|
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 |
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now this is giving me hope. I found this quote from MP:
| mp20748 wrote: | The real bandwidth bottle-neck in the 909 is in the neck boards, but I doubt it's also the single ended out IC by itself. And you won't know for sure until you can get the bandwidth to that chip.
The main problem is; I200 / OPA688. why they put that IC there blows my mind, when right after it, there is a Harris (now Intersil) HFA1100. And by using an HFA1100 (850Mhz) right after the OPA688 (look up the bandwidth) makes no sense, since the OPA688 was being used as a limiting chip. When Harris also made a HFA1130 limiter that is the exact same bandwidth as the HFA1100.
Now, Barco did exactly what Sony did in the G90 by putting a bunch of useless circuits in the video chain to boaster the features.
As limiter, the OPA688 allowed you to adjust the white ceiling as well as the black lower floor limit. Totally useless circuit if you're dealing with a legal video signal on the input (standard around the time it was manufactured).
Both chips should be replaced with something better, but it's not going to be easy to drop in replacements. And if you do find a set to work there, understand that you don't want to use limiting chips as replacements. |
Barco uses the HFA1100 from input to RGB to neckboard. That chip is not so bad.
But MP says exactly what I was thinking the chip close to the hybrid is a limiter and that might well be the problem. That chip has awfull specs.
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/opa688.pdf
I think I will try experimenting with the nechboards once. I will start with that limiting chip as the rest of the boards are not that bad as I can see. At least we should give the hybrid a chance.
There also is a bad transistor on the port 3 connector while on the port 5 connector there is a better transistor. But that is easy to fix. So standard port 3 is a little worse than 5 looking at the schematics but easy to fix.
That limiter has a gain of 1 and is useless with good video signal because it does white and black clamping. So I am thinking to just connect a 390 Ohm resistor between measuring points M203 and M202 and disable the opa688. Am I correct that it is that easy?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nashou66
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 16171
Location: West Seneca NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | Thanks Case your words are true and I honestly tested the extra bandwidth and it is nice to have. But when I look at the screenshots MP has put online I am stunned they are very very sharp. So I conclude that the Marquee when modded to the end and I don't know what tubes and lenses MP uses is possable the best machine in picture quality and Strid might have a point there. But the differences are very small because I know how stunning the 909 looks too with the lugs and hfq's.
When I rethink everything and after reading and soldering a lot I conclude that what Eisemann has done is a tremendous thing. He has brought the 909 to a level that MP could not achieve in his own words. MP clearly stated that the neckboard holds limitations in bandwidth and that he could not get it right but as Francisco shows with the one on one together with Eisemann he has gone past these limits somehow and that seems like a miracle to me!
But I am honestly thinking that the 909 will be limited in bandwith anyway but makes up for that with the lugs lenses and focus and convergence and low noise. So they are on par is my best guess.
Will I do the Eisemann mods? I will tweak a little on my own and wait if my MP modded boards come close when I have a better hdmi converter. I also have some ideas for lowering the noise that are inspired by the MP modded boards.
But when I see that Vision one Curt has for sale I am tempted  |
Ill guess you can make your 1:1 look like the one Francisco shows, if you play a bit with peaking, and alow it to do some overshoot to the horizontal line.
To me your pictures looks like quite clean bandwidth performance, or at least i cant detect any overshoot, Franciscos pics do show some overshoot, for that reason its not possible to find out whats real bandwidth and whats peaking.
How is the peaking adjustable on the 909, and do you all run it the same way for these tests.?
And do Eisemanns mods add extra peaking.?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francisco
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 305
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Barco has 3 settings for peaking, low freq. mid freq. and high freq. high gives the best result little bit better resolvability and no overshoot. I always test with peaking off and in high freq. to see how it behaves.
I'm still curious for these questions Strids 
| Quote: | Questions for you is, why are you using HDfury4? and not the MP modded VIM v3? Does it handle BW better?
Also how are you going to display 1080p@72hz without the Lumagen?
Another question is how is your setup now? Modded marquee? which modded boards do you use? and which tubes and lenses, color corrected? Video chain: oppo > HDfury4 > marquee?
Did you do grayscale calibration? how is your gamma holding. |
_________________
Philips vacuum cleaner | Trystar double toaster | Car radio with orange plastic memory arrows | Class A Fridge
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Francisco wrote: | oh boy Stridsvognen you must be a really Barco and Eisemann hater. I do agree on a lot of things you are saying but sometimes you are jumping to conclusions.
With the Eisemann mods and moome internal IFB-HD V3 board the bandwidth improved significantly and it resolves 1:1 much better, see picture:
1080p@60hz
I do agree that the video chain of the Marquees is kept simple and straight forward with a good result on 1:1 resolvability and can handle very high BW up to 200mhz.
But it is also a machine that needs a lot of attention to get it that far with a lot of modifications and tweaking. Also simple fact I don't have one... I have a Barco and will try to get the very best out of it because that's the sport off course like you try to get the best out of your Marquee. I already love the picture that it gives and the fact that it is silent because of the split pack configuration.
About Greg Eisemann, he has a small business and it's decreasing rapidly due to digital solutions. His modifications does improve the BW, don't judge him if you haven't tested it yourself. And I agree on the figures and percentages he's claiming are BS, but that's just different culture he's an American they exaggerate to make their point, bigger better best. But he knows what he is doing and has a lot of knowledge don't be to harsh on him.
I think it's very cool that we can combine our knowledge here and try to get the best out of our projectors. Doesn't matter if it's a G90 909 or 9500 ultra. |
Dont worry i dont hate it, it just find it strange that no one like to see what they buy from Eisemann before they buy.
And that some find it ok that he can write all that bs about Ghz and stuff, and then still not resolve a 1080P 60 hz image.
What i notice on the pic you posted here is that it looks like you still have roleoff on the 2:2 line group, and some overshoot/ peaking to the start of the horizontal lines.
Why is there none of you Barco guys who A-B test a 909 with standard and Eisemann boards.?
Evaluate bandwidth and see how the analog gama respons behave, low level performance, how it holds bandwidth at all levels, see how high gamma you can run before you crush black.
Also a good idea to see that the DAC can output a perfect 8 bit resolution, and how the croma signal is passed.
I find that to be able to give a CRT a decent chance to compete with a good digital projector, it needs to handle all those points pretty well, if the reference has to be what the source intended it to look like/ true to the digital data.
And display a framerate who is at least 72hz to get smooth motion, or at least not worse than the native 24hz source.
I think its great to share experience and cross them on different projectors, but for it to hold any meaning, we need to have a common reference. And thats a bit hard with the distances involved here.
If you can send me a high res. Pic of that moome board used, ill most likely be able to tell if it has the bandwidth to do a perfect 1080P 60hz |
I will send you a picture in high resolution to judge on it when I'm ready. You must know that this is a iphone picture the only thing we can make out of it is resolvability. This because the iphone ad's a lot of noise and can't focus well.
Soon I will test new moome board as well to see what it will bring. By the way I did a lot of A-B test with greg's boards and original Barco stock boards. My findings are that it when I connect internal moome board it handles on greg's boards 1:1 is better, sharpness is better, less noise. Compared to stock boards.
Questions for you is, why are you using HDfury4? and not the MP modded VIM v3? Does it handle BW better?
Also how are you going to display 1080p@72hz without the Lumagen?
Another question is how is your setup now? Modded marquee? which modded boards do you use? and which tubes and lenses, color corrected? Video chain: oppo > HDfury4 > marquee?
Did you do grayscale calibration? how is your gamma holding. |
I do use the MP modded Moome card for my Marquee. And i dont use the analog out of the Hdfury4, i use my Hdfury 4 as a frame tripler.
So my video chain look like this.
OPPO 103D HDMI 2 out 1080P 24hz 4:2:2 -> Hdfury4 1080P 72hz 4:2:2 out -> Marquee Moome card removed gamma and MP filters 0-255.
What i want to try if i can get the Hdfury4 to handle the analog bandwidth is to skip the moome card, removing 1 processor in the video chain, shorter signal path.
And for that to happen i need to find out how to take the RGB signal out of the board before the buffer and filters, and see if it will output the full signal bandwidth, and not have the high frequence noise issue.
I have ordered some DIN 96 connectors so with a bit of luck i should be able to build a plug in board to put in the VIM and use the projectors 5V supply to feed the Hdfury.
I think my gamma is quite good, but i did not run any complete calibrations on this setup yet, as im playing with to many different VIM Moome cards processors and so on. I just balance RGB and look that contrast and brightness is set right.
Ill post calibration files when its time.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nashou66 wrote: | Try the Intersil EL5166 its a direct drop in.
Nashou |
Thanks! I was just reading all the Marquee modifications you wrote. Good tips on soldering these 8 pin chips as I had one path get loose on a 808 board. It is a skill I have to learn but is doable with care.
I think it is very much fun to try these mods. I am getting a second split pack 919 within short time. I was wondering if it is possible to use the lugs hfq900 and focus coils of the barco with the complete headunit and to connect to a 8500 ultra with modified video path. I mean that is not so expensive and might just take lengthening some wires.
The split pack will be my experimental hybrid unit 
Last edited by redfox001 on Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:15 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: | Barco has 3 settings for peaking, low freq. mid freq. and high freq. high gives the best result little bit better resolvability and no overshoot. I always test with peaking off and in high freq. to see how it behaves.
|
Yes I also do try all these three but I really can see no difference in my pictures. In the manual it says to use the mid for the 1080p resolution not the high but as I said did not work with me. Perhaps my RGB driver peaking has problems as I see that when I have these streaking problems in the picture changing the peaking changes them too but everything contrast related changes it. So perhaps my RGB driver is dimming the contrast in a non uniform way causing the streaking. Perhaps I will learn whenI get the 919 with spare parts to exchange.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: | Barco has 3 settings for peaking, low freq. mid freq. and high freq. high gives the best result little bit better resolvability and no overshoot. I always test with peaking off and in high freq. to see how it behaves.
|
[/quote]
So the setting on the 1:1 shot you have peaking on.?
If so can you post a Picture with it off, so it direct compares to redfoxs 1:1 shots, or the 2 of you agree on a standard for comparing, so others dont get confused.
I suggest you agree on a resolution/ bandwidth, light output, and other relevant settings like peaking.
and did any of you look how the 1:1 patter comes out of Black.? Turning contrast all Down, and slowly up while looking into the tube face?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | Thanks Case your words are true and I honestly tested the extra bandwidth and it is nice to have. But when I look at the screenshots MP has put online I am stunned they are very very sharp. So I conclude that the Marquee when modded to the end and I don't know what tubes and lenses MP uses is possable the best machine in picture quality and Strid might have a point there. But the differences are very small because I know how stunning the 909 looks too with the lugs and hfq's.
When I rethink everything and after reading and soldering a lot I conclude that what Eisemann has done is a tremendous thing. He has brought the 909 to a level that MP could not achieve in his own words. MP clearly stated that the neckboard holds limitations in bandwidth and that he could not get it right but as Francisco shows with the one on one together with Eisemann he has gone past these limits somehow and that seems like a miracle to me!
But I am honestly thinking that the 909 will be limited in bandwith anyway but makes up for that with the lugs lenses and focus and convergence and low noise. So they are on par is my best guess.
Will I do the Eisemann mods? I will tweak a little on my own and wait if my MP modded boards come close when I have a better hdmi converter. I also have some ideas for lowering the noise that are inspired by the MP modded boards.
But when I see that Vision one Curt has for sale I am tempted |
Sure its nice to have, and i also feel the 9500 ULTRA can be made into a better 9" machine. Straight out of the box though its probably not.
I have never seen or read anything about Marquee convergence, so i cant comment on how good it is. I have not seen a G90 either, but if their convergence is anything like the G70, which isnt exactly bad at all, but id certainly take the CineMAX over that any day.
As good as a lot of people feel the Barco 81 point convergence is, its not a patch on what NEC had even in the original PG projectors. I never saw a GP series but apparently even those had a large number of totally independent points of adjustment. The fine adjustment mode on the Barco is still too coarse, and it adjusts too large an area to garantee pixel perfect alignment at higher resolutions. If you have a slight bit of a red line to the left of the green line on the barco, just one press toward the right will usually give you a slight but of red to the right of the green instead, and although its very close it isnt perfect. The fine adjustment of the NEC in the same situation might take 3 or 4 presses towards the right for dead on alignment, and each step is so fine you can hardly see it move.
Although the top XG has limited chance of competing with a 9" for best image quality, it easily slaps down the Cine8 Onyx and will more than likely do the same with an 8500 LC, i didnt spend enough time with the G70 but there is no question that the NEC is a more capable machine with respect to convergence.
Perfection in convergence is something ive always been driven by ever since i first had the ability to do it on my Panasonic GAOO, which had single point user convergence, but a huge number of service menu convergence adjustments. The difference there over "out of the box" was alot, and since the lenses were not perfectly focused out of the box, service convergence adjustments were required to get it right.
If i could throw my NEC XG boards into my Barco with my new P19LUG tubes, i have little doubt it would be even better than a modded Barco. The difference in sharpness and image quality for a perfectly converged image is really a huge step up over "almost perfect".
Will i notice the difference between "almost perfect" and dead perfect convergence when im screaming down the track in Mario Kart 8? F***en oath i will. And itll drive me nuts. Will i be able to tell if there is perfect 1:1 resolvability with respect to bandwidth? I doubt it, its almost certain i wont.
_________________
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 |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2802
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | Thanks Case your words are true and I honestly tested the extra bandwidth and it is nice to have. But when I look at the screenshots MP has put online I am stunned they are very very sharp. So I conclude that the Marquee when modded to the end and I don't know what tubes and lenses MP uses is possable the best machine in picture quality and Strid might have a point there. But the differences are very small because I know how stunning the 909 looks too with the lugs and hfq's.
When I rethink everything and after reading and soldering a lot I conclude that what Eisemann has done is a tremendous thing. He has brought the 909 to a level that MP could not achieve in his own words. MP clearly stated that the neckboard holds limitations in bandwidth and that he could not get it right but as Francisco shows with the one on one together with Eisemann he has gone past these limits somehow and that seems like a miracle to me!
But I am honestly thinking that the 909 will be limited in bandwith anyway but makes up for that with the lugs lenses and focus and convergence and low noise. So they are on par is my best guess.
Will I do the Eisemann mods? I will tweak a little on my own and wait if my MP modded boards come close when I have a better hdmi converter. I also have some ideas for lowering the noise that are inspired by the MP modded boards.
But when I see that Vision one Curt has for sale I am tempted |
Sure its nice to have, and i also feel the 9500 ULTRA can be made into a better 9" machine. Straight out of the box though its probably not.
I have never seen or read anything about Marquee convergence, so i cant comment on how good it is. I have not seen a G90 either, but if their convergence is anything like the G70, which isnt exactly bad at all, but id certainly take the CineMAX over that any day.
As good as a lot of people feel the Barco 81 point convergence is, its not a patch on what NEC had even in the original PG projectors. I never saw a GP series but apparently even those had a large number of totally independent points of adjustment. The fine adjustment mode on the Barco is still too coarse, and it adjusts too large an area to garantee pixel perfect alignment at higher resolutions. If you have a slight bit of a red line to the left of the green line on the barco, just one press toward the right will usually give you a slight but of red to the right of the green instead, and although its very close it isnt perfect. The fine adjustment of the NEC in the same situation might take 3 or 4 presses towards the right for dead on alignment, and each step is so fine you can hardly see it move.
Although the top XG has limited chance of competing with a 9" for best image quality, it easily slaps down the Cine8 Onyx and will more than likely do the same with an 8500 LC, i didnt spend enough time with the G70 but there is no question that the NEC is a more capable machine with respect to convergence.
Perfection in convergence is something ive always been driven by ever since i first had the ability to do it on my Panasonic GAOO, which had single point user convergence, but a huge number of service menu convergence adjustments. The difference there over "out of the box" was alot, and since the lenses were not perfectly focused out of the box, service convergence adjustments were required to get it right.
If i could throw my NEC XG boards into my Barco with my new P19LUG tubes, i have little doubt it would be even better than a modded Barco. The difference in sharpness and image quality for a perfectly converged image is really a huge step up over "almost perfect".
Will i notice the difference between "almost perfect" and dead perfect convergence when im screaming down the track in Mario Kart 8? F***en oath i will. And itll drive me nuts. Will i be able to tell if there is perfect 1:1 resolvability with respect to bandwidth? I doubt it, its almost certain i wont. |
I can't say anything about the Marquee Ultra, but the regular Marquee has rather poor convergence system, they even needed 2 years or so to introduce Vertical linearity in the menu... 45 point convergence. When I had my M7500 after the the PG xtra I really missed all the settings which the NEC had. However the Marquee did a good job while I rebuilt my PG xtra deflection board, but after finishing that, the Marquee had to go.
_________________
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 |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think it has alot to do with the camera used too.
_________________
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 |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was a little to fast with my former posts. I did calibrate the 720p@72 resolution and the 804p@60 resolution. The latter clearly does not resolve the 1 on 1 test but I also had the contrast way to high. Setting it correct the subtitles where just a very little bit softer than with the 720p resolution. In fact it looked damned good!
BTW don't know why but the gama turned out much better on both resolutions might have somthing to do with the higher bandwidth chip??? (edit: might be because I replaced the complete HV section with my 809 eht,quad,splitter)
Never had such a nice gamma before certainly not with digital. The contrast was at 65 and with the 804p resoluton even at 58 while the lightoutput is 12 ftL. I must say I am pleased with the numbers. Never had a beamer perform this well even with the limited bandwidth.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
136.89 KB |
| Viewed: |
7360 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
181.97 KB |
| Viewed: |
7360 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
168.54 KB |
| Viewed: |
7360 Time(s) |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francisco
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 305
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Francisco wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Francisco wrote: | oh boy Stridsvognen you must be a really Barco and Eisemann hater. I do agree on a lot of things you are saying but sometimes you are jumping to conclusions.
With the Eisemann mods and moome internal IFB-HD V3 board the bandwidth improved significantly and it resolves 1:1 much better, see picture:
1080p@60hz
I do agree that the video chain of the Marquees is kept simple and straight forward with a good result on 1:1 resolvability and can handle very high BW up to 200mhz.
But it is also a machine that needs a lot of attention to get it that far with a lot of modifications and tweaking. Also simple fact I don't have one... I have a Barco and will try to get the very best out of it because that's the sport off course like you try to get the best out of your Marquee. I already love the picture that it gives and the fact that it is silent because of the split pack configuration.
About Greg Eisemann, he has a small business and it's decreasing rapidly due to digital solutions. His modifications does improve the BW, don't judge him if you haven't tested it yourself. And I agree on the figures and percentages he's claiming are BS, but that's just different culture he's an American they exaggerate to make their point, bigger better best. But he knows what he is doing and has a lot of knowledge don't be to harsh on him.
I think it's very cool that we can combine our knowledge here and try to get the best out of our projectors. Doesn't matter if it's a G90 909 or 9500 ultra. |
Dont worry i dont hate it, it just find it strange that no one like to see what they buy from Eisemann before they buy.
And that some find it ok that he can write all that bs about Ghz and stuff, and then still not resolve a 1080P 60 hz image.
What i notice on the pic you posted here is that it looks like you still have roleoff on the 2:2 line group, and some overshoot/ peaking to the start of the horizontal lines.
Why is there none of you Barco guys who A-B test a 909 with standard and Eisemann boards.?
Evaluate bandwidth and see how the analog gama respons behave, low level performance, how it holds bandwidth at all levels, see how high gamma you can run before you crush black.
Also a good idea to see that the DAC can output a perfect 8 bit resolution, and how the croma signal is passed.
I find that to be able to give a CRT a decent chance to compete with a good digital projector, it needs to handle all those points pretty well, if the reference has to be what the source intended it to look like/ true to the digital data.
And display a framerate who is at least 72hz to get smooth motion, or at least not worse than the native 24hz source.
I think its great to share experience and cross them on different projectors, but for it to hold any meaning, we need to have a common reference. And thats a bit hard with the distances involved here.
If you can send me a high res. Pic of that moome board used, ill most likely be able to tell if it has the bandwidth to do a perfect 1080P 60hz |
I will send you a picture in high resolution to judge on it when I'm ready. You must know that this is a iphone picture the only thing we can make out of it is resolvability. This because the iphone ad's a lot of noise and can't focus well.
Soon I will test new moome board as well to see what it will bring. By the way I did a lot of A-B test with greg's boards and original Barco stock boards. My findings are that it when I connect internal moome board it handles on greg's boards 1:1 is better, sharpness is better, less noise. Compared to stock boards.
Questions for you is, why are you using HDfury4? and not the MP modded VIM v3? Does it handle BW better?
Also how are you going to display 1080p@72hz without the Lumagen?
Another question is how is your setup now? Modded marquee? which modded boards do you use? and which tubes and lenses, color corrected? Video chain: oppo > HDfury4 > marquee?
Did you do grayscale calibration? how is your gamma holding. |
I do use the MP modded Moome card for my Marquee. And i dont use the analog out of the Hdfury4, i use my Hdfury 4 as a frame tripler.
So my video chain look like this.
OPPO 103D HDMI 2 out 1080P 24hz 4:2:2 -> Hdfury4 1080P 72hz 4:2:2 out -> Marquee Moome card removed gamma and MP filters 0-255.
What i want to try if i can get the Hdfury4 to handle the analog bandwidth is to skip the moome card, removing 1 processor in the video chain, shorter signal path.
And for that to happen i need to find out how to take the RGB signal out of the board before the buffer and filters, and see if it will output the full signal bandwidth, and not have the high frequence noise issue.
I have ordered some DIN 96 connectors so with a bit of luck i should be able to build a plug in board to put in the VIM and use the projectors 5V supply to feed the Hdfury.
I think my gamma is quite good, but i did not run any complete calibrations on this setup yet, as im playing with to many different VIM Moome cards processors and so on. I just balance RGB and look that contrast and brightness is set right.
Ill post calibration files when its time. |
So you are using your HDfury4 as a scaler to triple 1080p24hz. Does the HDfury 4 affect the signal? other than only triples the framerate? It's all in the digital domain so I would guess it doesn't matter. But maybe you can share your findings in this setup, I quite like that you keep it simple and also sort off banned your expensive Lumagen
_________________
Philips vacuum cleaner | Trystar double toaster | Car radio with orange plastic memory arrows | Class A Fridge
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes i only use the HDfury 4 to tripple the framerate, and yes it do effect the signal. It seems that there is no way to pass a digital video signal true a processor chip without messing with the signal, i just try to find the least messed up solution.
With the current firmware the Radiance is a mess when you evaluate how it pass the croma signal and bit dept.
The Hdfury 4 is the only device i can find capable of outputting 1080P 72hz 178Mhz without effecting the image quality to much. It do limit the bandwidth of the croma channel, but its the best i have found from a processor so far, and it passes a perfect bitdept/ grayramp.
The analog output of the Hdfury4 has limited bandwidth, and will display distortion at 178Mhz.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2802
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | Yes i only use the HDfury 4 to tripple the framerate, and yes it do effect the signal. It seems that there is no way to pass a digital video signal true a processor chip without messing with the signal, i just try to find the least messed up solution.
With the current firmware the Radiance is a mess when you evaluate how it pass the croma signal and bit dept.
The Hdfury 4 is the only device i can find capable of outputting 1080P 72hz 178Mhz without effecting the image quality to much. It do limit the bandwidth of the croma channel, but its the best i have found from a processor so far, and it passes a perfect bitdept/ grayramp.
The analog output of the Hdfury4 has limited bandwidth, and will display distortion at 178Mhz. |
I am really curious how a htpc performs in this regard, so if you tell me what to look I'd be happy to try it on my rig and will report back how it went.
_________________
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 |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | Yes i only use the HDfury 4 to tripple the framerate, and yes it do effect the signal. It seems that there is no way to pass a digital video signal true a processor chip without messing with the signal, i just try to find the least messed up solution.
With the current firmware the Radiance is a mess when you evaluate how it pass the croma signal and bit dept.
The Hdfury 4 is the only device i can find capable of outputting 1080P 72hz 178Mhz without effecting the image quality to much. It do limit the bandwidth of the croma channel, but its the best i have found from a processor so far, and it passes a perfect bitdept/ grayramp.
The analog output of the Hdfury4 has limited bandwidth, and will display distortion at 178Mhz. |
I am really curious how a htpc performs in this regard, so if you tell me what to look I'd be happy to try it on my rig and will report back how it went. |
Run the S&M croma multiburst, at 1080P 72hz 4:2:2 look that all the lines on all patterns have the same level, both blue and red.
Look into the tubes its clear to see, specialy the green tube, it has a very low level output.
Run a grayramp, and look into the tubes, see that the fine steps are identical in the dark area where they are visible on the tube face.
If thats good its a good start.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: |
What i want to try if i can get the Hdfury4 to handle the analog bandwidth is to skip the moome card, removing 1 processor in the video chain, shorter signal path.
And for that to happen i need to find out how to take the RGB signal out of the board before the buffer and filters, and see if it will output the full signal bandwidth, and not have the high frequence noise issue.
|
I was looking at the same problem in the external Moome v3. I think it is possible to directly couple the video dac out and I don't think it will cause much heating in the transistors because these very high frequencies do not get far but don't tell this to an electrician, perhaps a little coil will kill these high frequencies or a little cap like some coax wire. But the problem that holds me from going further is that Mp adds custom peaking to the Sony internal as you know. There has to be the correct amount of peaking to compensate and I do not know how to get that right yet. Perhaps you know? I was thinking of simpel using my 150MHz scope as I need flat response below 100MHz. I might do one measurement at the dac and see what is left at the input. Is that a good idea? I have a 150MHz probe and it has probe compensation.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: |
What i want to try if i can get the Hdfury4 to handle the analog bandwidth is to skip the moome card, removing 1 processor in the video chain, shorter signal path.
And for that to happen i need to find out how to take the RGB signal out of the board before the buffer and filters, and see if it will output the full signal bandwidth, and not have the high frequence noise issue.
|
I was looking at the same problem in the external Moome v3. I think it is possible to directly couple the video dac out and I don't think it will cause much heating in the transistors because these very high frequencies do not get far but don't tell this to an electrician, perhaps a little coil will kill these high frequencies or a little cap like some coax wire. But the problem that holds me from going further is that Mp adds custom peaking to the Sony internal as you know. There has to be the correct amount of peaking to compensate and I do not know how to get that right yet. Perhaps you know? I was thinking of simpel using my 150MHz scope as I need flat response below 100MHz. I might do one measurement at the dac and see what is left at the input. Is that a good idea? I have a 150MHz probe and it has probe compensation. |
Peaking on the SONY V3 moome boards ? Never seen that, or what are your talking about.?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 09, 2014 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
There should be to correct for the cables but not sure. MP once said you needed different filters for different resolutions thought that was peaking relating to resolution like in the barco?
|
|
| 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
|
|
