|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
69.228.88.30
yes, i'm being serious ;-)
i mainly use my Pioneer Elite CLD-79 for a transport for my old skool theta DSPro GEN III DAC, but i do enjoy spinning the silver saucers every once in a while. LDs hearken back to my youth, they are a fricken dollar used in many cases, have uncompressed CD quality audio... and i like to freak people out at parties ;-)
i'm currently just using an old Sony Wega 27" CRT TV through the S-video output of the 79. comparing both S-video (using the 79's 3 line comb filter) and the composite out to the TV (using the TVs comb filter) the S-video out looks better. i'm using decent cables in both instances. the s-video cable is a monster cable. and the composite is a 75ohm MIT cable.
the color and sharpness looks awesome (i don't use DNR) - still have some chroma noise on pure blacks - but what can you do short of buying a fricken X0 or X9 LD player, eh?
which begs the question - i've heard many opinions regarding the 3D digital comb filters in new HDTVs. some say they are so advanced that they do NOT look good on laserdiscs (which doesn't make sense to me - the better the CF, the better the picture, regardless of medium, eh?) other say the comb filters in modern HDTVs are cheap and geared to digital component (like bluray and dvd) but are actually NOT high-quality. hence why they suck for analog sources, like LD. and others say the comb filters look great.
all this is so device dependent. anybody know what current LED HDTVs have bad-ass comb filters? i've heard vizio's filters suck - but their TVs are so cheap and tempting!
i am on the lookout for a fairly priced CLD-97, but that will take some time. the 97 is older than the 79, has a crappier internal comb filter, but the composite is supposedly a fair amount better than the 79 - mainly because the 97 was built to the hilt and weighs like 45 pounds. i also want the 97 because it's one of the best CD transports around (it's the base for mcintosh's MLD-7020 LD/cd transport)
basically, any amazing LED HDTVs out there with a comb filter that competes with a cristalio or something? would a scaler help? i can buy an old school faroudja scaler for like nothing
see ya,
Robby
Follow Ups:
there are people who say plasmas have burn in issues - especially with gaming (of which i do NOT play) and that the tubes loose their oomph after as little as 1,500 hours - making the blacks more grey looking.
do plasmas have burn in issues any worse than say an old CRT computer monitor? i had a radius 20" for years - FINALLY, i started seeing a burn in of my desktop and it stopped being sharp. do LCDs NOT have any burn in issues?
i'm sensing this is either BS or based on REALLY old plasma displays.
but is there any reason why a decent plasma won't look as good as new compared to an LED/LCD after say, 10 years? we watch about 2 hours a day - MAX on the TV.
basically, will LED/LCDs outlast plasmas? i'm not talking freak breakdowns - i'm saying will the picture get worn-out looking with one compared to another over time?
Robby
Ask the LCD crowd about brown-in. Yes, LCD has an issue that's seldom talked about: it's a brown tinge that is noticeable in the whites, mostly caused by having the contrast cranked to the max ("but it looks better that way"). A lesser, though real issue, also occurs when less picture than the aspect ratio of the display is displayed for extended periods of time.
Burn-in is a possibility with plasma displays, as it was with CRT. However, most of the burn-in issues are either a few faulty displays (which get reported by a vocal few who stain their underwear with the slightest issue), gamers who have zero understanding of the technology or improperly set up displays. The technology has come a long way since Fujitsu invented it in the late '60s. It is highly unlikely that anyone with some intelligence and understanding of the technology is going to have an issue with a plasma display purchased in the last 5 years re: burn-in. There were safegaurds put into play years ago to lessen the likelihood of burn-in with a plasma display.
Outlast can mean two things: buy one of each and see what one lasts the longest or which technology will be around in the next 15 or 20 years. For the first, I'd say they'll each last about the same amount of time, give or take a few years. You'll probably want to replace either with a bigger and/or better display or newer technology before either is no longer useable. As to the second, there will probably be a newer, better, more advanced technology emerging in the next few years that will make the choice of LCD or plasma a non-issue.
Plasma or LCD? Do your research from credible sources, read up on each as much as you can, visit friends or relatives who have nice displays and check out a few stores. Then make your decision. Just remember, most people can talk themselves into or out of anything. There's this guy, used to play football. One of the greatest QBs of all time. Maybe you've heard of him. Name's Brett Favre...
we are visiting friends and family for the 4th, so far, we been checking out their various LCDs and LEDs. from a 720p panasonic to a 1080p panasonic to a bravia XBR LED.
too tell you the truth, they all look sorta fake to me. like you are watching a video game.
i watched my parents old 32" panasonic CRT. i like the colors and depth much better. obviously the resolution doesn't compare.
and my know it all cousin was giving me crap for even mentioning a plasma. shows you how people are sheeple ;-)
not saying i'm totally aginst LED. but i need to really take a close look at a decent 1080p plasma. i think panasonic and samsung make decent ones, right? don't think i can afford a pioneer.
1. As cfraser said below, scaling in most displays is not exactly great. An external scaler will definitely do a better job than the scaler that's inside most displays. For not too much money (check online stores), you can get an Anchor Bay Technologies DVDO Edge.
2. Why LED LCD? Or LCD for that matter? Why not plasma? There's no local this that or the other -- plasma is individual addressing, 2 millisecond refresh, no backlight and no color that's "artificial looking" at times.
3. We'll have to disagree about the S-video outputs of the CLD-97 vs CLD-79. Many years ago, there was a thread at AVS Forum on this very subject and the majority of owners gave the edge to the CLD-97 (vs the CLD-79), some even preferring its output over that of the CLD-99's 3D comb filter. There were several sceenshots (using the same movies) in that thread comparing the outputs to show the differences. That said, it could be a taste issue.
i lust was CLD-97 but have never seen one in person. so, my statement were based on hearsay. i do really want a 97 though. especially for use as a bad-ass cd transport. and it's soooo purdy ;-)
but i only paid $100 for the CLD-79. i can't justify $500-$700 for the 97. $300? probably, but more than that - i'll just stick with the 79 until i strike gold with a great 97 deal.
thanks for the info on the DVDO Edge. is it better than the iscan or the older faroudja scalers (which are super cheap). i don't know how scalers work - do they have comb filters and you use the one in the processor - or it only upscales and you still use either the LD or the HDTVs comb filter?
thanks for your comments on plsama - it made me do some web perusing. seems LED is just LCD with LED backlighting instead of fluorescent, right? and some, i guess edge backlighting, turns off specific LEDs in the dark areas of the picture to make the blacks look darker?
but it seems there's still a raging debate over plasma vs. LED. some say good LED backlighting finally surpasses plasmas whites and blacks. BUT might not looks as natural (that plasma has a CRT organic quality to it).
plasma isn't as thin a profile as LED (i don't care - it's gonna sit on our current TV stand - not wall mounted). and it sucks up a crapload more power than LED. we don't watch all that much TV. maybe about 1-2 hours a day. so whatever - the plasma might cost like $30/yr extra to run.
what is important is the notion that plasmas break down and drop pixels a lot compared to current LED/LCD TVs. what are your opinions on this?
but i've also heard that NONE of these TVs (plasma, LED and LCD) will last longer than 8-10 years, if you are lucky. CRT still reigns in that regard.
Robby
Panasonic rates their plasmas now at 100,000 hours until half-life. Half-life is the point when the display can only produce half of its maximum brightness. At 8 hours a day, 365 days a year, that's over 34 years. By the way, LCD manufacturers give their displays about the same rating.
I bought my 50" Panasonic in 2004, my 42" Sylvania plasma in 2007 and my oldest son's 37" Insignia in 2008. Never had a problem with any of them and none of them have a stuck or dead pixel. That's my experience.
The way the LED LCD's get their blacks darker than regular LCD displays is local dimming. An area that calls for the darkest blacks can be turned way down, but not OFF. Therefore, this is not individual addressing: with plasma, if you want the pixel at Row 7 Column 54 to be OFF, you can do it. With LED LCD or LCD, that cannot be done.
Colors are better today on LCD, and even some early LED LCDs, than just a few years ago. However, they can still, at times, have that artificial look. Plasma produces color via a completely different technology and, like CRT, produces it at the glass -- not through a filtration process starting behind the screen.
Plasmas use more power than LCDs -- that's a fact. However, most of the forums that use this as a selling point for that technology exaggerate the difference in consumption. Most of the plasmas sold today, while still not equal to LCD in power consumption, are much closer than LCD proponents would have you believe. Just remember that when you look at the power ratings, LCD is more or less a steady state consumer -- power draw is very close to constant (ie, it doesn't fluctuate a great deal with picture changes). Plasma ratings are based on the maximum draw (eg, when there are extremely bright scenes such as explosions, flashes or white screens). However, normal viewing power draw is way down from such scenes. The rating system doesn't allow for average draw, so plasma is stuck with using its maximum draw for the ratings system. There are some threads at AVS Forum where people have done their own tests on LCD vs plasma in the area of power consumption. Except for the most nitpicky people, the newest plasmas do much better against today's LCD displays than older plasmas.
Weight is something that makes me laugh when it comes to displays. Once you mount it on a wall, place it in an entertainment center or on a stand, that's it. How often do these people who whine about the weight of a display move them? Seriously, for most normal people, the only time displays get moved is when you're moving to a new house or apartment.
Silicon Image has acquired ABT, the makers of the DVDO products. You can read about the different processors they offer
well, it looks like plasma is becoming more and more intriguing. we do have morning sun into the living room - but whatever, i'm sure it still looks nice enough to watch the news ;-)
but it seems in a dark room, in the evening - a good plasma will shine compared to an LED/LCD. maybe not dramatically - but i like the more organic quality of phosphor compared to LCD. agreed?
Robby
Hello,
I bought 2 ea top of the line Sony LCD's about 6 mos ago---they do look good but compared to Panasonic Plasma---there is no contest !! The Panny Plasma's are as close as you will get to a CRT based screen--but light years better in resolution and just that look natural,organic color quality. Also,off angle you can see the Plasma screen great---with an LCD--if you're not in the sweet spot directly in front of the screen you will see S**t--it will look terrible.
Luckily--the place that I bought the Sony LCD's let me exchange them for the Panasonic Plasma's. They look AWESOME !!
Plasma is the way to go. Images look natural, no motion artifacts, deep blacks.
Don't know why the industry wants plasma to die in favor of LCD and LED.
Best,
Ross
Happy Panasonic Plasma owner !
Many LCD/LED LCD manufacturers tell you that their displays have an angle of view near 180 degrees. While technically true (you can still see a picture), the picture quality started going downhill by the time it hit 60 degrees -- that leaves you about 120 degrees of sourspot . Again, the reason for this is because of the filtration-like process in LCD displays. Plasma starts the picture right at the glass.
Tough. I went through this a couple years ago. You mostly have to just try it, so get at a place that allows easy exchange. I ended up with a Toshiba for my SD display, I am surprised how good it looks. [I am definitely no Toshiba fan, it just worked out the best for what I wanted (Oppo music display at home and portable for cottage viewing). They seem a lot better quality now than the pretenders they've been for the last few decades IMO.]
The CF will be a lesser issue to PQ than the (IMO/E) horrible upscaling of SD material by the display. Since even dirt cheap current HDMI players do a fairly decent job of upscaling, display manufacturers bother trying even less these days. Besides that so few people seem to really care. So that external scaler would probably be a good idea. Also, don't assume a 720p display will look worse with SD than a 1080p one. And the display has the least chance of looking crappy with SD the smaller the display size. To match a 4:3 27" you'll need well into the 30s of 16:9, probably a 42" to make it worthwhile. If you really really care about PQ you wouldn't be looking at "LED" displays, but yes there are good reasons for LCD, just not absolute PQ so much...
unfortunately, i don't :-(
but let's see if i can hang. you are saying that the PQ (picture quality) wouldn't be harmed by current HDTV's 3D comb filters (CF) compared to the HDTV's crappy upscaling abilities? you are referring to laserdisc as SD (standard definition?).
what's a decent used upscaler? will one of those $100-$200 used adjustable faroudjas work? i can get a faroudja NRS for like free - but they are proprietary to a specific application, correct?
we are looking at a 42". so, you think that LCD looks better than LED? i've heard that some people still prefer plasma over the others.
again, we will buy a bluray player. but LDs are a dollar... or free - hence why i'd still like them to look decent on a new display. plus DVDs can't touch LD's uncompressed digital audio for concert discs. does bluray still compress audio? or is it cd quality (or better, like SACD or DVD-A)?
thanks,
Robby
I don't *really* know my stuff, it's just that I ran into some similar problems trying to find a "good" display for SD video.Yes, SD=standard definition, let's say anything below 720p to cover all the bases.
I have never used an upscaler myself. My friends with projectors have them. Mostly they were for regular TV signals and DVD, and to get an aspect ratio or custom size that built-in upscalers couldn't do.
LED=LCD display with LED backlighting (regular LCD uses fluorescent lighting). Yes, I meant that plasma is the preferred PQ choice, if it otherwise suits. Plasma uses more power and can make the room hotter too (not much in 42" though), and requires some sort of room lighting control (though not nearly as much as for a projector) i.e. darkish. LCD is much much better in a bright room, and is better for static images (perhaps some games).
Basically I meant that I would guess the SD upscaling ability of a given current display model would have greater effect on the picture quality than the CF differences between models. I don't think too many display manufacturers are concentrating on SD performance, so you just have to try displays to find one that happens to be OK with SD. Or find somebody with very current experience, display guts change at the drop of a hat these days.
I think the best DVD audio would surpass most LD audio. BD audio is at least that good, and can be (usually is) lossless audio of a very nice quality. It can easily tax a very fine audio system i.e. the BD source will likely not be your sonic limitation. Not saying it's as great as the greatest analog, but it's very good and quite flexible too. [Edit: sorry, I was thinking of BD audio discs there, and not so much the audio tracks of BD movies, which are also very decent.]
Edits: 06/30/11
The great majority of laserdiscs have digital audio tracks encoded at CD's standard of 16/44. In the early days of laserdiscs, however, the tracks were analog only. Later, as surround sound became more prominent in movies, laserdiscs adopted Dolby AC-3 (the early name for Dolby Digital's lossy format). However, an RF output was needed to make use of the surround tracks and the addition of the AC-3 tracks did away with the right channel analog track. Then, toward the "end", DTS was able to get some laserdiscs encoded in their surround format. For DTS' laserdiscs, they did away with the digital PCM tracks (both analog tracks remained).
Today, the majority of Blu-ray movies are encoded with DTS-HD Master Audio. This is a lossless format which, once decompressed, is equivalent to uncompressed PCM. The common bit depth and sample rate is 24/48, though there were some movies which were put on disc as 16-bit. The 48kHz sample rate is the movie industry's standard: some concerts have 96kHz tracks. The first couple of years saw Blu-ray encoded with uncompressed PCM, Dolby Digital (lossy), Dolby TrueHD (Dolby's lossless format) and DTS (lossy).
my system is primarily for 2 channel music. video is just something i hook up to it for a value add. i'm not really a hometheater guy. and am perfectly happy with quality stereo sound.
my system is pretty revealing though. even though i'm using 60 year old mcintosh MC60 tube monoblocks - the yamaha NS-1000M monitors can still get a bit edgy on compressed material. hence, why i like LD playback compared to our ancient 2002 POS philips DVD player.
Robby
Blu-ray surround sound can be downmixed to stereo, be it an analog output or a digital signal to a DAC. A room full of speakers isn't necessary.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: