LCD or PLASMA
01-20-2007, 05:00 PM
#21
Senior Members
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: sofia / london
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by UUronL' post='381036' date='Jan 20 2007, 05:52 PM
Well I'm telling you that at CES, televisions were coming out of the woodwork with HDMI 1.3 interfaces. Televisions that are announced with prices - due in spring/summer.
Now, whether or not there will be cable and Sat boxes with HDMI 1.3 is another story. The only HDMI 1.3 source device I know of that is currently available is the newest top-of-the-line Toshiba HD-DVD player, the HD-XA2. More devices will follow. The bottom line is, 1.3 is the way forward and buying something with 1.2 at this point in time doesn't make a ton of sense IMO.
HDTV cameras are constantly improving, and the color information they capture is -greatly- more than what gets encoded and transmitted. Unless you have ever seen uncompressed HD, you really don't know what I'm talking about. We're talking about 1.5Gb/s - yes, gigabits per second for uncompressed HD. Contrast that to the 19.38 Mbps used for the ATSC standard broadcast.
I dug this exerpt up from a recent article:
"Roadblocks to the full realization of HD's potential seemed much on the mind of HDTV entrepreneur Mark Cuban (he of HDNet and Mavericks fame). Cuban spent much of his allotted keynote speech time moaning about how compression is killing off the beauty of true HD broadcasts (which, uncompressed as shot by the Sony equipment his network uses, would require 1.5GB per second rather than the 19.4mbps capacity of the bandwidth the feds have given over-the-air broadcasters for their digital signal)."
The information is there, and we're seeing higher quality broadcasts -and- recorded media with each passing day. It's an evolving medium. Anyone who has had HD for more than a few years can probably sense that image quality has improved over time. I certainly can. This will continue, and I strongly believe having the newer technologies with wider data paths for the transmittal of visual information (HDMI 1.3) as well as a real way to go about presenting that information (LED backlighting or laser backlighting - i.e. wider gamut) will be beneficial.
BTW - for those who like RP technologies, the LED and laser backlit DLPs will have incredible color gamut - not to mention they will no longer require color wheels (no more rainbows) and they'll no longer require expensive bulb replacements.
Now, whether or not there will be cable and Sat boxes with HDMI 1.3 is another story. The only HDMI 1.3 source device I know of that is currently available is the newest top-of-the-line Toshiba HD-DVD player, the HD-XA2. More devices will follow. The bottom line is, 1.3 is the way forward and buying something with 1.2 at this point in time doesn't make a ton of sense IMO.
HDTV cameras are constantly improving, and the color information they capture is -greatly- more than what gets encoded and transmitted. Unless you have ever seen uncompressed HD, you really don't know what I'm talking about. We're talking about 1.5Gb/s - yes, gigabits per second for uncompressed HD. Contrast that to the 19.38 Mbps used for the ATSC standard broadcast.
I dug this exerpt up from a recent article:
"Roadblocks to the full realization of HD's potential seemed much on the mind of HDTV entrepreneur Mark Cuban (he of HDNet and Mavericks fame). Cuban spent much of his allotted keynote speech time moaning about how compression is killing off the beauty of true HD broadcasts (which, uncompressed as shot by the Sony equipment his network uses, would require 1.5GB per second rather than the 19.4mbps capacity of the bandwidth the feds have given over-the-air broadcasters for their digital signal)."
The information is there, and we're seeing higher quality broadcasts -and- recorded media with each passing day. It's an evolving medium. Anyone who has had HD for more than a few years can probably sense that image quality has improved over time. I certainly can. This will continue, and I strongly believe having the newer technologies with wider data paths for the transmittal of visual information (HDMI 1.3) as well as a real way to go about presenting that information (LED backlighting or laser backlighting - i.e. wider gamut) will be beneficial.
BTW - for those who like RP technologies, the LED and laser backlit DLPs will have incredible color gamut - not to mention they will no longer require color wheels (no more rainbows) and they'll no longer require expensive bulb replacements.
As for HDMI 1.3, the only device *i* know that supports it is the Sony playstation 3. Let me make my side of the argument: the only positive impression i would make for hdmi 1.3 is the following:
1) deeb colour (48bit colour): unrealistic given the state of technology
2) ability to carry HD-encoded audio over two cables, meaning the following: 1HDMI from the DVD player to your telly, and then one more HDMI lead from your telly to your surround sound processor (when such become available). But whats the point, considering all high-end CE players offer 2XHDMI connections. 1 for your telly, 1 for your surround sound processor.
In light of this if HDMI 1.3 is the only factor that is keeping you from upgrading, then i have to contest the logic. You have new generation items appearing every 8-10 months, so you might just as well well for another 7 years for the first 4K devices to appear commercial. BUY IT AND ENJOY IT now
As for me, i waited for the whole of 2006 for 1080p capable sets, and compared LCD/plasma/RP , and finally went with a DLP RP... this one >>> http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.act...r+Projection+TV
01-20-2007, 07:36 PM
#22
Contributors
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 14,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 Silverstone II E60 M5 2012 E70 AW X5 50i Sport w/ LCI Aero Kit and Rocker Panels
Originally Posted by 700700' post='381144' date='Jan 20 2007, 09:00 PM
I have had the pleasure of looking at uncompressed HD from a master tape, using a madgrigal 3crt projector (mark levison presentation at the Hi-fi show in 2005). Signal was transmitted using a propietory digital only connection (which they could not reveal for copyright reasons, but i would gess it would have been similar to the THETA interface =800mbps). The signal had no macrovision or any other features that would lead to unwanted side effects.
As for HDMI 1.3, the only device *i* know that supports it is the Sony playstation 3. Let me make my side of the argument: the only positive impression i would make for hdmi 1.3 is the following:
1) deeb colour (48bit colour): unrealistic given the state of technology
2) ability to carry HD-encoded audio over two cables, meaning the following: 1HDMI from the DVD player to your telly, and then one more HDMI lead from your telly to your surround sound processor (when such become available). But whats the point, considering all high-end CE players offer 2XHDMI connections. 1 for your telly, 1 for your surround sound processor.
In light of this if HDMI 1.3 is the only factor that is keeping you from upgrading, then i have to contest the logic. You have new generation items appearing every 8-10 months, so you might just as well well for another 7 years for the first 4K devices to appear commercial. BUY IT AND ENJOY IT now
As for me, i waited for the whole of 2006 for 1080p capable sets, and compared LCD/plasma/RP , and finally went with a DLP RP... this one >>> http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.act...r+Projection+TV
As for HDMI 1.3, the only device *i* know that supports it is the Sony playstation 3. Let me make my side of the argument: the only positive impression i would make for hdmi 1.3 is the following:
1) deeb colour (48bit colour): unrealistic given the state of technology
2) ability to carry HD-encoded audio over two cables, meaning the following: 1HDMI from the DVD player to your telly, and then one more HDMI lead from your telly to your surround sound processor (when such become available). But whats the point, considering all high-end CE players offer 2XHDMI connections. 1 for your telly, 1 for your surround sound processor.
In light of this if HDMI 1.3 is the only factor that is keeping you from upgrading, then i have to contest the logic. You have new generation items appearing every 8-10 months, so you might just as well well for another 7 years for the first 4K devices to appear commercial. BUY IT AND ENJOY IT now
As for me, i waited for the whole of 2006 for 1080p capable sets, and compared LCD/plasma/RP , and finally went with a DLP RP... this one >>> http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.act...r+Projection+TV
But 700700 is right. Sony's SXRD technology rocks. It's the best bang for your buck right now. No question. Makes DLP look like it's an old trinitron from 1980.
01-20-2007, 07:55 PM
#23
Senior Members
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: sofia / london
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cmansbimmer' post='381172' date='Jan 21 2007, 04:36 AM
Technically, the SXRD is not an DLP television. If you look at the Samsung next to the SXRD, it's night and day in terms of quality. As for the A2000, I would do the XBR2 over this model. The A2000 has the old XBR1 engine. The new XBR2 has an HD engine, which the A2000 does not. My uncle just bought the A2000 in 60" and I gotta tell you that the XBR2 blows the picture away compared to the A2000. The A2000 is about $1,000 cheaper, but there's good reason for it. Bottom line, if you're choosing between this model and the other sony, spend the extra cash and get the XBR2.
the new A2000 *just* came out here, it should be the European equivalent of your XBR2 or whatever, and it has i quote
1080 HD 1920x1080 Full High Definition SXRD Panels
# Superb 10,000:1 contrast ratio enhanced by Cinema Black Pro
# 2.5ms response time for smoother images
# Superb 10,000:1 contrast ratio enhanced by Cinema Black Pro
# 2.5ms response time for smoother images
They have them in 55" and 70"... No 60inch here. The previous A2000 was available in 50" and 60" and did not feature the BRAVIA HD pro engine (and was limited to 720p)...
This was the best model available here, and i had a demo of this set together with a 46inch X series bravia, and a 50inch Panasonic plasma (all 1080p) side by side, and especially under SDTV (mostly what we have in bulgaria) the SXRD is just beautiful
Which Samsung are you reffering to , and is it better than the SXRD, or otherwise?
01-21-2007, 10:53 AM
#24
Contributors
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 14,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 Silverstone II E60 M5 2012 E70 AW X5 50i Sport w/ LCI Aero Kit and Rocker Panels
Originally Posted by 700700' post='381174' date='Jan 20 2007, 11:55 PM
Mate you are getting slightly confused
the new A2000 *just* came out here, it should be the European equivalent of your XBR2 or whatever, and it has i quote
So its *identical* to the feature list of your XBR2 in the USA
They have them in 55" and 70"... No 60inch here. The previous A2000 was available in 50" and 60" and did not feature the BRAVIA HD pro engine (and was limited to 720p)...
This was the best model available here, and i had a demo of this set together with a 46inch X series bravia, and a 50inch Panasonic plasma (all 1080p) side by side, and especially under SDTV (mostly what we have in bulgaria) the SXRD is just beautiful
Which Samsung are you reffering to , and is it better than the SXRD, or otherwise?
the new A2000 *just* came out here, it should be the European equivalent of your XBR2 or whatever, and it has i quote
So its *identical* to the feature list of your XBR2 in the USA
They have them in 55" and 70"... No 60inch here. The previous A2000 was available in 50" and 60" and did not feature the BRAVIA HD pro engine (and was limited to 720p)...
This was the best model available here, and i had a demo of this set together with a 46inch X series bravia, and a 50inch Panasonic plasma (all 1080p) side by side, and especially under SDTV (mostly what we have in bulgaria) the SXRD is just beautiful
Which Samsung are you reffering to , and is it better than the SXRD, or otherwise?
They are as follows:
KDS-R60XBR2
KDS-60A2000
Yes, both TV's are 1080P and yes, both have 10,000:1 contrast ratio's and yes, both have 2.5ms display panel response time.
But here's the difference.
The XBR2 has the: WEGA Engine HD? with DRC-MFv2.5 digital video processing.
The A2000 has: WEGA Engine? with DRC-MFv1 digital video processing (note the difference).
This is the key difference between the 2. The A2000's engine is the SAME engine that the XBR1 had. The XBR2 has the new HD engine, which the A2000 does not, hence the reason it's a lot cheaper.
The XBR2 also runs off a 180 watt bulb, where the A2000 runs off a 120 watt bulb like in the old XBR1.
Now, I have the XBR2 and a family member has the A2000. I have to tell you that the XBR2 looks a lot better. It really does.
If you don't believe me, check out the Sony site for yourself and compare the two...
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/<wbr%20...mp;Dept=tvvideo
The model numbers are universal. It doesn't matter whether you live here in the US or in Europe. Sony makes 2 models of this TV. The KDS-A2000 is the cheaper of the 2. It's all about the HD Engine. I was on the verge of buying the XBR1 2 years ago, before the A2000 came out. I then considered the A2000 before they released the XBR2, but after hearing they were keeping the same engine in the A2000 that was in the XBR1 and were upgrading the XBR2 to a new HD engine, I decided to wait. And I am glad I did. It's so much better.
Now, they may have not released the XBR2 yet in Europe, but if they do, I would wait. It's well worth it.
Go on www.avsforums.com. You'll see what people say about the difference of the 2.
Trust me...I've done a ton of research over the years on the SXRD and have friends that have the XBR1, a family member who has the A2000 and myself who has the XBR2. Even my friends who have the XBR1 and have seen my XBR2 admit that my picture is slightly better.
01-21-2007, 11:06 AM
#25
Contributors
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 14,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2008 Silverstone II E60 M5 2012 E70 AW X5 50i Sport w/ LCI Aero Kit and Rocker Panels
And if you check out www.avsforums.com, you'll see how a lot of members from Europe have posted the difference between the two, yet only the A2000 is available in Europe. You should call Sony and ask them when they plan on releasing the XBR2 to the European market. It's crazy they haven't. Not sure why...
01-21-2007, 02:23 PM
#26
Contributors
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 2006 530i Sport
Silver Gray - Black Leather - Anthracite Maple
Manual Transmission
Premium Audio
Cold Weather Package
Rear sunshade
Sirius Radio
Autobahnd Roadblock (3M) film kit
Originally Posted by 700700' post='381144' date='Jan 20 2007, 09:00 PM
I have had the pleasure of looking at uncompressed HD from a master tape, using a madgrigal 3crt projector (mark levison presentation at the Hi-fi show in 2005). Signal was transmitted using a propietory digital only connection (which they could not reveal for copyright reasons, but i would gess it would have been similar to the THETA interface =800mbps). The signal had no macrovision or any other features that would lead to unwanted side effects.
As for HDMI 1.3, the only device *i* know that supports it is the Sony playstation 3. Let me make my side of the argument: the only positive impression i would make for hdmi 1.3 is the following:
1) deeb colour (48bit colour): unrealistic given the state of technology
2) ability to carry HD-encoded audio over two cables, meaning the following: 1HDMI from the DVD player to your telly, and then one more HDMI lead from your telly to your surround sound processor (when such become available). But whats the point, considering all high-end CE players offer 2XHDMI connections. 1 for your telly, 1 for your surround sound processor.
In light of this if HDMI 1.3 is the only factor that is keeping you from upgrading, then i have to contest the logic. You have new generation items appearing every 8-10 months, so you might just as well well for another 7 years for the first 4K devices to appear commercial. BUY IT AND ENJOY IT now
As for me, i waited for the whole of 2006 for 1080p capable sets, and compared LCD/plasma/RP , and finally went with a DLP RP... this one >>> http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.act...r+Projection+TV
As for HDMI 1.3, the only device *i* know that supports it is the Sony playstation 3. Let me make my side of the argument: the only positive impression i would make for hdmi 1.3 is the following:
1) deeb colour (48bit colour): unrealistic given the state of technology
2) ability to carry HD-encoded audio over two cables, meaning the following: 1HDMI from the DVD player to your telly, and then one more HDMI lead from your telly to your surround sound processor (when such become available). But whats the point, considering all high-end CE players offer 2XHDMI connections. 1 for your telly, 1 for your surround sound processor.
In light of this if HDMI 1.3 is the only factor that is keeping you from upgrading, then i have to contest the logic. You have new generation items appearing every 8-10 months, so you might just as well well for another 7 years for the first 4K devices to appear commercial. BUY IT AND ENJOY IT now
As for me, i waited for the whole of 2006 for 1080p capable sets, and compared LCD/plasma/RP , and finally went with a DLP RP... this one >>> http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProduct.act...r+Projection+TV
Actually, I disagree with a few of your assessments. Current technology in the comsumer display space -can- produce billions of colors. The upgrade with 1.3 increases the depth from millions to billions, making it possible to transmit color information to these displays. As I already clearly stated, the sources need to catch up. They will.
The added bandwidth permits higher frame-rates/refresh-rates (120Hz). That can be taken advantage of almost immediately with some of the newer sets. In the future, it can support higher resolutions.
The additional benefits for audio are more than you suggest. While existing HDMI can pass any 5.1 audio as LPCM (uncompressed), this can be problematic. For the sake of this argument, the important compressed formats are the ones that currently -aren't- supported over HDMI, and of those the most interesting are the lossless ones - Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio. The player can decode and pass these formats uncompressed over HDMI to a receiver that can accept multi-channel LPCM. The difficulty is that most players don't have granular enough adjustments to channel levels and time alignment. This is critical to getting correct sound. Some receivers "re-encode" this type of audio to get it into the digital domain to make these adjustments, but it is hugely sub-optimal. The better solution is to pass the compressed format to a Pre-Pro or AV receiver that supports the new formats - just as we do with existing Dolby Digital and DTS formats today. This will permit the receivers to apply levels and TA in the digital domain. CES had a plethora of compatible AV Receivers and Pre-Pros capable of doing this... again due out in the spring.
I doubt the "special interface" connecting your demo needed to be anything special, at least not from a bandwidth standpoint. It was probably proprietary from a copy protection standpoint. HD-SDI would have worked, so would standard 1.2 HDMI, which has a 4.95 Gbps throughput.
"Buy and enjoy" is always good advice. I own and have owned a very nice setup for many years. However, there are times when waiting a month or several months just makes good sense.
01-21-2007, 04:08 PM
#27
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: FL
Posts: 18,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: F02 LCI Individual
Model Year: 2013
There are two things on a TV I will never get again:
Sony
LCD
Having both, a Plasma and a LCD.
I can not understand the comments posted in this thread...
Sony
LCD
Having both, a Plasma and a LCD.
I can not understand the comments posted in this thread...
01-21-2007, 05:22 PM
#29
Senior Members
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: sofia / london
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cmansbimmer' post='381308' date='Jan 21 2007, 07:53 PM
Hate to tell you my man, but I'm not. The A2000 was released last year here in the US. But I need to correct you, the A2000 is not the same as the XBR2 whether you live in the US or Europe. It might be that Sony has yet to release the XBR2 to Europe since you JUST got the A2000 and we've had it for a year. Sony makes 2 universal models of the SXRD television. Let's take the 60" model's, since Sony offers both models in this size.
[snip]
Trust me...I've done a ton of research over the years on the SXRD and have friends that have the XBR1, a family member who has the A2000 and myself who has the XBR2. Even my friends who have the XBR1 and have seen my XBR2 admit that my picture is slightly better.
[snip]
Trust me...I've done a ton of research over the years on the SXRD and have friends that have the XBR1, a family member who has the A2000 and myself who has the XBR2. Even my friends who have the XBR1 and have seen my XBR2 admit that my picture is slightly better.
Maybe they are just delaying the timetable for European launches, or maybe the UK/EU version has a newer engine (have you cheked from the specs cause for me its not clear)
Nevertheless coming from a 3rd gen plasma (852X480, 800:1 contrast ratio) it is a revelation
01-21-2007, 05:29 PM
#30
Senior Members
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: sofia / london
Posts: 3,236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by UUronL' post='381379' date='Jan 21 2007, 11:23 PM
Actually, I disagree with a few of your assessments. Current technology in the comsumer display space -can- produce billions of colors. The upgrade with 1.3 increases the depth from millions to billions, making it possible to transmit color information to these displays. As I already clearly stated, the sources need to catch up. They will.
The added bandwidth permits higher frame-rates/refresh-rates (120Hz). That can be taken advantage of almost immediately with some of the newer sets. In the future, it can support higher resolutions.
The additional benefits for audio are more than you suggest. While existing HDMI can pass any 5.1 audio as LPCM (uncompressed), this can be problematic. For the sake of this argument, the important compressed formats are the ones that currently -aren't- supported over HDMI, and of those the most interesting are the lossless ones - Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio. The player can decode and pass these formats uncompressed over HDMI to a receiver that can accept multi-channel LPCM. The difficulty is that most players don't have granular enough adjustments to channel levels and time alignment. This is critical to getting correct sound. Some receivers "re-encode" this type of audio to get it into the digital domain to make these adjustments, but it is hugely sub-optimal. The better solution is to pass the compressed format to a Pre-Pro or AV receiver that supports the new formats - just as we do with existing Dolby Digital and DTS formats today. This will permit the receivers to apply levels and TA in the digital domain. CES had a plethora of compatible AV Receivers and Pre-Pros capable of doing this... again due out in the spring.
I doubt the "special interface" connecting your demo needed to be anything special, at least not from a bandwidth standpoint. It was probably proprietary from a copy protection standpoint. HD-SDI would have worked, so would standard 1.2 HDMI, which has a 4.95 Gbps throughput.
"Buy and enjoy" is always good advice. I own and have owned a very nice setup for many years. However, there are times when waiting a month or several months just makes good sense.
The added bandwidth permits higher frame-rates/refresh-rates (120Hz). That can be taken advantage of almost immediately with some of the newer sets. In the future, it can support higher resolutions.
The additional benefits for audio are more than you suggest. While existing HDMI can pass any 5.1 audio as LPCM (uncompressed), this can be problematic. For the sake of this argument, the important compressed formats are the ones that currently -aren't- supported over HDMI, and of those the most interesting are the lossless ones - Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio. The player can decode and pass these formats uncompressed over HDMI to a receiver that can accept multi-channel LPCM. The difficulty is that most players don't have granular enough adjustments to channel levels and time alignment. This is critical to getting correct sound. Some receivers "re-encode" this type of audio to get it into the digital domain to make these adjustments, but it is hugely sub-optimal. The better solution is to pass the compressed format to a Pre-Pro or AV receiver that supports the new formats - just as we do with existing Dolby Digital and DTS formats today. This will permit the receivers to apply levels and TA in the digital domain. CES had a plethora of compatible AV Receivers and Pre-Pros capable of doing this... again due out in the spring.
I doubt the "special interface" connecting your demo needed to be anything special, at least not from a bandwidth standpoint. It was probably proprietary from a copy protection standpoint. HD-SDI would have worked, so would standard 1.2 HDMI, which has a 4.95 Gbps throughput.
"Buy and enjoy" is always good advice. I own and have owned a very nice setup for many years. However, there are times when waiting a month or several months just makes good sense.
As for Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD , i may have got my info wrong... from what i understood is that HDMI 1.2 can carry the signals in the digital domain only (and should have enough bandwith), and HDMI can carry the split streams to make your AV processor's life easier.
Could you please point me to any links of AV receivers that will support Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD , as i though they were at least a year off...
Dont get me wrong, the wait for next gen player formats and surround sound processors is worth it, but for tellys i dont see the point. Technically speaking the only HDMI1.3 compliant source (PS3) , cannot pass deep colour or Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD, and *hopefully* these will be added eventually.
As for me im sticking with my SXRD, and getting a Blu-ray player and a next gen processor to benefit from HD audio.
