Video Scalers and Audio Delay Settings

[dalethecaptain]

Im not sure if this is the right place to post this, but I am looking at using a Crystalio VPS3300 in my new AV install, but I am looking for advice regarding the audio delay settings within the Scaler unit.

I would like to know the best (or optimum) way to avoid sync problems with audio/video, is it best to allow the Scaler to handle the video and audio separation and set up the delay offsets in the scaler unit, or should I take the audio directly from the sources to the Pre/Pro (in this case an Arcam AV9) and adjust the offsets (if any) here?

The Crystalio manual recommends doing it with the VPS330, but Arcam also reckon that there sync feature is better, and owing to the fact that these two bits of kit will unfortunately be in different locations in my install, I can't really afford to suck it and see as I need to set the cabling up in advance.

I have three HD sources and a single SD (Sky +) source to route through the VPS3300, and any hints and tips greatly appreciated.

[RobertPaulson]

Unfortunately, the only way to know for sure is to get all your equipment in place and wired up and take it from there. The main problem I find is that the delay can differ between sources. Although I am selling my equipment now, I used the following settings on the Amp.... PS3 - 20ms, HD-DVD - 40ms, Sky HD - 80ms and the DVD Player seemed to vary depending on the disc and could be anything from 60ms to 180ms.

The AV9 gives you the option of saving presets, so if you aren't using these for anything else, you can use one preset for each source if they need varying audio delays. If the Crystalio doesn't have presets I would use the AV9 to set the audio delay, if it does I would choose whichever one has more presets just to be on the safe side.

[dalethecaptain]

Thanks for that. I'm assuming that you have a video scaler handling all the video switching, with audio only routed through the AV9?

It was suggested to me that I put the scaler after the AV9 (?) before the display to save on HDMi cabling etc, and rely on the AV9 to perform the video and audio switching, and just have the scaler doing the signal processing, but I am not sure if this is an accepted method of interconnection.

Does extra switching in this way (as in using a Pre/Pro to switch everything before) add to signal degradation, or is performing video input switching at the scaler the preferred standard?

[RobertPaulson]

Yes, that is how I had it set up. I replaced the AV9 and P7 with a Yamaha DSP-Z11 which changed everything.

If you want to simply press one button to select picture and sound, plug everything into the AV9 and then out to the scaler, you shouldn't get any noticeable signal degredation. If at some point you change the AV9 to something that accepts sound over HDMI, the config will be pretty much the same. There are other options to consider in future, but it all depends the equipment you will be using, so you can always get more advice when you come to change anything.

[dalethecaptain]

Thanks for that, that info has just simplified my whole set up and saved me having to re-draw the plans, again.

Beers for that man!

[hornydragon]

I would drop piers@homecinemaengineering.com a line as he uses Lumagen Radiance and Arcam combo you are considering and is also an ISF and HAA acredited calibrator. SO interms of optimum set up he is the man to speak to, he also uses the Audessey Active EQ unit with applies real time filtering to correct for room accoustics issues.

[RobertPaulson]

I have been wondering about ISF calibration. I know what it is supposed to do and I would totally agree with it, if DVD, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, Sky and other sources were all the same in terms of brightness, contrast and colour. Unfortunately, in real life they are all different. I just don't see how one setting can cover everything. It's impossible. I have seen a massive difference from one DVD to the next, in both picture and sound. I don't have any experience of ISF calibration, but I know what I like to see and hear and I make the necessary changes to acheive the desired results. Even if ISF had setting for each source it still doesn't cover variations between one disc to the next, or one program to the next. I would question the whole theory behind ISF calibration on the strength of that. But like I said I have no experience of it, but my logic tells me that it is impossible to calibrate a system to the optimal settings when there is a big difference in the source material. Just my opinion.

[RobertPaulson]

Originally Posted by dalethecaptain

Thanks for that, that info has just simplified my whole set up and saved me having to re-draw the plans, again.

Beers for that man!

Believe me, my initial response was way longer. But I even started to confuse myself. That is how much there could be to consider in the long run. So, I decided to simplify what I had to say and tried to keep it relevant to what you want to do right now. Also, I would certainly recommend the Audessey EQ Pro to go between your AV9 and P7, it seriously does work wonders.

[hornydragon]

Originally Posted by RobertPaulson

I would question the whole theory behind ISF calibration on the strength of that. But like I said I have no experience of it, but my logic tells me that it is impossible to calibrate a system to the optimal settings when there is a big difference in the source material. Just my opinion.

Obviously you cannot level all variables, but what ISF can do is remove the cause of the issue by setting each source up optimally and by setting the display for the best perfermonace if you get a poor picture or image issue syou know who to blame (the studio or broadcaster) Its far more than the level of brightness and basic settings but accuarte greyscale tracking accuarte colour reproduction which are most significant.

I think your logic is flawed as the point is not to make everything look the same, but to make it look as the director intended, you may not like it but thats how its supposed to look. Adding a VP and calibration also imporves many other areas of performance and can acheive results that arent possible without the many thousands of pounds worth of test and measurement equipment and more importantly the many many hours of experience.

[RobertPaulson]

Originally Posted by hornydragon

I think your logic is flawed as the point is not to make everything look the same, but to make it look as the director intended, you may not like it but thats how its supposed to look.

I never said that I want everything to look the same, as I totally agree that we should see it how the director intended, that is the whole point. The problem is, when you watch a movie that has been released by Universal (for example) and then after that you watch a movie released by a different studio, you find that there is no continuity in the settings. It would be nice if there was a set standard that all studios had to conform to. At least that way, when a director wants a movie to have more contrast or a ceratin colour tint to the picture, we actually get to see it.

[dalethecaptain]

Thanks again for that guys.

I had already considered the Audyssey, but ruled it out because my current room is small (4.5x4.5x2.8m) and it has the staircase opening on to it, and with the new house at least 12-18 months away it may be hard to justify, but I will most certainly contact home cinema engineering and get more advice/demo.

Hornydragon - I agree regarding the ISF calibration and I had already budgeted for this. A few years ago at an expo in Vegas I happened to see a movie shown on a calibrated display and I could not believe how vivid the colouring was and the clarity and crispness of the black and white images. The benefits of viewing movies in this way far out ways the downsides of having to deal with the occasionally badly filmed and produced documentary on Sky.

[hornydragon]

Audessey is a benefit regardless of room size in rooms where you cant dictate the dimensions and apply treatments. in a smaller room where the dimensions mean that higher frequencies can be an issue then well worth auditioning the audessey IMO

[Liam @ Prog AV]

Switching video sources in the AVP and then on to the video processor is a bad idea. The video processor only sees a single input, so without massively complicated profiling you will only have one set of overscan settings which all your inputs must use, one set of contrast and brightness adjustment, one colour saturation setting, one gamma profile, and one bash at colour management. This is not one because a large part of the video processor is to be able to adjust for all the different/varying outputs of the different sources and then bring them all into line. With ISF calibration this is pretty much a requirement.

Personally I would want video to VP and audio to AVP to save risk of further loss over extra connections in the signal line. It also gives you the option to turn off the video signal chain entirely while listening to audio, or to view a video source but listen to a different audio source.

[hornydragon]

Originally Posted by RobertPaulson

It would be nice if there was a set standard that all studios had to conform to. At least that way, when a director wants a movie to have more contrast or a ceratin colour tint to the picture, we actually get to see it.

Well there are standards lots of them in fact, it cant stop a crap release in terms of quality or content. no one can force the studios in better quality releases and pressings but ISF does make a big difference and at least you know the equipment is performing at its optimum. I agree with Laim about the arrangement of VP and AVR its gets complicated by HDMI as this carries HD audio and video but as the Arcam doesnt have HD audio over HDMI not an issue at the moment as you will ned to feed audio direct to the AVR fromt he source and video to VP to gain the most benefit. YOu say they are going toi be in different locations. If would question this decision on both practicality and quality grounds

[dalethecaptain]

I had planned to let that Crystalio do the video switching, and looking at Liam's comments I now fully understand why this is the best method of inter-connection.

The reason the components were going to be in different places was because I only have a 20U rack in the cupboard and its all ready full, so I was going to put some kit on an AV stand. Common sense has prevailed and I have decided to move everything to different location where I can get in a full size 42U rack. Problem Solved.

Thanks again for all the comments.