Ok, I'll take a stab at the original question:
Quote:
Can someone comment on the video playback quality differences between a $150 stand alone player like the Pioneer DV563a etc. via component output VS. HTPC using radeon card, theater tek, and FDSHOW via VGA cable?
The display is an Infocus X1 on an 88" screen. I only want to go HTPC if DVD playback differences are MAJOR! Otherwise, I prefer the WAF of a standalone type setup. |
Ok, since I happen to own an InFocus X1 for my bedroom setup, and I own the Pioneer DV-563 for DVDA and SACD, and I have a couple of Panasonic standalone players (RP-82 and RP-56), I have actually made the comparisons requested.
The HTPC running TheaterTek, ffdShow, and with a Radeon card is the hands down winner!! The custom resolution ability, along with the excellent scaling and deinterlacing provides better color saturation, better gray scale tracking, and most noticable of all, MUCH better shadow detail than the STB counterparts.
The second best combination is the Panasonic (either the RP-82 or RP-56), fed via S-Video (and NOT component!) directly to the X1's S-Video input. The Panasonic, though having the best hardware MPEG2 decoder in the business, still is no match overall for the HTPC on film based material, though I would give it the edge on video based footage. I mentioned using S-Video only because the component inputs on the X1 are noticably poorer than the S-Video, a situation unique to that model of DLP. Also, the software on the X1 allows for more adjustment of colr than on the component input, giving the user more control of the final image quality.
The poorest of the three solutions is the Pioneer DV-563A, but I bought it for its combination of SACD and DVDA playback at a small price, not for its DVD video abilities. It is noticably poorer at deinterlacing both film and video, and demonstrates enough artifacts for me personally to consider it unusable in a medium to high end system. If you want to go the STB route, I highly recommend the Panasonic units.
Quote:
I'm interested in those who have ran both and realize that the WAF is an important attribute. Not just squeezing every last drop out of PQ at the expense of usability and hassle. |
Out of the box, the STB will win, but in the long run, the HTPC once again has the potential to be far more friendly than any STB could ever imagine. By using a combination of Girder and a programmable remote, you can set up macros and automation information that are in a totally different league than conventional STB players. Also, TheaterTek can set the movie start point to bypass the FBI warnings, trailers, etc. and then start the movie with the audio track of choice, and can even tweak up the AR, all on a DVD by DVD basis. Try that with any STB - It's just not gonna happen!
Quote:
You actually need some good smoothing to reduce jaggies. Good DVD players can be really good at this and give a very theater-like image. But lots of PC DVD playbacks look pixelated and too digital. I don't know about you, but I want a theater-like image, not a pixelated computer image. |
Sorry, and I don't mean to be offensive, but this is just plain old incorrect. The "smoothing" of jaggies that you are talking about is known as "deinterlacing" and is designed into the MPEG decoder. If the HTPC image looks "pixelated", while a STB image appears "theater-like" (I assume that you are viewing these on the SAME display, right?), either the person setting up the HTPC doesn't have a clue, or the viewer actually prefers a less than accurate image - I would have to view these two examples for myself to determine why you think that and to see what went wrong. The HTPC presents an
accurate image, and sometimes people mistake poor transfer of the original for poor image quality from the HTPC - you know, garbage in = garbage out.
Both devices display "pixels". It's just that the STB is locked to one certain resolution while the HTPC can be customized to display whatever resolution is desired. They're the same old pixels, though...
