HDTV sets available now

[Stan The Man]

I'm considering the purchase of a plasma TV but I'm conscious that high
definition (1080 lines) transmissions may begin during the life of this
set so I guess it would be prudent to buy a set which is "HD-ready".
Are there any? If so, is there a list of them somewhere? And how
"ready" would they be if there were any changes to the HD standard
between now and 2006 or whenever UK broadcasts may begin?

Stan

[Ben]

Post by Stan The Man
I'm considering the purchase of a plasma TV but I'm conscious that high
definition (1080 lines) transmissions may begin during the life of this
set so I guess it would be prudent to buy a set which is "HD-ready".
Are there any? If so, is there a list of them somewhere? And how
"ready" would they be if there were any changes to the HD standard
between now and 2006 or whenever UK broadcasts may begin?
Stan

Setting aside the issue of native resolution (which would ideally be
1920*1080, but 1280*720 would do) I think all you really need is to make
sure you buy one with an HDMI (or DVI) input. I expect DVI will probably
be fine for HD set top boxes when they appear, and it means you can
already view HD content from your PC (e.g. the microsoft windows media
high definition showcase stuff, plus the associated DVDs that are for
sale). As for HD-DVDs when they arrive, I'm really not sure what input
you will need. The studios want to use HDMI because it has copy
protection, but early adopters will probably want to watch HD-DVDs on
their PCs (because it will avoid buying an expensive player and TV, just
the drive will be required) but I guess that means DVI output will have
to be allowed. I don't think its been worked out yet.

[n***@this.add]

Post by Stan The Man
I'm considering the purchase of a plasma TV but I'm conscious that high
definition (1080 lines) transmissions may begin during the life of this
set so I guess it would be prudent to buy a set which is "HD-ready".
Are there any? If so, is there a list of them somewhere? And how
"ready" would they be if there were any changes to the HD standard
between now and 2006 or whenever UK broadcasts may begin?
Stan

pretty sure all plasma cater for hd transmissions go for better makes
like panasonic they then should be ok... do a search on google for
hdtv
Taz

[Roger]

My local Currys has the larger flat screen displays on islands in the centre of
the store so its easy to walk round the back of them and have a look at the
options available. ISTM there is a good chance of paying a lot of money for a
large plasma that can only support standard TV.

Some models like the Samsung have a label by the Component Video connectors
(three RCA Phono types) stating the supported resolutions. That particular
model supported all the resolutions up to 1080i. However there appears to be
quite a variation. One large Sony appeared to have only a couple of scarts for
connection, while another Sony had a full complement of scarts, component video,
and DVI as well, in addition to a range of audio connectors.

IMO its worth having taking the time to browse round the displays because in my
limited experience this isn't something you will find out from the manufacturers
web site, and don't expect the Currys or Comet sales man to know what you are on
about. As a start I don't think I'd consider a display without Component
Video and DVI connectors.

Not sure but I think that right now you can buy DVD players that support the HD
standards on Component Video connectors and it would be very disappointing not
to be able to connect your new plasma display using them as they provide the
best quality achievable.

Roger

[David Robinson]

There are now £420 CRTs which reportedly support HD:

http://www.jvc.co.uk/product.php?id=HV-28P37SJE&catid=100058&lid

It would probably be unwise to buy an expensive TV which doesn't
support HDTV.


However, don't be surprised if, when HD-DVD finally arrives in the UK,
the only video output is digital, probably HDMI with HDCP (though
that's an uninformed guess). Unless someone hacks this first. The
studios are very frightened of the "analog(ue) hole".

So even an HD ready TV may not turn out to be fully HD useful!

Cheers,
David.

[Stephen Neal]

Post by David Robinson
http://www.jvc.co.uk/product.php?id=HV-28P37SJE&catid=100058&lid
It would probably be unwise to buy an expensive TV which doesn't
support HDTV.

Yep - though the JVC reviewed very poorly and was accused of being "soft" in
SD modes - presumably the SD-HD conversion is less than great?

Steve

[Aztech]

Post by David Robinson
http://www.jvc.co.uk/product.php?id=HV-28P37SJE&catid=100058&lid
It would probably be unwise to buy an expensive TV which doesn't
support HDTV.

Anyone want to take a bet on the CRT being physically able to display 1125
lines?

Post by David Robinson
However, don't be surprised if, when HD-DVD finally arrives in the UK,
the only video output is digital, probably HDMI with HDCP (though
that's an uninformed guess).

HDMI is DVI+HDCP but with an extended plug for audio/data (but still backward
compatible). I also doubt any mainstream HD-DVD or STB's will include analogue
component.

Az.

[Dave Fawthrop]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 13:44:56 GMT, "Aztech" <***@tech.com> wrote:



| Anyone want to take a bet on the CRT being physically able to display 1125
| lines?

I am looking at one which is ATM displaying 1200 lines.
Ooops No! it is called a Monitor, but the technology is the same.

[Aztech]

Post by Dave Fawthrop
| Anyone want to take a bet on the CRT being physically able to display 1125
| lines?
I am looking at one which is ATM displaying 1200 lines.
Ooops No! it is called a Monitor, but the technology is the same.

That assumes most CRT manufacturers can be arsed to move it into your living
room ;)


Az.

[Roger]

Post by Aztech
Anyone want to take a bet on the CRT being physically able to display 1125
lines?
[snip]

How about the horisontal resolution?
I'm not too sure of my figures, but..

The JVC set is 28 inch, giving screen width about 18 inches.
At HD resolution of 1125 x 2000 thats 2000 pixels over 18 inches making
around 110 pixels per inch.

Aperture grill pitch is not usually specified for TV's but I'm guessing its
going to be somewhat coarser than those for computer monitors of which the
best CRT's offer aperture spacing of about 0.25 mm.
That's about 4 dots per mm or 100 dots per inch, which isn't enough to
resolve 110 pixels per inch.

Ok, where am I going wrong?

Roger

[Stephen Neal]

Post by Roger

Post by Aztech
Anyone want to take a bet on the CRT being physically able to
display 1125 lines?
[snip]

How about the horisontal resolution?
I'm not too sure of my figures, but..
The JVC set is 28 inch, giving screen width about 18 inches.
At HD resolution of 1125 x 2000 thats 2000 pixels over 18 inches
making around 110 pixels per inch.

The HD active resolutions commonly in use are the following :

1920x1080 (as used in the US and by Euro1080 in Europe)
1440x1080 (as used in Aus - non-sqaure pixels used to reduce horizontal
resolution and reduce the data bandwith required, allowing an SD channel to
be squeezed in with the HD one)
1280x720 (as used in the US)

A direct-view CRT will probably include about 5% of overscan on each side
(i.e. the picture will be scanned past the edge of the tube) - so there will
be a 10% horizontal and vertical reduction unless you tweak? This would
give the following (approx) resolutions of an actually displayed picture:

1730 x 970
1300 x 970
1150 x 650

(The 1125 figure you are quoting is close to the number of active lines used
by the defunct 1250/50i HD standard, or the total number - including
horizontal blanking - used by the Japanese 1125/60i standard that offered
between 1035-1050 active lines. That is like saying a 625 line TV displays
625 lines - when the 625 line standard only includes 576 active lines, and
most TVs will show fewer lines than this due to overscan)

Post by Roger
Aperture grill pitch is not usually specified for TV's but I'm
guessing its going to be somewhat coarser than those for computer
monitors of which the best CRT's offer aperture spacing of about 0.25
mm.

Yep - TVs need to be brighter than computer monitors so it is likely that
the shadow mask/aperture grille will need to be higher quality (to cope with
the higher beam energy needed for a brighter picture without warping) or
coarser.

Post by Roger
That's about 4 dots per mm or 100 dots per inch, which isn't enough to
resolve 110 pixels per inch.
Ok, where am I going wrong?

Assuming a TV displays the full active picture, and that a TV displays the
full broadcast resolution! AIUI the only direct view CRT on sale in the US
that fully resolves the 1920x1080 standard is a 34 or 36" Sony - and it is
apparently quite a lot dimmer than the softer models. A larger screen means
a coarser aperture grille can be used whilst still retaining the resolution
across the whole screen area.

However it is worth knowing that one of the most widespread HD VTR formats -
HDCAM - whilst recording and replaying 1920x1080 4:2:2 signals actually
subsamples to 1440x1080 3:1:1ish resolution to record onto tape... This
means that significant amounts of HD material broadcast as 1920x1080 only
have 1440x1080 luma resolution (and a lot less than the 720x1080 chroma
resolution one might expect from a 4:2:2 recording format running at
1440x1080?) HD-D5, D6 and HDCAMSR do run at higher resolution and are
capable of full-res HD recording.

Steve

[Stephen Neal]

Post by Aztech

Post by David Robinson
http://www.jvc.co.uk/product.php?id=HV-28P37SJE&catid=100058&lid
It would probably be unwise to buy an expensive TV which doesn't
support HDTV.

Anyone want to take a bet on the CRT being physically able to display
1125 lines?

AIUI only one direct-view CRT "TV" sold in the US can fully resolve the
1920x1080 broadcast resolution - and it's a Sony (XBR960?)

Of course 3 tube CRT projectors are better suited to this (no pesky
grilles/shadow masky things to worry about - just the nightmare of
convergence...) - though only much use if you like watching TV in the dark I
suspect...

Steve

[Stephen Neal]

Post by Roger
My local Currys has the larger flat screen displays on islands in the centre of
the store so its easy to walk round the back of them and have a look at the
options available. ISTM there is a good chance of paying a lot of money for a
large plasma that can only support standard TV.
Some models like the Samsung have a label by the Component Video connectors
(three RCA Phono types) stating the supported resolutions. That particular
model supported all the resolutions up to 1080i.

Be warned - many projectors and plasmas will accept signals of a higher
resolution than they can display. Just because an input standard is
supported doesn't mean it is displayed at its full resolution. (Many
projectors running at 800x600 will accept and display 1080i signals AIUI)

Post by Roger
However there appears to be
quite a variation. One large Sony appeared to have only a couple of scarts for
connection, while another Sony had a full complement of scarts, component video,
and DVI as well, in addition to a range of audio connectors.

[snip]

Post by Roger
Not sure but I think that right now you can buy DVD players that support the HD
standards on Component Video connectors and it would be very disappointing not
to be able to connect your new plasma display using them as they provide the
best quality achievable.

Very few DVD players output HD signal on their component outputs - though
there are a few with internal scalers on sale in the US. Many (but not all)
component output DVD players output 480p or 576p at best (a progressive
version of the source material) - though this might be considered HD by
some - many don't consider it to be so. There are also DVD players with
component outputs that only output 480i or 576i (i.e. normal interlaced
video). The presence of component outputs on a DVD Player doesn't
automatically mean the output is progressive - and certainly doesn't mean it
is HD.

Component video IS the HD analogue interconnect standard of choice for many
people (though RGB via separate BNCs or a 15pin VGA connector are also
used) - but not all component video is HD.

Steve

[Roger]

Post by Stephen Neal
Be warned - many projectors and plasmas will accept signals of a higher
resolution than they can display. Just because an input standard is
supported doesn't mean it is displayed at its full resolution. (Many
projectors running at 800x600 will accept and display 1080i signals AIUI)
[snip]

Thanks, most interesting, but potentially very confusing for the consumer.
I could almost imagine it being a trades description issue.

Just to clarify the point, many of the 'in store' descriptions, rather than
say anything about supported resolutions, instead promote the screen native
resolution, such as 640 x 480, or 1280 x 1024 etc.

Doesn't that mean the best a 640 x 480 screen can display 'without quality
compromise' is 480i or 480p, and a screen required to display 1080i would
need to be 1600 x 1200 to acheive an uncompromised display of the HD
picture?

Roger

[Stephen Neal]

Post by Roger

Post by Stephen Neal
Be warned - many projectors and plasmas will accept signals of a
higher resolution than they can display. Just because an input
standard is supported doesn't mean it is displayed at its full
resolution. (Many projectors running at 800x600 will accept and
display 1080i signals AIUI) [snip]

Thanks, most interesting, but potentially very confusing for the
consumer. I could almost imagine it being a trades description issue.
Just to clarify the point, many of the 'in store' descriptions,
rather than say anything about supported resolutions, instead promote
the screen native resolution, such as 640 x 480, or 1280 x 1024 etc.
Doesn't that mean the best a 640 x 480 screen can display 'without
quality compromise' is 480i or 480p, and a screen required to display
1080i would need to be 1600 x 1200 to acheive an uncompromised
display of the HD picture?

Not quite - especially in the interlace vs progressive display vs broadcast
argument.

A 480 progressive display fed progressive is inherently "sharper" vertically
than a 480 interlaced display fed interlace or progressive. This is a
result of a vertical resolution reduction (called the Kell factor and
normally taken to be about 70%?) introduced by interlacing - or more
accurately the filtering required to avoid excessive interlace flicker?.
Plasmas, LCD and DLP displays are all progressive by their very nature - so
a 480p plasma/LCD/DLP will be capable of displaying a sharper picture than a
480i CRT device (everything else being equal - which it probably never is).
A 480p plasma should thus be capable of fully resolving a 576i source
picture (as the 576i source will be vertically pre-filtered to avoid
interlace twitter, and will not be as sharp as a 576p source)

Similarly this argument holds true - vertically - for 720p vs 1080i. The
vertical resolution of both formats is usually taken to be pretty similar -
i.e. a 720p display should be close to resolving the bulk of the vertical
information present in a 1080i source picture. (To understand the filtering
vertically required by a 1080i picture imagine what would happen if a 1080i
signal was broadcast of 540 white lines and 540 black lines - rather than
resolving as a sharp grille of alternating black and white lines, you'd get
a screen flashing between a field of white and a field of black at frame
rate, so the pre-filtering required would actually give you a grey screen,
without the sharp detail, but also without the flicker...)

HOWEVER most 720p devices are square pixel based (1280x720) and 1080i
signals are also square pixel based (so effectively are quite a lot sharper
horizontally than vertically!) and are 1920x1080 (or in Australia more
commonly non-square 1440x1080 to save bandwith and squeeze an extra SD
channel in...) This means that a 1080i picture displayed on a 1280x720
display will be reduced in quality much more horizontally than vertically
AIUI.

Steve

[Roger]

Post by Stephen Neal
Not quite - especially in the interlace vs progressive display vs broadcast
argument.
A 480 progressive display fed progressive is inherently "sharper" vertically
than a 480 interlaced display fed interlace or progressive. This is a
result of a vertical resolution reduction (called the Kell factor and
normally taken to be about 70%?) introduced by interlacing - or more
accurately the filtering required to avoid excessive interlace flicker?.
Plasmas, LCD and DLP displays are all progressive by their very nature -so
a 480p plasma/LCD/DLP will be capable of displaying a sharper picture than a
480i CRT device (everything else being equal - which it probably never is).
A 480p plasma should thus be capable of fully resolving a 576i source
picture (as the 576i source will be vertically pre-filtered to avoid
interlace twitter, and will not be as sharp as a 576p source)
Similarly this argument holds true - vertically - for 720p vs 1080i. The
vertical resolution of both formats is usually taken to be pretty similar -
i.e. a 720p display should be close to resolving the bulk of the vertical
information present in a 1080i source picture. (To understand the filtering
vertically required by a 1080i picture imagine what would happen if a 1080i
signal was broadcast of 540 white lines and 540 black lines - rather than
resolving as a sharp grille of alternating black and white lines, you'd get
a screen flashing between a field of white and a field of black at frame
rate, so the pre-filtering required would actually give you a grey screen,
without the sharp detail, but also without the flicker...)
HOWEVER most 720p devices are square pixel based (1280x720) and 1080i
signals are also square pixel based (so effectively are quite a lot sharper
horizontally than vertically!) and are 1920x1080 (or in Australia more
commonly non-square 1440x1080 to save bandwith and squeeze an extra SD
channel in...) This means that a 1080i picture displayed on a 1280x720
display will be reduced in quality much more horizontally than vertically
AIUI.

Well thanks again for the detailed response. Some of these considerations are
new to me, so I'll have to print it out for bed time reading.

Roger

[Stephen Neal]

Post by Stan The Man
I'm considering the purchase of a plasma TV but I'm conscious that high
definition (1080 lines) transmissions may begin during the life of this
set so I guess it would be prudent to buy a set which is "HD-ready".
Are there any? If so, is there a list of them somewhere? And how
"ready" would they be if there were any changes to the HD standard
between now and 2006 or whenever UK broadcasts may begin?

Be warned - many plasmas and projectors will accept 1080i (1920x1080 or
1440x1080 interlaced) and 720p (1280x720 progressive) signals - and detail
1080/50i,1080/60i, 720/50p,720/60p as supported input resolutions, HOWEVER
they may have displays with far lower resolution than these - say 854x480 (a
common 42" plasma resolution)...

Just because a plasma says it will display a signal in a certain resolution
doesn't mean it will display it at full resolution!

Steve

[Aztech]

Post by Stan The Man
I'm considering the purchase of a plasma TV but I'm conscious that high
definition (1080 lines) transmissions may begin during the life of this
set so I guess it would be prudent to buy a set which is "HD-ready".
Are there any? If so, is there a list of them somewhere? And how
"ready" would they be if there were any changes to the HD standard
between now and 2006 or whenever UK broadcasts may begin?

Most decent plasmas will accept component (analogue) video at HD resolutions,
whether they're able to do them justice is another matter. I think only Pioneer
have HDMI kit available at the moment, and you can bet BSkyB and HD-DVD's
paranoia will mean them solely using this interface for European markets, they
don't have to worry so much about the installed base as they do in the US.

Az.