Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've been researching DLP's for some time and I finally decided on the Mitsu WD-57732. I'll be purchasing this as soon as I convince my wife it's close enough to Christmas for it to be a Christmas gift...hopefully by Thanksgiving HA! I thought I was done and my mind was made up, THEN I read in this months "Home Theater Magazine " that the two Mitsu's they tested (WD-57731, WD-65731) failed the 3:2 cadence test, and showed "some" attenuation in the bandwidth test. I understand the implications of lost resolution in the bandwidth test, but I'm a little confused about the importance of the 3:2 test. Can anyone offer an explanation of what this test indicates? Even though the units tested are the "Mitsubishi series" I assume all Mitsubishi DLP's use the same video processor. Is this a safe assumption? Any info is appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks, that article helps.
I would assume most buying a television like this will be running the signal through an HT receiver (Pioneer Elite VSX-84TXSi in my case). From the Pioneer website:

"The Faroudja DCDi HD Video Scaler accepts and up-converts low-res video signals to 480p, 720p or 1080i resolutions for a better match to your HDTV or monitor's native resolution."

What effect will this have on the video processing built into the Mitsubishi? Is it even a good idea to run the video signal through the receiver and then again through a video processor built into a display? I've very unsure of what the effect is going to be after I combine these componets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,398 Posts
I would assume most buying a television like this will be running the signal through an HT receiver
Errrm, I wouldn't :sad2: If buying a quality display, the processing in the display should be up to the task.

What effect will this have on the video processing built into the Mitsubishi?
Since the receiver can't upscale to 1080p, and since Mitsubishi DLPs use a proprietary "semi 1080p" display technology, anything you send to the Mitsubishi will need to undergo additional processing anyway. May as well go straight to the tv and have it all done at once rather than in seperate chunks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
999 Posts
the two Mitsu's they tested (WD-57731, WD-65731) failed the 3:2 cadence test, and showed "some" attenuation in the bandwidth test. I understand the implications of lost resolution in the bandwidth test, but I'm a little confused about the importance of the 3:2 test. Can anyone offer an explanation of what this test indicates?
Film is shot 24 fps. Failing the 3:2 cadence test means that it does not properly inverse telecine film based content passed in via 1080i60 or 480i60 video sourced by a video disc player (hi def or standard) to properly show all the pixels of the source when it is playing content based on film. Also may be a problem with cable/broadcast QAM/ATSC or NTSC signals that show movies based on film (most movies are) For more info Google and Wikipedia can help.

Bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Errrm, I wouldn't :sad2: If buying a quality display, the processing in the display should be up to the task.

... May as well go straight to the tv and have it all done at once rather than in seperate chunks.
For processing that makes sense, but are you suggesting to run each componet (DVD, Sat, game sys) directly to the TV inputs, and only the audio signals to the receiver? I never considered hooking up a system this way. What would be the point in HDMI then? (You only get one HDMI output on each componet.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,398 Posts
are you suggesting to run each componet (DVD, Sat, game sys) directly to the TV inputs, and only the audio signals to the receiver? I never considered hooking up a system this way
Yes, no sense in rerouting video through a receiver unless you run out of intputs on your display. Video switching in a receiver is meant to be a convenient solution to that very problem, not a mandatory connection. At the very best, under ideal circumstances, nothing would happen. You stand the potential for degrading picture though if things arent ideal. The shortest signal path with the least terminations is the best path.

What would be the point in HDMI then? (You only get one HDMI output on each componet.)
If every component you are hooking up to your tv uses HDMI out, then you should be fine with your routing, as the chances for digital signal degredation are almost nonexistant except for losing signal strength, and I doubt the run from component to receiver to tv is enough to do that. However, I don't know too many receivers that have more than 2 HDMI inputs. Unless you are carrying the new DD or DTS formats or multiple channels of uncompressed analog signals, good old optical and digital coax will work fine for your audio. I would prefer to keep audio and video signals seperate to keep the signal paths as short as possible, but as HDMI becomes the standard and these new audio formats come out, we'll be forced to do routing as you describe. Until then, I'll continue to keep my audio and video signals discrete. The only reason it is going to become the standard is because of digital copyrighting - DVI works fine and comes in some very thick gauges - 1080p is no problem for DVI. A triple optical cable could have been developed for increased audio demands if they really wanted, but they didn't want.

Anyway, I'm rambling now. If you are going to be doing HDMI routing, I would disable the video processing in your receiver.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top