Anyone know how the component scaling of the Liteon compares to the DVI scaling of the Bravo? When used the component output of my Bravo (while waiting on a DVI cable to arrive) the picture was kinda soft and I noticed alot of combing. Anyone have any feedback or comparisons on this?
That's what worries me Stephen. On the one hand you've got people who say the Liteon is a Bravo clone. Yet Bravo owners say that the scaling via component is not recommended over a good 480p DVD player. Yet you have Liteon owners who say the scaled result of the Liteon is better than a 480p signal.
But all three can't be true, unless it's a Bravo clone that has somehow been optimized in its scaling output via component (which I guess probably doesn't make it a Bravo clone).
I guess I'll have to find someplace that doesn't charge a restocking fee so that I can try it out.
Anyone know of a reputable dealer for the Liteon with a full-refund if you are not satisfied guarantee?
I wonder if it's really a Bravo clone or if (more likely) it simply uses the same chipset (EM8500 from Sigma Designs). I would guess if nothing else it has a better loader than the Bravo because Liteon is known for good quality low price CD/DVD products (CD and DVD Burners mainly).
My brother is probably going to be buying the Liteon to use mainly for region-free progressive and divx, so I may get the chance to compare the 2.
I forgot to cancel my backorder at another reseller, so I just got another Liteon in the mail today. If any Canadians are looking for one , I'll let one of them go for $175CAD shipped.
The quality of the component output would be largely a function of the video DACs used. Assuming that the EM85000 chipset does not contain the vDACs (which I think would be a reasonable assumption) the LVR-2001 could be both a D1 clone and have higher quality component output just by using higher quality vDACs. Since the LVR-2001 doesn't have a DVI connection I think it would make sense for them to instead invest in high quality video DACs for it. The D1, on the other hand, seems to have been designed with the DVI connection as the primary draw, and everything else just checklist items. In the digital domain you have to do something stupid to lower the signal quality (such as CUE). In the analog domain you have to bust your hump to get even good quality, and even pennies spent in the right components can mean the difference between OK quality and great quality. I envy no analog engineer, especially one working on a "budget" product
This player sounds interesting as a possible replacement for my Panny RP-91. A couple of other questions, though:
1. Can the player zoom/scale non-anamorphic widescreen titles similar to the RP-91?
2. How is the deinterlacing performance on video-based material? Does the player comb with this type of material? This is the weakest point of my RP-91.
Mine showed up today. It's not bad at all. It's heavy for a slim player.
I upgraded the firmware and disabled macrovision. The player wouldn't read Pearl Harbor, but it played (and upconverted) Black Hawk Down to 720p and 1080i. My 720p convergence and geometry are way off, so I can't say if it's really better than 1080i. I turned the brightness of the player down to the lowest setting. That seemed to greatly help the 1080i picture.
I will say this though--I like this arrangement much much better than the dvd-v + Zinwell BriteView scaler combination I was using a few months ago.