Question about CLDD704 vs LDS9

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Hello members,

I've been looking into buying a high-performance LD player, and have
been looking at S9's, X9's, C2EX's, etc. However, I also plan on
getting a Pioneer SD-533HD5 television set. I've read that the Pioneer
530 series televisions supposedly have the same 3D-Y/C comb filter as
the LDS9 and the HLDX9. Being that an LDS9 is basically a D704/79 with
the 3D/YC comb filter, would it be more cost-effective for me to
simply use a D704/79 through the TVs' comb filter? It won't get X9
results, but if it rivals S9 results, I'd be satisfied. Any comments?

 

[gtaylor]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

The Elite 530 does have the same comb filter has the X9/S9, but the
SD-533 does not. I believe the 533's filter is more in line with the
CLD99. Also, even though the 530 has the same filter as the X9, it
does not provide the same options. On the Elite 530, the comb filter
has 5 levels of adjustment, labled 1 through 5. the X9 has three
different modes, Normal, HR, and C-Wide, and you can indivdually
adjust the Y/C levels. The 530's comb filter does not have these
options. Never the less, it is an awesome comb filter, it is just
that it is tailored towards LD specifically in the X9/S9.

I myself have an Elite 530 and use an Elite CLD79 LD player via
composite into it. The CLD79 is the same player video wise as the CLD
704. I can tell you that this combination gives a great LD image. I
am very impressed with how the Elite 530 handles LD. I hope to pick
up an HLD-X9 within the next two weeks, and I can provide a comparison
between the Elite CLD 79 via composite and the X9 via S-video into the
Elite 530 then.




memnon2@ziplip.com (Chris W.) wrote in message news:<9fecf0b.0405151033.7ce46387@posting.google.com>...
> Hello members,
>
> I've been looking into buying a high-performance LD player, and have
> been looking at S9's, X9's, C2EX's, etc. However, I also plan on
> getting a Pioneer SD-533HD5 television set. I've read that the Pioneer
> 530 series televisions supposedly have the same 3D-Y/C comb filter as
> the LDS9 and the HLDX9. Being that an LDS9 is basically a D704/79 with
> the 3D/YC comb filter, would it be more cost-effective for me to
> simply use a D704/79 through the TVs' comb filter? It won't get X9
> results, but if it rivals S9 results, I'd be satisfied. Any comments?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405151033.7ce46387@posting.google.com...
> I've been looking into buying a high-performance LD player, and have
> been looking at S9's, X9's, C2EX's, etc. However, I also plan on
> getting a Pioneer SD-533HD5 television set. I've read that the Pioneer
> 530 series televisions supposedly have the same 3D-Y/C comb filter as
> the LDS9 and the HLDX9. Being that an LDS9 is basically a D704/79 with
> the 3D/YC comb filter, would it be more cost-effective for me to
> simply use a D704/79 through the TVs' comb filter? It won't get X9
> results, but if it rivals S9 results, I'd be satisfied. Any comments?

If that set does indeed have the same comb filter, using composite
output from a 704 should give you similar results to using S-video with
an S9.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Joshua Zyber" <jzyber@SPAMMERS-DROP-DEAD.mindspring.com> wrote in message news:<dSupc.7661$zO3.2832@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>...
> "Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
> news:9fecf0b.0405151033.7ce46387@posting.google.com...
> > I've been looking into buying a high-performance LD player, and have
> > been looking at S9's, X9's, C2EX's, etc. However, I also plan on
> > getting a Pioneer SD-533HD5 television set. I've read that the Pioneer
> > 530 series televisions supposedly have the same 3D-Y/C comb filter as
> > the LDS9 and the HLDX9. Being that an LDS9 is basically a D704/79 with
> > the 3D/YC comb filter, would it be more cost-effective for me to
> > simply use a D704/79 through the TVs' comb filter? It won't get X9
> > results, but if it rivals S9 results, I'd be satisfied. Any comments?
>
> If that set does indeed have the same comb filter, using composite
> output from a 704 should give you similar results to using S-video with
> an S9.

I don't think you can simply state that S9 = 704 + 3D filter. There
are other design differences, they show in numbers:

Specs: S9 vs 704
video S/N: 52 vs 51
audio S/N: 117 vs 115
weight: 10.2 vs 8.4

The S9 is LD-only while the 704 has a compromised clamp to accomodate
CDs. The S9's aluminium turntable better picks up RF signals (that's
what the Pioneer leaflet says). The S9 can read LD-G. Etc...

Whether the 704 rivals the S9, depends on how you value these
differences.

Nicolas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I have a PRO-530 and I have tested 704's, 97's and X9's on it. While
everyone knows I prefer the 97 on an Analog RPTV the same is not true for a
digital PRTV like the 530. I prefer the X9 with my 530. I prefer the 97
with my 34PW9818 Philips tube HD ready TV.

The best results I have achieved by using the X9's Y/C output into the 530.
The X9's 3D filter is a lot more flexible and I prefer it. I have not had a
S9 here for repair since I purchased the 530 but it does have the same
filter as in the X9 but the S9 has the same smearing issues as the 704. The
X9 corrected that problem.

Kurtis

"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405151033.7ce46387@posting.google.com...
> Hello members,
>
> I've been looking into buying a high-performance LD player, and have
> been looking at S9's, X9's, C2EX's, etc. However, I also plan on
> getting a Pioneer SD-533HD5 television set. I've read that the Pioneer
> 530 series televisions supposedly have the same 3D-Y/C comb filter as
> the LDS9 and the HLDX9. Being that an LDS9 is basically a D704/79 with
> the 3D/YC comb filter, would it be more cost-effective for me to
> simply use a D704/79 through the TVs' comb filter? It won't get X9
> results, but if it rivals S9 results, I'd be satisfied. Any comments?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Kurtis- You stated in another thread that the composite output of a
D704 "will equal the R7, R9, S9 and X9" (I'm assuming you mean equal
to the others' composite output). You're saying that the comb filter
in the set will minimize any major differences between the players?

Guys, ultimately I'm looking for a player under $500, due to the
modest size of my LD collection, but I want to view those discs in the
best video performance possible at that price. I've heard the japanese
Sony Hi-Vision players give extremely high performance at a cheaper
cost than the S9/X9, but I'm wary of getting a player that will be
difficult to repair or get spare parts for.

I've also considered the CLD97 and the Pioneer LDS9, but I'm not
willing to spend $1000 for an LD player. Should I just go ahead and
get a D704? Any more comments will be appreciated.

Kurtis Bahr" <kbahr@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<Yb-dncXvX7nadzvdRVn-vA@comcast.com>...
> I have a PRO-530 and I have tested 704's, 97's and X9's on it. While
> everyone knows I prefer the 97 on an Analog RPTV the same is not true for a
> digital PRTV like the 530. I prefer the X9 with my 530. I prefer the 97
> with my 34PW9818 Philips tube HD ready TV.
>
> The best results I have achieved by using the X9's Y/C output into the 530.
> The X9's 3D filter is a lot more flexible and I prefer it. I have not had a
> S9 here for repair since I purchased the 530 but it does have the same
> filter as in the X9 but the S9 has the same smearing issues as the 704. The
> X9 corrected that problem.
>
> Kurtis
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I have stated in the past that the composite output from these machines is
about equal. The difference is in the quality of the comb filter used for
the S-Video output.

The CLD-D704 should make you plenty happy unless you want the 3D Adaptive
filter in the S9 or X9 but those cost more.

As for Sony, the NTSC picture is grainier than Pioneer units. You are
correct in that you can get the Hi-Vision output cheaper with the Sony but
for NTSC the Pioneer is a better unit.

Kurtis


"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405181237.543ffd7@posting.google.com...
> Kurtis- You stated in another thread that the composite output of a
> D704 "will equal the R7, R9, S9 and X9" (I'm assuming you mean equal
> to the others' composite output). You're saying that the comb filter
> in the set will minimize any major differences between the players?
>
> Guys, ultimately I'm looking for a player under $500, due to the
> modest size of my LD collection, but I want to view those discs in the
> best video performance possible at that price. I've heard the japanese
> Sony Hi-Vision players give extremely high performance at a cheaper
> cost than the S9/X9, but I'm wary of getting a player that will be
> difficult to repair or get spare parts for.
>
> I've also considered the CLD97 and the Pioneer LDS9, but I'm not
> willing to spend $1000 for an LD player. Should I just go ahead and
> get a D704? Any more comments will be appreciated.
>
> Kurtis Bahr" <kbahr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:<Yb-dncXvX7nadzvdRVn-vA@comcast.com>...
> > I have a PRO-530 and I have tested 704's, 97's and X9's on it. While
> > everyone knows I prefer the 97 on an Analog RPTV the same is not true
for a
> > digital PRTV like the 530. I prefer the X9 with my 530. I prefer the
97
> > with my 34PW9818 Philips tube HD ready TV.
> >
> > The best results I have achieved by using the X9's Y/C output into the
530.
> > The X9's 3D filter is a lot more flexible and I prefer it. I have not
had a
> > S9 here for repair since I purchased the 530 but it does have the same
> > filter as in the X9 but the S9 has the same smearing issues as the 704.
The
> > X9 corrected that problem.
> >
> > Kurtis
> >

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405181237.543ffd7@posting.google.com...
> Kurtis- You stated in another thread that the composite output of a
> D704 "will equal the R7, R9, S9 and X9" (I'm assuming you mean equal
> to the others' composite output). You're saying that the comb filter
> in the set will minimize any major differences between the players?

The composite output of those players is inferior to the S-video output
of those players, and is about equal to the D704's composite output. The
D704's S-video output could go either way, depending on how good the
comb filter in your TV is.

> Guys, ultimately I'm looking for a player under $500, due to the
> modest size of my LD collection, but I want to view those discs in the
> best video performance possible at that price. I've heard the japanese
> Sony Hi-Vision players give extremely high performance at a cheaper
> cost than the S9/X9, but I'm wary of getting a player that will be
> difficult to repair or get spare parts for.
>
> I've also considered the CLD97 and the Pioneer LDS9, but I'm not
> willing to spend $1000 for an LD player. Should I just go ahead and
> get a D704? Any more comments will be appreciated.

At under $500, the D704 is your best bet.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Kurtis- What exactly do you do when you 'tweak' a D704?


"Kurtis Bahr" <kbahr@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<9a-dnQviisazWjfdRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
> I have stated in the past that the composite output from these machines is
> about equal. The difference is in the quality of the comb filter used for
> the S-Video output.
>
> The CLD-D704 should make you plenty happy unless you want the 3D Adaptive
> filter in the S9 or X9 but those cost more.
>
> As for Sony, the NTSC picture is grainier than Pioneer units. You are
> correct in that you can get the Hi-Vision output cheaper with the Sony but
> for NTSC the Pioneer is a better unit.
>
> Kurtis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

It is tweaking the servo's so it will not lock or skip up playing CAV and
CLV LD's, plus tweak the tracking angle and tangential angle to achieve
lowest crosstalk which also results in the lower background noise. If your
704 is already at these points I cannot improve it.

Kurtis

"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405191514.1c018c1d@posting.google.com...
> Kurtis- What exactly do you do when you 'tweak' a D704?
>
>
> "Kurtis Bahr" <kbahr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:<9a-dnQviisazWjfdRVn-ig@comcast.com>...
> > I have stated in the past that the composite output from these machines
is
> > about equal. The difference is in the quality of the comb filter used
for
> > the S-Video output.
> >
> > The CLD-D704 should make you plenty happy unless you want the 3D
Adaptive
> > filter in the S9 or X9 but those cost more.
> >
> > As for Sony, the NTSC picture is grainier than Pioneer units. You are
> > correct in that you can get the Hi-Vision output cheaper with the Sony
but
> > for NTSC the Pioneer is a better unit.
> >
> > Kurtis

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Actually I read on Josh Z's site that the LDS9 "is built off the
basics of the CLD-99 but with the addition of an even more advanced
High Resolution 3D Comb Filter", and that a CLD99 is "a CLD-79 with a
sophisticated 3D comb filter.", and that a CLD79 "is an Elite-ized
version of the CLD-D704". So based on those descriptions, I simply
assumed that S9 = 704 + High resolution 3D comb filter. So are those
specs you gave me based on the inherent design itself, or due to
differing filters?


nsa@dk.catv.ne.jp (Nicolas Santini) wrote in message news:<13d89e92.0405151803.1369667e@posting.google.com>...
> I don't think you can simply state that S9 = 704 + 3D filter. There
> are other design differences, they show in numbers:
>
> Specs: S9 vs 704
> video S/N: 52 vs 51
> audio S/N: 117 vs 115
> weight: 10.2 vs 8.4
>
> The S9 is LD-only while the 704 has a compromised clamp to accomodate
> CDs. The S9's aluminium turntable better picks up RF signals (that's
> what the Pioneer leaflet says). The S9 can read LD-G. Etc...
>
> Whether the 704 rivals the S9, depends on how you value these
> differences.
>
> Nicolas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I'd like to hear that, but I expect the X9 to still give better
performance, due to the special laser. I would expect the D704 + Elite
530 to more closely compare to the S9's S-Video output, due to the two
player's design similarities.


gltaylor74@hotmail.com (gtaylor) wrote in message news:<928d927c.0405151746.42a69dfb@posting.google.com>...
> I myself have an Elite 530 and use an Elite CLD79 LD player via
> composite into it. The CLD79 is the same player video wise as the CLD
> 704. I can tell you that this combination gives a great LD image. I
> am very impressed with how the Elite 530 handles LD. I hope to pick
> up an HLD-X9 within the next two weeks, and I can provide a comparison
> between the Elite CLD 79 via composite and the X9 via S-video into the
> Elite 530 then.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

gltaylor74@hotmail.com (gtaylor) wrote in message news:<928d927c.0405151746.42a69dfb@posting.google.com>...
> The Elite 530 does have the same comb filter has the X9/S9, but the
> SD-533 does not. I believe the 533's filter is more in line with the
> CLD99.

It is? Where did you get that information?

> I myself have an Elite 530 and use an Elite CLD79 LD player via
> composite into it. The CLD79 is the same player video wise as the CLD
> 704. I can tell you that this combination gives a great LD image. I
> am very impressed with how the Elite 530 handles LD.

Do you use the set's line doubler with LD movies? If so, how does it
look? And does the set's stretch modes work well with your letterbox
LD's?

 

[gtaylor]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

memnon2@ziplip.com (Chris W.) wrote in message news:<9fecf0b.0405201448.1df081b7@posting.google.com>...
> gltaylor74@hotmail.com (gtaylor) wrote in message news:<928d927c.0405151746.42a69dfb@posting.google.com>...
> > The Elite 530 does have the same comb filter has the X9/S9, but the
> > SD-533 does not. I believe the 533's filter is more in line with the
> > CLD99.
>
> It is? Where did you get that information?

I have no hard proof. However, the Elites comb filter is adjustable
from a range of 1 to 5. The 533 uses settings of off, standard, and
max. That just makes me believe that it may not be the same filter.

The line doublers are also not entirely the same. The new Elites use
the Pure Cinema III line doubler, which has Pure Cinema settings of
Off, Std and HQ and will upconvert 480i to either 480p or 1080i. The
533 uses the pure cinema I and has settings of Off or On. It does not
have the HQ mode. It only converts from 480i to 480p.
>
> > I myself have an Elite 530 and use an Elite CLD79 LD player via
> > composite into it. The CLD79 is the same player video wise as the CLD
> > 704. I can tell you that this combination gives a great LD image. I
> > am very impressed with how the Elite 530 handles LD.
>
> Do you use the set's line doubler with LD movies? If so, how does it
> look? And does the set's stretch modes work well with your letterbox
> LD's?

I think LD look great with the Elite. I do use the Elites line
doubler. Kurtis Bahr above also have an Elite 530 and uses it with his
X9. Kurtis compared the Elites line doubler to the Iscan Ultra with
his X9 has the source, and found no significant improvement in the
Iscan over the Elites. The Elite has the best stretch modes around. I
think they work great. I just purchased an X9 and should have it in a
couple of weeks, and am really curious to see how much of an
improvment it is over the CLD79.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

>
> I have no hard proof. However, the Elites comb filter is adjustable
> from a range of 1 to 5. The 533 uses settings of off, standard, and
> max. That just makes me believe that it may not be the same filter.
>

That's funnny you say that, because I recently read a rumor that the
533's internal structure is based on the Elite 510. I think the Elite
510 had the same comb filter as the CLD99, correct?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

All these are after the CLD-D703 if you want to get picky, the 703 is a 704
without AC-3. The 99 is a 704 with a better 3D Adaptive filter, the 79 has
the optics of the 704 but the digital section is downgraded to the one in
the 604. The S9 gives you a larger clamping surface but you loose CD
playback to get that and the S9 has a much better 3D Adaptive filter than
the 99.

I my opinion the 704 is the best bang for the buck, if you want CD playback
I prefer the CLD-97. If you don't need CD playback, skip over the 99 and
get the S9. Well worth a little more money.

Kurtis

"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405192330.67b0407f@posting.google.com...
> Actually I read on Josh Z's site that the LDS9 "is built off the
> basics of the CLD-99 but with the addition of an even more advanced
> High Resolution 3D Comb Filter", and that a CLD99 is "a CLD-79 with a
> sophisticated 3D comb filter.", and that a CLD79 "is an Elite-ized
> version of the CLD-D704". So based on those descriptions, I simply
> assumed that S9 = 704 + High resolution 3D comb filter. So are those
> specs you gave me based on the inherent design itself, or due to
> differing filters?
>
>
> nsa@dk.catv.ne.jp (Nicolas Santini) wrote in message
news:<13d89e92.0405151803.1369667e@posting.google.com>...
> > I don't think you can simply state that S9 = 704 + 3D filter. There
> > are other design differences, they show in numbers:
> >
> > Specs: S9 vs 704
> > video S/N: 52 vs 51
> > audio S/N: 117 vs 115
> > weight: 10.2 vs 8.4
> >
> > The S9 is LD-only while the 704 has a compromised clamp to accomodate
> > CDs. The S9's aluminium turntable better picks up RF signals (that's
> > what the Pioneer leaflet says). The S9 can read LD-G. Etc...
> >
> > Whether the 704 rivals the S9, depends on how you value these
> > differences.
> >
> > Nicolas

 

[gtaylor]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

memnon2@ziplip.com (Chris W.) wrote in message news:<9fecf0b.0405202147.7290f381@posting.google.com>...
> >
> > I have no hard proof. However, the Elites comb filter is adjustable
> > from a range of 1 to 5. The 533 uses settings of off, standard, and
> > max. That just makes me believe that it may not be the same filter.
> >
>
> That's funnny you say that, because I recently read a rumor that the
> 533's internal structure is based on the Elite 510. I think the Elite
> 510 had the same comb filter as the CLD99, correct?

I'm not sure about that. I think the Elite x10 series had the same
filter has the HLD-X9/LDS9 LD players. If you look at the owners
manual for the X10 Elites which can be downloaded from pioneer's
website, you will see that the comb filter has 5 levels of adjustment,
from a range of 1 to 5. Likewise, the pure cinema line doubler
settings are Off, STD, and HQ. The 533's comb filter has settings of
Off, Std, and MAX. The 533's Pure Cinema uses Off and On. The Elite
x10's used the pure cinema I line doubler, which is supposed to be
what's in the SD-533. If the deinterlacer and comb filter were the
exact same, why did they use different adjustment levels? If it
truely is the same deinterlacer and comb filter in the two sets, then
they took away some of the flexibility and possibly some of the
performance. For example, the 610's pure cinema has HQ mode, whereas
the 533 does not.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

I agree that my 530 is supposed to have the same filter as my X9 and I have
the service manuals for both and will look at it sometime. The big
difference that matters for me is that the X9 allows separate Y and C
adjustments where my 530 lumps them together into a NR adjustment function.
I also figured that by having the X9 do it closer to the source it could be
more noise free.

I tried other RPTV's and picked the 530 as in my opinion it did a better job
with NTSC signals so it's NTSC processing is good.

Kurtis


"Chris W." <memnon2@ziplip.com> wrote in message
news:9fecf0b.0405202147.7290f381@posting.google.com...
> >
> > I have no hard proof. However, the Elites comb filter is adjustable
> > from a range of 1 to 5. The 533 uses settings of off, standard, and
> > max. That just makes me believe that it may not be the same filter.
> >
>
> That's funnny you say that, because I recently read a rumor that the
> 533's internal structure is based on the Elite 510. I think the Elite
> 510 had the same comb filter as the CLD99, correct?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

> I myself have an Elite 530 and use an Elite CLD79 LD player via
> composite into it. The CLD79 is the same player video wise as the CLD
> 704. I can tell you that this combination gives a great LD image

Do you use the stretch modes when watching LDs on that set?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.laserdisc (More info?)

Kurtis Bahr <kbahr@erols.com> wrote in message news:<40bfda08$0$2935$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...
> I'm not home right now, taking care of my Dad, but I use Zoom mode or
> the one right before 4:3 to keep the correct aspect ration.
>
> Kurtis

How does the LD picture look with the zoom modes on? I heard that LD
doesn't look good zoomed on a widescreen set, but I also heard that
the Pioneer sets have the best stretch modes in the business. Also-
I'm the guy that emailed you inquiring about buying a 704 from you.
Email me when you get home and have checked out the 704s.