|
 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
 Link Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 2:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I'm will be off later today, for a week maybe, so I wont be able to run my machine or write much.
Oh I almost forgot. The new blue tube will have the factory settings on the tube so I will install like it is first, and if that goes well I must try and make some verifications too, with at least the grid pattern, I really like looking at my very similar side-to-side grid pattern. I want to know if stock coils straight from the factory has me beat easily. I'm sure it is.
But don't confuse that with the Frankenyokes, I'm sure they are really good, I mean tweaking the magnets to perfection too. I don't think I'm doing it right.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Link Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've found that there are some factors that affect how well the stock yokes perform. I had a Marquee demonstrate much better focus performance simply by swapping out an old LVPS with a much newer one. I rebuilt (replaced nearly all the capacitors) in the older one, and then it worked as well as the newer one, including focus performance.
Focus performance can be affected by noise. When the LVPS gets old and weak it get noisy.
Never forget that with a display system, noise in any signal that controls the electron beam will result in changes to where the
beam SHOULD be. And they happen very fast. You won't see the beam wandering around a bit, but you WILL see that the beam spot size is a bit larger and more blurry than it used to be when the unit was freshly built.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2790
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Link Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | I'm a little ways off from being able to post screen shots of this unit. But I can post some detail shots now.
You will simply have to trust me when i say that these images are taken from a test pattern running at a resolution of 2048x2048 and
mechanical focus has been optimized only for the areas of interest at the center of each image.
Just three images for now: The analyzer/pattern generator showing a set resolution of 2048x2048, and showing the text pattern selected, a shot of the entire screen projected on my garage door, and a close-up of the upper left corner of the same image. |
At the last picture the generator shows 64kHz H scanrate and 60Hz V scanrate, with 2048 pixels height how could that be? 2048*60=122880 (assuming no retrace at all)
EDIT: I see it was interlaced...
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB, VIM-DB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Link Posted: Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
How did I miss that?
I'll redo the test and set it up for progressive scan. I thought it was already.
Using this generator requires you to have some knowledge about how scan rates have
to increase to accomodate greater resolutions. It's been a while since I used it so I sort of forgot the finer nuances of setup.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | | I've found that there are some factors that affect how well the stock yokes perform. I had a Marquee demonstrate much better focus performance simply by swapping out an old LVPS with a much newer one. I rebuilt (replaced nearly all the capacitors) in the older one, and then it worked as well as the newer one, including focus performance |
True. This is more of a problem the higher the scan rate/resolution you're operating at. Actually, the noise level in a stock supply is too high for best 1920X1080P performance.
| Quote: | | Never forget that with a display system, noise in any signal that controls the electron beam will result in changes to where the beam SHOULD be. And they happen very fast. You won't see the beam wandering around a bit, but you WILL see that the beam spot size is a bit larger and more blurry than it used to be when the unit was freshly built. |
Yes, and that is why the Barco 909 puts large inductors on it's Focus Board main rails, and why they are also on my focus board. A well designed video projector should have a tight and low noise Power Supply, because noise on power rails greatly affect not only the Focus Stages, it can hinder the video stages from producing that small spot size or non blooming scan line.
The Marquee LVPS can be better improved for tighter/cleaner scan lines/detail, but a cleaner supply would have been much better. To improve the supply it's better to do frequency specific band stop filtering, and this require that you know which frequencies are affecting the sweep, focus and video chain. When doing it that way, you'll find that most of the upgrades would require capacitance values/types that are not in in the electrolytic range or high capacitance values caps upgrades or additions. When tracing down the noise in the LVPS, it seems like the design was not done with the mentioned circuits in mind. It's more of a workable design rather than a supply that takes in consideration the higher scan rates or bandwidth that the projector would be operating at. And according to a former Electrohome engineer, that level of R&D would have been very costly due mainly to time consumption. And if it worked, they did not fix it. We of course know that there's a big difference between it working and best overall performance.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Link Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 4:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
So true. Meeting a reasonable performance specification and designing for ultimate performance are two different animals, and there is (at least) an order of magnitude's difference in price and engineering effort between the two.
I seem to recall that some time ago, somebody with perhaps a wee bit too much time on his hands built a LINEAR LVPS system for a Marquee. It was external, because of course it would not fit in the LVPS bay. I seem to recall that it was more comparabhle in size to the entire projector.
I do not have the time or the inclination to do it but I'd have to wonder what the results would be if I were to build an LVPS system myself, using all Acopian (elite manfacturer) power supplies. They're engineered to be extremely stable, extremely noise free, and extremely reliable. For a fairly extreme price.
I'd need, what, 5, 6.3, 12, 15, 85, and 360 volt supplies, some in both polarities, just to start?
Oh, I redid my resolution test at 2048x2048-60 PROGRESSIVE this time. I could really not tell any difference.
WIth new tubes.
I then repeated the test using another Ultra in the workshop, also one with fresh tubes but with "classic" 338 or 339 neck cards
that show no symptoms of any problems. There really was not a lot of difference, but I will say that scan lines and grid lines just seem to be a little bit sharper with the newer cards. However, the two projectors are not matched, not even in terms of what lenses are on them or what screen size they're shooting. It can't be a fair comparison until I take steps to level the playing field a little bit more.
So, since I've practically got them falling out of my ears, I'll stick a set of USPL HD-10Ls on both units. They're very sharp within their optimal screen size range.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2251
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Link Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I still have a 9518 set available called for by barclay but that was a long long time ago so i am considering selling to someone interested. Perhaps just the neckboards and lvps to Chris?
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->hd1->hd350->vw100->cinemax+919sp+3x919+9500mp->cinemax+919sp(modded)+kuro600a
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Fri Apr 14, 2017 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: |
I seem to recall that some time ago, somebody with perhaps a wee bit too much time on his hands built a LINEAR LVPS system for a Marquee. It was external, because of course it would not fit in the LVPS bay. I seem to recall that it was more comparabhle in size to the entire projector...........................
|
Yes, and if could conveniently make it happen, I would also make me a linear Supply. Or better still, make a section of the supply linear.
The version mods that I have on my Marquee here, is basically adding a bunch of small value caps one each of the rails in the LVPS. Or at least that was my first version and this was done on a new LVPS. The same that I also did to Greg's and Kurt has , who both also had new LVPS and both noticed substantial difference in the image from the stock version.
I'm doing something slightly different from that original mod, and this is how you get the deeper black in the image. This upgraded version is a better and more precise lowering of noise. That is I've added even more small value caps.
My video chain I'm done with. But will be going after a lower noise floor in the projector chassis and other boards, like the CLM because it don't a ton of high frequency onto two of the power rails.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2790
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Link Posted: Sat Apr 15, 2017 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
For general power supply stability adding more caps is a good idea. Although I found that the standby section of the LVPS radiates out a lot of noise. This is something you can catch with oscilloscope even when you measure between two different grounding points, even with LVPS out of chassis. I could reduce this noise greatly by handling the resonances around the SMPS transformer of the stand by section. A better solution would be to substitute this with a linear supply. The power consumption is less than 10W so it could be a quite small one, that can be fitted between the LVPS and HVPS. I in fact did an experiment with this but adding an external linear supply to the exsisting LVPS is really-really inconvenient.
I have a guide on how to lower the noise on the standby supply, I just can't upload because the file is too large. I'll paste the content one day maybe...
EDIT: I just uploaded to my google drive:
Marquee modifications
I also put up the description for the HDM modification, which is not my merit, but it is useful for pre 2008 Marquees, the 9518LC typcally don't need it however.
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB, VIM-DB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | For general power supply stability adding more caps is a good idea. Although I found that the standby section of the LVPS radiates out a lot of noise. This is something you can catch with oscilloscope even when you measure between two different grounding points, even with LVPS out of chassis. I could reduce this noise greatly by handling the resonances around the SMPS transformer of the stand by section. A better solution would be to substitute this with a linear supply. The power consumption is less than 10W so it could be a quite small one, that can be fitted between the LVPS and HVPS. I in fact did an experiment with this but adding an external linear supply to the exsisting LVPS is really-really inconvenient.
I have a guide on how to lower the noise on the standby supply, I just can't upload because the file is too large. I'll paste the content one day maybe...
EDIT: I just uploaded to my google drive:
Marquee modifications
I also put up the description for the HDM modification, which is not my merit, but it is useful for pre 2008 Marquees, the 9518LC typcally don't need it however. |
All of the rails on that supply are noisy, some worse than others. On your boards it may be the standby 5 volt supply, mine it's a combination of them. With the standby not being a problem at all. Which is why I got into pin-pointing the noise based on where I'm at with the video circuit itself.
I've also looked into adding conductors to lower noise, but for some reason the end results wasn't that good. It was only sometime last year after getting the rig, I was able to better look at the noise in the chassis. And this is how I ended up adding a bunch of small value caps on the rails. This to my surprise was the best fix so far. My thought on the design makes me think the Pulse Width Generators on these supplies operate at higher frequencies than normal, and would be perfect for the sweep stages and higher scan rates. But these same frequencies are not good for a high bandwidth video chain, because those frequencies can affect the video performance and it has.
Adding smaller low value caps are a radical decoupling approach to notching out these high frequencies, and you can widening the notch windows or add many more notch windows by using various values.
I would say the LVPS designer may have done well designing the supplies around the sweep circuit, but when using the same rails the supply uses for the video chain. That simply was not a good idea to mixed that up.
My thought on the standby supply being a noise problem, is that it does not feed anything video. Which means its an radiated source of noise and that's usually the result or poor grounding design, either on the chassis or the LVPS itself, with my thought it being in the LVPS design. Sharing (both sweep and video) video rails is economical, but not wise from my experience. So when I speak of an linear supply for this chassis, I'm really meaning for the video chain to have its separate (not also connected to the sweep circuits) and own power source. This can be added in a slot form right above the VIM slot where that really stupid composite video board was an option.
The other problem is the control module, that's also on my to-do-list. It within itself is a mini nuclear reactor loaded with high frequency clock of computing switching residue.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2790
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Link Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I described is a fix for a design flaw of the LVPS stand-by section.
For my VNB-DB the biggest headache was to get rid of the noise that my board picked up, although as it turned out my board did not even use any of those voltages... This was solved by the LVPS stand-by mod, and with the HDM mod posted above, which all fix a radiated noise.
One could build a linear power supply for the VNBs for cheap using 4pcs. of 2x15V 30VA transformers with tying the secondaries in series (-> 2x60VAC). I'll use these transformers for the VNB-DB for Barco modification:
transformer.
I'd not put this inside the projector however, not just because it needs mains wiring inside the chassis, but it also cause needless dissipation inside. Also such power supply always should be used with filament voltage supervision, because if for some reason the VNB supply would not start with active filament the tube would fully light up.
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB, VIM-DB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Link Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What? Not sure I'm gettting that correctly.
With no filament power, you can not get any light out of the tube. In the event of a G2 runaway, failure, or, in the case of a Marquee, loss of G2 because the flying lead fell off, you pull the P14 filament voltage plug and let the tubes go dark before powering down in order to avoid a deflection burn.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2790
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Link Posted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | What? Not sure I'm gettting that correctly.
With no filament power, you can not get any light out of the tube. In the event of a G2 runaway, failure, or, in the case of a Marquee, loss of G2 because the flying lead fell off, you pull the P14 filament voltage plug and let the tubes go dark before powering down in order to avoid a deflection burn. |
I'm saying the oyher way: if there IS filament voltage but no power to the CRT end stages it is like with no G2 wire attached: fully lit and very likely you'll spot burn the tube. This is why using an external power supply for any CRT amplifier should control the filament as well.
_________________
projectors in the past : NEC 6-9PG xtra, Electrohome Marquee 6-7500, NEC XG 1351 LC ( with super modified Electrohome VNB neckboard !!!)
current: VDC Marquee 9500LC
The MOD: VNB-DB, VIM-DB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Mon Apr 17, 2017 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | What I described is a fix for a design flaw of the LVPS stand-by section.
For my VNB-DB the biggest headache was to get rid of the noise that my board picked up, although as it turned out my board did not even use any of those voltages... This was solved by the LVPS stand-by mod, and with the HDM mod posted above, which all fix a radiated noise.
|
True, but solving the noise problem by fixing the source of the noise in high bandwidth circuitry is not always solving the noise problem.
For the longest I used to have very similar problems, where a set of neck boards would work fine in my projector but not in another. This had me pulling my hair out, until I figured out that the problem wasn't the source of the noise, because I need to make the boards work in any Marquee. And to make that happen, I had to go through my many notes and study material, until finding out what was taught in a noise class I took about ten years ago.
That's also when I read up on a tech note from Analog Device and two other manufacturers about "Parasitic Oscillation" and the importance of board design and working with High Bandwidth Op Amps. For me it was taking a previous design PC board structure and adding higher bandwidth Op Amps and supporting circuitry to broaden the the video bandwidth. I've since moved on by solving the problem in both the circuit itself and the source of the radiated noise. When a video circuit can so easily pickup a radiated noise, it is also an indication that the circuit itself could be oscillating. Meaning also that the oscillation can turn an high bandwidth amplifier into an RF circuit, because that's the nature of an RF Receiver, its an high frequency amplifier and oscillator combined.
And of course, there are exceptions to this and they are being too close to the source of the noise and insufficient grounding. But with the Marquee chassis design being a bit sloppy with the neck boards being very close to both Sweep and Focus boards (ambient pulses). It's not so easy to avoid source problems, so your notch noise fix makes perfect sense. However, you should still look for and consider the possibility of oscillation.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thewolfman wrote: | You redeemed yourself Parker! I'm now running contrast at 100 without blooming. It's amazing to ramp contrast that high and watch nothing happen with the grid pattern. No smearing or anything. But settled with 80 which was as high I could go before. There is no audible noise as I ramp up the contrast either but that may be with the help of fresher parts in combination.
But I refuse to believe I need to find the sweet spot for the focus coil, the Frankenyokes are secure all the way forward so that's where I'll leave them. That's my part.
I never got around to make a full blown set up tonight, I just wanted to see if the brightness issue really was eliminated, and it is, so I simply boxed the lenses in place and never even bothered to fiddle with the magnets. So there is lots more to do to make the image much much better. I'll redo my write up when the day comes and it is all it can be, with all my ten thumbs up. It will be fun fun day!
10 months worth to waiting was in my mind perfectly alright!
But I need to do something about the remote as it is driving me insane sitting by the sofa all the time. |
I want to get back to this posting, to show the blooming or limited light output was solved long ago. This was also mentioned to several who also had the problem. And was presented as a free fix or upgrade.
I also wanted to really look at the remote issues you mention here, to include, the other problems that you've had are are maybe still having with that 9518 VDC version Marquee that I have here.
A week ago I helped one of Craig's customers solve a problem on his 9500 Ultra. After loading the firmware into the CLM, I must have spent 3 days trying to understand what was going on with the "restore" using both Marquee Librarian and the Loader. They both were giving me weird results, that had me thinking it was a cable problem, to me later wondering if I had a bad version my Librarian. But being one who had direct experience with that software going back more than 20 years, this particular problem was never on the books, and using Loader really ruled out it being a software problem. So after several different cables, to include genger changers and you name it, I've tried it. I took the same board I was testing in the 9518 and put it in my 9500 Ultra test unit. My test unit it not setup on a screen, it is mostly used for scoping and board checking, and this would explain why It was not being used for the firmware check. And with the boards being tested in the test unit looking only at the tubes surface with an image, the problem I saw on the 9518 on my ceiling is not showing on my test unit. And of course this had me scratching my head. To shorten things here, all things pointed to the 9518 and it not for some reason showing a good copy of the files from one CLM to the other.
Now, let me explain this better. I would download all settings from the 9518 CLM using the stock and same CLM that came in the set that is already setup for me screen. Once those settings were downloaded, I then would remove the stock CLM and install Craig's customers CLM into the 9518. And then upload the same settings from the stock 9518 into the customers CLM, which happens to be a very later Electrohome (Not VDC) version Ultra CLM. Turn on the machine and the image is wacked. My first time seeing this ever, and this had me going in circles. And the only way I got to figure out anything here was to put the loaded CLM into my test unit. So after isolating this to it only happening on the 9518. I simple reloaded the files Craig sent me into the customers CLM, ship it to him, and he reported back that all was well.
Now this makes the 9518 suspect, because I used the original file copied to another later version (but not the 9518 version VDC) CLM. and things were wacked - same file, different CLM.
Other than what I posted here, I'm still not sure what happened. But since having this 9518, it has for sure had some really weird CLM problems, and that was from day one out the box. After some time thinking a noise or moving line problem that surfaced after warn up. The problem turned out to be the on the defection daughter board on the CLM. either change the main chip on the board to an earlier version, or replace with an Electrohome version daughter board.
And then as this thread shows, there later became a remote problem, where the remote had to be pointed directly at the set and up close. And this is still not the only problems I've had, but will simple say, it is a very finicky set that appears that most of maybe quite a few of the boards are not backwards compatible. Or maybe it would require only boards of it's version.
I've also had problems with the set just turning itself off, or not turning on at all, as seem to be the case with another 9518 in the link below (0ne includes this thread).
Maybe someone else can be helpful here.
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=40769&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=40751
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=40578&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thewolfman
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 1311
Location: Sweden
|
| Link Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | | I still have a 9518 set available called for by barclay but that was a long long time ago so i am considering selling to someone interested. Perhaps just the neckboards and lvps to Chris? |
This set of cards did not solve the remote not working, so am f*ck***. I will put the machine back to stock 9500 and see what happens then.
Mike and I have a beef over a modded moome V3 which we will get back to later. For nor now making any 9518 boards work as a unit with the remote is top priority.
I will make it stock 9500 and work from there.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thewolfman wrote: |
Mike and I have a beef over a modded moome V3 which we will get back to later |
Yes, let's deal with this later. You've had that card back for more than a year, to indicate this month that it has an input not working is something though. The entire set of boards you know I've bent over backwards testing everything, to make sure they did not go over the pond and a problem popped up. I am however very pleased to be reminded that the video boards were as you told me initially and in this thread. You know who, told me something completely different. You are still a special customer, and that is why Ive even extended to you a few months ago, that you're entitled to an upgrade (free whenever you'll want it) to my latest version. So if there is a problem with that board, I can have Moome take care of it in Taiwan, or you can send it to me.
| Quote: | | I will make it stock 9500 and work from there. |
I was thinking the same thing, but wonder if the mother board would also need to be replaced. I could understand the problems this projector would have, because they would not have a need to check it for existing Marquee boards. But for you and I, not being able to use existing boards and having to deal with the other quirks it has, is something to really look at.
I may not be able to help you with the 9518 problems, but can assure you that you have nothing to worry about with the mod version and the moome card issue. Moome have always honored what I asked him, and I see no reason why he'll stop now. I am the guy btw, that also supplied a performance modification for his cards..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2251
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Link Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thewolfman wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | | I still have a 9518 set available called for by barclay but that was a long long time ago so i am considering selling to someone interested. Perhaps just the neckboards and lvps to Chris? |
This set of cards did not solve the remote not working, so am f*ck***. I will put the machine back to stock 9500 and see what happens then.
Mike and I have a beef over a modded moome V3 which we will get back to later. For nor now making any 9518 boards work as a unit with the remote is top priority.
I will make it stock 9500 and work from there. |
When you attach the remote to the remote wire does it work than?
I only know that I had problems when putting the 9518 controller in my 9500 even with lvps. But putting the remote on the wire it worked with the old or new remote, don't recall. But with the 9518 the remote worked without problems.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->hd1->hd350->vw100->cinemax+919sp+3x919+9500mp->cinemax+919sp(modded)+kuro600a
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2251
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Link Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I rediscovered this thread below with the same kind of problems and reading it back there was an incompatibility between modded vim and 9518CLM or something.
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38866&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0
But I vaguely recall that it was solved using the right remote controll with the right CLM and putting the jumper inside the remote in the right position. Also things worked better wiring the remote.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->hd1->hd350->vw100->cinemax+919sp+3x919+9500mp->cinemax+919sp(modded)+kuro600a
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5681
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Link Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | I rediscovered this thread below with the same kind of problems and reading it back there was an incompatibility between modded vim and 9518CLM or something.
http://www.curtpalme.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=38866&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0
But I vaguely recall that it was solved using the right remote controll with the right CLM and putting the jumper inside the remote in the right position. Also things worked better wiring the remote. |
It appears there's still a lot we have to figure out about the differences here, not that it's bad, just that because it's so different and backwards compatibility may not have been considered during the design. There are common things that's just not making sense here.
If in this case, the remote works when wired, it should also work using IR. But of course, all things should be considered. Do this:
- Select "Remote Control Options" on the first page of the projectors menu. Under "Keyboard Options" make sure both A and B are selected for both "IR Sensor" and "Remote Jack" under Keyboard Options
And then go right below to "Communications Setup" and make sure you have "000" and "9600"
This will work for most remotes it will cover both remote protocols, where the need to change the jumper is not necessary. You would only have to "Press *" and enter "000" on the Remote and maybe make sure the Remote has the jumper set for IR.
If all this is the case and it still does not work, the problem is most likely the IR Receiver. Because the only difference you mention above is the IR Sensor. If the wired works, the data and electronics is OK.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Forum powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Photo Albums
Register
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
