AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
just when i think i'm getting a handle on the basics of home theater video technologies, what seems to be so simple absolutley eludes me - can someone help me with the following?:


how many video processor users out there or, for that matter, how many soon-to-be video processor owners can actually take advantage (or need to take advantage) of the 480i and/or 480p component inputs that all of the latest video processors seem to offer?


can a quality progressive scan dvd player benefit from either of these inputs? are there many hd sat or hd cable boxes that can work with either of these inputs? my two hd sat boxes (c-band and directv) only send out upconverted 1080i and true 1080i signals from their component cables - i need to use y/c for sat 480i de-interlacing.


it seems that most folks investing in a $$ video processor intend to use it in a home theater environment that usually includes hd setups and modern dvd players. given that, are these multiple component inputs offered by video processor manufacturers obsolete? were they originally intended for laserdisc and non-progressive dvd players? if so, how many video processor owners and prospective owners fall into this category?


why don't vp manufacturers just do away with expense of including these component inputs and use the money to develop a component input that will accept 480i, 480p AND pass 1080i?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,099 Posts
WT,


The problem is that the source is typically 480i. If the units produce deinterlaced 480p already, then the processor is usually limited in the amount of processing it can do. i.e., if you feed 480i into a scaler, it will produce better results than using the same DVD player feeding it 480p.


You're basically asking why VP manufacturers bother with 480i at all. Mostly because it's the most common format around, and because it's the one that benefits the most from video processing. The larger your display, the less attractive 480i becomes, so a scaler becomes essential.


Regaring HD STBs, the first scalers for HT environments capable of processing HD are coming out now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,703 Posts
De-interlacing has long been the weak link, although even TV sets are coming out with better and better built in de-interlacers. After de-interlacing, being able to do scaling while the video is still in the digital domain (all de-interlacers do thier work on digital video) is advantageous, thus the rationale for a standalone de-interlacer with scaler.


As for the sat. boxes that deliver upconverted 1080i, if the video has already been butchered in the upscaling process, putting in a video processor isn't going to help things.


When the source device outputs 480p, doing scaling only in an external device has no advantage over doing it in the TV (or projector) unless the latter has no scaler or a deficient one.


Video hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/video.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
I have Focus CS-1 and Sony 9000es dvd player. I found that scalling 480p to 720p gives me better results than scalling 480i to 720p. I am using Sony 10HT projector with 16x9 100" studiotek 130.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
thanks for your feedback guys. unfortunately i don't think i framed my question/point very well.


oferlaor:


i wasn't asking why vp manufacturers bother with 480i de-interlacing, i was asking why they bother with the expense of adding y/pr/pb inputs for this purpose.


it seems that the y/pr/pb inputs on video processors have become obsolete with regards to 480i de-interlacing because 1) sat/cable hd boxes do not send 480i signals out through y/pr/pb connections and 2) 480i dvd players are quickly being replaced by quality progressive scan dvd players (especially in households that can afford $$ vp processors). consequently, many (most?) video processor users are employing their y/c connections for 480i de-interlacing.


so... could the money be better spent concentrating on other video processing/scaler goodies? sure would be nice if they made hd sat/cable boxes that would output non-upconverted 480i signals via y/pr/pb. but i guess this cause problems with the gui.


omer: for the last five months i have been scaling 480p to 540p using my rp91 and cs-1 and i really loved the results. but i recently started passing through the rp91's 480p signal and have decided that i like it better. i am extremely happy with both results and it is difficult to articulate why i now like the unprocessed signal better. it just seems a little sharper, a little more vibrant.


rather than start a new thread, can anyone shed some light on the following?:


1. anyone know anything about denon's avr-3803, 4802r and 5803 receivers that output all composite and y/c inputs via y/pr/pb? how are they accomplishing this upconversion? de-interlacing? i could not find details about this process at their website.


2. are the de-intelacing capabilities of the current crop of scalers/processors generally better than that found in the better progressive scan dvd players? i mean, are there many progressive scan dvd owners / scalers owners that are bypassing their dvds capabilities?


thanks again for all of your input
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,004 Posts
I believe the Denon receivers do not perform any deinterlacing. For those models than can convert a s-video or composite video input to a component video output, it will be just 480i on the output.


Ron Jones
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
The reason that manufacturers still bother putting component in is because some of the best results that Can be obtained are by running certain interlaced players through an external processor. Many current DVD players have poor de-interlacers and can benefit greatly from such a processor. This advantage for some players will likely disappear as digital pathways continue to evolve. The slight advantage of pre-DAC de-interlacing could be overcome by a superior external device. Future processors will continue to have component inputs, but the switch to digital inputs is starting to occur.



In the future component connections will be a disadvantage regardless of whether or not the signal they carry is de-interlaced.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top