CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

geisemann · Joined: 30 Nov 2009 Posts: 33

These Barcos were designed back in 1995 and they only had 800MHZ video amps aval.

Many people still think the old Barco design cannot be improved but they are dead wrong.

We now are using 3GHZ video amps. As everyone knows in audio design the higher BW the input section the better the amp sounds and can resolve .

Take a look at our testimonials . I will guarantee a 75% sharper image or money back. We to date have sold hundreds to possibly thousands of Barco mod sets and its a must for any Barco user.

http://www.eisemann-theater.com/index.php?option=displaypage&Itemid=78&op=page&SubMenu=

Feel fee to ask me any questions here about the mods and I will answer them.

Gregory Eisemann

www.eisemann-theater.com

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

As discussed via email recently Greg, i will be going ahead with your mods soon.

I dont think the CineMAX is what it could be on its own, it really needs alot of help!!

Nashou66 · Joined: 12 Jan 2007 Posts: 16171 Location: West Seneca NY

I am glad Case is getting these mods. He would be 100% honest in his evaluation of the modifications that Greg does.

I have never seen his mods and many give him grief for the claims he makes. But doing mods myself on my marquee's i know what a few simple changes can make so it will be nice to finally know the truth.

I have feeling Case will be very happy.

Athanasios

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

And Nash you know i dont take steps like this on a whim either, abit of thought and alot of questions went into it.

I generally make my stance on things pretty clear, this will be no different. Greg has assured me the results will be exceptional, and he is backing it up with a garrantee.

**kal** · Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:56 pm Post subject:

gnnash · Joined: 10 Jul 2013 Posts: 216 Location: Lake Elmo, MN

This could be very cool, especially with some before/after pictures of 1:1 test patterns and such.

Spanky Ham · Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 5643 Location: Comedy Central

**kal** · Posted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:39 pm Post subject:

Ok, true.

Modulation transfer function (MTF) is one way. I'd like to see this done actually. Anyone do this?

Kal

Nashou66 · Joined: 12 Jan 2007 Posts: 16171 Location: West Seneca NY

Nashou66 · Joined: 12 Jan 2007 Posts: 16171 Location: West Seneca NY

Here is the text and pictures.

With a video camera and an oscilloscope one can optimise focus while watching the scope display even if the screen is not visible from the projector or if you are having trouble seeing the screen well from the projector location. In any case you can have the scope right next to the projector and watch it's display up close. Project a one or two pixel on, one or two pixel off pattern and focus the camera on the screen. Maximize the signal amplitude on the scope and you have the best posible focus. I think this is how autofocus on digital cameras works. Largest peak to peak is best focus.

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

Spanky Ham · Joined: 22 Mar 2006 Posts: 5643 Location: Comedy Central

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

Yes Spanky in terms of internals, i sure do too. But the V3 external im just not impressed with it all, and i even got it free. Not to say its a sh*t product at all, but i dont find myself saying "wow"...

I had issues trying to get the 3D to work on it, i never ended up with it working properly ( ended up going back to RGB out of the PC and it worked fine straight away ). I had issues with it allowing anything ubove 1920x1080p @60Hz, apparently it will do it, but Windows wouldnt allow it no matter what i tried.

So in the end i tried it on my XG, compared it to the internal MOOME and the HD Fury 3, picture appeared to be at its best with the internal XG MOOME, just a touch sharper, used the same 2 HDMI cables ( both yielded same result anyway ) and tried 3 different RGB cables, all of which were also the same, but also a shade nicer when using RGB from the PC instead of HDMI.

Its just my opinion based on what ive seen myself here, there was basically nothing in it for the internal MOOME and direct RGB, both the externals reduced the image quality by a very small amount. The direct RGB from PC in my lounge room goes to the CineMAX Port 5 via 5 parallel quadshield RG6 with compression fittings each end which is a serious over kill, and the image is better with that at high resolutions than HDMI via the V3 box.

Its more the fact this device reports to Windows that it cant do specific resolutions that it is claimed to be able to and others it should be able to that really bothers me, what should be easy is plain not, and image quality is not as good.

km987654 · Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:16 am Post subject:

Case did you post why you are disappointed in the Cine Max?

mx83toy · Joined: 14 Dec 2012 Posts: 322

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

Yeah i think i did somewhere yeah. Just minor things really Keith, but with the apparent flagship machine i expect itll be perfect or closer to perfect than it is. I think i remember Spanky at some point posting a few months ago he would take a G90 any day, so he may also be able to shed abit of light on it with his experience too.

No question about the fact its a great machine, but there are enough short comings to drop it down a notch.

km987654 · Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:35 am Post subject:

Maybe it's a good and not great machine.

km987654 · Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:57 am Post subject:

gjaky · Joined: 05 Jun 2010 Posts: 2802 Location: Budapest, Hungary

CasetheCorvetteman · Joined: 09 Nov 2008 Posts: 6326 Location: Australia

Its all true Gabór yes, the astig is second to none, while the NEC XG is very good in that respect also, it is not easy to get round dots in the corners, hence not as good as the ConeMAX which i found very easy to get perfect round dots corner to corner, even with a full tube face.

The convergence system on the CineMAX is good, but the adjustments are not nearly as fine as the XG ( or even the plain old PG ) and there arent as many points of adjustment. The XG simply blows the Barco away there, and probably everything else too. There really is no question about that, although the CineMAX convergence would be considered easier to learn than the NEC, i can start from scratch with an XG and have a source converged 100% perfect from corner to corner in about 20 minutes.

The drift during warmup is not something ive come to expect from any NEC ive ever set up, and even after many months ive not even had to touch one up either. Not to say ive had to touch up the CineMAX, cause it does settle in right where it was left, but the fact remains its not there at cold start.

Although i have converged my XG using external patterns before, it made no difference cause if PHASE is set correctly prior to doing anything else, internal patterns yield exact results. The CineMAX on the other hand is certainly better done using external patterns.

The image on the CineMAX is sharp as f***, but it shows slight shimmering and it also blooms, although so very slight, it is easily seen moving windows around the screen. The XG does not do any of this, even with contrast at max setting. My 9PG didnt bloom at all either, which is why i find it a touch odd that a CineMAX does.