[munch]

Hello guys,

I've been lurking these forums for a while now and I am very grateful for all the info. Thing is, as I am looking into scalers, I'm getting more and more confused. It seems that if one invests in a scaler, it's always a compromise. There's always something that's done wrong. For example, the HD-Leeza, 480i on separate input is a deal breaker for me. Good thing for these forums.


HDMI inputs/outputs, 1080i to 1080p, to simple convenience features like intelligent switching (auto-detect sources), etc... what's on YOUR wishlist?


The list of possible features is just so broad so I thought it would be helpful (at least to me) if you guys would point out some things that are often overlooked when it comes to designing a scaler?


In light of recent discussions, I'd like to know what would be the IDEAL (end-all) scaler/processor?


IMHO, people seem to be more lenient on the final PQ, as long as it has the complete list of features (lipSync for example), am I wrong? I guess I'd like to know what you guys have at the top of your list when it comes to choosing the last piece of video equipment?

 

[oferlaor]

munch,


It is always a compromise, today's best PQ is produced by scalers that START at around $30,000 for the cheapest configuration...


I would say that the balance of PQ vs. features is slowly moving towards features as many of the leading scaler manufacturers have reached a level of PQ that's similar to the others. So, the real benefits of one scaler vs. another are price, features, inputs and company reputation (e.g., quality of customer service).


The list features of the perfect scaler are pretty well known here (the list is too long for me to put in myself) and I believe that the manufacturers themselves have a pretty good idea of what the perfect scaler would be. However, they have the same cost concerns and bang/buck concerns as we do...

 

[bpape]

Let's think about

1080i to 1080p is not a big deal since most PJs and displays won't do it.


NO auto-detect and switching.


Adjustable sensitivity for dropouts, etc.


NO settings per input. Instead, give me say 25-50 memories that can store

- Input

- Output

- Resolution

- Scan Rate

- Bright/Contrast/Sharp/etc.

- Gamma

- Position

- Size/Amplitude/etc.

- anything else I forgot. I want FULL control over the picture storable per memory.


In addition, give me a set of GLOBAL settings that I can apply for everything, make that my baseline, and then adjust the memories from that point.


Scaling or passthrough of ANY resolution

 

[Dale Adams]

Quote:

Originally posted by bpape 1080i to 1080p is not a big deal since most PJs and displays won't do it.

While you may not want to output 1080p, you do want to deinterlace 1080i to 1080p and then scale the 1080p to your desired output resolution. Otherwise, you're just doing a simple Bob by scaling single 1080i fields.

Quote:

- 2 x 1394

So you'll need MPEG compression and decompression unless all you want is simple switching. Do you want that to work for both SD and HD? (Could get expensive if you want HD MPEG encoding.)

Quote:

Why is it that nobody has come up with a piece that is exceptionally done both from a technical engineering standpoint AND a HUMAN engineering standpoint? I wish someone would make some of these guys do what I make my programmers/designers do. Try using it yourself in a real world envrionment with real tasks set up like most users will.

One potential problem here is that 2 users may differ significantly on what they want. Both viewpoints are valid, but they are inconsistent with each other. Which one do you design for? You could make it general enough to handle everything, but then you end up with something that's very complex to initially configure. I'd be willing to bet that if you described exactly how you wanted the scaler to behave, that you'd get 20 other folks chiming in that it should work just a bit different. (Personally, I differ with some of the points you've outlined above. That doesn't make either one of us wrong.)


- Dale Adams

 

[mark haflich]

Dale is right on. And unlike the masses with a stupid plasma (Hi Ofer) or 720p DLP, many can easily display 1080p (hell I can display 1200p if I want to). So my wish would be for a processor which didn't soften the image at higher resolutions. It is easy to scale. Processing to maintain the sharpness, that is another whole story.

 

[Audio Facist]

AV 192 may evolve into what you are looking for, the picture performance is unbelievably good considering the cost. The 192 is only rivaled by the Meridan 861 in sound quality and the extensiveness of its room eq and music surround.


But as for a tangible unit that is heading the right direction and on the market, I would keep my eye on this machine.


Having 1st hand experience with this scaler, something only two other people in the US have had for now (so weigh your comments carefully ). I have to say since I saw the Snell & Wilcox system on a Barco, I haven't felt any other scaler at any price was close to that system let alone one priced under $12K. But as this product begins to get into dealer showrooms and the digital projectors increase in resolution the engineering quality of this unit should begin to shine through. If you have a CRT now, then trying to get a demo of this Pre/Pro/VPro should be on your list of things to do.


Check it out...and TAG, no; is not going out of business.


BTW TAG192 was connected to a Sony CRT projector.

 

[oferlaor]

stupid plasma?!

 

[Dean Roddey]

All of the above, plus a high quality, fast, extensible control protocol, ethernet based

 

[bpape]

I would still say that most pj's and displays won't do 1080p RIGHT. They may accept the signal but don't really have the resolution to do it right. My XG135 will technically do it BUT the beam spot size is just not small enough to do it right. However, I do understand your comments about needing to deinterlace 1080i. Just trying to keep the cost down.


1394 - I want the option to use it IF they decide that this is the new STB connection standard instead of DVI.


Dale, I certainly agree that everyone will have a different opinion. That is why I tried to lay things out so that they can be done pretty much however you choose. IF you want a single setting per input, set up a remote macro that selects a memory when you switch to it. If you don't, then don't. Options like that don't make setup that much harder but provide infinitely more flexibility. All I really want is to avoid the silly things that are a PITA and would be easily recognizable if someone actually had to use the piece on a daily basis.

 

[Stephan]

Quote:

AV 192 may evolve into what you are looking for

The VSM 2048 is not even close to an ultimate scaler.

I've talked to Udo about this in person, as well as in their forum and he confirmed many times that they will not do 48Hz nor 72Hz, because that is used in theaters and Tag wants to be better than theaters...


Anyway, for NTSC sources 48Hz and 72Hz with proper cadence detection and lock is a must to get rid of motion judder. The VSM2048 does not do it and that makes it useless for those who want the best possible quality.


What I'm not sure of is, if it does proper 1080i deinterlacing, like the F5000 and the HDL. But even if it does, it's only available in combination with the av192r and since I personally jumped off the Tag train last year and onto the M train, I doubt I will go back to Tag. But that is another story.


A standalone product would be nice if it does proper 1080i deinterlacing.



As for Meridian, I've talked to them about their VE12 card for the 800 which supports 480p, 720p and 1080i for sure. They told me it may support 1080p or maybe not, they're not sure. The possibility is there, so I think it's just a matter of firmware updates.

No word on 1440x960 for us CRT users, but since the card is HDMI anyway, it's of not much use.


The card does use the FLI23xx BC rev. so proper cadence detection and lock is possible and so is 48Hz and 72Hz. However they didn't want to tell me if it is supported or not until the card is released, but they are well aware of these features.



And for the ultimate scaler, I'd like


- component input SD/HD

- SDI input

- DVI/HDMI input

- RGB/HV output (at least for analogue inputs and SDI)

- DVI/HDMI output


- CUE correction

- cadence detection and lock,

- 48Hz and 72Hz framerate conversion for all input signals

- proper 1080i to 1080p deinterlacing

- 1440x960 resolution as long as I'm stuck with a CRT and that's probably until 1080p DLPs come out, since I'd like to have 75" constant height 2.35:1 screen, perforated with perforated side masking...

 

[Audio Facist]

"AV 192 may evolve into what you are looking for, the picture performance is unbelievably good considering the cost. The 192 is only rivaled by the Meridan 861 in sound quality and the extensiveness of its room eq and music surround. "



Just so I was clear (Evolve is the key word) and you'll have to wait and see its performance for yourself as a Rock plus owner I know all about some these issues you speak of. And the 2048 scaler outperforms my Rock+ with these handicaps anyway. I have never seen a smoother moving picture than what I saw watching the last performance scene in Chicago a bulb never stopped being a bulb at any time....I was amazed.



Integration of the video and surround processor will be essential to getting all these integration features on a single practical unit, don't you think?

 

[Stephan]

Quote:

Just so I was clear (Evolve is the key word) and you'll have to wait and see its performance for yourself as a Rock plus owner I know all about some these issues you speak of.

Waiting is something I have no problem with. But as some things were not considered in the design of the VSM2048, we will never see them.

And since we all know Udo, we know that once he has made up his mind on something, he won't change it - even if it would be possible to add it to the VSM2048.


The best thing you can do right now is wait until they've sorted out all their bugs and compatibility issues (check their forum). The only fully working demo I know of is always done with the Cine9 at a way too high resolution of around 2000 lines, which is too much, even for a Cine9.



What I'd also like to know is, if the VSM2048 will offer a full digital signal path or convert to analogue at some point like the dvd32r and flr do.

You can't get a "full" digital signal out of them, the digital data is converted to analogue and then back to digital and then it's output via DVI.




Quote:

Integration of the video and surround processor will be essential to getting all these integration features on a single practical unit, don't you think?

While I see some advatages in this once HDMI takes off, I think you can't push people into buying everything from one manufacturer. To me, the best possible quality is important and if that means seperate components, I'm going to buy from several manufaturers.


Also some people might not be happy with recent changes that happend at Tag or just won't like their quality. Some prefer Theta, Lexicon, Proceed, Meridian, ...


I personally switched for several reasons from T to M and I really don't see a way to go back.

I like quality better (always did, just couldn't think of spending as much on it), updating (PLIIx is free) and modularity and therefore upgradeability.


I can only speak for myself, but others may see this the same I do.

So a stand alone unit would make sense to me.




Now let me add a few things I'd like to see on an ultimate scaler.

- RS232 control

- Ethernet port with control possibility.

- Modular card based design



Barco has a scaler which is card based. If you run out of inputs, you can just buy another input card and add whatever you want.

 

[gary.barker]

The answers to your questions on the VSM2048 scaler are as follows:


The VSM2048 is not a deinterlacer and operates strictly in the digital domain. It will scale any progressive signal, it will also scale 1080i by scaling the individual 540 frames. It is capable of scaling from 480/640 to 2048/4096 for digital displays, and from 480 lines to 2048 lines for analog displays in single digit increments. Aspect ratio is adjustable from 1.0 to 3.0 in single digit increments out to three digits (ie from 1/1 to 999/999).


Analog input signals are handled in two ways. 480i and 575i signals are passed through the separate progressive scan module for deinerlacing and digitalization. Analog progressive and 1080i signals require an analog interface board (essentially an A/D) for digitalization.


Frame rate is locked to the input frame rate, if you go to the tag forum at http://www.tagmclaren.com and do a search for VSM2048 there are fairly lengthy explanations for why this is so, but essentially it is to avoid the introduction of jutter.


I have run the scaler on seven different displays so far (including a V inc standard def plasma, a 1024 x 1280 LCD panel, a SIM2 HT300, a V inc high def plasma, and a Fujitsu 50" 768 x 1365 plasma) and the performance has been nothing less than astounding.

 

[Stephan]

Gary,

Quote:

Frame rate is locked to the input frame rate, if you go to the tag forum at http://www.tagmclaren.com and do a search for VSM2048 there are fairly lengthy explanations for why this is so, but essentially it is to avoid the introduction of jutter.

This has been discussed in the Tag forum before (including me) and I've spoken to Udo as well as Hartmut from Tag in person about it.


What TAG says is just a part of the truth. Motion judder in NTSC sources is always there, no matter what you do.

So if you lock the input framerate to the output (60Hz in case of NTSC), you can still see the motion judder that is part of the source.


I'm talking about film based material here, not video!


To remove this motion judder from the source, you have to convert the framerate to a multiple of 24fps, say 48Hz or 72Hz for flicker sensitive people. To do this right, you need a proper working cadence detection and lock. You have to drop the original 3:2 to 2:2 or in case of 72Hz to 3:3.

If it's done right, you'll end up with a motion judder free image.


If the cadence detection doesn't work properly, you may end up with 3:1 or 4:2, which introduces additional judder and that is exactly what Tag says.


Now while it is absolutely correct when Tag says that 48Hz or 72Hz would introduce additional judder to the output of the VSM2048, they don't tell us that they don't have a properly working cadence detection and lock.


If they would have it, it would be possible to have a motion judder free image from the VSM2048 at 48Hz and 72Hz.


48Hz and 72Hz (as well as every full multiple of 24fps) is the only way to get a judder free image from a NTSC source. This does not apply for PAL, but PAL has a 4% speedup, which also applies to the sound and can be heard.



If Tag can't do it, fine with me. No sale for them.

The explanation from Tag is just marketing language... "what we can do is good, what we technically can't do is not important anyway".


Framerate conversion is an essential feature for some of us, that just want the best possible image you can get. And 60Hz from NTSC film sources is definitely not the best.



The only reason for me to get a stand alone VSM2048 would be proper 1080i deinterlacing like the F5000 or HDL does. But again, the F5000 doesn't have 48/72Hz and the HDL can't do it properly (looses cadence) yet.


I can live with 60Hz for 1080i until a better solution comes out, and once it's out, my money goes to the company that has such a product.


And yes, I'm not alone when it comes to the framerate conversion issue.

 

[Audio Facist]

You will definitely need to take a "LOOK" at this scaler, Judder is something I am sensitive to with owning and selling the Rock and having spent time with Deniz M, and having him set it up and explain the rocks adjustments for that problem.


Your theories are in conflict with what Gary and I have seen, Gary has not seen the Sony CRT projector setup and I have not seen his setups but the performance of this unit is not compromised and as CRT's fade away for better or for worse, 48hz and 72hz become mute points.


I will tell you that the TAG scaler had ZERO jutter problems despite not conforming to common thinking on scan rates.


This is why I made a point about the final performance scenes in Chicago, all the diagonal pans and all the small details never shimmered or lurched, they remianed crystal clear, what is phenomonal is the careful cinematography which never allowed the camera to smear the bulbs by exceeding the capacity of the films frame rate.


So just like when I heard the Meridian 861 for the first time in Trifield after setting it up myself for the first time, I had to change my mind about what was possible.


An anology that I think you can appreciate.

 

[Dominic]

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephan Waiting is something I have no problem with.

Essential for the Tag scaler, I think we have been talking about this for at least 2.5 years now and it still isn’t out with punters, many of us Tag fans just gave up on it

Quote:

Originally posted by Stephan 48Hz and 72Hz (as well as every full multiple of 24fps) is the only way to get a judder free image from a NTSC source. This does not apply for PAL, but PAL has a 4% speedup, which also applies to the sound and can be heard. If Tag can't do it, fine with me. No sale for them. The explanation from Tag is just marketing language... "what we can do is good, what we technically can't do is not important anyway". Framerate conversion is an essential feature for some of us, that just want the best possible image you can get. And 60Hz from NTSC film sources is definitely not the best. The only reason for me to get a stand alone VSM2048 would be proper 1080i deinterlacing like the F5000 or HDL does. But again, the F5000 doesn't have 48/72Hz and the HDL can't do it properly (looses cadence) yet.

I'm with Stephan on this one, his 'theories' are fine.


Proper frame rate conversion I would think would be highly desirable to many buying this type of product but there are ‘some’ merits for Tag approach but it will loose customers because of it (one of the essential features to many purchasers), particularly to 50 hz countires as many devices work better at 60 Hz than 50 Hz, in addition to the 48/72 stutter thing.


The Tag scaler deinterlaces SD with the SIL504 using a ADC 7118 (PSM192) and outputs via a BT656 'bus'. 1080i signal by passes this altogether and goes to AD9883 before going to the Pixelworks 181 chip. This chip does the 1080i deinterlacing using a bob and weave strategy which by Tags own omission ain't good. However when the Pixelworks chip does deinterlacing AND scaling it runs out of puff, and limits the output to about 1200 pixels per line (perhaps a little more), thereby loosing much of the resolution of the HD source It will therefore loose resolution and will not do motion adaptive deinterlacing on 1080i.


The high figures being quoted here are for SD only I think (the pixelworks chip just doing scaling and not deinterlacing and scaling), all devices using this chip (like my Samsung LCD monitor) will have these limitations. There is NO way around it unless a new HD deinterlacing solution can be found to replace the great SIL504.


The Tag solution is not standalone unfortunately, Many of us wanted to keep the AV32R separate from the video processing (deinterlacing, switching and scaling) and have therefore not gone to the 192 route. We don't need or want the integration, in fact we told tag repeatedly it would be a mistake to drop it.


Video processors are all about compromise and a month is a long time, so who knows what we will see shortly

 

[yubyub]

Lots of good stuff has been mentioned, which I won't repeat.


One thing which I would give a valuable body part for would be integrated mosquito noise reduction. Using an external box isn't ideal at this point, as there are none (that I know of) which allow an all digital pathway. The last thing I want is another A/D->D/A conversion in the signal path.


Mosquito noise is definitely becoming more and more of a problem as digital broadcasts become more popular. It's severe on most DTV channels, and still quite noticeable on HD channels. Not so much for DVDs anymore, thankfully...

 

[1SalesPro]

mmmm....looks all covered, but how a way to collaborate with source manufacturers and be able to input 480i via DVI........ then add multiple display amplification ability, super fast menus and video switching, and of course it would have to be able to automatically decide whether to use passive or buffered (and have a no interest & no payments for 12 months then a fixed 1.9% rate over 30 years payment plan)

 

[rogo]

"1394 - I want the option to use it IF they decide that this is the new STB connection standard instead of DVI. "


Not a chance, so forget that.


And, yes, I mean, not any chance.


Have you checked the last 100 models of HD-ready displays announced? How many have DVI in? How many have 1394 in?

 

[bpape]

All the new Mitsubishi Diamond Series HD RPTVs have both. Not sure about the rest of their line.


There are also other reasons for 1394.