Is this correct about PS and Plasmas?


Active Member
This from a guy from on one of the newsgroups

"You will be hard pushed to notice the difference between prgressive scan done within the DVD player or within the screen itself. I use a TH-42PWD4 which has progressive scan built in, and my DVD player does not output progressive. Picture quality is absolutely superb and faultless. I've seen the same screen using a pure NTSC progressive signal and could not see any
difference at all."

I am wrestling with the purchase of PAL/NTSC PS DVD for my Panasonic Plasma and this stopped me in my tracks.

Is this correct in anyway :confused:

It's bad enough with all hullabaloo over PS PAL DVD's without this being thrown in.


Distinguished Member
That´s contrary to everything I´ve heard/read. Haven´t seen that particular model in action though so can´t comment on its performance.

As I understood it, the dvd players internal de-interlacers have always outperformed those in TV´s etc.


Well-known Member
I have the British 42" Panasonic model 4, I think the version you refer to is the US model though not too sure.

Anyway, the model is essentially the same and has the same internal deinterlacer, which I was using with my Toshiba SD9000 interlaced output DVD player (Region 1). Within the last couple of weeks I upgraded the DVD player to a Denon 3800 multiregion with PAL-Progressive.

I must admit that the differences between the two players are subtle but they are certainly noticeable. This is especially true when you switch back to interlaced DVD output (and use the Panasonic plasma deinterlacer), after growing used to the output from progressive DVD via the Denon deinterlacer.

One reason, with NTSC material is the lack of 3:2 pulldown in the Panasonic deinterlacer which results in unnatural motion on slow pans. This is the same as when NTSC discs are viewed on a standard CRT via interlaced output. The new Panasonic model 5 includes 3:2 pulldown, but I do not know how it compares with the pulldown on the Denon 3800 which is superb, resulting in vastly smoother, cleaner pans. As I said, this is not something you notice at first, but after getting used to it switching back to the Panasonic deinterlacer is surprisingly bad in this respect.

I also believe that I can see more detail from the Denon when it performs the deinterlacing. This is subjective, but I have tried both and definitely seem to see more texture in the image when the Denon is in progressive mode. I would attribute this to the fact that when the Panasonic is deinterlacing, it can only construct a progressive image from the 480i source image it is fed. When the Denon outputs the 480p image and bypasses the internal deinterlacer on the plasma I believe you are extracting a more pure 'source' from the disc as there is no need to interlace/deinterlace the image. This is purely my speculation but as I said, I can definitely see a more detailed image from the Denon 480p image.

Well, that's my opinion from a couple of weeks testing, for what it's worth...

PS. I forgot to mention that I also had lipsync issues when using the Panasonic internal deinterlacer, as it does not seem to allow for processing time to build the progressive image before it outputs the audio. The Denon 3800 and most progressive DVD players have this delay built-in to help remedy this issue. I haven't seen a lipsync problem while using the Denon in progressive mode.


By using information read on the (as the Americans got the plasmas first) it is clear that a decent external processor is best. Having one eases just what it is that the unit has to do and this workload reduction results in better output.
You'll have no doubt noted, Sharper, that a big question of late has been whether the Philips will have a Faroujda chip to do the PS, which is a top question asked by the Yanks with regard to dvd players and HD set-top boxes to input to their plasmas. Were this not the case then why would shed loads of Yanks be hunting for dvd players with top PS chips?:) ;)


Active Member
Thanks all

Would you, encaser, put the Philips 963 at the top of the list even over the Dennon due to the chip set?
CarlB made me think twice about the Dennon on "differences between the two players are subtle " comment between his Tosh and his 3800 costing around £1k. For the money I would want to see a marked improvement to my picture which is very good on my Pioneer 525 RGB output through my Panasonic 42" plasma 4 black.

My short list is (in no specific order)
1. HK25
2. Phillips 963
3. and save some moor pennies for the Dennon 3800
4. or wait.


Well-known Member
Don't forget that my Tosh 9000 was also a 1K player in its day and still offers one of the best interlaced pictures around. It's not like I'm comparing the Denon with my Panasonic A110, where the difference is much greater...


Active Member
Very true CarlB and noted. I'm just trying to get an idea of where my now limited funds will be best spent.

I would love to find a dealer where I could audition these different machines at home before buying.

Denon 3800
Philips 963 if pal ps
Arcam 88+

This would give me an idea of the differing qualities both for audio and video as I'm looking to get machine for audio CDs as well as my poor old CD player is 10+ years old.

The latest video from AVForums

Samsung QN800B 8K TV Review
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom