WM9 Terminator 2 vs D-Theater - Page 5  

I am going to be looking into this also. I just want to be able to offload these to tape for demos when I cannot take my computer with me.

With Blu Ray:

T2 Extreme running WM9 at 1080p between 20-30 Mbit/sec
with enough room for a primary audio track running somewhere around 5 Mbit/sec or so...

Try doing that with any other propsal other than Blu Ray.

Try having music videos with full blown HD-video AND 24/96 MLP DVD-Audio... you can't with other proposals.

As mentioned in the first post: Blu Ray players are going to support not only MPEG-2, but advanced forms of MPEG-2, and there is no reason manufacturers cannot produce Blu Ray players that play 1080p WM9 files. Additionally, an H.264 decoder can "easily" decode MPEG-2, advanced MPEG-2 and Mpeg-4. Further, Sony is only one of TEN commited manufaturers in the Blu Ray group.

The point is to voice your opinion on how to best use Blu Ray's bandwidth and storage... that is what the petition is also useful for!
I'd also love to see a discrete tatcile trandsucer channel. It would be easy to implement and has negligible bandwidth...and should run up to around 500 Hz, with only information that is supposed to produce tactile and in the proper levels... see my sig file for more details.

Please place comments that support 1080p as well as a significant increase in audio quality! Say no to 'old' Dolby Digital and yes to a less harsh, less lossy, or losless compression methodology utilizing and taking advantage of the V-A-S-T bandwidth and storage of BLU RAY!!!

right on. I was pretty quick to assume that JVC had a high bitrate realtime
HD encoder built in when nobody would probably use it.

I am amazed you get such better quality from your DTC100. I have the following:
samsung HD DTV tuner
hughes E86 DTV tuner
JVC DVHS

By far, and I mean by far, the best pic is the DVHS... HDNET tapes are stupendous on my SX-21 projector. Have never seen anything better, at any trade show or industry demo. Second place is probably E86 but the Samsung seems pretty close.

A lot of people think that the RGB outputs of the DTC-100 are better than the JVC. Perhaps it's because on some of our systems, which are fundmaentally RGB systems, an RGB output becomes a straight passthrough signal, while a component requires transcoding. And some folks have said that they don't think the DACs on the JVC are terribly good, but I'm not sure if anyone has really tested that by scoping them with test signals.

I see... well, the only diff between YPrPb and RGB is a simple matrix manipulation of color spaces... don't see what would be an issue here.

I really can't tell the diff between the two since I haven't had the same bits come thru them to the same display. But, again, from my experience of HDNET tapes on the JVC DVHS... I can't believe it can get more lifelike. I am really not exaggerating... it is amazing detail. Better than being there in person, due to the excellent lighting of this, er, swimware competition.

tzucc, what MR. Poindexter is trying to relate isn't the playback ability of the deck, but the recording ability of HD content. He believes some quality is lost in the HD signal when going from his DTC-100 to the tape (the DTC-100 shows a better picture off the air/sat than the recording). He believes this to be a symptom of the JVC, not the DTC-100.

No, Paul. I am saying that the quality loss is due to the poor component outputs of the D-Theater deck, compounded by running through my transcoder, not in the act of going to the tape.

There is no loss in quality going to tape on HD, but when the playback mechanism is different for that tape, then it becomes an issue. I need to see about getting another decoder for the video from the D-Theater deck. I was thinking that the DTC-100 could do that now that it has firewire. If it cannot, then I need to look into yet another HD receiver(!!) like the Samsung SIR-T165 to improve the quality of the decoder.

Mike

Don't need to test them, even JVC admitted that the component inputs on most D-ILA projectors are filtered. I complained at an event that JVC markets a nice projector, and their D-VHS deck only has component outs but componet on their projector blew, and they not only knew it but admitted it.

I documented with screenshots a few years back in the HD recording forum the differences of component vs. RGB on the JVC G-11 (using a D-VHS deck and an RCA DTC-100 w/169time mod).

How did you get the DTC-100 to decode the firewire stream? I am wanting to do that on mine, but I have so far only figured out how to get the JVC deck to record off the DTC-100. I haven't figured out yet how to get the DTC-100 to decode off of the firewire input.

Any help will be appreciated.

Thanks,
Mike

First, the DTC-100 will ONLY decode non-DTheater tapes.

But what isrequired was an OTA digital signal. Just tune to a channel with the strongest signal, verify that the D-VHS is synced to the DTC-100, and press play on the D-VHS deck. It'll take a few seconds to sync up, but then the D-VHS tape will replace the channel being shown.

Sometimes might require a couple tries, but generally worked with the first try.

Well, that may be true, but it says nothing about the quality of the OUTs of the JVC deck, only about the inputs on your projector. For those folks who either have a display with good component ins, or who are transcoding it to RGB, it comes down to how bad are the outs of the deck, and I've not seen any even semi-technical analysis of that.

Mr. Poindexter, just out of curiosity, how do you know the tapes are recorded with the same exact quality it was aired if your only way of comparing it is by playing them back through the deck? Do you have another tape deck (non JVC) playing these tapes and it looks better than the JVC?
I am confused because if prerecorded tapes can look good (as others are saying) I can't see how a recorded tape would look much worse than the original broadcast (given the signal path is exactly the same for playback).

They are always exactly the same, because the deck records the literal digital bit stream. It's not like an analog recorder, it's like a disk drive, but on tape. When you record, you are basically just sucking the literal MPEG2 stream off of the sat signal and putting it on tape. When you play it back, it is identical to what was recorded.

The reason for the difference is that when recording or watching live, most people are probably watching the RGB outputs form the DTC-100. When playing back, most people are wathing the component outputs from the JVC. Though the bit stream was literally recorded, in this case, it is being converted to analog format to send to the projector. The thing is that the JVC's conversion to analog seems to be inferior to the DTC-100's conversion to RGB.

Thanks Dean. I got it now. So it's actually the process of transcoding the signal from RGB to component that the JVC sucks at.

Didn't Widescreen Review do a technical analysis not only of the 30k but hte 40k measuring the output from the component outputs?

No, Paul. The JVC outputs component instead of RGB, but it doesn't transcode per se. It just has substandard D/A conversion. Actually, I guess it could be the transcoding portion, but since you cannot output RGB on the D-Theater, we cannot compare without soldering to the chip directly if that could even do it.

The JVC just doesn't put out as good a picture from the digital stream as the RCA. They each have the same input (MPEG2 stream) but the DTC-100 looks MUCH better.

OK. So where does the conversion take place, in the jvc? RCA only outputs RGB, so I am assuming the JVC gets the signal from the RCA via firewire (is this RGB or component)?

The MPEG2 data stream, after much massaging to decode it, is in a basically component format. MPEG2 is what comes over the Firewire.