Yeah, people have been saying that for years. It's always "next year or the year after that".
Posted July 13 2005 - 02:59 AM
| Faroudja's NRS+ falls well short of Teranex's HDX processing performance. |
Irrelevant. I’ve also seen video using a Teranex processor, and it wasn’t connected to the display using HDMI. It was connected using analog RGBHV cables, which are easily cable of carrying signals in the hundreds of megahertz (in other words, more than capable of transmitting 1080p at 60 hz, which requires less than 125 million pixels per second).
| However, component cable is indeed old (over 50 years now), as is CRT technology (will turn 75 next year). In fact, Sony got out of the CRT front projection business quite a while ago - as have almost every company that used to make CRT front projectors. |
Again, completely irrelevant. What counts is how the technology performs, not how old it is. Any knowledgeable person knows that the “age” of CRT OR its performance is not the reason why most front projection manufacturers moved away from it. Read the CRT vs. digital forums at AV Science, and you will see lots of posts talking about the “convenience” of the “bulb” projectors, their small size, etc. (the real reason for the marketing push for digital in the presentation market). They do NOT claim absolute superiority in picture quality, and the CRT people will give you a hell of an argument if you attempt to do so.The fact is that that there are VERY few “digital displays with HDMI connectors” capable of 1080p (most of them, in fact, are only capable of 1280 resolution at best). The resolution of high end CRT front projectors actually owned by people is better than the native resolution of most digital displays, HDMI or no HDMI.
| In addition, HDMI includes high performance audio transmission capabilities with sample rates between 32 and 192 kHz at up to 8 channels. |
So what? You think HDMI is the only way to achieve such audio performance?
| there are several new digital display technologies that are on track to surpass even the mighty 9" EM focus CRT guns for overall PQ! |
Posted July 13 2005 - 03:53 AM
| Then why did you bring it up in the first place??? |
It was you who raised the issue of CRT being "old". That's the irrelevant point.
| How about offering some actual technical insight that might support your disdain for HDMI and that can explain how component performs as well as HDMI when transmitting a 1080p signal from a digital source. |
Nils, I don't have "disdain" for HDMI. What I do dislike is the attitude I see in your posts that people who don't have it (your constant reference to "old technology") can't get superb performance from HD discs. That is simply not true. I've SEEN HD video using analog cables on the megabuck front projectors and processors, and you have no basis for saying that people wouldn't be THRILLED with such a picture. Why do you keep insisting that they wouldn't be, or shouldn't be?
Posted July 13 2005 - 04:40 AM
| On this I would never agree on. Kill HiDef DVD because they wont let it output in full-rez over an old under-performing outdated analog cable________________________________________ |
Doesn't mean component cable is worthless, just that HDMI outperforms it.
Your implication was that there’s no reason for people to be upset about the HDMI mandate, because they couldn’t get satisfactory performance from analog cable anyway. That’s wrong, and that’s what I took offense to.
| point out where I have "kept insisting" that people wouldn't be thrilled with HD over analog |
If you’re saying that they WOULD be thrilled with HD over analog, then it makes sense for them to be up in arms about not being able to experience it with their current sets.