be better than what comes with the TV set I'm going to buy.
ryarber is offline  
post #22 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 11:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bfdtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Hopkins View Post

As for Reon being worth $500 I guess it comes down to how much you watch SD sources. Even SD-DVD scaled by a decent DVD, HD-DVD, or BluRay player won't see much if any benefit from Reon, especially on 720p/1080i displays or even 1080p displays that aren't large-screen front-projection. And if you're still watching that much SD programming are you really in the market for a $1500 or even $1000 receiver? And will the kids even notice if Barney or Paper Mario is a little bit crisper?

Like a number of other members, you seem to misunderstand that quality SD deinterlace and scaling is only one benefit of the ReonVX.

Arguably the most important benefit of the ReonVX is its high-definition processing, as that is what sets it apart from other solutions like Faroudja. If you watch any 1080i channels at all on your 720p or 1080p TV, then high-definition deinterlace is very important. Unless you own an old CRT display, you can't display a 1080i signal on your screen until it is deinterlaced first. High-definition 1080i deinterlace is not easy to do right. It is far more difficult and computationally intensive than 480i deinterlace. The overwhelming majority of consumer displays do not do it correctly, because doing it right with available technology would cost more than they can fit within their desired margins.

One notable exception is Pioneer. One of the main advantages of Pioneer plasmas is that they do spend the money on correct high-definition deinterlace. Pioneer's solution in their 2006 models wasn't as good as the ReonVX, but they intend to improve it further in the 2007 lineup. Video processing -- including this feature specifically -- has a lot to do with the quality you see on Pioneer plasmas, and they charge a premium for it.

Here's a post I made some months ago, now buried in the 1080p vs 720p thread.

Quote:


Quote:


The most popular HDTV signal is 1920x1080i. Why are all LCD manufacturers rushing out 1080p LCD sets. Wouldn't a 1080i set be "better" for TV?

Keep in mind, 1080i is only the delivery format, aka the box in which the contents arrive. With more than 75+% of all programming on broadcast and cable, the actually contents of that package are 1080p24, just like you get with Blu-ray and HD-DVD. See below:

Quote:


On broadcast and cable, we have two sources of high-definition material on 1080i channels. We have video-sourced content, such as sports, acquired natively in 1080i60. We also have content acquired in 1080p24 with a HD camera or telecined from film, but flagged as 1080i60 for broadcast.

Video-sourced content

In the case of video-sourced material such as sports, we have 60 different 1920x540 fields, all acquired at different points in time (separated by 1/60th of a second). Because the fields were all acquired at different points in time, they don't "match up" when there is any movement on the screen. Attempting to combine every two fields to form a 1080p30 image would result in severe combing. Some older (and many cheaper) TVs simply "bob" to display 540p resolution, by taking each field and making it a frame without adding any new picture information. That was the old/cheap way of doing things.

The better displays on the market interpolate new information to create a full 1080p60 signal through a process known as motion-adaptive deinterlace. Adjacent fields are compared to determine what pixels are in motion. Areas of the picture that aren't in motion -- such as background scenery that did not move in the previous 1/60th of a second -- can be weaved together at full 1080p resolution. Areas of the picture that are in motion -- and did move in the previous 1/60th of a second-- are created by bobbing, or in some cases, averaging the information in adjacent fields, and will vary in resolution between 540p and ~1080p. Whether pixels in motion appear as 540p or closer to 1080p depends on the rate of movement, as well as the quality of the video processor in the display. Not all motion-adaptive deinterlacing is equal -- far from it.

Most newer 1080p displays do region-based, motion-adaptive deinterlace for 1080i60 video sources. With this approach, the video processor divides the screen into lots of different regions or boxes, and then compares 2 adjacent fields (typically 3 total) to see if anything has changed in those boxes in the last 1/60 of a second. If nothing has changed in a box (ex: part of a billboard), the processor "weaves" in the information from the previous field, providing full 1080p information for that box. If something has changed in last 1/60 of a second, the processors "bobs" to display 540p resolution for that box.

Even among products with region-based, motion-adaptive deinterlace, there are probably significant differences, depending on the computional power of the processor. For example, one display might divide the screen into 64 regions and another might divide it into 256.

Contrast that to pixel-based, motion-adaptive deinterlace solutions like Gennum VXP and Silicon Optix HQV. Rather than divide the screen up into large regions, those solutions compare every pixel across three or four adjacent fields (4-5 total) to determine what pixels are in motion and which are not. Weave and bob decisions are made individually for every pixel on the screen, rather than for larger regions of the screen at once. Since they compare more fields, these processors can also better determine the properties of the motion to apply motion compensation or a multi-directional diagonal filter, if appropriate. It should be fairly obvious why this more comprehensive -- and computionally intensive -- approach can yield superior results.

Film-sourced and 1080p24 content

In the case of 1080p24 content -- such as movies and television series -- all this is interpolation is unnecessary. Few people realize that virtually all movies and series content shown on CBS, NBC, HBO, Starz, and Showtime is actually full 1080p, just like Blu-ray and HD-DVD. There is no need to interpolate anything, because the full information for all twenty-four 1080p frames is already there. With 1080p24 content delivered in a 1080i60 signal, you have the following:

Frame1, Field1
Frame1, Field2
Frame1, Field1
Frame2, Field1
Frame2, Field2
Frame3, Field1
Frame3, Field2
Frame3, Field1
Frame4, Field1
Frame4, Field2
Frame5, Field1
Frame5, Field2
Frame5, Field1

This is known as a 3/2 cadence. You have three fields of one frame, two fields of the next, and the cycle repeats.

The fields highlighted in bold are sent using repeat flags, a few bytes which tell the MPEG-2 decoder to repeat a previous field. Only 48 unique fields of information -- each containing half the information in a full 1080p frame -- is typically transmitted every second with 24p content. Compare that to 1080i video, such as sports, where 60 different fields of information is sent every second. For that reason, 1080p24 source content requires less bandwidth to broadcast than video, not more.

The only hardware that has access to those repeat flags is the MPEG decoder inside the STB/DVR or HD-DVD player. Once the MPEG (or VC-1) bitstream from broadcast, cable, or HD-DVD is decoded by the STB, DVR, or HD-DVD player, there are no more flags. All you have at that point is the cadence.

The display processor can't simply combine every two fields, because they don't match up. Instead, the display must reconstruct the original 24 1080p frames through a process known as inverse telecine. Inverse telecine produces an image that is identical to the original 1080p source. To do this, the display processor must determine the cadence of the input signal by comparing the fields. If every field is unique, then the source is video. If every fifth field is a duplicate, then the display processor knows that the source is 24p**; it can eliminate the duplicate fields and reconstruct the original 24p frames. Once this is done, pull-down is applied to repeat the full 1920x1080p frames to match the refresh rate of the display (i.e. 60Hz). At that point, depending on your TV, the image is output directly to the screen, [or] digitally scaled to add overscan, or digitally scaled to fit a lower-resolution panel. On a display that correctly performs inverse telecine, there will be no difference between the 1080i and 1080p output from a Blu-ray player.

Most modern displays can detect the 3/2 cadence on 480p24 content flagged as 480i60 (i.e. DVD), but only a minority can do the same with 1080i60 signals. It is more computationally intensive to do this with high-definition, and many display makers skimp on high-def processing to cut costs. On displays that cannot detect the 3/2 cadence necessary to reconstruct the original 1080p frames, they treat the source as video. They either bob to display the signal as 540p -- as was the case on older/cheaper displays -- or they do motion-adaptive video deinterlace to interpolate the remaining information for the 1080p frame.

Progressive frames created from interlaced content through interpolation will never be as good as material originally acquired in 1080p and reconstructed with inverse telecine. The greatest differences are seen when there is a lot of movement on the screen, because all the information for that motion exists in a progressive source, but does not exist in an interlaced source.

If you've ever seen combing, blurring, moire, stairstepping, or other interlace artifacts on movies or series content shown on CBS, NBC, TNT, HBO, or SHowtime, chances are it was because your display could not correctly perform inverse-telecine. Unfortunately, most displays do not have quality deinterlace -- of the displays tested by Home Theater Magazine (more results here), only seven of the 61 tested would offer the same performance with a 1080i input as they do with a 1080p input. In its latest issue, Home Theater Magazine reviewed and compared the top 60" 1080p RPTVs from JVC, Mitsubishi, Olevia, Samsung, Sony, and Toshiba. Only two of the six could correctly detect and display 1080p24 content delivered in a 1080i60 transmission, such as Heroes on NBC and CSI on CBS.

Things become a bit more complicated when you have content with "bad edits," as you often get when film and video sources are mixed together. Further, while the actual movie or series may be a 1080p24 source, it's common for commercials to be video sourced. Hence, the display's processing has to be able to switch between video and film modes on the fly, based on what it detects as the source content (60i or 24p). Not all video processors and displays are able to do this well. Some display processors can detect and switch between video and film mode relatively fast (within a few seconds), whereas others may take 30-60 seconds.

** It's not actually quite this simple. Most film-sourced content on cable and broadcast is distributed with the appropriate repeat flags to minimize bandwidth use. But there are times when film-sourced content is distributed and compressed like video. Generally, broadcasters and cable companies like to avoid that, because it wastes bandwidth, but not every broadcast affiliate uses modern encoding equipment.

When content is distributed without those flags and compressed like video, the cadence is still 3/2, but due to compression, every fifth field may not be bit-for-bit identical to a previous field. Hence, to provide reliable inverse telecine, a display processor must not only detect identical repeated fields, but it must also detect when every fifth field is nearly identical. This analysis requires more computational power. Some implementations like the Silicon Optix ReonVX and Realta have the processing power necessary to do this, while other solutions, like those found in Pioneer plasmas, apparently do not.

Home Theater Hi Fidelity also posted an article on the subject with illustrations below:

High Definition 1080p TV: Why You Should Be Concerned

bfdtv is offline  
post #23 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 12:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
petmic10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,452
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Thanks bfdtv that was a great read.

Very informative.

Display: Pioneer PRO-151 60" Elite
Blu-ray player: OPPO BDP-93, Sony BDP-S1000ES
HD DVD player: Toshiba HD-XA2(2)
Processor: Onkyo PR-SC885
Amplifier: Emotiva IPS-1 150Wx7
Game Console: Xbox 360, PS3
Speakers: Mythos ST(Fronts), Mythos Ten(Center), Mythos One(Rears)

petmic10 is offline  
post #24 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 03:08 PM
XHT
Newbie
 
XHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Having seen the 875 in action and had time to think about the doubts over 'implementation that many of you guys are expressing I think you are seriously wide of the mark.

Regardless of Onkyo's experience with Video Processing and I believe they have plenty, the HQV Reon chip is properly implemented because, guess what Silicon Optix don't just flog a manufacturer a pile of chips and leave them to it. They work with the manufacturer on implementing the chips thus further enhancing their own reputation and ensuring the product into which there chips are placed are successful. This will, of course, mean more business for Silicon Optix and rightly so, they have a great product and Onkyo have been very smart to include it in their product.

Anyway just my twopenneth (I am English). Everyone will be able to judge for themselves very soon as the Onkyo guys I spoke to reckoned end of July in the UK for the 875 and you are sure to get it first. The Denon guy I spoke to reckoned September for the 4308 & 3808 and again I'm sure you will see these products before the UK.
XHT is offline  
post #25 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 04:01 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bfdtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by XHT View Post

Having seen the 875 in action and had time to think about the doubts over 'implementation that many of you guys are expressing I think you are seriously wide of the mark.

Perhaps it was you that said the Onkyo looked good at CEDIA UK. To that I would respond that it is pretty difficult to make the ReonVX look bad. However, I want objective results that prove it is a good implementation. More specifically, I want to know if it:
  1. outputs the correct YCbCr 4:2:2 or 4:4:4 colorspace
  2. has no pixel cropping on 4:3 or 16:9 sources
  3. has no peak white or BTB clipping
  4. passes full luma resolution, i.e. no roll off in vertical or horizontal Nyquist
  5. passes full chroma resolution, i.e. no roll off in vertical or horizontal Nyquist
  6. does not suffer from chroma bug, aka CUE
  7. correctly deinterlaces 480i film sources
  8. correctly deinterlaces 480i video sources
  9. correctly deinterlaces 1080i film sources
  10. correctly deinterlaces 1080i video sources
I would expect them to pass the last four, because the Silicon Optix HQV disks test for that. However, how will they do on the rest?

All of the above I consider requirements. They are 'dealbreakers' for me.

There's also the issue of video processing 'features.' We don't know if the Onkyo will have:
  1. adjustable color space - YCbCr for those with HDMI, RGB for those with DVI
  2. adjustable noise reduction levels for SD
  3. adjustable block/mosquito reduction levels for SD
  4. adjustable detail enhancement levels for SD
  5. adjustable color settings
  6. an option for auto 16:9 zoom for 4:3 letterbox material
  7. option to toggle between zoom, stretch, use black bars, or grey bars for 4:3 SD material -- with remote?
  8. adjustable overscan (default 0, but configurable)
  9. option for direct 24p output on 1080i60 film detection in a hidden menu
I don't expect Onkyo to provide all of these options, because it is a receiver, and not a $3000 dedicated video processor, but I would hope that they would provide a few of them as Toshiba has done with their HD-XA2 HD-DVD player.
bfdtv is offline  
post #26 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 04:43 PM
Member
 
DKatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Culver City, CA
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
BFDTV,

I have read SEVERAL posts from you about video processing. I really appreciate them.

I have one of those questions that I have been holding onto, hoping someone else might post (so I could continue to feel superior).

In an instance of owning one of these Onkyos with the Reon VX (I am leaning towards the 905 at the moment):

What would be the best setting to output from my HD DVD player (A1)?

Leave it set at 1080i? Or would I even leave it at less and have the ReonVX do all of the upscaling?

For my HDTV (I have both an internal decoder in my Samsung and an external Sony DVR),

I imagine that HDTV OTA signals will then look better from the DVR to the Onkyo to the TV (The TVs HDTV does seem ever so slightly better now).

In that instance, should I have the DVR put out its lowest res to have the REON VX do all of the processing?

I completely understand that the proper answer is "try all the modes and see what you like the best."

But for the sake of discussion, and knowing full well that you haven't seen any of these devices yet, what would your best educated guess be?

Thanks,

Dave
DKatman is offline  
post #27 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 05:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
bfdtv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 13,484
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKatman View Post

What would be the best setting to output from my HD DVD player (A1)?

Leave it set at 1080i? Or would I even leave it at less and have the ReonVX do all of the upscaling?

For my HDTV (I have both an internal decoder in my Samsung and an external Sony DVR),

I imagine that HDTV OTA signals will then look better from the DVR to the Onkyo to the TV (The TVs HDTV does seem ever so slightly better now).

In that instance, should I have the DVR put out its lowest res to have the REON VX do all of the processing?

I completely understand that the proper answer is "try all the modes and see what you like the best."

But for the sake of discussion, and knowing full well that you haven't seen any of these devices yet, what would your best educated guess be?

I have yet to see a Samsung display that would do proper film deinterlace with 1080i signals. You should definitely benefit from running 1080i output from the A1 through the 875/905, with the Onkyo set to output 1080p (or 720p, if you have a 720p Samsung). For DVDs, you'll want to output 480i.

You'll also want to output as many formats natively on your STB/DVR as it will allow (i.e. 480i as 480i, 720p as 720p, 1080i as 1080i). From what I recall, the Sony CableCard DVR has the option to output all formats natively, that is what you should choose. The Onkyo will deinterlace and scale those signals to 1080p (or 720p, if you have a 720p Samsung).
bfdtv is offline  
post #28 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 09:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
originalsnuffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
With regard to the 805 vs 875; if the feature list on the 805 meets your needs then go for it! I for one do in fact foresee using up the HDMI inputs pretty quickly. I am already at three units now that have hdmi outputs, so getting to four does not seem like a stretch at all.

One thing about remotes...if you go to the Denon 3806 owners thread, you will find quite a few unhappy users of Denon remotes for that unit (including me). I eventually went with a logitech harmony to supplement my Denon remote (the Denon remote could not learn the codes for my TVIX 5000). So I would not necessarily put remotes as a plus for Denon, based on previous experience. But who knows maybe Denon will get remotes right for this next generation.
originalsnuffy is offline  
post #29 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 09:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Buckeyefan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 1,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
You guys are forgetting the biggest difference between mid to high end Denon and Onkyo. The Denon is a much flatter sounding AVR than the Onkyo. If anyone is looking for a more lively sounding AVR, the Onkyo's are going to be on the sibilant side. Denon paired up with Polk is like throwing a blanket over your loudspeakers. If you run Klipsch or any horn loaded speaker, the Denon receiver may be the better choice. If you like a bit more "in your face" impact type of sound, the Onkyo may work better.

Remember, sound is the ultimate goal in the purchase of these AVR's. Video processing is simply a method of not degrading the signal from the source to the flat screen. Some still think you can turn a 480i frame rate into a 1080p equivalent. It ain't gonna happen, people.

A man meets a genie. The genie tells him he can ask for whatever he wants, but his mother-in-law gets double of what he gets. The man says give me a million dollars and beat me till I'm half dead.
Buckeyefan is offline  
post #30 of 105 Old 06-29-2007, 10:17 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Stephen Hopkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Douglasville, GA
Posts: 3,308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
uzun... why keep an HDMI SD-DVD player in the loop with an HD-DVD player there too? Even the old Toshiba A1 does a great job scaling SD-DVDs (even if not the quickest load times). I'm not saying 4 HDMI inputs is worthless, or even that excessive... I just don't think it and the Reon processing are the worth $500 difference between the SR805 and SR875. When street price on the SR805 gets down to around $700 and the SR875 is down closer to $1k then I'll likely see the difference as worthwhile.

Stephen Hopkins is offline  
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

User Tag List

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