Pioneer 520 vs 531

[strongbad]

520 image at XP using Svideo Memory1 with no filters adjusted


531 image at XP using Svideo Memory1 with no filters adjusted


verdict? 531/533/633 is junk

[FulciLives]

The 531 does tend to soften the pic a bit but this should help eliminate some MPEG artifacts while encoding ... this is actually a good thing especially with video that is not pristine.

I don't see why this slight softening bothers everyone so much. It has come up in other threads. No one seems to comment on the follow when I say it:

I'd rather have a slightly soft image with less MPEG aritfacts than a sharper image with MPEG artifacts.

I'm very happy with my 531 as it allows me to record many TV shows without the need to capture first then do a software MPEG encode (which is generally less than real time).

Hell most of my digital cable channels look like hell with MPEG artifacts already there from the get go ... the softening the 531 does is a blessing!

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[strongbad]

There are no mpeg artifacts on the 520 at XP. Looking at those two images, theres a very HUGE difference in clarity, sharpness, and good color reproduction. I don't think it's a tad soft, I actually think it looks horrible. It is very blurred, too bright. Where's the detail, and deep rich colors? It looks like an LP image.

[trhouse]

I am not sure this is a fair comparison. The two images are different with different lighting. If you look at the lighting in the background to the left of "Cotto", there is a lot more illumination in the image featuring "Torres" on the right.

[edit]also there are four Klieg lights on to the right of Torres and none in the other image.

[mike1061]

I don't think this is fair. I think you have the same image on both/all units for an acurate comparison.
Everything should be the same, same cables, same everything.

When you use differant broadcasts, you are open to different broadcast quality. Who is to say you had the same reception clarity on both nights.
CATV can have differant levels of interferance on differant nights.
Thanks Mike

[ann coates]

I've been hoping someone might do a direct comparison of the 531 to the 520 PQ, thanks strongbad. I've used both machines as well and I'm actually very satisfied with the 531. The text in that second image does look surprisingly soft/blurred. I've never experienced text that soft with my 531 in XP mode.

[Sam Ontario]

I have the 531H, Daytek-P30 and ILO R04. Picture qualities from P30 and R04 are way better (clarity and sharpness) than 531H at any comparable recording settings.

[gshelley61]

trhouse and I have been posting test results of a variety of machines (Pioneer 531/533, Pioneer 320/520, Lite-On 5006, Lite-On 5007, JVC DR-M10, Toshiba D-R4, Panasonic DMR-ES10, etc.) here:

https://www.videohelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1374060&highlight=#1374060

The LSI based machines (JVC, Lite-On) have the sharpest and most detailed DV to DVD transfer picture, with the s-video recordings looking very good as well. The Toshiba and Panasonic machines do pretty well with their s-video inputs, too. The Pioneer 520/320 also has a sharp and detailed image via DV or s-video input, although there is some faint edge ghosting visible in these encodes. The 531/533 have a softer picture when comparing the THX multi-purpose text pattern, but this is not as noticeable with actual film content.

There is still no perfect DVD recorder. Pioneer units easily have the best and most useful analog video input picture adjustments, but could use a better encoder. JVC and Lite-On (and the Lite-On clones like Daytek, Gateway, ilo, etc.) have probably the best encoding quality, but no user adjustable picture controls (especially no black level adjustment). The JVC has the best direct DV to DVD encode quality of the bunch.

The Panasonic looks OK, but uses a 704x480 frame size that crops 8 pixels on the left and right frame edges. The Toshiba is decent, with pretty good encode quality, and they finally added a black level adjustment on the input side.

More units are to be tested as time goes on.

[OldeMan]

There is still no perfect DVD recorder. Pioneer units easily have the best and most useful analog video input picture adjustments, but could use a better encoder. JVC and Lite-On (and the Lite-On clones like Daytek, Gateway, ilo, etc.) have probably the best encoding quality, but no user adjustable picture controls (especially no black level adjustment).

I agree with gshellly61 on this. I've tried a fair number of different DVD recorders and currently own Philips DVDR77, Panasonic ES10 and a Pioneer 531. Among the recorders I have owned was a Pioneer 225(220) and a Sony GX300. The Sony under some conditions had a slightly better recorded picture quality than the Pioneer 531, but it was basically unusable for my intended purposes. If, I'm not mistaken the Pioneer 220-520 series Pioneers does not not have a input gamma adjustment like the Pioneer 53X series does. This is a crtical adjustment for my particular digital cable system and setup.
Picture sharpness is only one of many factors in determining the overal usability of a DVD recorder. I'm pretty happy with the results I'm getting from the Pioneer 531, but it's definately not perfect. The Toshiiba 34 has more features but I haven't tried one yet.

I'd like to hear more about the new Toshiba(s)... 8)

[Frobozz]

I have the Pioneer DVR-510H-S which has the same encoder as the 520. When Pioneer announced it was putting a new and improved encoder in the 53x/63x series I was very interested. But their promotions kept emphasizing the longer potential recording times. I notice that it also allows lower bit rates at full 720x480 resolution than does my 510. So, based on the examples shown at the top, I'm making a wild guess that the new encoder is designed to improve picture quality in the 2+ hour recording modes rather than to have the best possible picture quality at the XP mode. Again, I'm only surmising this because I have nothing of evidence to back this up.

In any case, I've decided to stay with my 510 for at least another year.