Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

This is an LCD based rear projection TV? Does it have DVI connector?

No player gives truly "better resolution" on non-HD DVDs. Fundamentally you are stuck with the detail contained in the pixels on the disc, which is only 720x480 for SD DVD. Either the set or an upconverting player is just using interpolation techniques to generate the extra pixels to fill the screen, since there are 1280x720 or 1366x768 pixels or whatever (depends on your actual model #) to fill, you don't get more detail w/o more pixels originally. For picture quality it is just a contest whether & how much better the DVD player can deinterlace/scale compared to the TV itself. Personally I would just use your old player until you get Blu-ray, as improvements with a new one will be subtle at best, very moderate compared to the jump to actual Blu-ray.

If you want higher resolution but not funds for Blu-ray yet (or waiting for the new players w/ profile 2.0 features) then get a cheap Toshiba HD DVD player & either find clearance bin HD DVDs or rent from Netflix/Blockbuster.com until they stop shipping them.

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

CraigH, I went the the HD-DVD route just last week. If you can find an HD-DVD player (even open box), you won't be sorry. You'll need a HDMI to DVI-I cable to enjoy the best possible picture and that you can get from Blue Jeans Cable.com. I'm in the market now for the some HD-DVD titles to enjoy some HD but the biggest thing at this point is the upscaling of standard DVDs to 1080i. You will get the most out of your t.v. this way.

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

He probably needs HDMI->DVD-D cable; DVI-I doesn't fit a lot of older HDTVs. I'd get it from monoprice, cheaper than Blue Jeans.

But he can just use component for HD-DVDs if he doesn't care about scaling DVDs, see below.


Not necessarily. It depends on how well the player scales compared to the TV itself. Also on the Wega LCDs, 720p native, if using an upscaling player then scaling to 720p would be more sensible than to 1080i.

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

Not necessarily. My pj is 720p native and it does a better job converting 1080 material to 720p than either my PVR or HD DVD player. It depends on the internal processing of the TV vs. the source.

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

It's hard to see a scenario with a 720p native projector where 480i DVD -> 1080i -> 720p works out better than just feeding 480i/480p to the projector directly and letting the projector scale or using 720p out using the player's scaler.

Now for original 1080i content from a PVR, or original 1080p from HD-DVD, different factors would apply (deinterlacing 1080i can often be suboptimal), and indeed just outputting 1080i could be better.

I just don't think that for standard DVDs that this is likely. Do you really like 1080i better than all of 480i/480p/720p out for *standard DVDs*?

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

I have an Toshiba HD A2, a Cambridge Audio 540D (ver. 1) and a Marantz DV6400 in my system. I have a Sony AW 15 projector that gets glowing reviews for its video processing (it PROPERLY deinterlaces 480i and 1080i--no "bob and weave" for 1080i--and then scales them to 720p). I never use the Marantz for anything other than hi-res audio except for badly scratched rental discs because it has the best error correction of the three. I use the 540D for my PAL/other region discs (it's region free out of the box and my PJ accepts PAL natively) and for home movies on DVD+R discs (the A2 won't read them). I use the A2 (replaced the 540D for this) for SD and HD DVDs. I selected the A2 because it can output 480i via HDMI (the others are connected via component) as I wanted the PJ to do all the work. I A/B'd several SD discs and found the difference between 480i and 1080i neglible (however, the 720p output from the A2 was noticeably inferior--which suggests the deinterlacing of the A2 is not up to snuff) and the switch in output resolution from the A2 is cumbersome, so I leave it set to 1080i all the time. I've tried HD DVD output as 720p and it is worse than 1080i.

My conclusion is that my PJ's deinterlacer is better than any of my players (my 540D, when set to 480p is a LOT less nice than when set to 480i--same goes for my Marantz). So while my situation may be unusual, I suspect it is not unique. Therefore, I suggest trying ALL the permutations before making a final decision. I'm glad I did as I would otherwise have been tempted to set both my PVR (which I have set to pass the signal natively--whatever the resolution) and my A2 to 720p and, after having tried all the permutations, that would have been the worst of all possible setups with my gear.

Re: Progressive scan or HD player as interim player?

Well, in that case, and if you're sure you won't buy a BD-player right now (and can afford the HD DVD player), you should certainly consider the HD DVD interlude option. And the player nor the discs you buy are going away for a long time.

The Toshibas do a great job upconverting your DVDs (certainly not worse than your other options, possibly better) and you can buy or rent some of the absolutely great HD DVDs that are currently still on the market immediately and enjoy the picture. Many of the titles are available at unbelievable sell-out prices (often less expensive than the equivalent DVD).


Cees