OT - HDTV questions

[skintner]

Greetings gentlemen,
I am hoping that some of you home theater enthusiasts can help educate me on HDTV. My interest is primarily for movies (DVD).

I spent some time last night with a HT / HDTV "expert" at Best Buy trying to determine if HD was worthwhile in my particular situation. Basically, what I learned is:

HDTV requires a digital source... digital cable, digital satelite, or over-the-air broadcast. DVDs require an "up-converting" DVD player (avg cost $135). *Some* HDTVs will display analog signal nicely, some (DLP) will not. Some HDTVs have built-in receivers that are analog "cable-ready" but require a seperate digital receiver.

I live in a remote area in NE Washington. We have cable, but it's not digital. The cable company pays me rent and provides me with free service for having their dishes and head-end on my property. They plan to go digital but have no time frame yet. We're too far from the broadcast source to have over-air HD broadcast.

Is it worthwhile (in your opinion) to go HD and "up-converted" DVD? Is there enough HD programming out there to justify DirecTV satelite? Will the analog programming display on the HDTV be "at least" as good as on the analog TV?

TIA for your comments.

steve

[paul_n_oneal]

There is actually a difference between digital and HDTV. HDTV really requires the use of a DVI cable interface. Here TWC has that option (albeit on the upper end of the cost scale) where they will put in a HD box instead of the regular digital set top box. So this means your HDTV must have a DVI interface and your cable box. A lot of video cards have DVI too. I'm not an expert on this by no means, but am learning slowly. BTW, I really like the digtial radio stations that TWC provides. Regards, Paul.

[thylantyr]

>>Is it worthwhile (in your opinion) to go HD
>>and "up-converted" DVD?

There is about four mass market stores in my area and when I audition the newer technology
it looks horrible because they 'daisy chain'
the feed into all the TV's in the show and I can
really guage performance.

One day I walked into the high end store and
they have a simplified setup.

DVD player {HDMI} -> HDTV

The particular player was upsampling ordinary
DVD and the quality on a regular LCD was alot
better than what I seen on those mass market stores. It was almost HD quality. So, upsampling
on a good DVD player works. There are some budget
DVD players like Oppo, etc. that have amazing
picture quality upsampled. These units are under
$300. The one I auditioned was a $2k Marantz.

This is a great place to do homework;
<A HREF="http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=18">http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=18</A>

To finish my post, I'm running a 5 year old Sony
53" RPTV with only analog input, no digital input like DVI or HDMI {newer}. I can use upsampling DVD players because they only upsample
via digital interface due to 'laws'. But, there are a few players in the street that can be hacked to upsample over analog outputs so someone
like me can enjoy a better picture on an old
CRT based projection screen, albiet, not as good
as a LCD, DLP, Plasma set. I snagged a Samsung
HD941 for $126 shipped. With a simple trick using
the remote I was able to enable upsampling over
analog outputs, I can watch movies and what not
in 1080i mode as my old TV supports this mode.
I found this hack on that forum I linked, it works and it's very cool for those folks who still have dated HD ready TV's with no digital inputs.

Upsampling DVD into a better TV will give you better results that I get so I think it's worth
it. But don't spent big bucks to do so, perhaps
get a DVD player in the sub $300 range, there is
no need to spend thousands as the new format is coming {High Definition DVD}.

[chadg]

Provided Link: http://chadgray.info/


It sound like you have a pretty good grasp on your options.

I am lucky. Time Warner Cable in my area has a great package for HD that includes a DVR that records HD. I get all the local channels (abc, cbs, nbc, pbs etc.) in HD along with the "premium" or Pay HD channels like HDNET, DiscoveryHD etc.

Satellite cannot deliver the local channels in HD. You have to get an antenna on the roof to get them. The local channels (abc, cbs etc.) are where the best programming is. The "pay" section of HD like HDNet and DiscoveryHD etc. does not have great programs on them. I rarely watch those channels.

So if you wanted to watch ER last night in HD make sure you can get that channel in HD.

Go here to find out more about antenna needs for your area. You may only need a small antenna to pick up the HD channels off the air you may need a giant antenna.

<A HREF="http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx">http://www.antennaweb.org/aw/Address.aspx</A>

I was a die hard satellite fan 2 years ago. DirectTV was the only one that supported the Tivo that recorded two channels at once and the channels were all digital.

Once TWC came out with their HD DVR (the GUI sucks compared to Tivo), Cable Modem, HD Local channels, Voice over IP phone i had to switch.

The analog channels on TWC suck, but i have to weigh in all of the other advantages i get with TWC vs. Satellite.

[thylantyr]

typos, my bad.

Should read
"
There is about four mass market stores in my area and when I audition the newer technology
it looks horrible because they 'daisy chain'
the feed into all the TV's in the showroom and I can't really guage performance."

I hate this old forum software

[stam4p5]

As a former employee of both Best Buy and Circuit City, trust me when I say that most employees at these types of stores get their information from either pamphlets or from coworkers.

I don't believe a DVI interface is required for HDTV, since both 720p and 1080i formats will work through a progressive component output. That said, DVI is supposedly better quality, and many newer devices will come solely with a DVI interface, instead of the older progressive component jacks.

As far as DVD is concerned, it is not necessary to have an upconverting DVD player for 2 reasons:
A. The compressed video on the DVD is in a digital format, and comes in a specific resolution when dubbed, rarely more than 480 vertical pixels.
B. Most HDTVs have upconversion capabilities built in.
Just pick up a good quality progressive scan DVD player. I have been very happy with my Toshiba 5-disc one, but you should be able to find a decent player for ~$60.

[bill]

Over-the-air broadcast is going entirely digital within the next few years, most likely Jan 1, 2009. That's still the proposed date for Congress to pull back the remaining analog channels. There's no mandate for cable to transmit those signals as digital, but since they take up less space on cable as digital than as analog, odds are your cable company will do that.

Since you live in the back of beyond, get your cable for free and the headend is on your property, your choice is pretty much dictated by what the cable company offers. I wouldn't suggest others be guided by this; it's unique in my experience.

For your DVD application, you don't need an HD display, just an EDTV (480P) one, but the price differential between them is shrinking and EDTV is an endangered species. Were I you, I'd look for an HD display (of whatever technology) that has both component analog and HDMI inputs. I'd also insist on seeing how well it upconverts normal analog TV, since that's what you're stuck with for now on cable.

What you need to do is find yourself a store that will actually show you what a DVD played on a progressive-scan player through the component analog outputs will look like on the display of your choice. From my experience, you can't do that at Best Buy or Circuit City. It's not just a matter of the display technology (DLP, plasma, etc.), it's how well the image format converter works. Despite the fact that these should be becoming commodity items, there's a vast difference in performance. I just saw a 60" LCD that had an abysmal converter in it; it softened 720P until it looked like a bad DVD. This is a moving target, so any recommendations I made today might be wrong in six months.

Were I you I wouldn't be in a hurry to buy something now. Your cable company will convert to digital when they must and not before; that will happen when the satellite companies switch to AVC compression and start transmitting local broadcast signals in HD in the next couple of years. No doubt you'll have some advance notice of this, as activity around the headend will pick up. You'll almost certainly need a cable box for this, as digital-cable-compatible HD sets are still very thin on the ground (I think only two models have been certified by Cable labs so far.) Besides, your cable boxes will be supplied free. (Those boxes will have HDMI outputs, which is why you need a display with HDMI inputs.)

FWIW, I've been working on HDTV since 1986. I've participated in writing many of the standards, and I work for a major TV network that delivers a significant and increasing percentage of its programming in HD. I do not own an HD receiver yet; I've yet to find one that meets my requirements. It'll happen, but I'm in no rush.

HTH,
Bill

> Greetings gentlemen,
> I am hoping that some of you home theater
> enthusiasts can help educate me on HDTV. My
> interest is primarily for movies (DVD).

> I spent some time last night with a HT /
> HDTV "expert" at Best Buy trying
> to determine if HD was worthwhile in my
> particular situation. Basically, what I
> learned is:

> HDTV requires a digital source... digital
> cable, digital satelite, or over-the-air
> broadcast. DVDs require an
> "up-converting" DVD player (avg
> cost $135). *Some* HDTVs will display analog
> signal nicely, some (DLP) will not. Some
> HDTVs have built-in receivers that are
> analog "cable-ready" but require a
> seperate digital receiver.

> I live in a remote area in NE Washington. We
> have cable, but it's not digital. The cable
> company pays me rent and provides me with
> free service for having their dishes and
> head-end on my property. They plan to go
> digital but have no time frame yet. We're
> too far from the broadcast source to have
> over-air HD broadcast.

> Is it worthwhile (in your opinion) to go HD
> and "up-converted" DVD? Is there
> enough HD programming out there to justify
> DirecTV satelite? Will the analog
> programming display on the HDTV be "at
> least" as good as on the analog TV?

> TIA for your comments.

> steve

[colby]

If you like to keep up with technology and don't want to replace the TV you are looking to purchase now in a few years, go with a HDTV.

EDTVs are becoming more rare and I would spend alittle more and get the HDTV.

You don't need an upconverting DVD player. The TV can handle the conversion.

The DVI and HDMI talk is getting confusing on this thread. If you are looking to get a digital TV such as Plasma, LCD or DLP it should have an HDMI or DVI input. Just about all do now. Those inputs are digital. With CRT TVs (projection or otherwise) it does not matter. The digital TVs require a digital signal for the picture. Utilizing the DVI or HDMI input the TV does not have to convert an analog signal (component video) to digital. One less conversion can lead to better picture quality. CRT uses an analog signal and therefore does not need a digital input. HTH.

[Dirk]

> There is actually a difference between
> digital and HDTV. HDTV really requires the
> use of a DVI cable interface. Here TWC has
> that option (albeit on the upper end of the
> cost scale) where they will put in a HD box
> instead of the regular digital set top box.
> So this means your HDTV must have a DVI
> interface and your cable box. A lot of video
> cards have DVI too. I'm not an expert on
> this by no means, but am learning slowly.
> BTW, I really like the digtial radio
> stations that TWC provides. Regards, Paul.

Actually, no, HDTV does NOT require a DVI. All you need is a cable (or cables) with enough bandwidth to provide the required resolution (which is up to 1080p these days). Component video cables (decent ones, anyway), have plenty of bandwidth to carry the signal. DVI is neat because it allows a fully digital bitstream from the source to the display and it's only one smallish cable. Visual differences are negligable, if there at all.

Anyway, it sounds like he actually got a halfway decent guy at Best Buy. There are a few of them. ;-)

Personally, I'd ask the question "for how long will I have this new TV?". If I were happy with my current set, I wouldn't upgrade. If an upgrade is warranted (or you just want something bigger), go HD. You'll kick yourself for not having the functionality in 2 years. Also, I wouldn't buy the big expensive unites with the built-in tuners...not if you're unsure how you're going to be getting your content. Instead, make decoding of the HD the problem for some other piece of equipment. Yes, it's a little annoying to need an external box, but at least then you're not paying for expensive hardware features you may not be able to use.

As to technologies, I'll say that not every TV is created equal when it comes to reproducing "standard def" content. And it's not really the fault of the display type. DLP is not neccisarily worse at upconversion than CRT based units... Though some certainly are, others most certainly are not. Toshibas do a decent job of it, but Samsungs don't in my opinion. Same goes for the CRT tvs made by each company. it's really about the quality of the scaler that a company prefers to use.

Sorry for the typos. In a hurry. Off to see System of a Down in Chicago!

[Chris Roemer]

> If you like to keep up with technology and
> don't want to replace the TV you are looking
> to purchase now in a few years, go with a
> HDTV.

> EDTVs are becoming more rare and I would
> spend alittle more and get the HDTV.

> You don't need an upconverting DVD player.
> The TV can handle the conversion.

> The DVI and HDMI talk is getting confusing
> on this thread. If you are looking to get a
> digital TV such as Plasma, LCD or DLP it
> should have an HDMI or DVI input. Just about
> all do now. Those inputs are digital. With
> CRT TVs (projection or otherwise) it does
> not matter. The digital TVs require a
> digital signal for the picture. Utilizing
> the DVI or HDMI input the TV does not have
> to convert an analog signal (component
> video) to digital. One less conversion can
> lead to better picture quality. CRT uses an
> analog signal and therefore does not need a
> digital input. HTH.

Looking at it from a different angle (mine), the traditional analog broadcast signal was matched to standard crt resolution (at the time) which is STILL only in the range of 250 to 300 horizontal scan lines (if they were sharp enough to see - like with a magnifying glass - and alternately colored black and white - you could count these starting at the top of your tv screen and counting downward). This is the standard "vertical" resolution. No set or converter can create any more data, period.

DVD's are a whole other thing. Their native resolution is about double that of standard broadcast video, or around 500 horizontal lines (counted verically down the image). AFAIK, HDTV is doubling this to about 1000 lines.

Being a computer guy (geek), and relating to computer graphics (which is part of my job) the ORIGINAL VGA standard (from back around the mid '80s now - yikes) had 480 lines of resolution. Most monitors in the last 5 years (or even 10 for some) have had closer to 1000 lines of resolution, so . . .

Two years ago I bought a 42" RPTV. It is HD. How can they do this? They use CRT's (in the bottom) that are more like computer monitors (1000 lines) than older (like 20 years ago) projection sets that used analog TV type monitors (250-300 lines). So I've got 1000 lines that my set can do, but my std. cable is only delivering 250-300 (yup, looks real "creamy"); however, DVD's look absolutely stunning (and they're only delivering 500 lines).

For those of you with digital cameras, HDTV is roughly equivalent to a 2 megapixel image (for widescreen sets - roughly 2000 pixels wide by 1000 pixels high). DVD's are only equivalent to a half megapixel image (about 1000 wide by 500 high - or close to a 768 x 1024 15" computer monitor), and standard TV/video tape is only around 270 high by 360 wide, or an astonishingly low 97,000 pixels, or 0.1 megapixel.

[pjay]

Provided Link: My Speaker Site


I just went through the whole process. My cable bill went up a lot and now I have 300 channels and it is all garbage.

Ok,

The DVD is 460p, not HDTV. HDTVs do DVD really well. The Toshiba $70 DVD does a really good job. Generally, the upsampling is better done on the TV side than the DVD or cable box side.

You need digital to get HDTV. Everything will be digital in 3-5 years and HDTV will be 1/2 the price.

Non HD shows on a big screen suck big time. Huge drop in quality overall.

P

[unknownuser]

I would wait a year or two to buy a HDTV because the prices are falling,there will be more HD programming and by then all will have an HDMI connector.HDMI connectors will be required to watch HD-DVD >720x480p and digitally recorded shows because of HDCP encryption.
I agree with the earlier post regarding letting the tv upconvert the resolution.


(Originally posted by: ShawnM)

[shawn_a]

Off to see System of a Down in Chicago!

Dirk, gimme an idea of how the show went. I've been wanting to see them for a while now but the older I get the less I enjoy playing chaperone for a bunch of kids I don't even know. Used to be a time I enjoyed that kind of thing but geez. All it takes is folding one little dipsh*# in half with an elbow to the kidney to make you lose your desire to go to a live show. BTW, the kid really deserved it .

shawn

[skintner]

Thanks to all of you who have responded to this thread...

I am still unclear, due to unfamiliarity with input terminology... DVI, HDMI... wtf??? DVI=Digital Video Interface???

So the Toshiba HD (CRT) that I am contemplating will do a great job with DVD... that's the main thing I want. The Best Buy guy demoed analog on a similar Toshiba CRT which looked ok.

If I buy the Toshiba, I will be hoping to not have to buy another TV for years to come... and that when the cable co upgrades to digital, I won't have to purchase another receiver since they should supply the digital "box"...

Does this sound correct or am I just as well off to keep the old analog tv and wait awhile? My current set doesn't even support an s-video input, the wife's bedroom tv does support s-video and it's pretty decent. I am hoping the HD CRT tv (Toshiba) will improve our viewing experience.

Thanks again.

Further comments are appreciated.

steve