I'm very interested in this technology but I'm curious why they provide NTSC color ratings when most people are interested in HD (ATSC) on these things.

The problem with the transmitters is that they tend to default to 88.1 or another low frequency, which is where the public radio stations reside. The type of person that listens to classical music isn't going to appreciate Howard Stern's swearing. :)

I really like the idea of making cable companies use Cablecards in their own equipment. If the cable companies had needed Cablecard 2.0 released in order to make money on pay-per-views or offer VOD then it would have been released many years ago!

>they don't realize their $400 power cable is fed by 10
>cent a foot power cables in the wall.

Quite a few audiophiles plug the expensive cables into expensive line conditioners/regenerators. The cabling inside the conditioners costs more than .10 per foot.

I personally use a regenerating computer UPS and standard cables, a poor-man's version but the same philosophy. There is AC line noise in my area which makes A/B comparisons pretty obvious.

@Leslie -- thanks for a good post.

I recently switched from a DVR to a Cablecard because it was $10/month vs free. Comcast's DVR option is garbage compared to Tivo due to the poor quality of their guide data--season recordings of shows always result in missed new shows and repeats of mislabeled old shows. It makes the box unusable when compared to a Tivo. What blows my mind is that Comcast announced that they were going to install Tivo software on a Comcast DVR 'sometime soon' and I've been waiting a year now. If Tivo series 3 is released before Comcast gets a clue then there's no question what I'll be buying in the near future.

I will definitely be buying an high def player at some point (I'm assuming that Blu-ray will win), but I will not buy a first generation player. My current player (a high-end Denon) plays almost every disc format including DVD-A and SACD. Why would I pay $1k for a video-only player? I'll wait for the second generation models.

I've previously owned Arcam gear and although I had far too many service issues with it, the gear is of premium quality and quite a value when it comes to hi-end. I have moved to a Denon 3910 and am happy with the decision, but Arcam is worth the money if you can afford it.

Jason, that particular set only accepts 1080i input but it converts it to 1080P when it displays it. Sets that actually accept 1080P input are in the following generation.

I have an E50A10, probably the same set as your friend and it is a really good value.

I've own a couple higher-end DVD players. One is the Arcam DV89 and the other is the Denon 3910--they cost me $2k and $1k, respectively. My opinion is that the Denon is at the sweet spot in the cost/value equation. If you aren't finicky enough to have your display ISF calibrated then you probably won't be picky enough to appreciate the quality of even a $1k player.

The specs specifically state that the unit is only capable of 480P resolution. That isn't to say that downconverting HDTV to 480P won't look good--the quality of a good DVD is nothing to sneeze at. It isn't, however, HDTV....it's EDTV.