I have a LT150 that is working great with my JVC 721 but less than wonderfully with laser discs on my Pioneer 703. I am using a S-video connection. Are there any relatively inexpensive additions that I could make to my system to improve laser disc quality? The picture apprears noisy and soft but this varies from disc to disc depending on the quality of the transfer. As well, colour vibrancy is much less intense with most of my laser discs. To give a sense of proportion it would probably cost me about $1000 to buy dvd versions of the laser discs I currently would want to retain assuming that sale of the laser discs would be unlikely.
NEC LT 150 and LD
- Status
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Joined
·
2,812 Posts
smyth22,
The DVDO Iscan is something to try, especially because it has some controls that can help as well (e.g., sharpness).
However, I strongly suggest that you try before you buy.
The reason is that the LT150 has its own deinterlacer on board, and you may find that the Iscan is not that much better.
My experience with Infocus equipment was that the deinterlacer is good enough that the Iscan does not improve the LD situation that markedly.
I am also told that some better LD players can really help. There are two Japanese models that have been discussed a lot on the DVD/LD forum, you might check it out.
Does anyone else have experience here?
The DVDO Iscan is something to try, especially because it has some controls that can help as well (e.g., sharpness).
However, I strongly suggest that you try before you buy.
The reason is that the LT150 has its own deinterlacer on board, and you may find that the Iscan is not that much better.
My experience with Infocus equipment was that the deinterlacer is good enough that the Iscan does not improve the LD situation that markedly.
I am also told that some better LD players can really help. There are two Japanese models that have been discussed a lot on the DVD/LD forum, you might check it out.
Does anyone else have experience here?
This is in reference to an NEC LT 150, which is reputed to have quite a poor deinterlacer/scaler, as opposed to an Infocus LP340/50, which is supposed to have a fairly advanced video processer (at least for an off the shelf business presentation projector). He should definitely see much more of a difference then on an Infocus unit...
imo,
Yes, I am aware that smyth22 is referring to an NEC LT150. I still think that it is worthwhile to test the IScan (or other scaler) before committing to purchase since it may or may not make enough difference over the internal scaler to justify the purchase. I just think it is a judgment call.
Yes, I am aware that smyth22 is referring to an NEC LT150. I still think that it is worthwhile to test the IScan (or other scaler) before committing to purchase since it may or may not make enough difference over the internal scaler to justify the purchase. I just think it is a judgment call.
Thanks for the suggestions guys. I will have a look at the DVDO. I believe I can get my hands on a demo unit. Is there any reason to think that the new version will be any better for laser discs than the one that has been out for a few years?
Well, I've been involved with LD for about 9 years now. By comparison LD is primitive compared to DVD. Video is recorded as an analogue composite signal on an LD vs. the digital component signal that is recorded on DVD. I've been slowly replacing my LD collection over the last 2 years and I still have about 1 year to complete. My DVD collection is up to a modest 115 titles now. I’ve tried my THX Special Edition Star Wars LD collection with my LP350, the discs are filled with video noise, edge enhancement and artifacts and are not enjoyable to watch for me. The signal from the LD is sent through my S-VHS player so it’s converted to S-Video output for the LP350
I've lusted over front projection for an equal amount of time (9 years) and have just about every edition of Widescreen Review up until last year. It is my understanding that huge cost of the original Faroudja line doublers and quadruplers is attributed to the complex circuitry involved to just deal with and clean up the video noise of LD which was the best presentation format of it’s time. To quote Mr. Joe Kane "people just don’t realize how good NTSC can be" he said this in the era of LD and Faroudja processors. The relatively low cost of new processors reflects this and I think its a testament to DVD that these newer processors don’t have to deal with video noise and thus aren’t built to handle it. In may opinion, therefore, your search for a cost effective solution to your LD dilemma may be in vain. In the end you may be forced, as I have, to bite the bullet and replace your collection.
For me it was a no brainer, better color saturation, higher resolution, much greater signal to noise ratio and anamorphic video were far to important to ignore. It would be regrettable to invest half to three quarter of the cost of your LD investment to keep your LD collection that still would not come close to competing with the picture quality that DVD can provide. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
Just my .02
------------------
Regards
GMan
I've lusted over front projection for an equal amount of time (9 years) and have just about every edition of Widescreen Review up until last year. It is my understanding that huge cost of the original Faroudja line doublers and quadruplers is attributed to the complex circuitry involved to just deal with and clean up the video noise of LD which was the best presentation format of it’s time. To quote Mr. Joe Kane "people just don’t realize how good NTSC can be" he said this in the era of LD and Faroudja processors. The relatively low cost of new processors reflects this and I think its a testament to DVD that these newer processors don’t have to deal with video noise and thus aren’t built to handle it. In may opinion, therefore, your search for a cost effective solution to your LD dilemma may be in vain. In the end you may be forced, as I have, to bite the bullet and replace your collection.
For me it was a no brainer, better color saturation, higher resolution, much greater signal to noise ratio and anamorphic video were far to important to ignore. It would be regrettable to invest half to three quarter of the cost of your LD investment to keep your LD collection that still would not come close to competing with the picture quality that DVD can provide. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif
Just my .02
------------------
Regards
GMan
A very well considered .02 it is. Thanks Gman. I must admit I am coming to the same conclusion. I have not yet been able to test a DVDO but I have talked to several who have and I am not encouraged by their comments. I hope to resolve this within the next couple of weeks.
Smyth22,
I am very interested in your findings on the DVDO Iscan (pro?). My LT 150 arrived today. It will be mated to my Pioneer elite DVL-91 (DVD + LD) via component (rca)output from my Dennon 5800 if I can find a decent scaler at a resonable price. At the moment, I have ruled out the high end - do everything scalers (TAW Rock, Farjouda, Quadscan, etc). So, if I can't find a decent scaler, I'll bite the bullet, abandon my pricy Pioneer (480i output) and find a good progressive scan DVD player. Needless to say, My LD's will require replacing. Thanks for your post, I'll be watching with interest.
I am very interested in your findings on the DVDO Iscan (pro?). My LT 150 arrived today. It will be mated to my Pioneer elite DVL-91 (DVD + LD) via component (rca)output from my Dennon 5800 if I can find a decent scaler at a resonable price. At the moment, I have ruled out the high end - do everything scalers (TAW Rock, Farjouda, Quadscan, etc). So, if I can't find a decent scaler, I'll bite the bullet, abandon my pricy Pioneer (480i output) and find a good progressive scan DVD player. Needless to say, My LD's will require replacing. Thanks for your post, I'll be watching with interest.
Joined
·
4,198 Posts
Being a long time (10 year) LD fan, and having *not* yet replaced many of my favorite LD's (like the SWDC set mentioned here--of course that's not on DVD anyway), I have a couple of observations. When auditioning projectors in the past, I have not felt that LD's were so bad as to be "unwatchable" via S-Video. Several facts of the set-up:
1) DVD *and* LD were compared via S-video (yes, the DVD was sharper--I'm not blind)
2) My LD player is an Elite-99, which has one of the best S-Video circuits available
3) The projector was a Sony 400Q LCD (before the 10HT was out)
4) The screen was one of these quickie fold-up types and a poor match for the projector
Having said all that, I'm getting close to auditioning more current DLP-type projectors with my new Da-Lite HC screen (I have yet to purchase a projector--and I don't think that will change this year). Obviously, LD performance will be as important as DVD via S-Video. I can post some subjective reviews of this set-up whenever I finally get a projector to try-out with my screen if desired.
1) DVD *and* LD were compared via S-video (yes, the DVD was sharper--I'm not blind)
2) My LD player is an Elite-99, which has one of the best S-Video circuits available
3) The projector was a Sony 400Q LCD (before the 10HT was out)
4) The screen was one of these quickie fold-up types and a poor match for the projector
Having said all that, I'm getting close to auditioning more current DLP-type projectors with my new Da-Lite HC screen (I have yet to purchase a projector--and I don't think that will change this year). Obviously, LD performance will be as important as DVD via S-Video. I can post some subjective reviews of this set-up whenever I finally get a projector to try-out with my screen if desired.
Sudsurfer:
I hope to be able to locate a DVDO in about 2 weeks and I will post my results.
Stanton:
I have come up with a kludge to help LD viewing. It involves moving the projector closer to the screen. You can probably guess the rest. When I go from an 80" wide image to about 50", a lot of the noise disappears, unfortunatly so does a lot of the drama. Ah well.
I hope to be able to locate a DVDO in about 2 weeks and I will post my results.
Stanton:
I have come up with a kludge to help LD viewing. It involves moving the projector closer to the screen. You can probably guess the rest. When I go from an 80" wide image to about 50", a lot of the noise disappears, unfortunatly so does a lot of the drama. Ah well.
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
