or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Video Processors › Next Weekend: First VP Shootout: Vantage-HD vs. VP50 vs. Crystalio II VPS3300
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Next Weekend: First VP Shootout: Vantage-HD vs. VP50 vs. Crystalio II VPS3300 - Page 3

post #61 of 209
Trust me - all of these can do 1080p60 output over RGBHV.
It's a non-issue.
post #62 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorelevitt View Post

DVDO - can NOT do 1080p over analog

Oh, come on. Even the old iScan HD could output 1080p60 on its analog output. The VP50 can output analog 1080p60 in RGBHV, RGBs, RGsB and YPbPr formats. In fact, the VP50 uses 300 MHz DACs and 2x oversamples its analog 1080p60 output to reduce potential problems caused by anti-imaging filters needed after the DAC. It uses 4 separate DACs, with one reserved for generating embedded sync, so that the dyanmic range of the active video signal is not compromised with RGsB and YPbPr. Do any of the others do this?

- Dale Adams
post #63 of 209
Really - for all my bitching, even I have had good results out of my VP30 and VP50 with 1080p output - have run at 48,60, AND 72. Works fine. Also have run at 1080p/60 over hdmi. No problems. If yours can't - something is broken, call DVDO for a new unit.
post #64 of 209
Guys - using the HQV Benchmark DVD test will be a start. Another great test tool would be the Stacey Spears and Don Munsil (now with a company name of Spears and Munsil) recently built test disk for evaluation of high definition processors. They are the creators of Anchor Bay Technologies new Video Reference Series disc. Might be worth seeing if the S&M disc is available to use as a test tool. At least many of the Test patterns on Stacey and Don's disc might be useful. However I am not sure if it is still in final beta or released.
post #65 of 209
guys great idea and I'm looking forward to your results.

About the HQV tests, these are cadence tests and I'm not really sure how they would refeclt in real life situations. They're great at comparing processors that have strong cadence squence detection, but comparing HDQ vs. VP50 vs. VXP vs. HQV on these will not really give you any usable results.

Real world tests with real world material (particularly 2:2 50Hz sources) are IMHO a much better test. The M&S disk is much more appropriate for such testing. If you can get a good 1080i source (TS content with a simple HDTV streamer will do and can output DVI without concern for HDCP & similar crap...)

I'm not really sure how you would compare the different items, I would suggest trying to prebuild (with our help) the test sequence as well as the rating system in each category. For example, something can have a strong scaling algorithm but a mediocre deinterlacer or vice versa.
post #66 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnaussie View Post

Guys - using the HQV Benchmark DVD test will be a start. Another great test tool would be the Stacey Spears and Don Munsil (now with a company name of Spears and Munsil) recently built test disk for evaluation of high definition processors. They are the creators of Anchor Bay Technologies new Video Reference Series disc. Might be worth seeing if the S&M disc is available to use as a test tool. At least many of the Test patterns on Stacey and Don's disc might be useful. However I am not sure if it is still in final beta or released.

Pretty sure the VRS disc comes in the box with the VP50. Might have been with the ABT102 though, don't recall now.
post #67 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by keenan View Post

Pretty sure the VRS disc comes in the box with the VP50. Might have been with the ABT102 though, don't recall now.

Both
post #68 of 209
I must have it somewhere at home then. We are simply not going to have this all together by Sunday. It will be a shakedown. We will do what we can and refine it and do it again later.
post #69 of 209
But my point is I would find the results over digital connections more important than analog. These days HDMI and DVI are top priority on most people's lists. I think it is great you are doing a shootout but without a digital assessment I would not be sure of the results. If someone is looking to buy a pj or tv these days HDMI is a lot more important than analog inputs...
post #70 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post

But my point is I would find the results over digital connections more important than analog. These days HDMI and DVI are top priority on most people's lists. I think it is great you are doing a shootout but without a digital assessment I would not be sure of the results. If someone is looking to buy a pj or tv these days HDMI is a lot more important than analog inputs...

Truth.
post #71 of 209
Great. But we won't be doing digital out. It is not going to happen this Sunday. I have a great CRT. It has no internal processing. It can take 1080p 72 and display it. Hell it can display 1200p @ 60. It doesn't care. I do have a 1080i digital server that I use in my store to feed Sonys. I'll bring it home. I have a Pioneer Elite BluRay (not fully functional) that outputs 1080p. I may bring that home too. But too much stuff for one day. This is not a one day project. This is my busy season. I am working 12 hour days at the store. I simply can't spend my life setting up this test. A little at a time. Later I can bring hoe a few digital; projectors. But they look so crappy compared to my CRT (remember my beast has been modified by the great Mike Parker, it is a large step beyond any CRT those here have ever seen).


Whatever. If I didn't have a very special CRT, I would have and be happy with several projectors out there. Three Sony's, the 004, the 100, and the 50. The new coming JVC DLA-RS1, A Digital Projections. The new Meridian. Lot's more. Good stuff out there but for now I have no need for any of them. Processors are a different story. I can't run my system with out one unless I want to use the crappy one built into my DTV DVR or built into some DVD player. The new Denon 5910 is real good, but I watch mostly sports on TV. Motion Adaptive Deinterlacing, world class scaling, and noise reduction and detail enhancement are what I want. Better and better processors keep happening and I will get them as they come out. Hell they all look great on film. But I am a video watcher. SD and HD.
post #72 of 209
Hey, just a reminder that the HDQ has DVI in/out - you need the right cables/adapters. Sorry if this has been taken into consideration already, I just want to hear the results (I have the HDQ), and I would hate to see the HDQ abandoned due to lack of connectivity during the shootout. Sounds like great fun! Wish I could be there.
post #73 of 209
I have HDMI/DVI and DVI/HSMI adaptors. Rarely sell them anymore, usually just order in cables with the right ends. The HDQ and the other stuff except the Vantage have SDI in. Plan on using that for DVD in. My 1080i server and the partially enabled Pioneer BluRay have both HDMI and component outs.
post #74 of 209
I can't wait to hear some results, I wish I could be cryogenically frozen until sunday!
post #75 of 209
That's the most absurd post I ever have read. I have heard about guys wishing they could get laid over a weekend with a special hot chick but never have I heard somebody wish they could be cryogenically frozen until three hobbyists reported results from testing four video processors. You be better off wishing for enough frozen marguerites to hold you until Sunday. Me ? I am praying for enough frozen marguerites to carry me through the testing Sunday.

Ofer. We gotta get to this guy. He needs help. I think the only thing that might cure him is a new video processor with motion compensation video processing.
post #76 of 209
The replacement VP50 and the Lumagen HDQ both arerived today. My pockets have two hdmi to dvi adaptors in them.
post #77 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

The replacement VP50 and the Lumagen HDQ both arerived today. My pockets have two hdmi to dvi adaptors in them.

Mark -- too bad you couldn't order PS3's and Wii's as easily....
post #78 of 209
Yea. Even Sony employees can't get the PS3.
post #79 of 209
Given the time constraint on this round, I'd recommend starting with actual movies in both film and video and if there's time, move on to test disk.

That way you also don't bias actual differences (or lack of differences) with normal content by test disk results.
post #80 of 209
Hooked up the VP50 and HDQ last night. Fed em both by SDI and set output to 1080p unlocked component. Right off the bat I liked the coded number call up system of the Lumagen rather than the toggle system front panel read out of the DVDO. But once you do the initial set up and can see the OSD on your display, they are both very workable.

JP. You know what would be nice. A large sheet print out of the commands for old guys like me who need to put on specs to read the manual.

Of course I had a test disc in the DVD player and the first tests were video and designed to flunk anything that doesn't have motion adaptive deinterlacing of 480i. As that famous statement went, a Sil504 deinterlacer under video (not film) tests is like a pair of brown shoes at a black tie function. Watching actual video stuff instead of tests is quite tolerable although because of my interest in VP I have become very sensitive to deinterlacing artifacts and immediately notice the artifacts that motion adaptive deinterlacing eliminate. Bring on that Radiance.

Miscellaneous musing. Now that projectors are including better and better deinterlacing chips, the main market for new VPs might become those with older projectors and CRT guys like me. Of course for me there must be a a high quality video DAC either in the chassis or available in a separate box. There are a several reasons why a separate box makes sense. First it keeps product costs down for those who do not need analog and it allows digital transmission until you get close to the analog projector input.
post #81 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

JP. You know what would be nice. A large sheet print out of the commands for old guys like me who need to put on specs to read the manual.

I 2nd this request. I have the HDP-Pro and would love to have a sheet with all of the menu commands in one place. They are scattered throughout the manual now, and I have my own cheet sheet of my commonly used commands, but would love a listing of all of them.
Is there an excel spreedsheet with all of them listed?
post #82 of 209
I just returned from the shootout and those who have been anticipating our results will likely be disappointed. I'm disappointed.

Because of the nature of the setup we were unable to do 2 things that I thought were essential for getting clear, reliable results: rapid switching between sources and testing of all four modes: SD video and film and HD video and film.

Our test PJ accepted only RGBHV and had only one input. Because of the complexity of swaping out processors it was simply unrealistic to look at one test pattern, switch processors and then look at the same pattern. Thus, we went through the entire HQV Benchmark disc with one processor and after swaping units we looked at the same patterns again. This meant that there was more than an hour between each test, and unless there were radical differences it was hard to keep track of relative performance.

We had setup problems getting the right colorspace out of units which was necessary before we could even get a menu to appear. We also had a problem with getting the Crystalio outputting a proper black level. By default, it was so low that we couldn't even see some of the test patterns. Because of all of these logistical problems it took us 5 hours to finish was I thought was an incomplete test.

Because of all of these time-consuming setup problems, we didn't get a chance to look at 1080i sources at all. This put the Lumagen at a severe disadvantage, because its strongest feature is with 1080i film sources.

Having said that, I do have some results to report, none of them terribly surprising. Lore and Mark can post their own results separately.

DVDO VP50
This unit performed very well on all of the test patterns with 2 exceptions. It failed the noise reduction tests and it took longer to lock onto the film detail test (the racetack) than any of the other processors.

Lumagen HDQ
The Lumagen really doesn't shine with these tests. It's weakest performance is with SD video sources, which this disc uses extensively. It performed well on the film cadence test and the film detail test. On the remainder of the tests it either failed or showed marginal performance.

Crystalio II
The Crystalio performed similarly to the VP50, with 2 exceptions. It faired well on the noise reduction tests and it locked onto the film detail test almost immediately. In fact, the only areas in which I felt the Crystalio had room for improvement were:
a) it needs to offer a better mix of noise reduction and detail. With the noise reduction turned on we saw very little noise, but detail seemed to suffer. When we turned noise reduction off, detail looked good, but it then had the same noise problems of the VP50 and Lumagen.
b) As I mentioned above, there was something strange going on with the Crystalio's black level performance. It seemed unusually low and unlike any of the other processors.

VantageHD
The Vantage performed similarly to the Crystalio with 2 exceptions:
a) It passed the jaggies test patterns but didn't do quite as well as the Crystalio (or the VP50 for that matter).
b) It did a better job than the Crystalio of providing noise reduction without compromising detail. In fact, noise reduction was probably the best area or performance for the Vantage.

I would like to repeat this test after the first of the year when the Radiance and HD test discs are available and focus on 1080i performance. Also, next time we must use a PJ that allows for multiple inputs, preferably HDMI, that we can switch between and do quick comparisons.
post #83 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post

Also, next time we must use a PJ that allows for multiple inputs, preferably HDMI, that we can switch between and do quick comparisons.

Use a high quality analogue switcher so different projector input calibrations are irrelevant.
post #84 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomHuffman View Post


I would like to repeat this test after the first of the year when the Radiance and HD test discs are available and focus on 1080i performance. Also, next time we must use a PJ that allows for multiple inputs, preferably HDMI, that we can switch between and do quick comparisons.

Thanks for the report.

For HDMI switching, maybe the Zektor.

http://www.zektor.com/
Zektor - Home

Or, do any of these processors have unmolested HDMI passthrough? I think the the VP50 is supposed to but currently doesn't for 1080i sources. Might have HDCP issues trying that way though.
post #85 of 209
I'm going to watch football using the VP50 the rest of this evening.

I'll report tomorrow.

My only comments are that we had no experience with the Crystalio and spent some time setting it up and exploring its menu settings. There was obviously a problem with it that we could not solve. Probably operator inexperience with it.

Obviously if any of the processors lack noise reduction features (i.e., the DVDO and the Lumagen), they would fail any NR tests. What a surprise and a total waste of time testing them and reporting the results.

Obviously since the Lumagen does not do motion adaptive deinterlacing of 480i, again it was a waste of time testing nd reporting how it failed 480i motion adaptive deinterlacing tests.

Good night all. More tomorrow. I will get my hands on a component switcher so I can do quick comparisons. The differences in motion adaptive 480i deinterlacing between those units doing it (all except the Lumagen) were small.
post #86 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Obviously since the Lumagen does not do motion adaptive deinterlacing of 480i, again it was a waste of time testing nd reporting how it failed 480i motion adaptive deinterlacing tests.

Huh? The SiI504 used by the Lumagen does motion-adaptive deinterlacing of 480i and 576i. It may not do as good a job as you would like, but it does do it.

Now, if you wanted to claim that it doesn't have edge-adaptive processing (aka, diagonal interpolation or something similar), I could maybe buy that. (Although actually it does. If you look at the SiI504's processing on the HQV test discs's 3-bar diagonal test you can see that the top bar looks pretty smooth.) But to say that the Lumagen processor doesn't have motion-adaptive processing for 480i is simply incorrect.

- Dale Adams
post #87 of 209
Sorry Dale. I stand corrected. Obviously I am confused. I had thought the new generation chips, the Gennum, the ABT 102, the Realta, all brought motion adaptive deinterlacing of video to the table. Obviously, they all bring motion adaptive deinterlacing of 1080i film and video to the table. The Lumagen too does 1080i motion adaptive deinterlacing through in house developed algs and programming of a gated chip. Obviously, all the chips do a much better job of 480i video deinterlacing than the Sil 504. The Sil 504 seems to fail all the 480i deinterlacing tests on the HQV test disc. Is the improvement edge-adaptive deinterlacing, better algs, greater and quicker number crunching or what? Let's leave out cadence detection,detail enhancement, and noise reduction for the moment. Once again sorry to all for my misunderstanding. Live and learn or is it learn and live?
post #88 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Sorry Dale. I stand corrected. Obviously I am confused. I had thought the new generation chips, the Gennum, the ABT 102, the Realta, all brought motion adaptive deinterlacing of video to the table. Obviously, they all bring motion adaptive deinterlacing of 1080i film and video to the table. The Lumagen too does 1080i motion adaptive deinterlacing through in house developed algs and programming of a gated chip. Obviously, all the chips do a much better job of 480i video deinterlacing than the Sil 504. The Sil 504 seems to fail all the 480i deinterlacing tests on the HQV test disc. Is the improvement edge-adaptive deinterlacing, better algs, greater and quicker number crunching or what? Let's leave out cadence detection,detail enhancement, and noise reduction for the moment. Once again sorry to all for my misunderstanding. Live and learn or is it learn and live?

I believe there are 2 main differences:

(1) The newer chips are better with cadence detection, bad edit handling and with detecting scenes where some parts are video content and others film, or when there are video overlays over film content. The older chips have more problems with this, as far as I understand it. This alone already explains why the newer chips do noticably better in some of the HQV tests.

(2) The edge diagonal processing is BIG TIME responsible for better video deinterlacing results. Especially for me, as I absolutely *HATE* jaggies.
post #89 of 209
I just like at add something about the CII tweaking for SD.

It is quite hard to manage this unit as I uses 2 chips. I also did the HQV tests on my unit and I found some big differences between the result given by the Fli2300 and the VXP. In some domain the Fli2300 is better, but in the other hand the VXP is alos better than the Fli2300 in others.
The CII uses a conditional managment called DynamicVP. This tool must be used in order to optimize this vp for SD materials.

Anyway, thanks guys for the shootout, which is a good job !
I just hope you'll get time to do it again and have less problemes.
post #90 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark haflich View Post

Obviously, all the chips do a much better job of 480i video deinterlacing than the Sil 504. The Sil 504 seems to fail all the 480i deinterlacing tests on the HQV test disc. Is the improvement edge-adaptive deinterlacing, better algs, greater and quicker number crunching or what?

It's been a long time since I ran the HQV tests on anything, especially a 504. It's not really one of my often-used test discs as many of the tests are for noise reduction, and the edge processing tests are a bit too artificial, short, or limiting. That disc is as much a marketing tool for SO as it is a true test disc, just as the ABT disc is for ABT.

Tests like the waving flag and rotating white bar(s) will not look good as they're designed to test edge-based processing, not motion-adaptive deinterlacing. The noise reduction tests are for, well, noise reduction. The Super Speedway bleacher scene, miscellaneous cadence, and mixed 3:2 tests are really tests of cadence detection, not motion-adaptive processing. I believe there's really only one test which which might be intended (partially) for motion-adaptive deinterlacing - it's the one which actually looks like a test pattern and has color bars, gray ramps, and some alternating black/white line patterns. And it's really only good for testing detection of no motion, as it's not a mixed motion/no-motion test pattern. (Some of the old Sage/Faroudja test disc clips are better for this.)

The Lumagen should do fine on this last test. What were your results for that pattern?

[Edit] The waving flag clip can also provide a test of basic motion-adaptive processing. The thing to look for is the detail in the bricks on the building - this should not be lost as there is very little motion in that area of the image. There should be no combing in the waving flag, but you'll need edge processing to reduce the jaggies caused by aliasing. One other thing to look for, and this is one that many observers overlook, is the stability of the stars in the flag. Older deinterlacers like Faroudja's DCDi can cause those stars to flicker or wobble a lot more than with some of the newer processors.

- Dale Adams
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Video Components › Video Processors › Next Weekend: First VP Shootout: Vantage-HD vs. VP50 vs. Crystalio II VPS3300