video DAC question (1 Viewer)

[Bob_M]

Hi All,

I am looking at two DVD players from Sony. One has a 12-bit video DAC 54 MHz and the other 12-Bit video DAC 108 MHz. The price difference is $20. Why would I want the 108 MHz Dac? I am not using Progressive now but may in the Future?

Thanks bob

 

[John Garcia]

The 108Mhz DAC *should* give you a better picture, but in terms of picture quality, IMO, Sony is not the pick of the litter.

 

[BrianWoerndle]

Interlaced video runs at 13.5 mhz. Progressive scan runs at 27 mhz. A 108 mhz video decoder will have 8x oversampling for interlaced, and 4x oversampling for progressive scan. Oversampling is good. As with all computers, headroom is necessary. But I doubt that you would ever see the difference. There might be a few times where the 54 mhz chip bogs down and loses some detail, but it would be rare and hard to see.

 

[EricRWem]

I'm thinking about this 216Mhz DAC I'm seeing on the Onkyo 1000 and Integra 10.5. WOW! That must be something amazing!

 

[John Garcia]

The Denon 5900 already has 216Mhz video DACs, as well as the new 2910 and 3910.

 

[Phil Nichols]

Yes ...... but the video DAC's (ADI?) in the Denons are only 12-bit.

There is a 14-bit 216MHz video DAC (ADI?) available and in some DVD players. Check the Onkyo -> maybe it uses this ultimate video DAC.

Note that the discontinued/over-looked/under-appreciated Denon 9000 had 14-bit 108Mhz video DAC's ..... combined with that superb Silicon Image deinterlacing chip. The new Denons use Faroudja, which cuts chroma bandwidth in half (Silicon Image doesn't) .... but Faroudja maintains that human vision can't see the difference.

 

[EricRWem]

FWIW, I've had a couple of Krell owners feed me a line about the Onkyo 1000/Integra 10.5 that goes something like this:


Granted, this enthusiasm was probably generated by the lust for wanting to make a sale, but...I've had a few "non-salesman" say simillar things to me...

I like the idea a lot that Onkyo and Integra are using Silico Image instead of the well documented-flawed Faroudja chips.

It doesn't seem to matter how much you spend or what brand you go with, if it has a Faroudja chip, it's going to have MPEG artifact issue, the macroblocking issue, the chroma bud, and/or some other variations thereof.

Silicon Image all the way!

 

[John Garcia]

The Silicon Image chips yeild just as many flaws as the SIs do. There are other factors besides the deinterlacer that contribute to those flaws. It was my understanding that the Faroudja DCDi players have the LOWEST instances of chroma bug.

I'm quite happy with my SI though

 

[EricRWem]

Seems like a safer bet overall.

 

[Phil Nichols]

FYI, the chroma bug does not come from the deinterlacing process. The chroma bug comes from the decoder IC's processing.

Si or Faroudja deinterlacing is not related to the chroma upsampling error.

 

[John Garcia]

CUE comes from the decoder, but I thought it was the deinterlacer that tended to "mask" the error, and that Faroudja players were better at doing this? I tried out scenes Secrets calls tough scenes with film based material, and I could basically not see it on my player. On video based material, I can see it clearly.