AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I can't find the post at the moment, but someone reported that a test done with the European version of the Sharp 9000 (the 9000E) concluded that sending 480i from a DVD player to the Sharp looked better than sending it 480p. Others have reported that the Sharp's internal scaler does an excellent job of deinterlacing and scaling.


If it does such a good job, would sending it 480p instead of 480i result in a worse picture? If you send it 480i, the Sharp takes care of deinterlacing and scaling. If you send it 480p, the Sharp only scales. What's better?


I'm sure there are a lot of theories and "golden rules" about this, but can someone actually test 480i vs. 480p with the Sharp? How about the guys at hometheaterhifi.com who conducted the DVD benchmark tests -- Don Munsil? Those of us who can't afford a Faroudja NRS would be in your debt.


Testing the Sharp's internal scaler may also answer the question: "Does a DVDO iScan improve the Sharp's performance with LDs and TV?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,289 Posts
The answer to this question is going to depend heavily on the DVD player used, I think.


When my proj. arrives I will be happy to give it a whirl with my Sony 7700, my Sony 860 (piece of crap) and a progressive player a friend has that I should be able to borrow. Of course, if I go with the Faroudja, I'll also post that result. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
At CES, I asked someone at Faroudja a similar question (namely, wouldn't you want to send an interlaced signal to a projector with a Faroudja deinterlacer in it, rather than a progressive signal). He said you'd absolutely want to send the interlaced signal, and let the deinterlacer on the projector do the work, if the deinterlacer on the projector is better than that in the DVD player. So I guess (if you believe that Faroudja does the best job of deinterlacing: (1) if the DVD player has a Faroudja chip, send the progressive signal (use Faroudja, not Sharp); and (2) if it doesn't and the Sharp deinterlacer is better than what's in the DVD player, send an interlaced signal.


By the way, he said sending a progressive signal to a projector with Faroudja deinterlacing could cause artifacts (double deinterlacing, I guess, if that's possible).


Drew
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,463 Posts
So,


will someone tell me if this new software will be incorporated into the Sharp 9000 units sold in the US????


-dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Can someone with the 9000U run through some tests, maybe even some of the hometheaterhifi.com progressive scan tests, to determine what's best -- feeding the Sharp 480i or 480p?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,186 Posts
 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3&pagenumber=1

Quote:
Irrespective of the method of input (composite, S-Vid, component), any interlaced signal (NTSC or PAL) appears delayed relative to the audio by about 0.25 seconds
I hope this is only an aberration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
282 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by royalswin
At CES, I asked someone at Faroudja a similar question (namely, wouldn't you want to send an interlaced signal to a projector with a Faroudja deinterlacer in it, rather than a progressive signal). He said you'd absolutely want to send the interlaced signal, and let the deinterlacer on the projector do the work, if the deinterlacer on the projector is better than that in the DVD player


Drew



I just purchased the NRS and the Pioneer 503CMX and was wondering the same thing about sending interlaced or progressive from my Sony 9000ES into the NRS.


Considering the above - I am now wondering if my SONY is way overkill for this system and I would I be better with something much less expensive and not as featured???


What do you think?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
726 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Michael M


I just purchased the NRS and the Pioneer 503CMX and was wondering the same thing about sending interlaced or progressive from my Sony 9000ES into the NRS.


Considering the above - I am now wondering if my SONY is way overkill for this system and I would I be better with something much less expensive and not as featured???


What do you think?
I don't believe the NRS accepts 480p input, so for video the Sony is probably an overkill. However, doesn't the 9000ES play SACD recordings? So you might want to keep it for that reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
I'm pretty sure that's right. Check out Faroudja's web site; the manual for the NRS is there. I'm pretty sure it says that the component input only accepts an interlaced signal.


As an aside, if you're going into an NRS, check out the DVD Hardware forum. I've been over there a bit, and I'm betting you see what I did--namely, that the RP91 (with DVD-A) as a bonus makes the most sense into an NRS, since it has no chroma bug and is only missing the Faroudja deinterlacing, which you don't want anyway (since it would be a waste because you have the NRS).


By the way, I don't actually own any of this stuff yet, so I can't tell you I've seen it in action. But, based on the comments of the people who have, this is what I conclude.


Drew
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
claw,


As at least one other forum member has seen this lip-sync issue as well as myself (makes it *unwatchable*) - I'm not sure it is an 'aberration'.


In terms of the image quality between 480i (CIVIC de-interlaced) and 480P (with a Pana 56 Sage de-interlaced) not a huge difference. However, the lip-sync issue is not there with the 480p input (see my long 9000 review elsewhere).


The NRS will *not* accept a 480p input - you must use 480i for it to work. I bought a new DVD player with this in mind, and the concensus on the DVD harware forum is that the panasonic players don't have the 'chroma-bug' so I chose the 56 to go with the new setup.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Nick,


The lip-sync problem has only been seen on the 9000E, not on the 9000U, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,064 Posts
This problem/solution is not unlike the "S-video vs. composite" argument that went on for years (and is the reason I eventually pick-up an Elite-99 LD player). Whichever piece of equipment has the better de-interlacer/line-doubler (or whatever you like to call it), will dictate the type of connection to use.

(1) If you have a good progressive DVD w/3:2 pull-down and a "crummy" line-doubler in your projector/TV, then you'll want to go with the component input (assuming you have one).

(2) On the other hand, if you have a good video processor in your projecter/TV (like the new Infocus models) and "crummy" (or in my case, interlaced) component out on your DVD player, then you'll probably do better w/the S-Video input. For those people who still watch LD as well as DVD (like me), the latter would be a very attractive combination.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,918 Posts
Quote:
The lip-sync problem has only been seen on the 9000E, not on the 9000U, right?
No. Its the other way around. It has been seen on the 9000U which Nick imported and not the 9000E. Well yet anyway.


Spero D.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top