<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.0.9">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Im thinking about getting the HDTV card, but haven't yet. The normal TV signal is what is twice as sharp. I have the cable box piped to both the set and Myth - and Myth has the S-Video while the TV has the RCA jack... On the good side - I just won an xbox on ebay - aparently you can get the HDTV resoloutions from the it (1280x720;720p) - it was just released.... Now I just need the pcHDTV card, heh...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 21:55, Joseph A. Caputo wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<PRE><FONT COLOR="#737373"><I>Top-posting rearranged.
On Thursday 08 January 2004 10:31, Curtis Wood wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 17:58, Joseph A. Caputo wrote:
> > On Wednesday 07 January 2004 23:06, Yuri wrote:
> > > Hmm, could you please explain the difference?
> > >
> > > Encoding would be from video to digital (hdd) or the other way
> > > around?
> >
> > Both the 250 & 350 do hardware encoding (i.e., converting the input
> > TV signal to MPEG1/2 so that it takes up less disk space).
> >
> > Only the 350 does hardware decoding (converting the MPEG1/2 data
> > back to raw video for viewing on a monitor or TV).
> >
> > Only the 350 has an integrated TV-out (output of the decoded stream
> > to TV). Other solutions require a separate TV-out method (video
> > card with integrated TV-out, external VGA scan converter, etc).
> > However, note that the quality of the picture on the 350's TV-out
> > is reportedly far better than anything you'll get from any consumer
> > grade video card or VGA scan converter; I hear it's about on par
> > with standalone A/V equipment.
> >
> > Think:
> >
> > encode::decode as compress::uncompress
> >
> > -JAC
> >
> On the quality of the 350's tv out... How would it compare to an
> AT8500 -> connected to a 57" hitachi hdtv (widescreen) via DVI
> (720x480)? The only thing that sux about this setup is that the
> sharpness can be a big factor, and its at least 2x less sharp through
> a 250... Also since Im asking - I have a Sb Audigy (v1), but cant get
> to the AC3 pass through goodies, because I can only use the audio
> from the encoded stream - does anyone know a way around this? Would
> the 350 be anybetter?
>
Well, first off I've never actually *seen* a PVR-350; just going by
other people's reports. I'd imagine if you have an HDTV with DVI-in,
then the best quality would be via DVI-out if you have it; however,
you're still bound by the quality of your incoming signal + your codec
parameters. When you say it's "2x less sharp through a 250", compared
to what? Live television tuned through your HDTV? Well, that would
make sense since the 250/350 is not an HDTV tuner, so you're capturing
at standard NTSC resolution (SVHS quality, at best). If you have an
HDTV set, you might want to consider a pcHDTV card, which has hardware
compression & can receive HDTV stream over the air. Check elsewhere
for the availability of cards that can receive HDTV over cable; I don't
think there are any available in the U.S. Also, keep in mind that your
CPU requirements will go up if you want to decode & play full
HDTV-resolution streams (the pcHDTV will encode, but not decode AFAIK).
The PVR-350 won't help in the decoding for that, because AFAIK it will
only decode up to DVD-resolution (720x480 or whatever).
-JAC
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users@mythtv.org</FONT>
<A HREF="http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users"><U>http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users</U></A>
<FONT COLOR="#737373">
</I></FONT></PRE>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
</BODY>
</HTML>