|
As this forum is rarely used anymore, we've locked it. Feel free to browse and read. Questions? Please reach out to us directly. Cheers! |
|
|
 |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
A Rogers
Joined: 14 Feb 2011 Posts: 133 Location: Toronto On
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | I think myself, Curt and maybe a few others are the ones constantly putting down digital reliability and repair ability. Why, you ask? Because we are the ones constantly repairing and having conversations with others repairing these POS's. We have the facts to support our rants. Plus like I already said, CRT's can be repaired, digitals usually not. |
Why rant, though? They do a certain job. Most do it well, and last for as long as most people want to keep them. Some don't, obviously. Do you have exactly failure rates on each manufacturer and model? No. That's a fact. Hell, most of the manufacturer don't even know that. S
| macgyver655 wrote: | Right, so if the CRT vs digital comparisons stop, so will my rants. I only rant when they are trying to be compared. Discuss digitals by them selves and you wont hear a peep out of me.......well until someone asks for help trying to repair one, LOL.
So if your someone who can afford to be replacing bulbs every couple thousand hous(if they last that long) and/or afford to replace that few thousand dollar projector every couple years(if it lasts that long) then by all means buy a digital.
But if you can only afford a couple thousand or less and want it to last for years and years with "MAYBE" a repair every decade or two then go with CRT.
But lets stop comparing the 2. You either like the digital pic or you dont. |
Why stop comparing the two? Why do you have to rant about it? They're both ways to watch a movie. They're both valid choices. They each have their pros and cons. Depending on the priorities of the individual, one or the other may make the most sense. There's no more reason for CRT guys to rant against digital than there is digital guys to rant against CRT.
Frankly, I don't understand why anybody cares what anybody else wants. Your priorities and concerns are very likely not the same as mine. I don't tell anybody what kind of car, refrigerator they should have, why should you TELL anybody what kind of projector they should buy. We should all get over ourselves.
SC |
but you did just tell everyone you want to buy a Ford on a Chevy forum
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My main rant is because these digital manufacturers could build these better but they dont. They use crap parts.
And I really dont care what anyone else buys or doesn't buy. I choose only specific comments that are made to comment on. And that is where someone compares a CRT to a digital and claims that the pic quality is close enough to say digital is just as good as CRT but doesn't comment on life span. And the PQ may almost be there. But the quality of the device is not. And the pro digital people always want to ignore this, or not speak about it or try to disclaim it.
To many people, this is a high factor. Not many want to spend thousands of dollars and have a door stop in a year or two or 4 if your lucky.
Again, you think a digital is right for you, fine but dont try to pacify the fact they are built like crap and wont last and it will take thousands again to replace it. If you dont care about that, good for you, but most do care.
Just stop comparing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: |
Prices on used JVC RS-2's have fallen to the point that I can sell my G70 for a few hundred bucks, and replace it with a JVC. I'll sacrifice only on/off and a little motion resolution (which is mostly irrelevant with 24fps movies), but I'll get a smaller, quieter projector in exchange and improve the look and sound of my room. I'll have superior ANSI contrast (which is just as important as on/off), no brightness compression, perfect geometry, and excellent sharpness.
|
This is your comment Steve that provoked me to comment. You left out the big sacrifices of build quality, longevity and repair ability, expense differences, very major issues.
And pro digital people always do the same..... it's not just you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Motobias
Joined: 08 Jul 2008 Posts: 163 Location: Osnabrueck, Germany
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
building your home cinema should be a hobby and not a purpose
i own a xg135 for a couple of years now and never had the chance to set it up...finally happening this year
and this is where it goes to:
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.398619678501.211345.738343501&type=3&l=e618777553
i also have a linear polarisation filter mask for 2 crts stacked...but this requires a second xg
i will go 3d with two projectiondesign f1 sx+ and circular filters, brainstorming for a diy silverscreen at the moment.
for me it's all about tech and trying out, if it would be all about convenience you need to spend much more money and buy the latest projectors... but i like diy and getting everything surplus and/or broken !
my xg cost me 60€
both f1 xg+ together 400€
and then there are a dvdo vp30 for 140€, lexicon mc-1 for 250€, heaps of amps and speakers... all just waiting to go live
it's all about the fun of building
_________________ Most peope talk about HD without knowing the meaning and how to do it RIGHT !
FIGHTING STUPIDITY SINCE 1983
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ecrabb Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 15909 Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | ecrabb wrote: |
Prices on used JVC RS-2's have fallen to the point that I can sell my G70 for a few hundred bucks, and replace it with a JVC. I'll sacrifice only on/off and a little motion resolution (which is mostly irrelevant with 24fps movies), but I'll get a smaller, quieter projector in exchange and improve the look and sound of my room. I'll have superior ANSI contrast (which is just as important as on/off), no brightness compression, perfect geometry, and excellent sharpness.
|
This is your comment Steve that provoked me to comment. You left out the big sacrifices of build quality, longevity and repair ability, expense differences, very major issues.
And pro digital people always do the same..... it's not just you. |
And pro CRT people always leave out the a lot of the disadvantages of CRT. Hell, some of the people in this forum don't even watch movies on their projectors - I imagine some of them don't even get that there are disadvantages! Who cares if the noise floor in your room sucks, if you don't even watch movies!
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Curt Palme CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 24396 Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Who cares at this point really? There are still CRT newbies, CRTers that upgrade, and CRTers that are now digitalers. (I've got one digit for ya... )
The lifespan of a CRT is about 20-25 years for the chassis. Some longer, some shorter. A digital typically is 2-5 years, and most early adopters of the older JVCs have now upgraded. My guess is that the JVC chassis lasts a bit longer, but I'll also bet that JVC will discontinue all parts at the 7 year mark. Look what happened to the $27K Qualia. Can't get nuffin' for it at this point.
A hobby is a hobby. I haven't turned on my own HT in 18 months, as I can't be bothered. My room sucks bigtime, and it was a big highlight for me when I bought the house. If I had $10-20K, I'd just fly up a few of you talented DIYers to do my room to the 9s. It still wouldn't get used.
Hell, right now I'd rather spend an hour fixing a 5 year old laptop to learn how it works rather than spending 2 hours in front of a TV screen, but that's just me. THe hobby can be taken as far as you want, usually on a minimal budget. That's what's cool about dealing with the 'old' technology.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
dturco
Joined: 06 Feb 2009 Posts: 3778 Location: Eastern Shore Maryland
TV/Projector: Runco DLP VX-3000i Marquee 9500 parts doner
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | ecrabb wrote: |
Prices on used JVC RS-2's have fallen to the point that I can sell my G70 for a few hundred bucks, and replace it with a JVC. I'll sacrifice only on/off and a little motion resolution (which is mostly irrelevant with 24fps movies), but I'll get a smaller, quieter projector in exchange and improve the look and sound of my room. I'll have superior ANSI contrast (which is just as important as on/off), no brightness compression, perfect geometry, and excellent sharpness.
|
This is your comment Steve that provoked me to comment. You left out the big sacrifices of build quality, longevity and repair ability, expense differences, very major issues.
And pro digital people always do the same..... it's not just you. |
And pro CRT people always leave out the a lot of the disadvantages of CRT. Hell, some of the people in this forum don't even watch movies on their projectors - I imagine some of them don't even get that there are disadvantages! Who cares if the noise floor in your room sucks, if you don't even watch movies!
SC |
S.C. I know what you mean. After putting in the PT22's and having to "work around" the issues they've caused, I can honestly say one more issue and I will part out my 9500. I just don't have the time or want anymore to fiddle with it. I want to just watch a movie. The noise a CRT makes is a big deal to me. I have my Mitsubishi RPTV back in the theater while I am waiting to fix the HV problem I have. The noise floor is none existent, it does make for a more pleasurable movie watching experience.
I am far to involved with studying now to waste time chasing the perfect picture. It was kinda fun when I had the time, but now life has changed, so I will adapt to what works for me. That may be digital, even if Gozer runs like a top, the PT22's are dimmer than I think I am willing to tolerate.
_________________ Firefly rules. Can't stop the signal.
http://www.hulu.com/firefly
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | ecrabb wrote: |
Prices on used JVC RS-2's have fallen to the point that I can sell my G70 for a few hundred bucks, and replace it with a JVC. I'll sacrifice only on/off and a little motion resolution (which is mostly irrelevant with 24fps movies), but I'll get a smaller, quieter projector in exchange and improve the look and sound of my room. I'll have superior ANSI contrast (which is just as important as on/off), no brightness compression, perfect geometry, and excellent sharpness.
|
This is your comment Steve that provoked me to comment. You left out the big sacrifices of build quality, longevity and repair ability, expense differences, very major issues.
And pro digital people always do the same..... it's not just you. |
And pro CRT people always leave out the a lot of the disadvantages of CRT. Hell, some of the people in this forum don't even watch movies on their projectors - I imagine some of them don't even get that there are disadvantages! Who cares if the noise floor in your room sucks, if you don't even watch movies!
SC |
Oh, I already agreed with you that if people have thousands of dollars to continuously spend with out worry and dont have the space, or knowledge or ambition to do CRT then digital would be best. Or portability or outdoor movie nights. All in the digital realm. I agree there are many circumstances where digital fits better. It is what it is. I'm was just correcting your post where you indicated the only things you would be sacrificing.....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ecrabb Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 15909 Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Curt Palme wrote: | | Hell, right now I'd rather spend an hour fixing a 5 year old laptop to learn how it works rather than spending 2 hours in front of a TV screen, but that's just me. THe hobby can be taken as far as you want, usually on a minimal budget. That's what's cool about dealing with the 'old' technology. |
That's a perfectly valid position, Curt! Just as valid as the guy who opts for a digital because whatever advantages CRT holds aren't worth the trouble and the sacrifice that goes along with it. Just as valid is the guy who opts for CRT because whatever advantages digitals hold aren't worth the sacrifice.
The projector debate is very similar to the new/old debate when it comes to cars. Some guys like to drive an older car and work on it themselves and they save a lot of money doing that. Other guys like newer stuff because they don't want to work on their car, don't want to deal with repairs themselves, want something newer, or whatever. The point is nobody is wrong because it's all about your personal priorities. What pisses me off is the people (on both sides) with the chip on their shoulder telling people on the other side they're stupid for doing it that way. THAT is stupid.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
AnalogRocks Forum Moderator
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 26706 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
TV/Projector: Sony 1252Q, AMPRO 4000G
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Hell, right now I'd rather spend an hour fixing a 5 year old laptop to learn how it works rather than spending 2 hours in front of a TV screen, but that's just me. THe hobby can be taken as far as you want, usually on a minimal budget. That's what's cool about dealing with the 'old' technology. |
That's a perfectly valid position, Curt! Just as valid as the guy who opts for a digital because whatever advantages CRT holds aren't worth the trouble and the sacrifice that goes along with it. Just as valid is the guy who opts for CRT because whatever advantages digitals hold aren't worth the sacrifice.
The projector debate is very similar to the new/old debate when it comes to cars. Some guys like to drive an older car and work on it themselves and they save a lot of money doing that. Other guys like newer stuff because they don't want to work on their car, don't want to deal with repairs themselves, want something newer, or whatever. The point is nobody is wrong because it's all about your personal priorities. What pisses me off is the people (on both sides) with the chip on their shoulder telling people on the other side they're stupid for doing it that way. THAT is stupid.
SC |
No isznot!
_________________ Tech support for nothing
CRT.
HD done right!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Curt Palme CRT Tech
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 24396 Location: Langley, BC
TV/Projector: All of them!
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Haha! IT's funny, I was thinking of electronics today while walking the dogs, and thought of an angle that I hadn't of before. That is: WHat if they made medical electronics or other crucial electronics the way they made consumer stuff? Traffic signal computers for example? Pacemakers or defib machines (don't ask me to spell defibrillator (sh*t, I got it right!)) should also only last 2-5 years. (no worries, we revive MOST of the patients, when the machines work... )
I do have a big beef with the way consumer and pro electronics is made. I do also recognize that CRTs have a finite life.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
A Rogers
Joined: 14 Feb 2011 Posts: 133 Location: Toronto On
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Curt Palme wrote: | Haha! IT's funny, I was thinking of electronics today while walking the dogs, and thought of an angle that I hadn't of before. That is: WHat if they made medical electronics or other crucial electronics the way they made consumer stuff? Traffic signal computers for example? Pacemakers or defib machines (don't ask me to spell defibrillator (sh*t, I got it right!)) should also only last 2-5 years. (no worries, we revive MOST of the patients, when the machines work... )
I do have a big beef with the way consumer and pro electronics is made. I do also recognize that CRTs have a finite life. |
Sitting on my desk right now is a Sony TA-F55 from the late 1970s. A friend of mine scooped it out of the recyclers, but before he did so it had been placed in a garbage truck and dumped into garbage sorting pile that is routinely moved around via skid steer. Besides being beat up, 30 years old, and having no working lights the stereo works as new. and by works I mean sounds absolutely fantastic with its 65watts rms per ch @ no more than .008% THD. My point is, and I am all for advancement but why can we no longer build things with a life span greater than 5-10years?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ecrabb Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006 Posts: 15909 Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stuff that's made cheaper isn't all bad, though. There's an upside, and that is we can afford a lot of this cool stuff.
A TV in the 70's was a HUGE purchase as a percentage of a family's income. The damn thing BETTER last - it cost a frickin' paycheck or three. Now, a 32" TV is about the same as 2-3 nights in a decent hotel in most cities- or a few days' wages for a white collar worker.
Yes, our CRT projectors are well-built, will run for thousands- if not tens of thousands of hours... But, considering that many of them cost more than a family sedan when they were built, they damn will should be. They're industrial equipment - very similar to the hospital equipment Curt referenced!
I like nice gear, too... But the reality is that if stuff was still made like some of you here are pining and wishing it were - like CRT projectors used to be - very few of us here would be able to afford it! That's a fact.
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tanwn
Joined: 26 Dec 2006 Posts: 104
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I think the truth of the matter for a guy who owns a 9" CRT is the best in video quality which till now can not be fully replicated by digital. You have to see a properly calibrated 9" CRT to know the real truth.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
AnalogRocks Forum Moderator
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 Posts: 26706 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
TV/Projector: Sony 1252Q, AMPRO 4000G
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tanwn wrote: | | I think the truth of the matter for a guy who owns a 9" CRT is the best in video quality which till now can not be fully replicated by digital. You have to see a properly calibrated 9" CRT to know the real truth. |
Shhhhh that's a secret!
_________________ Tech support for nothing
CRT.
HD done right!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010 Posts: 2802 Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have my NEC PG for free, and if it has problem I can repair from a couple $ -not like a digital in most cases. Not to mention the picture isn't bad at all for the price. And if I would like to "upgrade" to digital I should pay a serious amount of money just to keep the quality level.
When I picked up my first CRT (it was sitting in a dust bin) I didn't know much about them at all, but while learning they construction, their setup I really fell in love with them. IMO a digital PJ doesn't involving the user that much therefore the user remain unconcerned with them. -You use your fridge every day but who loves it? And what about your car, which you care for big time: you may love, may hate, but you are not unconcerned -I see the same with the CRTs
Did you recognize that you are arguing about the 10+ years old CRT vs. the recent technology LCD/DLP. The fact itself that the CRT's still have advantages over the recent technology deserves big honour to them. Compare your computer which you used in 2000 with the one which you use now -was it better than the new in ANY aspect?
_________________ 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 |
|
 |
jask
Joined: 17 Mar 2006 Posts: 10187 Location: kamloops BC
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
It sure kept my office warm in the winter!
seriously though, although this may be an obsolete technology it is by no means inferior, in many aspects and very specific conditions it remains clearly superior. I think what draws almost every member of this community together is that common joy in learning and mastering something that rewards our efforts
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
HighDefMike
Joined: 20 Aug 2008 Posts: 62 Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Curt Palme wrote: | | ....WHat if they made medical electronics or other crucial electronics the way they made consumer stuff? |
LOL. Oh that's a good one!
| ecrabb wrote: | | ... But the reality is that if stuff was still made like some of you here are pining and wishing it were - like CRT projectors used to be - very few of us here would be able to afford it! That's a fact. |
Not necessarily....there was plenty of affordable, good quality audio electronics built back in the day. I still have a Yamaha 2 channel Integrated Stereo Amp from 1985, operating in my bedroom....and it used to be part of my main HT rig many years ago. I even still have a Sanyo DDrive turntable (only cost me $99) much older than that, and except for a "short" in one channel of the output cable, is still functional as well. I had to fire it up for a 12 year old I know, who saw it and went "..what in the world is that!?"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheVerge
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 928
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: |
Oh, and I forgot about brightness compression... That awesome on/off contrast and 12fL that eek out of your CRT? That's with a 20% window. Like Dave always used to say - space scenes look amazing, and movies like Ice Age look like crap because the CRT is putting out maybe 6 fL in high-APL scenes.
SC |
You used to play BFBC2 if I remember, dunno if you have played BF3 yet, but the opening screen looks stunning on my digital compared to a crt.
But for movies, there is just some sort of intangible reason why i prefer the softer analog picture.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Boilermaker
Joined: 21 May 2006 Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | But for movies, there is just some sort of intangible reason why i prefer the softer analog picture |
I think that many of us have either heard that said, or felt it themselves. I think I have an explanation for this if you will follow my twisted logic:
First let me remind us that the universe is analog in nature, and that digital is a mathematical tool to work with an analog medium. Harry Nyquist's sampling theorem has changed the world as we know it.
In a practical application of our "hobby" we take analog signals (both audio and video) and transform them into the digital domain because we can do wondrous things in this domain.
Now, in order to view/listen to it, we have to transform it back into the analog domain as our eyes and ears are analog. For audio, this is done in our receivers and/or pre/pro's. For the video portion, when we use our analog projectors, the signal is transformed to analog before display.
Along comes the digital display device, which does not really transform it into the analog domain, but processes it in various ways (depending on display type) in order to "emulate" analog light as were are used to. It attempts to "fool" your eye/brain into thinking it is analog. It is here that I believe something (and I don't have the faintest idea of what it is!) is amiss, which is why we have the quoted statement above.
Along the same lines, I want to remind the older ones out there that at the beginning of digital video, most all atsc broadcasts were sent by C-Band satellite without encryption. At that time, I was viewing these non-encrypted signals with a Motorola 4DTV using an 8' dish. My display was an early generation GP series NEC projector. Because all the numerous PBS stations in the country had not yet converted over to digital, both digital and analog signals were used. The resolution was standard definition 480i (remember it!). With the 4DTV receiver I had, I could view both the analog and digital signals.
Granted, this was using early generation D/A converters, but the pure analog signal was easily recognized as superior to the digital version even at 480i!
While I never saw one, maybe someone on this forum has seen the analog HD Laser Disc system that was developed in Japan, and never was marketed anywhere else. If I recall it had 1050 lines, but I'm not sure. Because it was pure analog from camera to your display, it was probably superior to our new 1080i HD. Does anyone remember seeing one of these anywhere - I forgot what it was called.
In sum, and IMHO, given high quality gear, with a film based (analog) movie, an analog display will look more like the original film than a digital display. This is obviously not withstanding the many inconveniences that analog displays have - size, noise, light output to limit size, etc.
Bob
|
|
| 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
|
|