Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman
I would never say TVs are usually better at the job. That would require a statistical analysis of a sampling and testing of TVs, receivers and source devices
* Don't scale twice if possible, that't just silly. The goal would be no scaling.
* Deinterlace using the best device - If you are really anal, there are tests out there for dinterlacing performance; Note that one device may not be noticably better than another if you are not a dedicated video hound who loves to find these differences
TV's are designed for the task. With the exception of standalone video processors, most any brand name, quality HDTV will outperform most any upscaling dvd player, cable/sat stb or avr. Particularly when compairing to the later two (stb & avr).
With an avr video processing is an afterthought and is not it's main function. Most avr's have no more advanced video processing chips and FW than many budget upconverting dvd players. With stb's the video output can often be inferior to all of the above due to the cable co's buying the cheapest box's they can (which is why we are usually stuck with only Scientific Atlanta, Pace and Motorola, hardly brands that are known for their quality video reproduction). With future changes coming in FCC cable co. regulations the cable box or cable cards can be purchased off the street (actual competition)
so we are not *stuck* with only the crap they want to rent us. Imagen an OPPO cable box!
But, as I always state, you have to try it yourself. There certainly are exceptions out there. I've hooked a $40 upconverting dvd player to a cheap HDTV panel and the dvd player made a noticeable improvement. On much better quality HDTV panels I've hooked up several players like HD-DVD, Blu-ray, OPPO and others and the HDTV did a better job than these players with SD content. Until you A/B compare them you won't know.
But I'll always put my money on a good, brand name, high quality HDTV panel over most any alternate source for video processing.