It is currently 05 Aug 2021, 08:16




 Page 1 of 2 [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2013, 05:30 
User avatar
Which of these players do you think would give the best PQ on LD playback. Most importantly, which of these players is better suited for LCD and which of these players is better suited for CRT? Also, I'm somewhat interested in AC-3, so would a modded 95/97 be better or the 99 be better? It seems to me that one of the advantages of the 99 would be the 3D VNR, however, both the 95 and 97 are better built than the 99. However, on certain discs, the 95 I had tends to be grainer than my other players. And yes, I do understand about the whole composite/S Video issue.
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2013, 06:57 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:23
Posts: 389
Location: Costa Rica
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
jpass992 wrote:
Which of these players do you think would give the best PQ on LD playback. Most importantly, which of these players is better suited for LCD and which of these players is better suited for CRT? Also, I'm somewhat interested in AC-3, so would a modded 95/97 be better or the 99 be better? It seems to me that one of the advantages of the 99 would be the 3D VNR, however, both the 95 and 97 are better built than the 99. However, on certain discs, the 95 I had tends to be grainer than my other players. And yes, I do understand about the whole composite/S Video issue.


Different strokes for different folks. Some like lots of grain, some like the clearer more plastic DNR effect. What do you prefer?
Either way, depends on what you want to pay. If money doesn't matter, go with the 99 otherwise the other two are fine and you could always play around with an additional pass thru device. Although I haven't had much luck with these extra cooks in the kitchen with the 97 as far as transfers to digital. But it doesn't matter since post production software can accomplish fantastic digital results. As far as CRT, what for? LOL, either of the 3 is sufficient.


8-) Elvis
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2013, 13:05 
Young Padawan
Young Padawan
User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2009, 18:05
Posts: 3311
Location: Laguna Beach, CA
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 180 times
Noise on my cld-97 and mld-7020 were so low, I don't remember ever needing dnr. Side changes are slower but never bothered me. 97/95 produce smoother but softer picture. 99/79/704 produce sharper but noisier even with dnr on
_________________
Wanted
HD-VMD Discs
Hi-Vision/Muse Discs Only complete/mint!
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2013, 17:39 
Advanced fan
Advanced fan
User avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2008, 04:35
Posts: 567
Location: Minnesota, United States
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
substance wrote:
Noise on my cld-97 and mld-7020 were so low, I don't remember ever needing dnr. Side changes are slower but never bothered me. 97/95 produce smoother but softer picture. 99/79/704 produce sharper but noisier even with dnr on


Completely agree. Although the 97 can be made slightly sharper than stock. You have to decide if you like a sharp picture or low noise as this is generally the trade-off.
_________________
Laserdisc Player
CLD-3080 w/ AC-3
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 29 Mar 2013, 18:20 
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight
User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2010, 09:44
Posts: 5274
Location: Ann Arbor
Has thanked: 732 times
Been thanked: 739 times
As for the CRT/LCD thing, unless you have something really special few sets being made today do good job with LD. Pioneer's Kuro line was great at LD, Sony's XBR9xx series was awesome too, but these were the last great HDTVs for SD video (and games, which are an even bigger issue).

There are loads of people who say that LD looks great straight into their LCD but IMHO they don't have a clue of how good LD can look. The colors get horribly blown out and the low resolution really hampers the picture when it's blown up to three times as big as the largest LD-era TV ever made. I have a 17" CRT production monitor I use for games and making copies of LDs and I'm being serious when I say that LDs from this look WAY better than they do on any LCD. My main unit is a Sony XBR960, a 34" wide format CRT.

I haven't seen every TV in the world, and some are better than others, but if you have a late-model LCD you probably need a fancy scaler that costs more than the TV...and even then, frankly, CRT looks better.

This changes not at all with the player, btw. Good players and bad players all look the same with a garbage TV. A 97 or a S-104, money spent at that level is a band aid on a bullet hole.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 00:09 
Advanced fan
Advanced fan
User avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2008, 04:35
Posts: 567
Location: Minnesota, United States
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
^This post speaks true.
_________________
Laserdisc Player
CLD-3080 w/ AC-3
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 02:21 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:23
Posts: 389
Location: Costa Rica
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
If not using a CRT screen, all the more reason to use DNR and/or digital after effects software to alter your LD picture/captures to a desirable digital viewing which you will want with the LCD/Plasma TV's.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 03:43 
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight
User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2010, 09:44
Posts: 5274
Location: Ann Arbor
Has thanked: 732 times
Been thanked: 739 times
Yeah, you're going to want to process the hell out of the signal. The more chaotic it is the worse it looks on an modern LCD since that's more work for the upconversion hardware in the TV to do.

Or, failing that, just buy a Trinitron of $50 off Craigslist. :)
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 03:44 
Advanced fan
Advanced fan
User avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2008, 04:35
Posts: 567
Location: Minnesota, United States
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
There's a world of difference between post processing and real-time deinterlacing/scaling. I tend to think most people here are after real-time results not post processing captures. Therefore, the advice we give is geared toward real-time results.

In my opinion, and I stress opinion, scaling should be avoided at all costs. SD looked best on SD displays and HD looks best on HD displays.
_________________
Laserdisc Player
CLD-3080 w/ AC-3
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 05:23 
User avatar
Well, right now, I have multiple players, a D701, 95, 97(which is broken), and a 3080. It seemed like when I upscaled the players through my Onkyo TX NR809, the PQ looked better on my LCD versus the CRT I just got (Sony KV 20V50). However, if I just send the raw SVHS signal to the LCD, hands down, the CRT looks alot better. Strangely, between the 701 and 95, the 701 actually looked alot better. The 95 was pretty grainy, unless I turned on the V DNR. From what I've seen the Elite 95/97 does have a better build quality than the 99, but they do lack in the VNR department. I've seen from videos that the 99 does have an adjustable 3D VNR, which I'm not sure if it will improve the PQ over something like the 95/97. What I can say is that my Dad has a DVL 919, that's hooked up to a Elite PRO 70X5FD and the PQ looks better than anything I've seen in my life. I mean, this is coming from a DVL 919! Even I don't like that player! Could the 99 give me near DVD quality? Or is that simply a dream?
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 06:25 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:23
Posts: 389
Location: Costa Rica
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
jpass992 wrote:
Well, right now, I have multiple players, a D701, 95, 97(which is broken), and a 3080. It seemed like when I upscaled the players through my Onkyo TX NR809, the PQ looked better on my LCD versus the CRT I just got (Sony KV 20V50). However, if I just send the raw SVHS signal to the LCD, hands down, the CRT looks alot better. Strangely, between the 701 and 95, the 701 actually looked alot better. The 95 was pretty grainy, unless I turned on the V DNR. From what I've seen the Elite 95/97 does have a better build quality than the 99, but they do lack in the VNR department. I've seen from videos that the 99 does have an adjustable 3D VNR, which I'm not sure if it will improve the PQ over something like the 95/97. What I can say is that my Dad has a DVL 919, that's hooked up to a Elite PRO 70X5FD and the PQ looks better than anything I've seen in my life. I mean, this is coming from a DVL 919! Even I don't like that player! Could the 99 give me near DVD quality? Or is that simply a dream?


From what your saying you expect digital picture results from an analog source. If that is the effect you desire then by all means get the 99 with it's 3D DNR or/and capture first then use some post production software to achieve the desirable digital effects. Might as well store all your finalized captures to HDD and playback with HDMI. In fact anyone playing with digital monitor has to achieve digital somewhere in the chain from analog. I too, would not mess around with scalers or other devices to achieve as you go playback from analog to digital. Wouldn't you rather save the analog devices from usage by using HDD's for playback? Just my 2 cents.
Otherwise quite playing around with digital and do like the other poster suggested and stick with a good CRT TV for playback.
Can't guess what your dad is doing from the brief outline you give.


Last edited by elviscaprice on 30 Mar 2013, 06:36, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 06:33 
User avatar
elviscaprice wrote:
jpass992 wrote:
Well, right now, I have multiple players, a D701, 95, 97(which is broken), and a 3080. It seemed like when I upscaled the players through my Onkyo TX NR809, the PQ looked better on my LCD versus the CRT I just got (Sony KV 20V50). However, if I just send the raw SVHS signal to the LCD, hands down, the CRT looks alot better. Strangely, between the 701 and 95, the 701 actually looked alot better. The 95 was pretty grainy, unless I turned on the V DNR. From what I've seen the Elite 95/97 does have a better build quality than the 99, but they do lack in the VNR department. I've seen from videos that the 99 does have an adjustable 3D VNR, which I'm not sure if it will improve the PQ over something like the 95/97. What I can say is that my Dad has a DVL 919, that's hooked up to a Elite PRO 70X5FD and the PQ looks better than anything I've seen in my life. I mean, this is coming from a DVL 919! Even I don't like that player! Could the 99 give me near DVD quality? Or is that simply a dream?


From what your saying you expect digital picture results from an analog source. If that is the effect you desire then by all means get the 99 with it's 3D DNR or/and capture first then use some post production software to achieve the desirable digital effects. Might as well store all your finalized captures to HDD and playback with HDMI. In fact anyone playing with digital monitor has to achieve digital somewhere in the chain from analog. I too, would not mess around with scalers or other devices to achieve as you go playback from analog to digital. Wouldn't you rather save the analog devices from usage by using HDD's for playback? Just my 2 cents.
Otherwise quite playing around with digital and do like the other poster suggested and go out and find a good CRT TV for playback.
Can't guess what your dad is doing from the brief outline you give.


I'm not interesting in capturing LD, just watching it in the highest quality possible. I prefer removable media to hard drives because they always crash. What exactly do you mean about my Dad?
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 06:41 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:23
Posts: 389
Location: Costa Rica
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
jpass992 wrote:
I'm not interesting in capturing LD, just watching it in the highest quality possible. I prefer removable media to hard drives because they always crash. What exactly do you mean about my Dad?


To watch LD in highest quality possible use analog all the way. Done. Except for sound, then it gets more interesting with digital.
Your the one that mentioned the effects your Dad was getting with his setup.????

Number one fallacy. HDD crash. Hogwash. Only time I ever lost an HDD was from misuse.
When protected properly, I've never lost an HDD, and I have many.
But for protection, always have a backup, no excuse.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 17:23 
Young Padawan
Young Padawan
User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2009, 18:05
Posts: 3311
Location: Laguna Beach, CA
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 180 times
After trying,

Entech CVCS-1(Highly acclaimed comb filter), Faroudja NRS (output at 480p), HQV Vida(in Yamaha RX-A3000), DVDO VP30 with ABT102, Composite directly into Pioneer Elite Kuro Pro-141FD Signature Edition (Hand-built limited edition 9.5th gen Plasma monitor) and PMS Crystalio II

I found PMS Crystalio II to be the best processing for Laserdiscs.

My setup is below

McIntosh MLD-7020(CLD-97 clone with factory built RF out) -> Audioquest Hawk Eye with(100%silver with dielectric-bias system circuit) 1m composite cable -> Crystalio II -> Audioquest Chocolate (Silver connectors) 12m Hdmi cable -> Pioneer Elite Kuro Pro-141FD

All of these devices are connected to Panamax M-5300-PM Level IV Power Center with 100+ db EMI/RFI filtering for clean power.

Analog devices need a lot of attention in every step. Digital is not like that. My BD setup is very simple, a $250 Sony BDP-790 in direct mode(no processing) into Receiver then TV.

I would rank Pioneer Kuro processing and Faroudja NRS in number 2 place after Crystalio II.
Kuro has nice 3d comb filter but OK de-interlacing and poor scaling.
Faroudja has OK comb filter, very good de-interlacing(for LD), the best noise reduction for LD. Cleans picture very good with almost no detail loss. I use Faroudja NRS on my DVL-919 which needs noise reduction.
DVDO VP30 with ABT102 has the best de-interlacing in all devices for all sources. No noise reduction, very good scaling, poor comb filter.
HQV Vida has very smooth picture similar to Gennum VXP in Crystalio. Noise reduction blurs image on LD. Yamaha receiver had OK comb filter.

I found the 2D comb filter in Pioneer CLD-97 as good as the 3D comb in Yamaha, 2D in Faroudja, 2D in Entech, 2D in DVDO. Only Pioneer Kuro's 3D comb and Crystalio II's 3D comb filters excelled it.

I have never been able to implement it for LD but I love the picture coming from Marvel's Qdeo chips. Qdeo makes BD/DVDs so smooth and analog like. I know some receivers have Marvel Qdeo for video. But receivers generally do not implement full power of video processing chip.

On limited Budget, I recommend Faroudja NRS(can be found for $100-200) or Receiver with HQV Vida, Marvel Qdeo(Generally at least $500 but comes with Audio)
On Large Budget, I recommend PMS Crystalio II.

As conclusion to above, always remember no matter how much you spend, and/or buy the best equipment, LD picture will look like crap comparing to Blu-Rays or HD-DVDs. With all the money and time I spent to build above setup, my picture is on par with average DVD at best.
_________________
Wanted
HD-VMD Discs
Hi-Vision/Muse Discs Only complete/mint!
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 18:28 
Jedi Master
Jedi Master
User avatar

Joined: 03 May 2004, 19:05
Posts: 7259
Location: Dullaware
Has thanked: 755 times
Been thanked: 514 times
from what i remember in some of jpass's past posts.
you like these players since they are higher end of the time due to elite or machines that are based off of elite.

IF you are getting them for picture quality then you have some great players and just need to keep tweeking the TV, cables etc.

IF you want a better picture quality then i guess you need to go the route of all the others that say players
like the R7G give a more DVD image.
I for one do not agree with the fact that they give a more DVD image but i do feel it's a great top end player
under 1 grand.

but since you have some really good players already you just need to keep tweeking.
also some older discs look better than newer and some newer look better than older.

you have to get a disc that YOU know is a really high end pressing and that was reviewed as a high end pressing.
and then tweek to that, not just video essentials, that will only help you with bars and colors and even sharpness.
but it won't help you with the image that YOU know you like.

so what i'm trying to say is you have to do a setup with video essentials and then you still have to tweek.
one gets you a base line, the other gets the image that YOU want :)
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 30 Mar 2013, 19:54 
User avatar
rein-o wrote:
from what i remember in some of jpass's past posts.
you like these players since they are higher end of the time due to elite or machines that are based off of elite.

IF you are getting them for picture quality then you have some great players and just need to keep tweeking the TV, cables etc.

IF you want a better picture quality then i guess you need to go the route of all the others that say players
like the R7G give a more DVD image.
I for one do not agree with the fact that they give a more DVD image but i do feel it's a great top end player
under 1 grand.

but since you have some really good players already you just need to keep tweeking.
also some older discs look better than newer and some newer look better than older.

you have to get a disc that YOU know is a really high end pressing and that was reviewed as a high end pressing.
and then tweek to that, not just video essentials, that will only help you with bars and colors and even sharpness.
but it won't help you with the image that YOU know you like.

so what i'm trying to say is you have to do a setup with video essentials and then you still have to tweek.
one gets you a base line, the other gets the image that YOU want :)


Well stated rein-o :thumbup:
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 02 Apr 2013, 15:12 
Serious fan
Serious fan
User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2012, 13:21
Posts: 199
Location: United States
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Not to repeat what has already been said, but:

A decent LD player outputting through composite > a DVD recorder with a good comb filter outputting through S-video > calibrated CRT monitor will yield the best PQ results every time.

No amount of snake oil is going to change the fact that you're dealing with low resolution video designed primarily for viewing on a CRT.
_________________
Blu-ray Collection | LaserDisc Collection
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 02 Apr 2013, 18:25 
Young Padawan
Young Padawan
User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38
Posts: 3242
Location: Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 75 times
elviscaprice wrote:
Number one fallacy. HDD crash. Hogwash.

That is not a fallacy. They do crash. Stop spreading lies to support your preference.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 02 Apr 2013, 19:42 
True fan
True fan
User avatar

Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 23:23
Posts: 389
Location: Costa Rica
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
elahrairrah wrote:
elviscaprice wrote:
Number one fallacy. HDD crash. Hogwash.

That is not a fallacy. They do crash. Stop spreading lies to support your preference.


Then let me restate it correctly from the overly presumptive view of constant crash short term.

Just as much as the analog material LD's will all eventually rot, so do the HDD's eventually run the course of their life and crash. What's the point?
Always, always have backup's. Analog and/or digital and you will never lose the material.

8-) Elvis


Last edited by elviscaprice on 02 Apr 2013, 19:47, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Pioneer CLD 95 vs. 97 vs. 99
PostPosted: 02 Apr 2013, 19:47 
Young Padawan
Young Padawan
User avatar

Joined: 30 Aug 2005, 15:38
Posts: 3242
Location: Pennsylvania
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 75 times
elviscaprice wrote:
Then let me restate it correctly from the overly presumptive view of constant crash short term.

Just as much as the analog material LD's will all eventually rot, so do the HDD's eventually run the course of their life and crash. What's the point?
Always, always have backup's. Analog or digital and you will never lose the material.

8-) Elvis

Except I have plenty of LDs that have outlived HDDs.

And don't just "restate" it. You should edit your post since you flat out lie.
Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 2 [ 32 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: