To go progressive or not to go progressive

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Leo, Dec 20, 2001.

  1. Leo

    Leo Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 1999
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well I'm just about through building the new home theater in my basement. I've purchased a Mitsubishi 65819 Platinum Plus HDTV (will use Dish 6000 receiver with it when it's time) and am wondering if I need a progressive scan or is the 3:2 pulldown in this TV is sufficient that I can get a nice non-progressive player to work in my system. So my question is do I go for a progressive scan player or is a non-progressive the better route?

    Leo
     
  2. DanaA

    DanaA Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2001
    Messages:
    1,843
    Likes Received:
    1
    My opinion is that you should definately get a progressive scan DVD. You have a real nice TV, so why wouldn't you want to saddle it up with a DVD that can bring out its best? And, progressive scan DVD's aren't all that expensive now. My Toshiba 4700 was only $249 and not on sale at that.
     
  3. Craig Brandstetter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2001
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have to agree about getting a progressive scan player. I had a decent interlaced player along with my Sony KP53HS10 with a built in line doubler and I was annoyed that during certain scenes (slow moving with many horizontal lines) there were a lot of "jaggies". I'm a newbie so I don't know the term for the "jaggies" but I know they drove me up the wall. I got one of the JVC progressive scan players ($189 at etronics.com) and no more "jaggies". Relatives are getting the old player for Christmas. It should work fine for them since they have an analog rear projection TV.

    -Craig
     
  4. Leo

    Leo Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 1999
    Messages:
    292
    Likes Received:
    0
    I guess my question is more of a better understanding of: if the TV does better job at 3:2 pulldown than a progressive scan player would I not want to use a regular interlaced DVD player? Sorta like the old LD issue of use composite over S-video if your TV had a better 3D comb filter. Is this logic incorrect?

    Leo
     
  5. Andrew Beck

    Andrew Beck Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2001
    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    0
    My understanding is the DVD player will almost always do a better job, since it can do it all in the digital domain. If you were to let you TV do it, the DVD player would convert the bitstream to interlaced analog, the TV would convert it back to digital to do the line doubling, and then convert it back to analog for display. the fewer conversions the better. therefore the progressive scan dvd player will generally have the better picture.
     
  6. Craig

    Craig Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 1999
    Messages:
    467
    Likes Received:
    0
    Progressive scan has become so pervasive that I don't know if it's a matter of going progressive scan or iterlaced anymore. We're getting to the point that even enty level players have both progressive scan and interlaced modes available. I saw a Toshiba 3750 online for $179 including shipping the other day.

    I wouldn't spend money on a player that didn't have progressive scan if I had a HDTV. In addition to prog scan you can also get players that do DVD Audio and also scale non-anamorphic DVDs (which means you won't have to use stretch or zoom modes on your TV as often), all this for under $500.
     
  7. Craig Brandstetter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2001
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    The general rule of thumb is that it is better to let the DVD player handle the signal. There is less converting of the signal. You could always go to a local electronics store with a good return policy, pick up a few of the lateset Progressive scan players and give them a try. I did that with the Panasonic RP-56 and the JVC XV-S65GD. They both gave me a better picture than my Panasonic A-115. It was fun testing the two players and I was a lot more confident that I was making the right desicion. It removed all doubt for me and I plan on making future purchases that way instead of letting what somebody else says be the end all, deciding factor.

    -Craig
     
  8. Scott-C

    Scott-C Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    0
    I own a Mits WS RPTV and would definitely get a PS player to accompany it. From what I've seen the line doubler in the DVD player does a better job than the one in the TV, probably for the reasons mentioned above. I have both an interlaced machine (Sony DVP-S7000) and a PS player connected and the difference in picture quality is noticeable. Qualitatively speaking, I notice improved picture depth and more detail with the PS player than with the interlaced player (and the S7000 is no slouch!).

    PS players are getting so inexpensive these days, and I'm continually amazed at what you can buy for < $500.
     
  9. Jeff_Johnson

    Jeff_Johnson Auditioning

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2001
    Messages:
    10
    Likes Received:
    0
    The extra $30-$100 it costs for a reasonably priced progessive-scan player is worth it. "Consumer Reports" just had its DVD player round-up and gave the Sony DVP-NS700P ($300) and Philips DVD953 ($230) progressive-scan DVD players their highest rating adding in the comments that each had "Top-notch video in progressive-scan mode." The Philips was actually cheaper than some of the top rated non-progessive units.
    I've got the Mits WS65908 and replaced my Sony DVP-S560P with the Philips DVD Q50. Before I gave the Sony to my Dad, I hooked it to the component jacks of the TV, the Philips to the progressive jacks, borrowed duplicate DVD titles from the neighbor so I could run the same movie in each player at the same time and had at it! The Philips justified every extra dollar (Approx. $130 more than the Sony). The movies were Independence Day, True Lies and The Princess Bride (all anamorphic). Hope this helps.
    Go to: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/ select Feature Articles and read the "DVD Benchmark" series. These articles really helped me out and I still refer back to them.
     
  10. Craig Brandstetter

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2001
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    I get a subscription to consumer reports and I read that article. They rated the JVC as second to the Sony. But if you pay close attention to the fine print, they didn't really test any of them in Progressive mode at all. They said the tests were based on interlaced mode. The JVC is known for having a slightly lesser quality picture interlaced mode but I don't use that mode. It amazed me that Consumer Reports tested Progressive scan players, but not in Progressive mode. I had to read the fine print several times to make sure that's what they were saying. Or coarse we are talking about people who are testing toasters and frozen pizza right along side DVD players. [​IMG] I wish I would have tested the Sony along with the Panny and the JVC but I was so happy with the JVC I went with it.
    Craig
     
  11. RossB

    RossB Extra

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2001
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    LEO I just purchased the toshiba 4700. I bought a home theater set up in January and elected not to go with the progressive scan DVD palyer and choose a 5 disk DVD player instead (the concept being a CD/DVD in one). Well the toshiba SD3205 suffers from artifacting ... just enough that my wife can notice, and it does not play the CD's as well as my other CD player. After thinking about it for a while I moved the 5 disk DVD to the other TV and got a progressive SCAN for my theater (my TV is a toshiba 50hx70). The difference is not at all obvious at first, but later..when I watch the other one ..it is quite. My vote is go for the progressive scan right off.
     
  12. Dan_Goodrum

    Dan_Goodrum Auditioning

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2001
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have several questions related to Progressive Scan. I have just purchased a Toshiba 57HX81 along with a Pioneer Elite DV-C36 DVD Player and a Yamaha RX-V1000 receiver/amp.

    I have hooked up the video between these units with Monster 3 component cable (expensive!). My questions are:

    Do I turn on the progressive scan capability on both the DVD and the TV?

    If both are enabled, does one take over the task of progressive scan or do they support each other?

    I couldn't find anything in the TV manual on how to enable the progressive scan, but I think by going to "film" instead of "video" in the cinema mode (picture menu) actually does the trick.

    Thanks
     
  13. John Royster

    John Royster Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    1,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    By all means go with a progressive scan player. Thats why you got that big fancy digital television remember? (I too have a 65819, love it) When you do have your prog player watch some scenes in progressive, the watch again interlaced. You'll see.

    I am amazed as well when you look at the current crop of DVD players under 500. I wound up with a panasonic RP56 - why? 'cause it has a great chipset/prog scan/picture and cost $200. Getting my feet wet so to speak until I feel I should spend more.

    Also there is the whole "poor mitsu line doubler" issue. by using progressive scan you won't have to worry or be bothered by it.
     
  14. Ralph Summa

    Ralph Summa Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2001
    Messages:
    715
    Likes Received:
    1
    Here's another take on the story. My sister-in-law has been grilling me about info on DVD players. She wants to buy one for my brother who has a 27" Sony tube TV. I'm pretty sure his TV only has composite inputs. She's looking to spend about $250. I recommended the JVC SA70-BK which has progressive scan. He will used it in the interlaced mode but it's a decent player that gives him DVD-Audio and DD and DTS decoding. Would he get better internal components for $250 with an player that does interlaced only. What to do?

    Ralph
     

Share This Page