|
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 |
Francisco
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 305
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Andreas21 wrote:
Yes they hide it and call it 4K! But that is ok with you but a real 4K machine is just crap and you would not even want to see it? And I think JVC is using 10$ processing chip.
JVC made their projector to please people like you and us High End guys. Guess who the 4k part was for?
what a clown you are.....
Alright, here's what fascinates me.
Mike came in and made one of the most subjective posts I have seen in this thread. He simply said that your test with an 8 inch air-coupled CRT projector versus a 4k projector, with a 1080p source, was a poor comparison. And you know what? He was absolutely right, it was a poor comparison!
The CRT projector you saw was a mid-grade CRT at best. And your VW1000 is arguably one of the best digitals available anywhere. The 808 that you used cannot resolve 1080p properly. Period. A higher end 9 inch CRT arguably can. So, Mike is absolutely right, not just a "clown", to say that the 1080p source in the 808 could not be resolved.
Then, he tipped his hat to you, saying that it wasn't even fair to your VW1000, because it isn't using your projector to its full potential either, as the scaling will invariably (also a fact) introduce artifacts! Might these artifacts not be noticed by an average user in film content? Sure! Is the VW1000 a damn nice projector? Absolutely. Nobody said that it wasnt.
But comparing your projector to an 8 inch AC set, and then now saying that us users with our high-end CRTs and VHS tapes are stupid, is like us comparing the fully modified 9500LC that Mike has with a sh***y Epson digital projector that belongs in a board room somewhere, and then saying that all digitals are useless.
Nobody said that. In fact, those of us who can arguably afford it or don't wish to spend the extra effort on CRT projection have moved to digitals, and love them! I belong to neither of those camps, so still enjoy my CRT, but do appreciate the advantages that exist in digital projectors. |
 good point, same here.
I think Diddern and Andreas have a lot off or maybe a bit to much testosteron levels.
Don't spoil it on a forum, just make your wife happy with it 
To be ontopic, I think not one of us all CRT users believe that the "superior" greg eisemann mods will ever let a CRT compare with a vw1000.
I think CRT users like to tweak and try to get best out of the old beast.
And I think we all know that Greg shout loud to get some business, I'm sure it will bring improvements but not what he claimes but that doesn't matter just see and judge for yourselve.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gnnash wrote: | | Diddern wrote: |
You do not know the half of the fact why we just for fun took the vw1000 to the 808 that Greg made some mods.
It was a hole lot of crap talk that started it.
This is not the time and place for that again. And it was to state a point yes. And some dirty.
For me it's not interesting to go deep into the CRT. I see what needed to bee seen. And am finished with it for good. |
It I had $10 for every time someone said they are done with this, I would go out and buy...
a JVC.
Seriously, if anyone here has been a "fanboy", it is you guys for Sony digitals. |
Listen are you listening,,, no!!!!!Fan boy or not you make me believe you are a big one.
It's been a lot of crap talk, and no use for that. I have seen and own almost all the pro home cinema projectors.
Including CRT. So not a fanboy. But I like what I see in a jvc and a sony. And picked the best in my eyes. And you did the same.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnnash
Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Posts: 216
Location: Lake Elmo, MN
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: |
good point, same here.
I think Diddern and Andreas have a lot off or maybe a bit to much testosteron levels.
Don't spoil it on a forum, just make your wife happy with it
To be ontopic, I think not one of us all CRT users believe that the "superior" greg eisemann mods will ever let a CRT compare with a vw1000.
I think CRT users like to tweak and try to get best out of the old beast.
And I think we all know that Greg shout loud to get some business, I'm sure it will bring improvements but not what he claimes but that doesn't matter just see and judge for yourselve. |
Very true. I am very interested in seeing what is possible with Greg's mods. I believe they do offer improvement, but I'd really like to see what that improvement is, and hear from an objective user.
So... Case? When are you getting these mods already?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: | | Quote: | Andreas21 wrote:
Yes they hide it and call it 4K! But that is ok with you but a real 4K machine is just crap and you would not even want to see it? And I think JVC is using 10$ processing chip.
JVC made their projector to please people like you and us High End guys. Guess who the 4k part was for?
what a clown you are.....
Alright, here's what fascinates me.
Mike came in and made one of the most subjective posts I have seen in this thread. He simply said that your test with an 8 inch air-coupled CRT projector versus a 4k projector, with a 1080p source, was a poor comparison. And you know what? He was absolutely right, it was a poor comparison!
The CRT projector you saw was a mid-grade CRT at best. And your VW1000 is arguably one of the best digitals available anywhere. The 808 that you used cannot resolve 1080p properly. Period. A higher end 9 inch CRT arguably can. So, Mike is absolutely right, not just a "clown", to say that the 1080p source in the 808 could not be resolved.
Then, he tipped his hat to you, saying that it wasn't even fair to your VW1000, because it isn't using your projector to its full potential either, as the scaling will invariably (also a fact) introduce artifacts! Might these artifacts not be noticed by an average user in film content? Sure! Is the VW1000 a damn nice projector? Absolutely. Nobody said that it wasnt.
But comparing your projector to an 8 inch AC set, and then now saying that us users with our high-end CRTs and VHS tapes are stupid, is like us comparing the fully modified 9500LC that Mike has with a sh***y Epson digital projector that belongs in a board room somewhere, and then saying that all digitals are useless.
Nobody said that. In fact, those of us who can arguably afford it or don't wish to spend the extra effort on CRT projection have moved to digitals, and love them! I belong to neither of those camps, so still enjoy my CRT, but do appreciate the advantages that exist in digital projectors. |
good point, same here.
I think Diddern and Andreas have a lot off or maybe a bit to much testosteron levels.
Don't spoil it on a forum, just make your wife happy with it
To be ontopic, I think not one of us all CRT users believe that the "superior" greg eisemann mods will ever let a CRT compare with a vw1000.
I think CRT users like to tweak and try to get best out of the old beast.
And I think we all know that Greg shout loud to get some business, I'm sure it will bring improvements but not what he claimes but that doesn't matter just see and judge for yourselve. |
About testo I am low on that so your statement is wrong hehe. But shots work fine. Lol
We did not start the unserious stuff here only the fact. You are right about CRT users but they need to accept that some thing are and will be better. And about Greg hehe don't want to go there but you are right. Have a nice Sunday.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Happy weekend folks time to serve the lady hehe high on testo
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andreas21
Joined: 02 Oct 2013
Posts: 582
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gnnash wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | gnnash wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Andreas21 wrote: |
What you donīt seem to realise is that I also have alot of experience with projectors and know what to look for in a good picture, I am not a teenager with too much hormones. I have seen CRTīs set up by experts and have heard what my calibrator says about them and I have seen good CRTīs, but none of them has made me want to sell my digital. |
now we are back on track.. No one wants you to get a CRT. And no one say that your SONY dont give you and others pleasure, you just need to understand that other have have other parameters who pleases them..
I also dont think you will prefer a 300Mhz capable CRT whos sharp, bright and fully resolves 1080P 72hz
Preferences.. i dont want to change yours.. and you cant change mine..  |
When you guys are talking about the source and 1:1 pixelmapping, why do you need a external VP to make the CRT show 72Hz when the source is 24hz (23.976Hz)?? |
All that we are doing when displaying 72Hz with a processor is tripling every frame - showing it three times in a row. Just like your old CRT monitor on your computer, the higher a refresh rate you display on a CRT projector, the less flicker there is. For most people, anything above 60 Hz won't flicker appreciably.
Our projectors won't display a source at 24Hz, because the flicker would be absolutely horrible.
The images are still 1:1 pixel mapped, the frames are just each shown identically three times. Picture content does not change in any way.
Please stop looking for more reasons to bash. |
It was just an honest question!  |
Great, glad to hear it. I didn't want you guys to start attacking us for using video processors and degrading our source material. |
I am not in the position to attack anybody for using VPīs as I have used many myself including DVDO VP50 pro, Crystallio VPS3800 and now I am using a Lumagen XS 3D and I use it for calibration and some other stuff and love it. But of course I knew about why you use 72hz on the CRTīs I just wanted to see how you guys reacted to the ignorant question and know it has nothing to do with 1:1 pixelmapping and source material.
_________________
http://www.minhembio.com/21Andreas
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: |
Preferences.. i dont want to change yours.. and you cant change mine.. |
That's really what this comes down to..preferences. Kurt owns both multiple CRT projectors and a very good (but not as good as the Sony) JVC digital and he like myself is consumed with attaining the best possible low end performance. That one particular trait is why a CRT market still exists. The top digitals are all sharper and brighter and will defeat CRT in almost every category. However, the pinnacle of low end is where CRT is dominant and why there are many that still prefer it (regardless of cost).
Since Mike's credentials are not enough (and you consider him a fan boy) it would be nice if Craig would chime in. Though I highly doubt he will be dragged into such a juvenile debate. He has multiple clients who can afford pretty much anything and some of them still use CRT for the very reason I mentioned above. He's seen and calibrated the best of both technologies (including the very best modified 9" CRT's), understands (from a technical stand point) what makes them tick and can explain it in simple terms.
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 7:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
I did a writeup on some of my experiences some time ago.. Posted: Thu May 31, 2012 11:52 am
https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=31033.html
Now there have run some water in the lake since then..
But nothing that have changet my standpoint much.
What i can say.. stick with your first impression.. its normaly quite close.. when starting to wonder and dig down in different parameters, the big overview seems to get lost.
So back to the beginning of my CRT days.. playing with my VIDIKRON, i dident have much advanced video processors and stuff.. I had a old DVDO VP50.
The calibration was all done in the CRT.
Later i got the Radiance XS+ and played a lot with that, somewhere in all this development i lost something i had seen in the beginning.. The image got more flat and boring, lost much of the sparkle and realism that i had seen.. it started to look a bit like the digital image on the JVC.
What i later found out is that if i touch any calibration parameters in the Radiance.. CMS adjustments like 21 point gamma, or color matrix, something happens.. it measures more perfect, but in the same time the image gets lifeless.
I even think my old DVDO VP50 did a better job pasing the signal untuched. but its limited to 165Mhz, or im sure it would be used today.
So i started hunting video processors to see how they performed, and today i have a small colection.. I had and sold the DVDO VP50pro.. It just dident match the picture of the old non pro.
I cant explain why i see what i do, but i have a idea.. and its all about processing those huge amount of data.. somethings just gets lost in the way.
Now it for sure helps using the Radiance CMS in the JVC.. it bumps up the performance, But with the CRT it drags it down.
So im sure the Radiance do a better job corecting the messed up response curve of most digital projectors, but it cant keep up with the natural analog response curve. And touching that in the digital domain will just mess it up.. more or less.
Then i know that some reality engines can bump up the realism to a level where its all over realistic, and im sure SONY did a better job finding a good level of realism. Better than JVC, but it dont change the fact that its a manipulated realism, in the efford to gain some of the lost stuff back.
If someone would make a digital projector with no processors, other than whats needet to adress the pixels and the level, with panels, and electronics that had the perfect gamma response im sure that would beat up almost anything ever seen..
But the video tech is based on the CRT response curves, and its just not a very easy thing to emitate in digital world without trying to make a digital generated response curve.
Then there is some bumps on the road in the CRT response.. all know the blue response is a bit tricky, but it can be analog controled to do a very decent responce, with a few naughty tricks.
Do we have the same ANSI contrast.. measured NO.. do we have the same ability to adress 1:1 pixel resolution as sharp as digital.. NO
But we do have a huge advantage in gamma response, and the way that CRT are updated on the tube, that compensate for a lot of judder, and the pixel free structure.. Imitating a word who are more round than square.
Anyone wants my opinion on Surround VS stereo, and the use of EQ.? 
Last edited by stridsvognen on Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:12 am; edited 5 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: |
Preferences.. i dont want to change yours.. and you cant change mine.. |
That's really what this comes down to..preferences. Kurt owns both multiple CRT projectors and a very good (but not as good as the Sony) JVC digital and he like myself is consumed with attaining the best possible low end performance. That one particular trait is why a CRT market still exists. The top digitals are all sharper and brighter and will defeat CRT in almost every category. However, the pinnacle of low end is where CRT is dominant and why there are many that still prefer it (regardless of cost).
Since Mike's credentials are not enough (and you consider him a fan boy) it would be nice if Craig would chime in. Though I highly doubt he will be dragged into such a juvenile debate. He has multiple clients who can afford pretty much anything and some of them still use CRT for the very reason I mentioned above. He's seen and calibrated the best of both technologies (including the very best modified 9" CRT's), understands (from a technical stand point) what makes them tick and can explain it in simple terms. |
 hehe
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gnnash wrote: | | Francisco wrote: |
good point, same here.
I think Diddern and Andreas have a lot off or maybe a bit to much testosteron levels.
Don't spoil it on a forum, just make your wife happy with it
To be ontopic, I think not one of us all CRT users believe that the "superior" greg eisemann mods will ever let a CRT compare with a vw1000.
I think CRT users like to tweak and try to get best out of the old beast.
And I think we all know that Greg shout loud to get some business, I'm sure it will bring improvements but not what he claimes but that doesn't matter just see and judge for yourselve. |
Very true. I am very interested in seeing what is possible with Greg's mods. I believe they do offer improvement, but I'd really like to see what that improvement is, and hear from an objective user.
So... Case? When are you getting these mods already? |
When im not running my ring out with work!! Havent had time to scratch my arse lately, so it could be a few months yet.
_________________
Barco Cine 9, ,Sony VPL570ES 4K SXRD, 135" OZ Theatre Majestic 16:9 screen, Denon X6700in preamp mode, 2x 7ch Tonewinner amps, 2x Tonewinner 15" subs, 2x 10" subs, 7.2.6...
RUNCO DTV991 LC ( NEC XG 852 LC ) 100" 4:3 screen, H/K AVR 7.1...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Question....
When you use a lumagen xs+ or the other talked about with the possibility to run 72hz on a CRT will the picture get sharper? Or just improvements in motion?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2802
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/
_________________
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 |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | | This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/ |
Welcome to the fact
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kabuby77
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 147
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | Question....
When you use a lumagen xs+ or the other talked about with the possibility to run 72hz on a CRT will the picture get sharper? Or just improvements in motion? |
When you increase bandwidth use picture can't be sharper. Lumagen Radiance doesn't use motion enhancement software like Epson or Sony projectors, but it is useful to have a frame rate exact multiple of original film material.
24 -> 48,72,96
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barclay66
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
Posts: 1304
Location: Germany
TV/Projector: Marquee 9500 Ultra
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | | This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/ |
+1
Again one of the many analog vs. digital disputes. Going back to post #1, the only things I want to know are:
- Is Greg's statement true?
- Under which circumstances is it true?
- Can it be measured (technical objectivity)?
Regards,
barclay66
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kabuby77 wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | Question....
When you use a lumagen xs+ or the other talked about with the possibility to run 72hz on a CRT will the picture get sharper? Or just improvements in motion? |
When you increase bandwidth use picture can't be sharper. Lumagen Radiance doesn't use motion enhancement software like Epson or Sony projectors, but it is useful to have a frame rate exact multiple of original film material.
24 -> 48,72,96 |
And on epson and sony you can turn that off also as you know.
Ok thanx
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| barclay66 wrote: | | gjaky wrote: | | This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/ |
+1
Again one of the many analog vs. digital disputes. Going back to post #1, the only things I want to know are:
- Is Greg's statement true?
- Under which circumstances is it true?
- Can it be measured (technical objectivity)?
Regards,
barclay66 |
- NO and far from the truth. I can prove that. He's mods make it better but not comparable with a sony hw50, but for some CRT enthusiasts more than enough. And a really god CRT picture.
- better than original CRT nothing else.
- I don't know not my aria.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | | barclay66 wrote: | | gjaky wrote: | | This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/ |
+1
Again one of the many analog vs. digital disputes. Going back to post #1, the only things I want to know are:
- Is Greg's statement true?
- Under which circumstances is it true?
- Can it be measured (technical objectivity)?
Regards,
barclay66 |
- NO and far from the truth. I can prove that. He's mods make it better but not comparable with a sony hw50, but for some CRT enthusiasts more than enough. And a really god CRT picture.
- better than original CRT nothing else.
- I don't know not my aria. |
Better in wich parameters.? Is the bandwidth improved like stated.?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Diddern
Joined: 02 Jun 2013
Posts: 821
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | | barclay66 wrote: | | gjaky wrote: | | This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/ |
+1
Again one of the many analog vs. digital disputes. Going back to post #1, the only things I want to know are:
- Is Greg's statement true?
- Under which circumstances is it true?
- Can it be measured (technical objectivity)?
Regards,
barclay66 |
- NO and far from the truth. I can prove that. He's mods make it better but not comparable with a sony hw50, but for some CRT enthusiasts more than enough. And a really god CRT picture.
- better than original CRT nothing else.
- I don't know not my aria. |
Better in wich parameters.? Is the bandwidth improved like stated.? |
Sorry to say do not think so, need to see it my selves. Your Marquee is still the best CRT I have ever seen from test picture.
Much better sharpness, then with correct focus jokes, and spokes.
Better dynamics visible.
My statement here is only from pictures....
This is your marquee right.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
87.14 KB |
| Viewed: |
3191 Time(s) |
|
Last edited by Diddern on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:01 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Diddern wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Diddern wrote: | | barclay66 wrote: | | gjaky wrote: | | This thread is so unexciting... yet can't get myself to not read, it's total waste of time :/ |
+1
Again one of the many analog vs. digital disputes. Going back to post #1, the only things I want to know are:
- Is Greg's statement true?
- Under which circumstances is it true?
- Can it be measured (technical objectivity)?
Regards,
barclay66 |
- NO and far from the truth. I can prove that. He's mods make it better but not comparable with a sony hw50, but for some CRT enthusiasts more than enough. And a really god CRT picture.
- better than original CRT nothing else.
- I don't know not my aria. |
Better in wich parameters.? Is the bandwidth improved like stated.? |
Sorry to say do not think so, need to see it my selves. Your Marquee is still the best I have seen. |
Ahh i got the idea that you seen it.. Sorry..
It would be realy cool if someone was able to make the 909 200Mhz capable or more.. It would make it HD capable.
I sende you a PM..
|
|
| 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
|
|
