Laserdisc info

[jhawk92]

I have an opportunity to get a Pioneer CLD-3080 laserdisc player that's in great shape. I don't know much about LD players, so how do they compare in quality to DVD? I know this player does not have AC-3 output, but can be modded to pass DD/DTS signals to my receiver via optical digital cable. I also know they are not releasing new movies on LD, but that there are a number of older titles available. So, while this could be called a medium with no future, for a very good player at a nice price, is it worth checking out? Thanks.

[Cal Blacksmith]

I might be able to scrape up an old beta tape player for you also if you are intending to start a museum

[jhawk92]

Nah, not into starting a museum, but thanks for the offer.

[gcoker]

Just because a player has optical output does not always

let DD through. I had a Sony Directv receiver with optical

and DD wwould not pass through. I would pass on the Laser

Disk Player. From what I remember the PQ is not as good as

Progressive DVD.

[sfogg]

LD quality wise are different then DVD. The video on a LD is analog in nature so it will tend to have more video noise and not quite as high of a resolution. They can still give a very very good picture though and since it is analog there are no compression artifacts like what can happen on DVD. Sound quality wise LDs have a digital audio track and two analog audio tracks. The digital track can carry PCM or DTS though there aren't many DTS LDs. The analog tracks will either carry L/R analog (sometimes used for commentaries) or a few carry AC-3 data on one analog track and the other is used as a mono audio track.

I think the 3080 was a double side play machine which is nice in a LD player as it will lower the number of times you need to get up to flip the disc. For some movies you will still need to get up to change the disc though of course.

The only thing I'm not sure of is if this supports digital audio on LDs. I'd guess that it would since it is a double side machine but you will want to confirm that. Otherwise you will be stuck with the analog tracks only which on some LDs are commentary tracks or even a single mono track as the other analog track will hold AC-3 data.

Can't say anything about its video quality as I haven't seen this one.

The big thing to know is how much it costs?

I've seen Pioneer 504s go for under $100 and that is a better machine. Dual side play with an AC-3 output. About the only thing it lacks is a digital audio out but it does still support the PCM tracks on a LD player.

Or if you can find one cheap enough a 704 will have you totally covered.

Keep in mind if you want to listen to AC-3 you still need another piece of hardware in the form of an AC-3 demodulator if your receiver/processor doesn't have an AC-3 RF input.

The big question of course is how many movies are you expecting to pick up vs. how much do you want to pay for a player.

Shawn

[sfogg]

"Just because a player has optical output does not always let DD through."

On a LD player the DD track *never* was passed out an optical digital connector. DTS OTOH was.

To maintain backwards compatability with existing players/systems the DD/AC-3 track was encoded on one of LDs analog tracks.

That way those that didn't have AC-3 could still listen to the LDs PCM tracks at full quality. For those that had AC-3 compatible systems they had the option of using the AC-3 track.

The only people that lost out on this were those with really old LD players that only had analog audio playback ability. For them they had to listen to AC-3 LDs in mono.

On the flip side those that didn't have DTS playback only could listen to the analog tracks on DTS LDs. As such DTS titles tended to be dual inventory.

The AC-3 data on a LD was spit out a special output in a RF modulated format. They player would have a AC-3 RF output on it.

That needed to go either to a AC-3 RF input on a receiver/processor or to an external AC-3 demodulator. The demodulator took the RF signal and converted it to a normal AC-3/DD digital signal just like what comes out of a DVD player.

Shawn

[edwardre]

I tried the LD scene about a year and a half ago. Found it to be noisy and hot, with resolution a distant second to DVD's. Not worth the bother considering how far along DVD's have come, IMHO. Now I have 2 Pioneer LD players under the house collecting dust.

[jhawk92]

Shawn-

You are correct, the 3080 is a double side play machine, but for a number of movies, it would still require getting up to swap discs. From what I understand, it does support digital audio, but would need the AC-3 demodulator, or some sort of parts kit to mod the machine. Realistically, I would rather get DVDs than LD, but there may be a few LD movies that don't come out on DVD, or not in the format I would like; ala Star Wars Trilogy. I'd prefer to have the Original Edition vs. Special Edition that will be coming this fall on DVD. But to spend $$ for a format with only a few titles does seem a bit silly.

Ed-

Pretty telling story there. Sounds like this may be one to pass on.

Any other thoughts from the forum?

[chambers1517]

I have a front projector with a 100 inch screen. A friend brought over a LD player to try it and the picture was terrible. Not much different than vhs.

[TBrennan]

LD looks much better than VHS but not as good as later era DVD. However LD did look better than early generations of DVD players.

As such LD is still the best way to watch lots of important pictures that haven't been released on DVD: Boystown, Angels with Dirty Faces, Our Daily Bread, The Sea Hawk, Northwest Passage, Young Mr. Lincoln, Taras Bulba, White Heat, Sargeant Rutledge, Seven Women, The Drum, Captain from Castile and on and on.

I would think that anyone serious about watching good pictures would have a LD machine, it's still that essential.

[dantfmly]

----------------

On 6/23/2004 1:44:10 AM TBrennan wrote:

LD looks much better than VHS but not as good as later era DVD. However LD did look better than early generations of DVD players.

As such LD is still the best way to watch lots of important pictures that haven't been released on DVD: Boystown, Angels with Dirty Faces, Our Daily Bread, The Sea Hawk, Northwest Passage, Young Mr. Lincoln, Taras Bulba, White Heat, Sargeant Rutledge, Seven Women, The Drum, Captain from Castile and on and on.

I would think that anyone serious about watching good pictures would have a LD machine, it's still that essential.

----------------

I differ in Opinion about the LD being better then the first DVD players. LD is much better then VHS in both video and sound, but does not even touch DVD, Even the first run at DVD. I would know because my DVD/LD player is a the first run of DVD players (boy i really need to catch up with the times). I don't think a laserdisc player is essential anymore, unless you are tring to get copies of movies that are not out on DVD. LD is much better then VHS.

[edwardre]

Tom - you are of course correct regarding the numerous classics 'as yet to be released on DVD', hence the necessity to own a LD player. But you'd have to be a really serious movie buff.....IMHO....to put up with the drawbacks of LD in general. I thought I was really serious, that's why I got one and went to the trouble of setup etc.....but I found I wasn't as serious as I thought as the LD sat unused for a long time before being disconnected and tossed into storage. I found the pq to be 'grainey' in general, of course some flicks were worse than others...largely dependent upon the transfer. Another kind of weird thing was that there seemed to be greater equivelent of sonic 'dynamic range' in the picture....like the whites were ultra white and the blacks were....ultra black....did you get this impression at all?

BTW - I noticed that there were some negative comments directed at you Tom in another thread. From my perspective I cannot disagree more. You have been extremely helpful throughout the past few years both here and on AA. You contributions to this and other forums have been tremendous. Thank you very much.

[ygmn]

NOT WORTH IT....

I own one....have had it for over 10 years....I have about 40 LD....

The quality is not up to par with DVD...it is ahead of VHS...they can be found on EBAY...and sell cheap...cause no one wants them.....

The picture quality is consistant...but at best is a bit better then the best VHS tape you can watch....SOUND...STINKS....technology was not around for DD5.1...so they are all Pro Logic...

My advice...is to buy a DVD player....But I bet you have one already...if so....spend this money on DVDs.....you will be happier....

Now if you must buy one...I will make you a hell of a deal...

And mine you do not have to get up to flip LD....as it will play both sides...automatically....it will also play CDs.....

Pioneer model # CLD-D501....

[sfogg]

"...technology was not around for DD5.1...so they are all Pro Logic..."

The first available commercial movies that had DD soundtracks were on laser disc. Back then Dolby called the format AC-3.... and later renamed it to Dolby Digital.

Dolby Surround encoded soundtracks were of course far more common. Dolby Pro Logic II (or IIx) or Logic 7 can do wonderful things for Dolby Surround encoded material. Which is of course handy since many older movies on DVDs only have two channel soundtracks as well.

Shawn

[SteelerFan]

I'm with ygmn, I don't think it's worth it. Yes it's a better picture than VHS, but there are still lots of artifacts in it.

I have the Pioneer CLD-3090, a $1200 player and always had trouble with it. I just use it to play CD's in my 2ch system now. When I gave my parents their first DVD player they gave me their Pioneer CLD-990. I used it for awhile before it quit recognizing when it had a disc in it. Lucky for me I only ever bought a few discs.

So I'd a say unless you already have a fairly large library of laserdiscs, you are better off spending money elsewhere.

[TBrennan]

Ed--Thanks for the kind words.

Yes, DVD has a better picture now than LD but LD is far superior to tape. I remember when people were wowed by the picture quality of LD compared to tape. Hell, I remember when I was wowed, like when the first letter-boxed version of The Searchers came out.

Anyway the pictures that I need to watch on LD are very important to me and most are certainly important pictures. How can anyone get by without White Heat?

"A copper, how da ya like that boys, a copper. And we went for it, I went for it, treated him like a kid brother. And I was gonna split 50-50 with a copper."

Jeez, stuff like that is worth a hundred modern, bombastic, surround-sound action movies.

Or to see the young Elizebeth Taylor peeking over her veil from behind a curton at Robert Taylor in Ivanhoe, MY GOD, was she fine.

I maintain that LD can have sound at least as good as DVD and often does. There are technical reasons why but I'm sure you know them Ed.

[erdric]

Hey Rob,

I picked up a Pioneer Elite CLD-59 about 2 years ago. I got it for one reason and one reason only, I wanted the original Theatrical versions of the Star Wars Trilogy. That was enough for me. I've also picked up the theatrical version of Last of the Mohicans and THX1138, which was not available on DVD at the time.

I've only watched the LD's three times since picking the player up (yes, Star Wars) because I find it annoying to have to change discs. At least the player flips side to side. Once I have a DVD recorder I'll be transfering the SW LD's to DVD-R and I'll never pull out the laserdiscs again.

So, IMO, if you want the theatricals of Star Wars in a much better format than VHS then get yourself a LD player. If not, I'd pass and save yourself some time and money.

[texas42]

I have a Pioneer CLD-D750 (plays both sides) and about 100 LDs (give or take a few) I'll let go for cheap if anyone is interested.

[jhawk92]

Steeler-

Yeah, no laser discs at all in the library, so this would be a one trick pony, or maybe 2-3 tricks if there are some good LD deals. But I think for the money, I'll go a different route. Thanks for everyone's advice.

Rob

[J.4knee]

I still use my LD for the same reasons mentioned above.