Return to the CurtPalme.com main site CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum
A forum with a sense of fun and community for Home Theater enthusiasts!
Products for Sale ] [ FAQ: Hooking it all up ] [ CRT Primer/FAQ ] [ Best/Worst CRT Projectors List ] [ Setup Tips & Manuals ] [ Advanced Procedures ] [ Newsletters ]

 
Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Photo AlbumsPhoto Albums  RegisterRegister 
 MembershipClub Membership   ProfileProfile   Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in 
Blu-ray disc release list and must-have titles. Buy the latest and best Blu-ray titles to show off in your home theater!

Watched a movie on a digital last night and...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly view    CurtPalme.com Forum Index -> Digital Projectors
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Spanky Ham




Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


        Register to remove this ad. It's free!
kal wrote:
digitalayon wrote:
CasetheCorvetteman wrote:

Well id say since Kal was sporting a Barco Cine 8 Onyx variant, stepping to digital wouldve been going up in the world.



Ya know.....I looked for years for an available onyx unit or 1200x. Seems to be really illusive!!


Just get a JVC RS56. Wink Mine's considerably better in all regards than my previous 1200x. Everyone that's into HT that saw both at the same time agreed.

Kal


It looks like the better play right now is the 4910 that comes with the DI.

macgyver655 wrote:
Spanky Ham wrote:
macgyver655 wrote:
I'm sorry. I did not realize that everyone here agrees that digitals are only good for about 3 or 4 years and then they are junk. And it is not wise to buy a used one if it is 3 or so years old. My mistake.


Are you now saying that digitals will last as long as CRTs? Shocked


Those were not my words. They were a reference to the words of the person that was being discussed. And you are welcome to ask him of CRT longevity. I did not inject my own opinion. Of course you are welcome to ask my opinion and you might be very surprised at my answer.


I am all ears. Please give us your opinion.
Back to top
macgyver655




Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508



PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spanky Ham wrote:


I am all ears. Please give us your opinion.


Very well, but first to set a parameter. When I say digital I mean home theater quality, probably starting price of 2000.00 or more but don't hold me to that. Not cheap ass crap. You can choose the line between there.

So for digitals I am absolutely sure they have come to a quality that I would be more then happy to enjoy. I believe the words spoken by the people that have them. I also believe that digital build quality has improved greatly over the past few years even with flat panels. The times of early failures because of poor quality parts seems to be disappearing at a pretty fast rate. So I see no reason why a good quality digital couldn't last a nice long time. Flat panels are surely lasting longer.

If I did not have any projectors and I was ready to put together a nice home theater it would surely be a digital.

The 2 draw backs I see with digitals is the initial cost and lamp replacement costs.

To some, a couple thousand dollars is a lot of money and if they have a family the chances of them ever getting a HT is probably close to none. And even if they could work the projector into there budget somehow the thought of having to replace a costly lamp will still put it out of budget. So they will never have a good quality HT if they only want digital.

This is where I think the diehard CRTer's come in. A good quality projector, anywhere from free to maybe 500 bucks. And not to have to worry about a "definite" lamp replacement in 1 or 2 thousand hours, or a little more if your lucky. And not all CRT's are tube burners like some try to use as a comparison. Plus many are not put off by 10,000 20,000 30,000 hour tube wear. And a non tube burner can still have good tubes even after 50,000 hours. Sure something could still go wrong but with cheap replacement parts and availability plus not having a definite lamp cost, CRT is their only option.

This is why a hate to see any more comparisons between CRT and digital. Many of the CRTer's that are left just cannot afford to go to a good quality digital and they feel like they are being put down every time these arguments begin. They are happy with what they can afford and do not want to feel bad about it.

Anyways, I am all for a good quality digital projector if it is within your budget. I am sure image quality is all there. And if a new light source arises that will last a much longer time then it would definitely put digitals in the most desired position, even with those on a tight budget. But still not all.

So to an end, I am in favor of a good digital if you can afford it. And I believe they now last for a much longer time then the old standing. Smile
Back to top
Jeremy112




Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2645
Location: Fond du Lac, WI


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I recently made the switch to digital for my HT (not completely, still have to remove the CRT from its spot). In the end I decided that for my HT I would like to enjoy the movies more than playing with the projector.

Don't get me wrong, my CRT is still going to stick around for use with older gaming systems, digital just doesn't cut it on the old non HD systems, CRT still manages to make them look good. (not to mention the light guns are compatible with CRT PJs as case knows Smile )

I have had people ask if the CRT was what theaters used. Amused by that question often, but I think its because the way the image "looks" it just has that "look" like vinyl audio has that "sound" that no digital can seem to reproduce; hence the question.

I never get that question with a digital, but I do get plenty of compliments regarding the overall PQ of my digital, brightness, black levels (yes, there are a few that noticed such things), sharpness, and my favorite one is how the lines between the pixels are practically non-existent.

To put it short, everyone seems to prefer the digital PJ over my CRT. It could be the completely silent operation, or the outstanding PQ that modern digital PJs can produce, but in the end everyone who has seen my CRT and my digital, preferred the digital.

If someone came up to me asking my advice on what to do for a projector, I would be honest and give them the pro's and cons of CRT, and the pros and cons of digital. In the end I would recommend the digital simply because the end user will likely be more happy with it than the CRT. I feel that digitals have come to a level of quality that I can feel comfortable suggesting them to people without feeling guilty, like I once used to.

To each his own, and don't toss the CRT just because you saw someones high end, high priced system, that would be the worst reason!

_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it Wink
Back to top
digitalayon




Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 915



PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

HogPilot wrote:
digitalayon wrote:
Just ribb'n ya Kal! Trust me guys....my paycheck relies on your digital upgrades. I am just saying my kids do not know the difference and love the projector. I do use it for various sports stuff but still mainly use my 8 year old panni plasma for most of that. I thought it was crap. But direct TV looks like crap on any projector. I am beginning to think they calibrate their signal for flat panels only.


We know you think it looks like crap and we agree - the question is do you know why it looks like crap, and why it's not indicative of any HT projector's performance (or at least one made in the last 4-ish years)? Smile



Of course I do...the hamster wheel is needing some lube though....however...the projector was new 2 years ago and ran 1,800 bucks.
Back to top
ecrabb
Forum Moderator



Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah

TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

digitalayon wrote:
however...the projector was new 2 years ago and ran 1,800 bucks.

Right, but how old it is, and how much it cost is somewhat irrelevant to the discussion. The projector's design goals (sacrifice color accuracy and contrast for high brightness), are essentially at odds with the home theater use case.

To use a metaphor, your original post is a little like posting about how you drove a new Ford F150 with Ecoboost… And man, these new pickups with turbocharged motors just suck because they just don't run and handle like your like your old 10-year old Mustang does. Wait, what?

SC


Last edited by ecrabb on Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's photo album (10 photos)
ecrabb
Forum Moderator



Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah

TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

macgyver655 wrote:
This is why a hate to see any more comparisons between CRT and digital. Many of the CRTer's that are left just cannot afford to go to a good quality digital and they feel like they are being put down every time these arguments begin. They are happy with what they can afford and do not want to feel bad about it.


There are absolutely a few here who have gotten CRT's free, or close to it, and I do agree there are a few folks with CRTs who really can't afford to go to a good digital, however I don't believe that represents a majority of the die-hard CRT'ers who are left. Most of the CRTers left at this point either have 9-inch EM/LC machines, and/or they're happy enough with what they have that there's no reason to change horses right now. In my mind, there's still no question that a CRT offers an amazing value and almost a nonexistent TCO if you buy right. If you have the time, space, and inclination, CRT is amazing. For others, things have changed, and digital makes more sense to them, or it fits their wants and needs better.

I do have to take a little issue with your point about these discussions making CRT'ers feel bad, though. In my years here, I've seen way more anti-digital rhetoric by the CRT crowd than the other way around. If anything, it was the "switchers" who were put down in the comparison threads, i.e. "the gray side", "digital plastic shoeboxes", "unrepairable junk", etc. Worse, the vast majority of that rhetoric came from CRT owners whose idea of digital projection was what they'd seen projecting PowerPoints at the office. This thread is really a perfect example.

CRT vs. digital is a totally reasonable, relevant subject for many on this site, and there's a lot for all of us to learn. Unfortunately some would rather make stupid, snide comments. Welcome to the internets.

SC
Back to top
View user's photo album (10 photos)
Nashou66




Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 9:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ecrabb wrote:

CRT vs. digital is a totally reasonable, relevant subject for many on this site, and there's a lot for all of us to learn. Unfortunately some would rather make stupid, snide comments. Welcome to the internets.

SC


Then Why sensor the subject line?

Once again welcome to the new AVS where if your topic or opinion hurts someones feeling we have to change it or delete it.

Nashou

_________________
Don't blame your underwear for your crooked ass~ unknown Greek philosopher


"Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15." --- President Reagan

One Smart Dog!!!

Marquee High Performance Bellows now shipping!!
Marquee Modifications and Performance Enhancement
Marquee C-element and Bellow removal
Back to top
View user's photo album (1 photos)
HogPilot




Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

digitalayon wrote:
HogPilot wrote:
digitalayon wrote:
Just ribb'n ya Kal! Trust me guys....my paycheck relies on your digital upgrades. I am just saying my kids do not know the difference and love the projector. I do use it for various sports stuff but still mainly use my 8 year old panni plasma for most of that. I thought it was crap. But direct TV looks like crap on any projector. I am beginning to think they calibrate their signal for flat panels only.


We know you think it looks like crap and we agree - the question is do you know why it looks like crap, and why it's not indicative of any HT projector's performance (or at least one made in the last 4-ish years)? Smile



Of course I do...the hamster wheel is needing some lube though....however...the projector was new 2 years ago and ran 1,800 bucks.


Actually, the projector first shipped in 2009, which means it was designed in 2008 - it was sold through 2012.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
ecrabb
Forum Moderator



Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah

TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nashou66 wrote:
ecrabb wrote:

CRT vs. digital is a totally reasonable, relevant subject for many on this site, and there's a lot for all of us to learn. Unfortunately some would rather make stupid, snide comments. Welcome to the internets.

SC


Then Why sensor the subject line?

Like I said, I wouldn't have changed the subject line. I do agree with Kal's sentiment though, and the original post and subject were very misleading.

Nashou66 wrote:
Once again welcome to the new AVS where if your topic or opinion hurts someones feeling we have to change it or delete it.

I understand your concern, but I think the comparison is totally unfair. One changed post doesn't make this "the new AVS" any more than one speeding violation would make somebody a reckless driver. Like Kal said, if it were AVS, the thread would have been locked or deleted. I'd also point out that those threads aren't so common there because people tend to be a little more knowledgable about what is outside their own back yard than people are here.

Speaking of our own back yard, I can't speak for Kal, but if he's like me, he's sick and tired of the pervasive attitude around here that digital - any digital - is somehow inferior. It's especially maddening since much of that attitude is based on pure ignorance. I'm constantly amazed at how few people on this forum have seen anything besides their own setup and whatever what was set up at Best Buy or some other retail store. If Kal's like me, he probably doesn't have the same patience with some of the same stuff - I'm being nice - let's call it what it is - bull**** - coming up over and over.

In fact, to follow up on what I said to Mac earlier, I was being nice… What I didn't say before, but which I will point out now, is that the reality is that the hard-core CRTers are much more likely to sh*t on digital than the other way around. If I had a dollar for every time I heard a sentiment or comment along the lines of, "Small, digital junk bad… Big, heavy, analog good", I could buy any projector I ever want along with unlimited lifetime supply of lamps.

SC
Back to top
View user's photo album (10 photos)
garyfritz




Joined: 08 Apr 2006
Posts: 11565
Location: Fort Collins, CO


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On the other hand you have to admit the old CRTs are a lot better designed for repairability (hence Curt's livelihood for quite a while!) while (most? all?) digitals are of the "use it for a couple of years until it breaks, then throw it away because it can't be repaired" philosophy. The CRTs were priced much higher when new, and they were built in a "fix it" era. The digitals are priced at consumers and enthusiasts, with much more of a "throw it away" mentality.

ecrabb wrote:
There are absolutely a few here who have gotten CRT's free, or close to it, and I do agree there are a few folks with CRTs who really can't afford to go to a good digital, however I don't believe that represents a majority of the die-hard CRT'ers who are left. Most of the CRTers left at this point either have 9-inch EM/LC machines, and/or they're happy enough with what they have that there's no reason to change horses right now.

That's me. Even with Dragan's help I never got my 8500 going as well as even a decent 8" should, but I don't watch the damn thing enough to justify spending any significant $$ on it. It's up on the ceiling, it works, and everybody who sees it is blown away. I know it could be better but I choose to be satisfied with what I've got.
Back to top
ecrabb
Forum Moderator



Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah

TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010


PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garyfritz wrote:
On the other hand you have to admit the old CRTs are a lot better designed for repairability (hence Curt's livelihood for quite a while!) while (most? all?) digitals are of the "use it for a couple of years until it breaks, then throw it away because it can't be repaired" philosophy. The CRTs were priced much higher when new, and they were built in a "fix it" era. The digitals are priced at consumers and enthusiasts, with much more of a "throw it away" mentality.

There is no question that the CRT projectors many of us have or had were designed with longevity and field-serviceability in as goals. However, that doesn't make consumer equipment "junk".

But, I'd argue that it's a bit of a misrepresentation to say consumer digitals are designed with a "throw it away" mentality or to be "used for a couple of years". Certainly, they're designed with different objectives with respect to pricing, longevity, and repairability, but that doesn't make them "junk". Look at digital cameras; Nikon and Canon both sell DSLRs that are as cheap as $500, and as expensive as $5000 and up. Are the $500 cameras "throw away junk"? Of course not. They're less durable, use less expensive materials, and don't have the features their more expensive brethren have, but they certainly aren't junk.

On one hand, some of this new stuff seems "cheap", or even "disposable", and I know people like Curt and Mac hate that. I understand. It's annoying that things can't be repaired. On the other hand, miniaturization and automated mass production has driven prices down, and grown many hobbies exponentially. Home theater, computers, photography, cell phones… Amazing technologies that were all once accessible only to the elite, now used daily by millions of middle-class folks who never could have afforded it if consumer electronics were still designed to last decades.

Technology keeps improving, better tech keeps getting cheaper, and that does cause obsolescence much quicker than it ever has. Combine that with the fact that people's time (to repair stuff) is relatively expensive, and it does make for a certain "throw-away" (or preferably a "recycling") element to our culture.

But, none of this provides a justification to call newer digital projectors "junk" or their purchasers dumb or blind.

garyfritz wrote:
Even with Dragan's help I never got my 8500 going as well as even a decent 8" should, but I don't watch the damn thing enough to justify spending any significant $$ on it. It's up on the ceiling, it works, and everybody who sees it is blown away. I know it could be better but I choose to be satisfied with what I've got.

That's great! Your bank account thanks you! You would also see no reason to make posts denigrating others' choices to back up your claims about how satisfied you are with with yours. Not everybody on this forum has always been so considerate.

SC
Back to top
View user's photo album (10 photos)
macgyver655




Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508



PostLink    Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ecrabb wrote:
garyfritz wrote:
On the other hand you have to admit the old CRTs are a lot better designed for repairability (hence Curt's livelihood for quite a while!) while (most? all?) digitals are of the "use it for a couple of years until it breaks, then throw it away because it can't be repaired" philosophy. The CRTs were priced much higher when new, and they were built in a "fix it" era. The digitals are priced at consumers and enthusiasts, with much more of a "throw it away" mentality.

There is no question that the CRT projectors many of us have or had were designed with longevity and field-serviceability in as goals. However, that doesn't make consumer equipment "junk".

But, I'd argue that it's a bit of a misrepresentation to say consumer digitals are designed with a "throw it away" mentality or to be "used for a couple of years". Certainly, they're designed with different objectives with respect to pricing, longevity, and repairability, but that doesn't make them "junk". Look at digital cameras; Nikon and Canon both sell DSLRs that are as cheap as $500, and as expensive as $5000 and up. Are the $500 cameras "throw away junk"? Of course not. They're less durable, use less expensive materials, and don't have the features their more expensive brethren have, but they certainly aren't junk.

On one hand, some of this new stuff seems "cheap", or even "disposable", and I know people like Curt and Mac hate that. I understand. It's annoying that things can't be repaired. On the other hand, miniaturization and automated mass production has driven prices down, and grown many hobbies exponentially. Home theater, computers, photography, cell phones… Amazing technologies that were all once accessible only to the elite, now used daily by millions of middle-class folks who never could have afforded it if consumer electronics were still designed to last decades.

Technology keeps improving, better tech keeps getting cheaper, and that does cause obsolescence much quicker than it ever has. Combine that with the fact that people's time (to repair stuff) is relatively expensive, and it does make for a certain "throw-away" (or preferably a "recycling") element to our culture.

But, none of this provides a justification to call newer digital projectors "junk" or their purchasers dumb or blind.

garyfritz wrote:
Even with Dragan's help I never got my 8500 going as well as even a decent 8" should, but I don't watch the damn thing enough to justify spending any significant $$ on it. It's up on the ceiling, it works, and everybody who sees it is blown away. I know it could be better but I choose to be satisfied with what I've got.

That's great! Your bank account thanks you! You would also see no reason to make posts denigrating others' choices to back up your claims about how satisfied you are with with yours. Not everybody on this forum has always been so considerate.

SC


geez dude, do you want some cheese with that whine? Laughing
Back to top
digitalayon




Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 915



PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Calm down guys.....I never intended to mislead nor did I mean one setup is better than another. I think both camps have value and depending on what you have, you should feel happy that you have any projector. I remember roomates in college that were turning tv's upside down and putting a homemade cardboard box with a cheap fresnel lens from staples in front to project. I used to assist by swapping internally a few cables to invert it without having to flip over the unit. I paid 45 bucks for the VV1. And I paid 8.99 for new parts in the Epson. Which one has more value? That is the application itself. My kids love it as my oldest can do the adjusting himself. To me that works great. Modding to improve it....not a chance!!! In my mancave, it is my CRT. It is fun seeing the quality of the image you can get by mods and additions like moome cards. Telling people I have HDMI in a old CRT makes them look funny at me every time.
Back to top
garyfritz




Joined: 08 Apr 2006
Posts: 11565
Location: Fort Collins, CO


PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 3:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ecrabb wrote:
There is no question that the CRT projectors many of us have or had were designed with longevity and field-serviceability in as goals. However, that doesn't make consumer equipment "junk".
But, none of this provides a justification to call newer digital projectors "junk" or their purchasers dumb or blind.

Ahem. May I point out that, other than one somewhat-sarcastic comment from Mac, the ONLY person to use the term "junk" in this entire thread is.... YOU !? Laughing

macgyver655 wrote:
geez dude, do you want some cheese with that whine? Laughing

Srsly. Chill, Crabb. Very Happy
Back to top
Spanky Ham




Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 5643
Location: Comedy Central


PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 4:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the reply, Mac.
Back to top
ecrabb
Forum Moderator



Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah

TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010


PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 7:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

garyfritz wrote:
ecrabb wrote:
There is no question that the CRT projectors many of us have or had were designed with longevity and field-serviceability in as goals. However, that doesn't make consumer equipment "junk".
But, none of this provides a justification to call newer digital projectors "junk" or their purchasers dumb or blind.

Ahem. May I point out that, other than one somewhat-sarcastic comment from Mac, the ONLY person to use the term "junk" in this entire thread is.... YOU !? Laughing

May I point out that the post that started this thread is just a single example of many more like it?

garyfritz wrote:
macgyver655 wrote:
geez dude, do you want some cheese with that whine? Laughing

Srsly. Chill, Crabb. Very Happy

I'm cool as cucumber. Just explaining what I think could be the source of frustration which may have led to Kal being a little less tolerant than he might otherwise typically be.

I do find it interesting that Mac can point out how some CRT owners may not like CRT vs. digital threads because they can't afford a new digital, but I can't point out the simple fact that if anything, there is way more anti-digital sentiment than anti-CRT sentiment - without being told to chill. Rolling Eyes

SC
Back to top
View user's photo album (10 photos)
digitalayon




Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 915



PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apples and oranges guys. It really doesn't matter. I would be happy with anything other than a DLP. Lets not slam digital s. Only DLP!!!....HA HA
Back to top
CasetheCorvetteman




Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6319
Location: Australia


PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

But 3 chip DLPs arent bad.
_________________
Barco CineMAX, 120" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...

RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 5.1...
Back to top
digitalayon




Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 915



PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CasetheCorvetteman wrote:
But 3 chip DLPs arent bad.
No they are not. Just rotten on price!
Back to top
HogPilot




Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383


TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD


PostLink    Posted: Tue Feb 18, 2014 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As someone who has only owned mid- to high-end LCoS and DLP projectors, I have to agree with crabb that the anti-digital rhetoric here can get quite heavy from some, and is often based in pure ignorance. Often I say nothing and move along when it is in a thread not specifically discussing digital projectors. When I do speak up and share knowledge and experience that few here have with expensive LCoS and DLPs, I'm often met with distain and more rhetoric - weak black levels, expensive/frequent bulb replacements, SDE, pixel visibility, etc. What entertains me is that the most vehement people tend to be the ones with the least experience, or worse yet those who base their experience solely on units like the one discussed in this thread. Those here who own well-regarded digital HT projectors say none of those things.

I appreciate mac's honesty about those who can't afford the higher price tag attached to a well-performing digital HT projector, and how CRT is their only choice. However I don't understand why any CRT owner should take the good performance of a digital unit personally. The PQ of any display tech is not bolstered in the least by denigrating other techs; that simply leads to petty and useless pissing matches over the absurd idea of which tech is "better" overall. "Better" is a very relative term that depends upon a myriad of variables - room conditions, screen size/gain, viewing distance, budget, and personal preferences.

I've always been quite clear that I'm not a blind fanboy of any one display tech - each tech has its benefits and drawbacks, and none is perfect yet. Sites like this one should be a place where people can come to get useful information about Home Theater, but threads that start off like this only serve to detract from that goal. Kal's thread title change was 100% accurate, so I don't see why anyone should take issue with it.

_________________
ecrabb wrote:
Curt Palme wrote:
Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure.

He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.

SC
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   Printer-friendly view    CurtPalme.com Forum Index -> Digital Projectors All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5
Jump to:  
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