Maybe I've been spoiled by HDTV but I've been shopping around for a double DIN DVD head unit and I've been left unimpressed. Everything I've seen from Pioneer, Panasonic, Eclipse, Alpine, etc., has left me wanting (and it's not a technology problem, LCD is known for having the ability to fit many pixels into smaller displays; the only logical explanation for lower res LCD head units is cost cutting).

Every time I've brought a reference picture quality DVD to the store to test these head units, there has always been low res blocking, mosquito noise, ghosting, false contouring, bad screen uniformity, you name it, it's there (no offense to everyone who owns it here, but the Alpine IVA-W200 has the worst picture quality by far while the Pioneer AVH-6800 may have been the best, its PQ was only acceptable at best).

Just from standing in the store, those blocky PQ LCDs really bothered me, I couldn't image how I'd feel if they were actually in my center stack. If the manufacturers really expect me to contribute $1k+ to their kids' college funds, I have a message for them: UP THE RESOLUTION ON THOSE DOUBLE DIN LCD DISPLAYS.

 

Meh.

I'll question the need for such higher quality displays in a car to begin with!



A big issue you're going to face is that the display is mounted in the dashboard of a car and controlling the outside lighting is tough ... but not as tough as getting your face square to the display in the first place. When I drive I tend to keep my eyes on the road while driving watching out for people drifting from lane-to-lane and driving 20 mph under the limit while they're busy watching HD TV on their in dash displays illegally. When I watch HD TV I tend to spend more time on the sofa than the road where a 62" screen and 6.1 surround system have the ability to function a bit better than in the tight quarters of the car.

 

+1

You have a good point and I agree with you. I think I get what you are saying: “Why can’t the image and the display be very clear, especially since a 7” screen is small and should be very sharp.” The screens you mention do look like crap, and there is no excuse. They are very expensive, and they look awful when compared to decent home units. I don’t get it either.

The only point I would add to your accurate perception is that it may not be only the resolution. My problem with these units (small screens) is the view-angle (as Paul mentions). Once you go past a 45 to 60 degree viewing angle, the picture is horrible on the screens you mention. That is not a problem with the new generation of LCD screens sold for home-theater, so why are the 7” screens sold for cars so bad? I have no idea other than I notice that viewing-angles on touch-screen monitors are the worst.

Hope I got your point (which I thought was very valid). --Spike

EDIT: I was responding to GalvatronType_R (just in case that was not clear)

 

I think the headunits do well, considering they are in a vehicle. They serve the purpose for long road trips,,,bling factor,,,and gadget hungry people. I do agree the prices are steep,,,but are coming down in price as the technology grows. Now, I havent seen any of the resolution on the moniter type set-ups..(IE faren. 7000/7001). But, being a doubledin,,,and all the incredible things that one piece of equipment does,,,I feel it serves it's purpose....Just offering a different point of view.....

 

i am no expert, but is it true that touch sceen layer does mess with the overall picture quality of hte screen a little?

b

 

^^ I did some more testing with touch-screen vs. non-touch-screen.

Here is what I did to test different LCD displays.

Test Setup

- I tested two 7” touch-screens (from two different companies) and one 7” non-touch-screen monitor. I won’t mention the brand names because I am not a professional installer/video analyst, and I have no qualifications. It would be unfair for me to compare products from different companies on a public forum and say that one is better than the other since I am not qualified. I will say that the touch-screens devices were well known brand names that cost around $400-$500 MSRP, and the non-touch-screen was, of course, less costly (less than half of the afore-mentioned touch-screens MSRP and far less for street price)

- I used a RadioShack 13.8VDC/3Amp power supply (AC to 12V DC converter) to run the bench-tests. I believe this is a very good power source to run bench-tests. I don’t think it introduces any artifacts that would affect the tests.

- I connected the three different monitors to the power source, and fed video to the screens using a component video connection from a new 15” Sharp LCD TV (for the first test), and the second test was run with video feed from a Garmin GVN52 navigation box. Of course, the Garmin GVN52 does not support touch-screen function, but that isn’t important here since I was only testing the screen display.

Results

- All the monitors suffered from off-angle viewing (45-60 degrees off-center). That surprised me since that problem is solved with LCD screens. For example the 15” Sharp LCD TV I was using for the feed in the first test is very good when viewing off center (and much better than the 7” LCD screens I was testing).

- The (two) expensive 7” touch-screen were no where near delivering as crisp an image as the inexpensive 7” non-touch-screen LCD monitor. That was mostly apparent when viewing off-center.

- All three monitors experienced a slight amount of “ghosting” screen-text display from the Garmin GVN52. I’m not sure if that is a problem with the GVN or if I was unable to set the monitors optimally. I tried all the adjustments available with the different monitors, and still experienced the slight amount of ghosting. It was hardly noticeable (just a little bit of fade of the text to its right side). I doubt that users will even see it. It is only that I was looking very hard for any deficiency. I hesitate to even mention it.

Conclusions

- Paying $400-$500 for a monitor may not get you any better image than a less costly LCD display.

- Small (7”) monitors are expensive, but do not provide the sharp image you expect. I don’t get why a smaller monitor would not give a razor-sharp image.

- The car-pc guys do not report these problems (very slight ghosting, off-center viewing problems, etc.), so installing a better monitor using a RGB connection probably provides a better display. I’m not sure about that statement. Hopefully some people who installed car-pc’s can offer some additional information here.

--Spike

BTW: Your website looks great. I especially like your Personal Philosophy Statement. I’m located in Frostbite Falls, Minnesota, which is just too far away to use your services. But… If I was just a little bit closer…
===========
EDIT: I corrected this sentence: "That most mostly apparent when viewing off-center. To:" That was mostly apparent when viewing off-center.