|
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: Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | One of the points that I do not get when we compare CRT's is that we agree on using the MTF function, that is the modulation transfer function to see how well it can produce fine detail or sharpness.
Now sometimes people say there is a lot more to MTF than just bandwidth. I think that is true because the lenses also contribute to MTF but if I look at the definition of MTF it is a way to calculate a number that expreses the contrast between the white and the black line at high spatial frequencies. In other words if we look at the 1:1 testpattern we also take in account the 'other' parameters that make up the MTF liek the lenses and the CRT that make perfect black to white is clearly resolving better.
So what other parameters are there to make a CRT that has worse 1:1 have a better MTF? |
MTF is a good meassurement, but you can get that up by put sharper tubes, peak the video chain, and improve on focus magnets.
All that dont mean you have a clean high bandwidth linear non distorted video chain.
Ill prefer a softer, tube lens and focus system with a clean linear high bandwidth video chain.
If we can get both a super sharp and clean linear high bandwidth machine that for sure is to prefer, just that nobody has ever made that one.
I guess someone someday will have to build a Marquee with LUG tubes and G90 focus yokes, HD10E lenses and a complete MP modedet video chain / electronics. And run a nice clean digital video chain with as few processors as possible. |
From a theoretical point of view I think that if there is enough focus to clearly distinguish between two lines/pixels than the MTF would not improve on making the focus dot smaller.
The definition of MTF is the maximum luminance - the minimum luminance / the sum of the two.
Or is it so that a smaller dot is brighter?
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
haireez
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 207
Location: singapore
TV/Projector: Vidikron Vision 1 - Ultra
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've seen Barco Cinemax in action & had 2 Vision 1. However, I hardly heard anyone in Singapore own a Sony G90 and if there is anyone here locally offer 2 G90 at $USD 1250, I would not hesitate to buy both even though I already got 2 Vision 1. I agree it's a no brainer as what Craigr mentioned.
_________________
2 White Vision 1
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | One of the points that I do not get when we compare CRT's is that we agree on using the MTF function, that is the modulation transfer function to see how well it can produce fine detail or sharpness.
Now sometimes people say there is a lot more to MTF than just bandwidth. I think that is true because the lenses also contribute to MTF but if I look at the definition of MTF it is a way to calculate a number that expreses the contrast between the white and the black line at high spatial frequencies. In other words if we look at the 1:1 testpattern we also take in account the 'other' parameters that make up the MTF liek the lenses and the CRT that make perfect black to white is clearly resolving better.
So what other parameters are there to make a CRT that has worse 1:1 have a better MTF? |
MTF is a good meassurement, but you can get that up by put sharper tubes, peak the video chain, and improve on focus magnets.
All that dont mean you have a clean high bandwidth linear non distorted video chain.
Ill prefer a softer, tube lens and focus system with a clean linear high bandwidth video chain.
If we can get both a super sharp and clean linear high bandwidth machine that for sure is to prefer, just that nobody has ever made that one.
I guess someone someday will have to build a Marquee with LUG tubes and G90 focus yokes, HD10E lenses and a complete MP modedet video chain / electronics. And run a nice clean digital video chain with as few processors as possible. |
From a theoretical point of view I think that if there is enough focus to clearly distinguish between two lines/pixels than the MTF would not improve on making the focus dot smaller.
The definition of MTF is the maximum luminance - the minimum luminance / the sum of the two.
Or is it so that a smaller dot is brighter? |
And the tubeface phosfor will always have some bleed at hi level, so the tighter the dot, and less bleed who spill into the dark area, the higher MTF.
But If MTF should be used as a reference meassurement ill think you need to meassure it in steps from 0-100% IRE and again the first vertical line to the last, as most CRT video chains seems to have a unstable reference level.
It wont help much on PQ if you can only hold performance on 1 spot on the tube face at a very specifik resolution and level.
So that númber can be as misleading to PQ as the contrast number on a new digital projector.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HogPilot wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Why is there none of you guys who pick up on my post, and document me wrong on some of the week/ bad points i state related to the G90.? |
Because that's not how this works. No one is right until proven wrong; the burden of proof lies upon you to prove your position. I'm not a CRT guy, but your track record of grossly misinformed/biased/subjective comments about digital projectors in general (and JVC projectors) doesn't imbue me with any confidence that this situation is different. Prove me wrong 
|
I would think that i have proven and documented most of what i have pointed out, with calibration files, screen shots and so on, i cant remember you do anything else than writing your opinion. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | One of the points that I do not get when we compare CRT's is that we agree on using the MTF function, that is the modulation transfer function to see how well it can produce fine detail or sharpness.
Now sometimes people say there is a lot more to MTF than just bandwidth. I think that is true because the lenses also contribute to MTF but if I look at the definition of MTF it is a way to calculate a number that expreses the contrast between the white and the black line at high spatial frequencies. In other words if we look at the 1:1 testpattern we also take in account the 'other' parameters that make up the MTF liek the lenses and the CRT that make perfect black to white is clearly resolving better.
So what other parameters are there to make a CRT that has worse 1:1 have a better MTF? |
MTF is a good meassurement, but you can get that up by put sharper tubes, peak the video chain, and improve on focus magnets.
All that dont mean you have a clean high bandwidth linear non distorted video chain.
Ill prefer a softer, tube lens and focus system with a clean linear high bandwidth video chain.
If we can get both a super sharp and clean linear high bandwidth machine that for sure is to prefer, just that nobody has ever made that one.
I guess someone someday will have to build a Marquee with LUG tubes and G90 focus yokes, HD10E lenses and a complete MP modedet video chain / electronics. And run a nice clean digital video chain with as few processors as possible. |
From a theoretical point of view I think that if there is enough focus to clearly distinguish between two lines/pixels than the MTF would not improve on making the focus dot smaller.
The definition of MTF is the maximum luminance - the minimum luminance / the sum of the two.
Or is it so that a smaller dot is brighter? |
And the tubeface phosfor will always have some bleed at hi level, so the tighter the dot, and less bleed who spill into the dark area, the higher MTF.
But If MTF should be used as a reference meassurement ill think you need to meassure it in steps from 0-100% IRE and again the first vertical line to the last, as most CRT video chains seems to have a unstable reference level.
It wont help much on PQ if you can only hold performance on 1 spot on the tube face at a very specifik resolution and level.
So that númber can be as misleading to PQ as the contrast number on a new digital projector. |
Ok but the 909 is also a very bright CRT I think. When I do a little boosting on the white is very bright so evenif the bandwidth is lower the details might still be there because of the brightness making for big contrast. I do not know if the Marquee is just as bright or if the G90 is. The few experiments I did with my Marquee seemed less bright in first impression but that was without proper setup.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thats a different thing, more light is not the same as higher MTF, or better contrast.
The G90 is bright and sharp, i even think i posted that in my original post in this thread.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah ok. More brightness also makes the black brighter if the bandwidth is limited.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HogPilot
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383
TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Why is there none of you guys who pick up on my post, and document me wrong on some of the week/ bad points i state related to the G90.? |
Because that's not how this works. No one is right until proven wrong; the burden of proof lies upon you to prove your position. I'm not a CRT guy, but your track record of grossly misinformed/biased/subjective comments about digital projectors in general (and JVC projectors) doesn't imbue me with any confidence that this situation is different. Prove me wrong
|
I would think that i have proven and documented most of what i have pointed out, with calibration files, screen shots and so on, i cant remember you do anything else than writing your opinion. |
You've done nothing of the sort, at least not with respect to your JVC. You do pass off a lot of your personal preferences and purely subjective opinions as fact in addition to making completely factually incorrect statements about it and digital proejctors in general. But there's no need to rehash all the specifics of that, I and others here have shut you down at almost every attempt to rant about digital projectors because you made some poor purchasing choices and didn't like the outcome.
I know that you know a lot about CRT setup and maintenance, but you're also very opinionated about your projectors, and you suffer from the false idea that the former makes the latter fact. Many of your statements remind me of audiophiles discussing things like which exorbitantly expensive HDMI cable results in a better sound from their "reference" systems. In other words, grounded not in fact, but personal observations that are nothing more than the result of our senses being poor absolute measuring devices.
_________________
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure. |
He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.
SC |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HogPilot wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | HogPilot wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Why is there none of you guys who pick up on my post, and document me wrong on some of the week/ bad points i state related to the G90.? |
Because that's not how this works. No one is right until proven wrong; the burden of proof lies upon you to prove your position. I'm not a CRT guy, but your track record of grossly misinformed/biased/subjective comments about digital projectors in general (and JVC projectors) doesn't imbue me with any confidence that this situation is different. Prove me wrong
|
I would think that i have proven and documented most of what i have pointed out, with calibration files, screen shots and so on, i cant remember you do anything else than writing your opinion. |
You've done nothing of the sort, at least not with respect to your JVC. You do pass off a lot of your personal preferences and purely subjective opinions as fact in addition to making completely factually incorrect statements about it and digital proejctors in general. But there's no need to rehash all the specifics of that, I and others here have shut you down at almost every attempt to rant about digital projectors because you made some poor purchasing choices and didn't like the outcome.
I know that you know a lot about CRT setup and maintenance, but you're also very opinionated about your projectors, and you suffer from the false idea that the former makes the latter fact. Many of your statements remind me of audiophiles discussing things like which exorbitantly expensive HDMI cable results in a better sound from their "reference" systems. In other words, grounded not in fact, but personal observations that are nothing more than the result of our senses being poor absolute measuring devices. |
Did anyone ever post a detailed gamma drift, cold to hot measurement of another JVC projector as i asked for, to confirm im mine behaved normal or was defect.? I dont remind anyone picking that up.
And lately ecrab made a very nice new pattern who is good to tell how the projectors handles different resolutions from black to white, if its linear or not.
I think redfox was the only one who had the balls to jump on that one, maybe someday if you grow up to be big girl you can also join. 
But to keep it relevant to this thread, lets hear about your G90 experience, and how it compares to mine. Who knows, you might be able to tell me how to set it up to work around some issues. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Just slightly off topic here but I sometimes think of some english words that sound funny when you pronounce them. You wonder who thought of it and when you say it, it just sounds funny. Example: obsessed. It just sounds funny, doesn't it? LOL. Anybody else ever notice this?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeremy112
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 2649
Location: Fond du Lac, WI
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | Just slightly off topic here but I sometimes think of some english words that sound funny when you pronounce them. You wonder who thought of it and when you say it, it just sounds funny. Example: obsessed. It just sounds funny, doesn't it? LOL. Anybody else ever notice this? |
Rofl  Great way to break up the convo mac 
_________________
When I'm asking for a Model number, that doesn't mean I'm asking for a nude photo with your number on it
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HogPilot
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383
TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | Just slightly off topic here but I sometimes think of some english words that sound funny when you pronounce them. You wonder who thought of it and when you say it, it just sounds funny. Example: obsessed. It just sounds funny, doesn't it? LOL. Anybody else ever notice this? |
Edit: My apologies mac, my original post was based on the incorrect assumption that your comments were directed at me when they were not.
It's a shame that what useful knowledge that Kurt has to offer is often lost in the noise of him bloviating about whatever display tech (or specific display) he's deemed doesn't meet his odd personal needs/standards.
_________________
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure. |
He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.
SC |
Last edited by HogPilot on Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:36 pm; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HogPilot
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 2383
TV/Projector: Vizio P702ui-B3, Pioneer Elite Pro-151FD & 111FD
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | Did anyone ever post a detailed gamma drift, cold to hot measurement of another JVC projector as i asked for, to confirm im mine behaved normal or was defect.? I dont remind anyone picking that up.
And lately ecrab made a very nice new pattern who is good to tell how the projectors handles different resolutions from black to white, if its linear or not.
I think redfox was the only one who had the balls to jump on that one, maybe someday if you grow up to be big girl you can also join. |
Lol, perhaps you should have sent your JVC back for warranty work once you started unearthing all of these "problems." JVC USA would have been happy to take a look for you. Or are you too cheap to do that, which is what led you to buy a projector not warrantied in your part of the world in the first place?
| stridsvognen wrote: | | But to keep it relevant to this thread, lets hear about your G90 experience, and how it compares to mine. Who knows, you might be able to tell me how to set it up to work around some issues. |
The OP already made his decision, so at this point the thread is whatever we make it. Besides, I've never pretended to have any knowledge or real interest in CRT. I don't have the time or desire to keep one of those things running. I'm just here for the occasional entertainment, something you always seem to provide on queue!
_________________
| ecrabb wrote: | | Curt Palme wrote: | | Interesting, Mac isn't returning my emails. Go figure. |
He's mad at us for making Hog a moderator. He took his ball and went home.
SC |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| HogPilot wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | Just slightly off topic here but I sometimes think of some english words that sound funny when you pronounce them. You wonder who thought of it and when you say it, it just sounds funny. Example: obsessed. It just sounds funny, doesn't it? LOL. Anybody else ever notice this? |
Edit: My apologies mac, my original post was based on the incorrect assumption that your comments were directed at me when they were not.
|
Thank you much. Glad we could resolve this issue!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ecrabb
Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 15909
Location: Utah
TV/Projector: JVC RS40, Epson 5010
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| macgyver655 wrote: | | Just slightly off topic here but I sometimes think of some english words that sound funny when you pronounce them. You wonder who thought of it and when you say it, it just sounds funny. Example: obsessed. It just sounds funny, doesn't it? LOL. Anybody else ever notice this? |
I think "crusade" sounds even a tad funnier than "obsession".
SC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
macgyver655
Joined: 22 Aug 2007
Posts: 8508
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ecrabb wrote: | | macgyver655 wrote: | | Just slightly off topic here but I sometimes think of some english words that sound funny when you pronounce them. You wonder who thought of it and when you say it, it just sounds funny. Example: obsessed. It just sounds funny, doesn't it? LOL. Anybody else ever notice this? |
I think "crusade" sounds even a tad funnier than "obsession".
SC |
Yes, that is funnier.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But the whole discussion of G90 and 909 and Marquee is based on dvd source material. Even if you upscale to 1080p you still have around 3 pixels with almost the same brightness. With 1080p source material we do need higher bandwidth to keep up with digital that have unnatural sharpness by the way
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | CIR Engineering wrote: | I would like to buy the projectors if they aren't located too far from me. Two G90's for less than $625 a piece is a no brainer. This thread is absurd.
...and the only person on this forum who would not consider a G90 a top reference projector is Kurt. As soon as I saw him post in this thread I was thinking "here we go again." Good lord this place has descended into royal crapulence. No wonder I have been coming here less and less.
craigr |
Happy new year for you to..
I have no financial interest in how different projectors players or processors performs, but i can understand why it might not be so for all of us.
I just state what i see, your welcome to argue or comment to the speciffik post you dont like, and we can take it from there, but the outcome might not be a great G90 sales add. |
It is to bad that most people underestimate Kurt especially when they are experts in the field. Think they forget that Kurt is a very close tester for Mike Parker and a lot of what he says is backup by Mike Parker with very much experience in the field. So if you read Kurt saying something you better take it serious and you do not get away with 'here we go again. I do not have to debate this because it is ridiculous because of.. what?' CRT has never before done 300HMz we better pay close attention if this does not change the best projector out there listings that where made in the days of dvd's.
If so than a Marquee that canbe bought pretty cheap with some $1000 of modifications might be a far better choice these days. |
No one underestimates him, just that no one cares. Theyre over it.
_________________
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 |
|
|
CasetheCorvetteman
Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 6326
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | | But the whole discussion of G90 and 909 and Marquee is based on dvd source material. Even if you upscale to 1080p you still have around 3 pixels with almost the same brightness. With 1080p source material we do need higher bandwidth to keep up with digital that have unnatural sharpness by the way |
And who really cares? Thats the source material available to home theatre users.
Since you love to back Kurt so much, maybe you can have a go, in your own words ofcourse, at explaining why a G90 is not a good machine for home theatre use?
_________________
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: Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CasetheCorvetteman wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | | But the whole discussion of G90 and 909 and Marquee is based on dvd source material. Even if you upscale to 1080p you still have around 3 pixels with almost the same brightness. With 1080p source material we do need higher bandwidth to keep up with digital that have unnatural sharpness by the way |
And who really cares? Thats the source material available to home theatre users.
Since you love to back Kurt so much, maybe you can have a go, in your own words ofcourse, at explaining why a G90 is not a good machine for home theatre use? |
Ok I removed that but you are very sensitive to criticism on you projectors. When I say something about your Nec you go completely nuts. Now Kurt is saying something about a G90 and you feel offended. I do not get that. He said a lot about 909 and I learned from his knowledge. Some things I just let go and I still enjoy the 909 but it is the hobby to search for something even better.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| 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
|
|
