Laserdisc Playback: CLD-925 Vs DVL-909
Prestel on-line
laserdiscs, I still want to view my collection.
I'm currently using the CLD925 for my lasers. I've read that the LD
playback on the DVL909 isnt as good as the CLD925...
Any comments people?
Gary M
Kelvin Trundle
Kelvin
Prestel on-line wrote in message <35AA0A...@netsales.prestel.co.uk>...
Jamie Ketskemety
Kelvin Trundle
on the 925/909, this is due to the digital frame store that video signal has
to go though.
That's why I said just as bad as the 925 because it's no where near the
quality of the of the older models before the 925.
check out a review in Home Entertainment confirming the same. I understand
that Pioneer visited the Home Entertainment offices some weeks ago due to
the bad review they gave the 909. This visit was to prove to Pioneer why HE
gave such a bad review. From what I understand that Pioneer left with their
tail between their legs after being shown that a 4 year old model displays a
better picture than their current flag ship model.
In some camps the CLD-2950 is still the PAL/NTSC LD King.
Kelvin
Richard Hopkins
>playback on the DVL909 isnt as good as the CLD925...
>
>Any comments people?
It's difficult to comment authoritatively as I haven's seen a 925 and 909
back to backed on the same monitor, but it would indeed appear that the
909's LD playback is slightly inferior.
I noticed visible chroma noise on titles that don't exhibit any on my 925
and display. There was also noticeable dot crawl and hatching on the S-Video
output, indicating that the built-in comb filter isn't as hot as the 925's.
Best bet would nbe to get a home dem on a 909 and back to back with your own
player...
Richard Hopkins,
(replace .nospam with .com in reply address)
Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom
Send all my spam to: tony...@labore.org.uk
Richard Hopkins
>Well compaired to an CLD-1850 or a CLD-2950 the video reproduction is
blocky
>on the 925/909, this is due to the digital frame store that video signal
has
>to go though.
There's next to no difference between the picture quality of the 925 and the
2950 in normal playback once the 'HQ' circuit on the 925's been switched
out. The digital field memory is only employed during search or trick play
functions. Videotec among others offer a mod giving a picture output prior
to the digital stages on the 925. The main advantage of this is a reduction
of the number of components in the picture path. However, I can't personally
see any difference between the 'before' and 'after' outputs.
That said, the 2950 has the advantage of a better engineered chassis, which
could be expected to give superior laser alignment.
Leon Rees
on the 909 is slightly inferior to the SCART output on my CLD2850 that is 6
years old.
The difference is marginal, but I remember being disappointed with the 909
LD output after purchase. I tested a few discs expecting a huge difference
in quality over and above my CLD2850, but it was not there.
If digital frame memory is to blame, Pioneer can keep it... who needs CLV
slo-mo and freeze frame anyway? I also prefer the blue screen that the fade
to black or the last still while changing.
Can't beat the 909 for convenience though.
Leon.
Prestel on-line wrote in message <35AA0A...@netsales.prestel.co.uk>...
>I've recently thinking of getting a DVD player. As I already have a few
>laserdiscs, I still want to view my collection.
>
>I'm currently using the CLD925 for my lasers. I've read that the LD
>playback on the DVL909 isnt as good as the CLD925...
>
>Any comments people?
>
>Gary M
DPerry3935
<xw...@dial.pipex.com> writes:
>Well compaired to an CLD-1850 or a CLD-2950 the video reproduction is blocky
>on the 925/909, this is due to the digital frame store that video signal has
>to go though.
>
>That's why I said just as bad as the 925 because it's no where near the
>quality of the of the older models before the 925.
I have a CLD2950 and compared it side by side at home with a 925 via the
s-video output. The picture quality was virtually identical. I did an a/b
comparison with two copies of Jurassic Park(PAL) and 2 Video Essental LDs
playing and switched back a forth to discover no significant difference.
However, although the digital field store is a bonus for CLV discs it should
have been by-passed when a CAV disc is played but it is not. Unfortunately, on
the 925 the only time you get a high quality analogue full frame trick play
image is when in pause mode, any fast or slow motion will be limited quality
field only playback with added digital noise. This is what put me off the
purchase.
Finally, the contruction seemed to be a little light weight compared to the
2950.
Sorry I have no comment on the 909 as I have not seen it in action, I would
guess it is based on the 925.
Cheers.
David J Perry
DPerry3935@aol. {eliminate_spammers} com
Remove the brackets and everything within them to email me.
SAnderson
You'll need a multi-standard tv i'm afraid, R1 comes out as an NTSC signal
only.
Sean
Stuart Wright wrote in message <35aaf49f...@news.dial.pipex.com>...
>On 13 Jul 1998 21:42:13 GMT, dperr...@aol.com (DPerry3935) wrote:
>
>mmm I was thinking about replacing my (DIY upgraded) 2950 with a 909
>but I will now probably get a dedicated DVD player.
>One question for all you gurus - if you have a DVD player which can
>output PAL and NTSC (my current TV is PAL only) will it output all
>region DVDs to a PAL signal or will I have to get an NTSC telly to
>watch region 1 discs?
>-----
>Stuart Wright st...@usa.net.remove.everything.after.net
>Software developer,
>web author for the Hi-Fi and Home Cinema industries,
>drummer and fast biker.
>Visit my web site http://ds.dial.pipex.com/town/road/xmk67/
Steph
you could select the TV standard as well...
SAnderson wrote in message <6oe149$mir$1...@heliodor.xara.net>...
SAnderson
seen one one nor have I read any reports on them.
Anyone any info?
Sean
Steph wrote in message <6oe1gr$n16$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
Kelvin Trundle
If you play a region 1 disc on the DVD player that can output Pal I quess
that you will be able to play all discs in Pal as the DVD digital video
stream is not processed in the Pal or NTSC and it is down to the
configuration of the player to output Pal or NTSC.
Unlike LD where the Video is recorded in anaologue (but we all know that!!)
for the right format for the country it is intended for.
I hope this is clear
Kelvin
Graham Lang
:-) Agreed 100%, the 909 looked identical to a 925 to me.
Graham
Stuart Wright
Stuart Wright
<horn...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>Stuart,
>You'll need a multi-standard tv i'm afraid, R1 comes out as an NTSC signal
>only.
> Sean
>
Oh poop. No point in getting a DVD player this year then.
Thanks
Graham Lang
you don't have a multi-standard TV there should be no problem once the
switch is set to the "PAL" position.
In fact, even if you *do* have a multi-standard TV the PAL output option
(from DVD, not LD) is almost certainly preferable anyway.
Graham
Graham Lang
Yup, and the 2950 is a joke (particularly in the chroma noise department)
compared to a CLD-99. I thought that's what you meant when you said the
909 was "as bad" as the 925. :-)
Graham
Kelvin Trundle
Graham Lang wrote in message ...
Remember that CLD-99 is a NTSC only machine, so how can you compair it and
it cost a hell of a lot more.
Kelvin
Mark Webb
> One question for all you gurus - if you have a DVD
> player which can
> output PAL and NTSC (my current TV is PAL only) will it
> output all
> region DVDs to a PAL signal or will I have to get an
> NTSC telly to
> watch region 1 discs?
I have a multi region DV505 and it you can choose (via a
switch at the back) to output NTSC discs a raw NTSC or
modified PAL (i.e. the same NTSC->PAL trick the 925
can perform with NTSC LD).
Mark W.
Graham Lang
True, but 95% of LD software owned by most users will be NTSC so I think
the comparison is valid. I'm sure the reason that the 99 is so vastly
superior to the 2950/925 isn't because they've "removed" the PAL
circuitry, but because the entire video processing hardware in all Euro
players is "average" at best when compared to most US machines,
particularly the high-end US players equivalents of which just aren't
available here at all.
> so how can you compair it
Simple, I flick between the two different inputs on my amp which connect
to the 2950 and the 99! :-) When you compare a 99 to a 2950 it does
finally answer the old question about which LD format is better, PAL or
NTSC... and I'd now gladly trade *any* PAL disc for it's NTSC equivalent.
> and it cost a hell of a lot more.
Not necessarily. My 99 cost less than 100 UKP more than my 2950 cost me
originally. Granted it does retail at 2500 USD, but if you hunt around on
the net they can still be found new for *much* less than that.
If you already have a fairly large collection of NTSC LD's, particularly
if you have a lot of titles which may never be released on DVD then it's
definitely worth tracking down a high-end US player...
Graham
Andy C
Graham Lang wrote in message ...
>> so how can you compair it
>
>Simple, I flick between the two different inputs on my amp which connect
>to the 2950 and the 99! :-) When you compare a 99 to a 2950 it does
>finally answer the old question about which LD format is better, PAL or
>NTSC... and I'd now gladly trade *any* PAL disc for it's NTSC equivalent.
But doesn't the TV need to be set up differently for PAL and NTSC. I seem
to remember that the brightness settings for PAL HAVE to be
different for NTSC to get the best image. Can't remember
which way round it is but I think the brightness for
PAL has to be higher than for NTSC.
If thats the case then simply switching between to two
will make PAL look less bright (providing that you
used video essentials to set up your display). This will have
the effect of losing contrast on the PAL picture and
generally making it look a lot worse. If you haven't
had your set adjusted properly (either with VE or
by a professional) then any such comparison is
meaningless. IMHO
Andy C
Graham Lang
Yup, brightness + colour both need adjusted for optimum results.
When flicking between both players I was actually comparing NTSC discs,
not PAL + NTSC, though even with an identical PAL and NTSC transfer of the
same film the NTSC version played on a CLD-99 will easily beat the PAL
disc on a 2950.
Graham