I Just Don't Get Video


At this years CES, I was able to catch the Faroudja demo, which some of you may have also seen.

I rarely watch television and dont get too excited about video, but I must say it looked AMAZING -- a scene from a recent (?) movie showing a high school drum corp competition or something.

Because I am clueless about video, I felt a bit like the audio neophyte that may like what he hears but just has no idea what he is listening to or where or how to attribute the quality or critique various aspects of the sound.

From what little I now understand, that demo used Faroudja's new DLP front projector ($12,500?) and a combination DVD player and video processor that I think is about another $10,000. Didnt ask about the screen but I imagine it costs more than a bedsheet as well.

Unfortunately, 12,500 is a bit more than I want to spend on the projector and my wife is lobbying for a 50" flat plasma screen at the foot of the bed.

Therefore, could someone please explain video processors and how they would impact my watching Time Warner Cable in HD in New York City?

Would a processor dramatically enhance the occasional DVD on my Sony 9000 ES?

Would it make sense to invest in a processor even if I went with a more ordinary and less expensive -- albeit HD - display device?

Or -- extra credit !! -- is there a bargain out there for last years model where I can get 90% of Faroudja's demo for < 50% of the price?

Thanks
cwlondon
I have a Sanyo plv-z1 projector - cheap and cheerful, but beats any Plasma I have seen hands down at a fraction of the price. Getting all carried away I tried a number of processors and either saw no meaningful improvement or a degraded picture. One of the problems is that the Sanyo already has an ok scaler, and adding more stages of A to D and D to A is hardly beneficial. Mine was only one experience, but I have heard some experts say that processors were sensible for the old CRT projectors but do not make much sense with today's digital projectors.
That's right these scalers inverters and such are for making your lazer discs/vhs tapes and interlaced dvd players and the like;look much better on your projector. i.e.480i material.Many have odd rez for Pal.Many of the projectors up convert prog. dvd to 720. (mine does)Which is about as good as can be had, without a computer program card.I have a dvi in,but no supporting player. The early dvi players are a mess./compatibility issues. The D1 and 931. Others are comming out. Then ya got 2 types of dvi inputs. Reminds me of when Quad sound came out in the '70s. This cart. would only work with Columbia/RCA or what ever incompatibility it was.
I've been thinking about this thread and another thought comes to mind:

THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS for a super high end device from one of the tweakiest manufacturers to make "vhs" "look much better" but seems out of place and/or redundant with other state of the art video gear?

I still don't get video?!?!
Videophiles can be a lot like audiophile...IT'S THE GEAR, not the movie. A little time spent at the avsfourm will find the two hobbie's both drive some people to excess and plenty of manufacturers to fill all needs.

Dave
Dave

I take your point about obsessing over the gear and overpriced incremental improvements, but to me, this example is not an apples to apples comparison.

To complete the audio metaphor, this seems more like Faroudja marketing a state of the art, up to the minute latest generation, wildly expensive signal processing device that made cassette tapes sound quite good, but really didnt make clearly discernible improvements to high end analogue or a well recorded SACD.

What self respecting audiophile would buy that?! Remember DBX signal processing devices in the 70's? Readers of Stereo Review, not TAS bought them.

Or am I missing something? I still dont get video.