Question on video upconversion for LaserDisc... (1 Viewer)

I am currently running composite directly from a CLD-59 LaserDisc player (I'm looking to get s CLD-99 when the budget allows) to a Mitsu WS65511 display. My understanding is that on LD, the signal is composite to begin with, so that it is better to run it directly to the display, and use it's 3-D Motion Adaptive comb filter instead (the S-Video uses the CLD-59's 3-line filter). My question is whether it would yield a better picture by running composite to a Denon-2105 and letting it split the signal into component? I know that it will not add anything not already there, and does not do upscaling, but I was thinking that splitting the signal to seperate Y, B, and R components might yield a cleaner picture. Does anyone have any experience with this?

I'd try it. It depends entirely on how good the Denon's conversion is. It takes a good 3-D comb filter to convert from composite to component or S-Video. How good is the circuit on the Denon?

FWIW my X1 does an amazing job with LaserDisc. It doesn't look as good as DVD of course, but it looks really nice!

Phillip,

I have not been able to find any specs on the Denon relating to the comb filter, although I'm gonna keep digging. All e-mails to their tech support have so far gone unanswered...

If you cannot find information about a comb filter, the filter is certainly not in the top category, 3D motion adaptive. If you are lucky the filter is in the intermediate category, 3 line adaptive aka 2D. Any 2 line filter is in the low category.

View the large color bar test pattern in Video Essentials or Barney the dinosaur or the red and blue borders around players' names and scores on sportscasts. The less crawling zipper edges on contrasting color patches, the better. (I don't think AVIA has a LD version but you can test the A/V receiver's comb filter using a DVD player connected via the yellow jacks.) Also view resolution test patterns. The maximum horizontal resolution of LD is just over 400 lines on the upright wedge test pattern scale.

Video hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/vidcomb.htm

I recently tried svideo upconversion on an AVR for LD. It sucked compared to svideo straight in.

My 3 line digital comb filter in my display is the worst. Anybody that buys philips should just never expect to hook anything up via the composite connection. It stinks.

By contrast, the line doubling on the display when fed even a half decent svideo signal is really quite good.


I gotta make sure I add this to my posts suggesting Philips CRT RPTV displays. The composite in is almost unuse-able in my opinion. Not a big deal for me, but may be a bigger deal to some others.

PS: Even if you have a great Comb Filter in the set, you should try both as there are limitations on the composite cable itself that may yeild better results via svideo.

Allan,
I will defnately give that a shot, but I fear you are correct: that the Denon's filter is pretty much stock. When hi def DVD comes around, I will need to use the Denon's signal switching between component, but I don't think there is any conversion there (and hopefully no signal degredation)...

John,

For quite a while I had both the composite (Liberty InterFlex Z-300) and S-Video (Monster) hooked up simulatneously, so that I could do head-to-head comparisons just be switching inputs. I found the composite to be much sharper (relatively speaking, of course), with less color bleed. The comb filter in the CLD-59 is only a 3-line (if memory serves), and the Mitsu has a 3D-motion adaptive comb filter. Now that I think about it, a $650 amp probably would not have a better (even equivalent) filter as a $3000 HDTV....

Thanks for all the input!

Sounds like your display has a very good comb filter for sure. It is the only thing I hate about the Philips displays. Seems consistant too across the different models they offer too.

The best thing you can do is get a better player. I agree to try it and see, but I believe the others are correct in that the Denon reciever will not have a great comb filter. I'd like to hear your results though. I would also suggest to skip the CLD-99 and go for a pioneer LD-S9.

Depending on what is available on ebay when the bugdet allows (probably in the neighborhood of $1k)....

EDIT: Just looked on ebay..... looks as if the LD-S9 is a little out of my league (as the CLD-99 was when it was originally produced)....:frowning:

>>> limitations in the composite cable ...

If you think the connection setup using the 3D comb filter is not so good, try a different composite cable. You can even try the green cable of a component video cable set (connected between the yellow jacks).

Allan,

Actually, the picture is quite good as is.... on a 65" screen (better than it has any right to). A very well mastered LD (Men in Black, Titanic, Sound of Music, etc) looks nearly as good as a non-anamorphic DVD, albeit a little soft in the focus area. I attribute much of this to the comb filter in the Mitsu, as even "less than steller" LD titles that looked pretty bad on a 53" 4:3 screen now look pretty darn good. Being the anal little geek that I am however , I am always looking at ways to improve my PQ..... Now, if only I can find someone as compulsive about his toys as I am that wants to part with their CLD-99....

I don't really think you'll gain much going to a CLD99. Your TV already has a 3D comb filter that is likely as good as or better than the one in the 99. I just don't think you'll gain much by getting a 99. The LD-S9 would give much better results for slightly more money.

There are currently 2 LD-S9s on ebay: one for $1800 and the other for $2400. Given my buget right now, that is a little out of my league. To my knowledge, this player is the only one that is more legendary than the 99, so I will definately shoot for it. As for now, it's the wife's turn getting her toys, so I will have to wait. If I am really not going to notice a big diff with the 99, I will wait longer and save for the LD-S9.... Thanks!

Greg, given that my original estimated budget was around $1000, and now you have given me the bug for a LD-S9 (around twice that much), I'm pretty sure my bank account has put a price on your head (of course, behind mine for getting involved in this hobby in the first place)... Fair warning.

Seriously, are you suggesting that the major difference between the CLD-59 and the CLD-99 is the comb filter (3-Line Digital vs 3D Motion Adaptive). I think the 79 has the same comb filter as the 59, but still has a higher s/n ratio.... I mean, if the combo of the 59 and the Mitsu's 3D comb filter is even close to the 99... (or am I dreaming here?)

I would say that it is the major difference. The 99 will give you better video I believe based on it's design improvements, but I just don't think you'll get a huge difference, especially if you are using the comb filter in your mitsubishi. The Mits is likely going to have a better filter than the 99. My advice is to take your time and really research these players. You need to ask yourself do you want the best quality you can get, or is it not that important? I myself wanted the best, so I got an HLD-X9. But my needs may be different than your.

I do think you'll get improvement, but not a huge one. The 99 is the better player over the 59 no doubt, but much of that can be attributed to the 99's filter, which you won't even use as the Mits is probably better.

You may want to consider the CLD79 has it is the same player as the 99 except it has a 3 line digital filter, but again that doesn't matter as you will likely want to use the 3D one in the mits. I would also do some research on the CLD 97, which is highly regarded. If you could get a 99 for a good price, go for it. I just wouldn't spend crazy money on one. I saw one go for over $1000 on ebay last week and for that money you can spend a little more and get the S9, which truly is a better player.

But if you're really serious consider the LD-S9 or even the HLD-X9. The X9 is a truely awesome player but is really expensive. I have an X9 and a CLD79. I use a 53" pioneer elite HDTV, and I thought that the 79's image quality was fantastic on it until I got the X9. There was no comparison. The X9 was far superior. But the X9 will set you back quite a bit. The S9 is a cheaper alternative. Both the X9 and S9 are japanese players.

The S9 is based on the CLD 99 design but uses the 3D motion adaptive comb filter developed by Mitsubishi. It plays LD only, no CD's.

The X9 is a totally different design. It also used the 3D motion adaptive filter but I believe has more adustments than the S9's implementation. It has 3 algorithims, called Standard, Sports, and Art. Once you choose one you can go in and select from the following options:

Y/C mode: Normal, C-Wide, and HR
Y/C processing level: adjustable from 1 to 8 and controls the level of 3D processing.
Y 3D noise reduction adjustable from 1 to 8
C 3D noise reduction adjustable from 1 to 8

It uses a narrow bandwidth red laser for a better read on the disc, and with the red laser can play MUSE high definition laserdiscs. It has seperate power supplies for the analog and digital sections, has the D-EXT feature to proplery set black levels, has a 20 bit burr brown DAC compared to the S9's 1 bit dac for audio.

Thanks, Greg!

Small detail: The CLD-99 and a few other high end LD players do not have native composite output. Instead they recomposite their S-video output to become their composite output. The significance to the consumer is that the composite output on these players will never be better than the S-video output.

I just want to chime in on LD players here in the contrary. If your TV has a really good video processing circuit for composite video, you'll reach diminishing returns very quickly with LD players. I used to have a CLD-99 feeding my NTSC 50" projector, and the difference between that and my (bedroom system) CLD-D704 and (backup) CLD-D406 was noticable and definitely worth my trouble. However, I sold off the 99 in my very satisfying campaign to "gear down" and simplify my system, and ended up with the 704 in the main theater instead of the 99. The 704 didn't look as good on my NTSC display, but it still looked good enough to make me satisfied.

When my 50" NTSC display died (leaking green gun - ugh!) I replaced it with a used InFocus X1. Now, as we know the X1 is famous for having a fantastic Faroudja DCDi chip for handling NTSC sources. One of the first things I did was watch some LDs through it, plugged in composite. I was very impressed! The X1 does more than just deinterlace, it also does some really nifty noise reduction and other processing on the composite input.

Recently I brought the CLD-D704 to my office for DVD conversion of some LDs. Chances are it's going to be there for months or years because I have a lot of OOP LDs to convert and not a lot of spare time.

As a result of this, I pulled out the backup CLD-D406, a very basic player without "good numbers" for things like S/N and such. It's still LD though, with decent resolution and great time base for nice straight lines everywhere. I honestly can barely tell the difference between the CLD-406 and the CLD-D704 on the X1. And in some ways the 406 actually looks better, I think the noise reduction on the 704, so necessary on an NTSC display, actually harms the picture on this display.

So to make a long story short, I think modern displays which have very good processing on board render some of the old rules of thumb with LaserDisc on NTSC displays obsolete. My CLD-D406 on the X1 looks stunning. Certainly dramatically than NTSC Dish Network if not quite as good as nonanamorphic DVD.

Did you try turning off the noise reduction on the 704? I have a CLD79 (elite version of the 704) and found the noise reduction to be very bad and kept it off.

I don't really agree with your statements though. I'm willing to bet that if I brought my X9 over and hooked it up to your 406 the difference would be quite noticeable.

Derek, there's no substitute for better players so far as the LD format goes. The hi-end Japanese players rule. The S9 and X9 convey way better colour than U.S. models via S-video. ...or S-video into an iscan and then into a component input, as my S9 is employed for my 36" Sony XBR 450. I run my X9 straight into a Pioneer 630 set as it's de-interlacing is quite worthy.

I bought my S9 for $1500, shipping included, new back in 2000. I brought it in from Hong Kong. Within' a year, I had an X9 too. The S9 priced quoted in an earlier post caught my attention as out of line unless these players are appreciating...? The S9 is the bang for the bucks hi-end player, IMO. With purr-fect condition discs it closely rivals the X9.

Forget the CLD-99 if you're gonna use composite. The CLD-79 and CLD-D704 will give you the same performance, presumably for less dinero. The best composite U.S. Elites would be the CLD's 97 & older 95. Either of those decks should be a considerable improvement over your 59. I own a 59 too. I used to have a 95 and it had better colour than a 99 when each ran composite into a 32" Sony XBR 250's 3-D comb. ...not as good as the LD-S9's S-video but a notch closer, IMO.

I'd be patient and plot for a great player like the S9 or X9...or, get a CLD 97 or 95. Any of those 4 will substantially beat the 99 or 79/704.
Good luck on your quest!