Progressive scan question

I've got another possible complication. I was looking at the Loewe Aconda in a shop the other day, and the salesfella said that it's not really important to get a progressive scan DVD player with it because the progressive scan onboard the TV (and the 2:3 pulldown) is better than any he's seen on a DVD player, and since it is applied to all incomming signals, there is no point in duplicating it on the DVD player. Indeed, he said that the Loewe folks suggested using one type of input (where the progressive scan info won't be passed from the DVD player to the TV) as opposed to one where it will (ok, forgive my ignorance, but I don't remember which is which -- although the TV does indeed have both (x3) along with a few others) for just this reason--the TV does it anyway, and the TV does it better. This reasoning makes the Pioneer DV-09, which may be selling for less these days precisely because it does not have progressive scan, a real good idea for the TV. As an aside, I do trust this guy, he's sent me elsewhere when he thought I could do better for a partcular need at a different shop--and that counts for a lot in my book--but somehow this progressive scan equation doesn't seem to add up right. Have I got it right? Thanks.

Me too on the Loewe results. It would be much appreciated.

Interesting. Thanks for the update. I was planning on getting an Aconda this weekend, so you have captured my undivided attention. If I read you right, you'd say that the progressive signal from the Sony is a tad better than the onboard progressive scan hardware on the Loewe? (The trick being that it is no small feat to bypass the onboard hardware on the Loewe -- which can only be done by converting to VGA and going in that way)? I've got a Pioneer DV-37 and, for better or for worse, a component video cable, already. The pioneer runs a (switchable) progressive signal from the component outs. What happens when you run a progressive signal from the DVD into the component ins on the Loewe? Maybe put more clearly, is there a difference between a progressive out into a progressive in v. an interlaced out into a progressive in? I suppose it should be easy enough to find out for myself this weekend (if all goes as planned) with nothing more than the flick of a switch, but I was just curious whether you had any experience with it. (I expect that there would be no difference as, either way, you'll really be seeing the Aconda's processing, but I just don't know).

I really can't say how the Pioneer players stack up against the competition with any authority, so I won't waste your time guessing. However, I will mention that the DV-37 has more tweakable parameters on the video output than anything I have ever seen (something like 15). Truth be told, I have yet to figure out what even a third of them mean or do. That said, it is certainly a tweaker's delight in that there is really nothing about a picture that you shouldn't be able to tailor to you particular likings, whatever they may be. Personally, it gives far more control than I can ever imagine finding a use for but, then, I (still) haven't managed to get that Aconda and, with it, a dsiplay that might deserve / benefit from that degree of fine tuning. I'll surely do plenty of experimenting once it get it together. No SACD though, that's for sure.
Dovetail: thanks again for your input and I'd love to compare notes once I actually manage to get off my but and get the TV. As far as the sound on the Pioneer, I really haven't spent that much time with it. (The HT was an add-on to a two channel system, and I really haven't used the DVD player for anything but DVD's). Before I got the digital interconnect to run into my processor, I was running RCA's directly into my stereo preamp for a day or two, straight out of the box. Right away, it was clear that the Pioneer was tons more detailed than my CD player (AH!Tjoeb 99 with all the extras and NOS tubes). However, with Bryston and Thiels down the line, the last thing I needed was more finely-etched detail. Truth be told, I think I am pretty much addicted to the arguably sloppy romanticism I get from the tubes. So I threw in the digital interconnect and run the Pioneer only into the processor (which, for music, is simply not even in the running at all as a DAC--all part of the plan, really, why pay for a processor that can pull double-duty when you can get a decent HT processor for cheap and do two-channel seperately?). Anyway, now that the Pioneer has had plenty of time to break in, I may just have to try the old head-to-head again. I expect that the Pioneer may have warmed up a bit with use. By all accounts, it also makes a great transport with a decent outboard DAC, but that would be one more piece of equipment than I need. We shall see. Cheers.