AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
These "Scaler Wars" are quickly turning into a Shakeout or Market Correction. The winners will be those one or two companies that retain the elite market, and those who make the transition to the new price point.


I suspect that the Sage/Faroudja mariage proved that selling 5,000,000 $25 chips generates more profit than selling $5k-$20k boxes to the video elite.


Vigitec (for example) is responding appropriately by incorporating this technology into there products, but how long before these $20 chips find their way directly into displays or sources or
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,608 Posts
Supposedly, the scaling/processing in the new Fujitsu flat panels is superior to any outboard processor. Also, the 3rd gen DRC processor in my Sony KD-34XBR2 HD set is so good, I'm using an interlaced DVD player with super results (480i output from Dish looks good, too) - there is no need for outboard processing. But, my older Mits 65907 surely benefits from the Faroudja NRS scaling to 540p.


Here's what I'd like to see: for any display type, the internal processing would be equal to - heck, better than - any current outboard processor. Outboard processors would be needed only for very high end FP, or special applications.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
399 Posts
The scaling/processing may be one of the few things that differentiate the various display vendors. As the case with the HD1 DLP projectors.


With the additional issues of complying with the DVI/HDMI rules, this will further push this function inside the display.


MJ
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
J. Mike Ferrera,


It's a question of personal choice. The only display I've seen so far where the internal scaler was "good enough" not to require an outboard scaler is the Sharp 9000 (a great projector by all measures).


Pretty much everything else I've seen was close, but no cigar.


I'm quite sure that not everyone would agree with you on the merits of DRC, nor about the AVM rendering outboard scalers obsolete.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,608 Posts
Quote:
I'm quite sure that not everyone would agree with you on the merits of DRC . . .
It's my understanding that the implimentation of the DRC for the KD-34XBR2 greatly improves upon previous models. I consider myself quite picky ($3000 for the NRS!!!) and the DRC meets my expectations. If you are ever in the US/DC area, I welcome you to drop by & see for yourself ;)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
I haven't seen the DRC on your model, but everywhere else it wasn't really up to the task.


Of course, you have to remember, it's only a 34" TV set (I remember when I had a TV of that size, and thought it was pretty big...), so alot of artifacts might escape you...


I think we agree that it's a matter of personal taste. DRC on your TV might be acceptable to some, but not others. Also, you might be right - companies have a tendency to change technologies around and keep the same name, because of name recognition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,679 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Yes, I agree that every builtin I've seen was not that great. In fact I wasn't as thrilled with the AVM in the new Fujitsu 50" as I thought I would be.


But Faroudja is another story altogether. And that's what is available now and more is coming!


The new owners of the the F-magic are very business savvy and know how to turn the magic into gold. The benefit for the rest of us is the best for cheap.


There will always be a market for ultra-expensive everything, but the mid-market is going to move into a much lower price point. The average enthusiast will pay a small premium for things like access to algorithm tweaking and convenience features like switching but our tolerance to pay $5k+ for this very minor performance boost will fall off exponentially.


Ken
 

·
AVS Forum Special Member
Joined
·
11,139 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by oferlaor


The only display I've seen so far where the internal scaler was "good enough" not to require an outboard scaler is the Sharp 9000 (a great projector by all measures).
Greetings, oferlaor. Haven't been following all the 9000 posts at AVS, so perhaps Sharp modified them after shipping one to Greg Rogers for review in the Jan. 2002 Widescreen Review. It's too long and detailed to excerpt, but I didn't get the same impression, from Rogers' review, about all the 9000 circuits used for deinterlacing and scaling. He did comment favorably about the 9000's computer input, which bypasses the scaler, and was very impressed using a costly Faroudja DVP-3000 for this input.


But his comments about excessive edge enhancement, plus the extensive problems with the two deinterlace modes for live video, seemed surprising for such an expensive projector. In fact, they were so serious, if they still exist, I'd think quite a few owners might consider buying an external scaler and deinterlacer to avoid such artifacts. -- John
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
842 Posts
"But his comments about excessive edge enhancement, plus the extensive problems with the two deinterlace modes for live video, seemed surprising for such an expensive projector. "


I can attest to this. Using an HTPC or scaler things look terrific and I am quite pleased with this projector, despite my disdain for single-chip DLP. However, feeding a Denon 1600 480P into the projector or any interlaced source for that matter, I am seeing quite a lot of ringing. I thought perhaps it was my source. You can lessen the effect using the sharpness control but the picture will be too soft to completely minimize it.


Other than that, I think this projector offers too many tweaks for me to give it up right now. And with a scaler or HTPC it is a very nice piece IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,092 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by oferlaor
J. Mike Ferrera,


It's a question of personal choice. The only display I've seen so far where the internal scaler was "good enough" not to require an outboard scaler is the Sharp 9000 (a great projector by all measures).


Pretty much everything else I've seen was close, but no cigar.


I'm quite sure that not everyone would agree with you on the merits of DRC, nor about the AVM rendering outboard scalers obsolete.
John M,


Funny you mention that, I was fortunate enough to see a side-by-side demo between the Sharp 9000 and the Sony 11HT with one of the reviewers from Wide Screen Review who lives in Houston.


The Sharp absolutely got its butt kicked in major fashion by the newest generation of DRC in the Sony. We tried all types of reference material. The Sharp did good on the 24fps stuff but was pretty poor with everything else. Wih video originated stuff, it would often appear to bob and weave at the same time creating weird horizontal stripes etc, it was very dissappointing.


Also we stayed away from s-video and composite altogether with the Sharp. Both of which had a chroma bandwith of about 1MHz (no joke) and the s-video had a chroma delay that was off the Avia chart.


Greg Rogers was being very polite with his review.


I had no complaint about the Sony's deinterlacing it was fantastic. And since DRC now has 3:2 pull-down detection it handled films better than it used to (I'm a former 10HT owner). It is also worth noting that the Sony handles composite extremely well. If the 11HT had better contrast it would be hard to beat.


I guess the Sharp 9000E might be slightly different that the 9000 I tested in the states (NTSC vs. PAL) because I wouldn't ever feed the Sharp 9000 480i directly. I would at least go through a Iscan Pro or something.


-Mr. Wigggles


Ps. The Sharp we used was not a prototype but a production model. Now firmware has changed a few times in the last few months. So Sharp might have fixed what I consider major issues with 480i.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,098 Posts
Hey John,


I never used the VGA port of the sharp, so I cannot comment on it.


There were some problems with the video modes, but we tested PAL material on both 2D and 3D filters (Svideo source) and it looked terrific on the 9000E (the 9000U had more artifacts!). We also saw some ringing on SVideo, but I'm 99% sure the ringing was in the source.


I did not see any ringing with the Toshiba player we tested at the time.


My friend (who owns the unit & occasionally visits the various AVS forums) has the RP91 now & this is a very good combination. The deinterlacing is done by the player (I guess he finds this combo ideal).


I didn't see the
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top