Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Home Theater Forum Meets' started by mike_frontier, Jan 23, 2003.
Dave, Dave, Dave... what am I going to have to do to get through to you... lol
My main point to Mike was to warn him of CRT burn-in, and the tradeoffs you have to go through to avoid it. I just reread your original message, and you didn't mention burn-in, so I wanted to offer a different opinion. So if I came across wrong, please accept my apologies. But I do feel that burn-in is a VERY big issue that the majority of folks don't consider into their purchasing decision. I wanted to make sure Mike knew of it.
I'll give you that a properly ISF certified RPTV will have better color fidelity and contrast than a good FPTV. But how long will that perfection last? A year? What percentage of customers have their sets perfectly ISF converged? How much does it cost? What I'm saying is not that "all FPTV's are better than RPTVs"... just that if you were to compare the state of most newer RPTVs in homes that an FPTV could, most likely for a similar price, put out a more impressive image with several advantages (no burn-in, no convergence, flexible picture size).
Hey, I used to own a CRT FPTV (a Runco 990 spec'd Zenith Pro 900X). It was great. Perhaps if I had you come and converge it I would still have it! I finally gave up with the monthly tweaking. I've also owned CRT RPTV's, though not recent models.
I *do* think contrast is more important than lumens. Granted, contrast doesn't mean as much if your color is off and you have scaling artifacts. But, all else being equal, I'll take a 1000 lumen/2000:1 CR projector over a 3000 umen/700:1 CR projector.
As for PQ, hey, my NEC has tons of flaws. I see them all. Rainbows, dithering, a green push, light spill, etc. But its a business projector that came out over 3yrs ago. I'm waiting on the next generation to upgrade. Until then, I can live with it. The improvements to the latest batch of HT specific models are nothing short of stunning. 3000:1 contrast, better color temp tracking, decent scalers/deinterlacers built in, and good prices. I still think a $3000 FPTV will outperform a $3000 RPTV for movies. For SDTV? Well, maybe -- it depends on lighting, install etc.
So, I guess I'll just say I defer to your expertise, but I do feel burn-in, to me at least, is a big enough issue to consider NOT buying an RPTV. Most of my issues with RPTV's deal with either burn-in or convergence. But I'm not ignorant (hey I never said you were wrong, only that I disagree). I just have different priorities in my choice of TVs. Now if I sat 5' from my TV maybe I'd reconsider....
What do you think of the new Samsung/Optoma HD2 DLP RPTVs?
PS-Mike, Infocus is giving all purchasers before a certain date of the X1 a 3yr warranty, so its not just one vender.
WHAT??!! Nils, why didn't you tell me you're an ISF tech?
If I'd know that, I wouldn't have paid Steve Martin to come down from Dallas to calibrate my RPTV last July.
Dave: I guess I'll wade in with my 2 Hz. I bought a Samsung 54" 4:3 entry level RPTV last February, with the plan to use it for 2 years and then move to FP. I will state that burn-in was NOT a considered factor and that I still don't consider it a factor at all. I don't play video games, so the problem of video game pause burn-in doesn't exist. I think you are putting too much emphasis on burn-in. Also, off-axis viewing is not a problem and no one has complained to-date. I do agree that constant tweaking is a factor to consider for ANY CRT-based projector. Jonathan and others who value the PQ of CRT's has accepted and will gladly do a monthly tweak of his high-end CRT FP. It's all in what you're willing to do to get the image you want, and also, some people frankly enjoy tweaking. I will move to FP for image size, and will give up ultimate best image quality by NOT buying a CRT-based FP.
I've been associated with front porjection for quite a while as my company has sold data grade portable projectors for a few years, and also, our lab guys have developed IMO, the best light engine on the planet via proprietary prism technology. It is LCOS-based and you would be impressed. LCOS is the future.
I don't watch much television, but for people who do, I'd recommend people buy a CRT direct-view television and save their projectors (front or rear) for movies and big sporting events.
I totally agree with you on LCoS. If someone comes out with a native HD rez LCoS thats small and quiet for $4K, sign me up. Hopefully in the next 12-18 months.... Right now the JVCs are >$10K and the Hitachi has other issues.
The problem with Burn-in is that a lot of regular folks DO buy an RPTV to play video games, watch regular 4:3 TV, etc. For those folks, it can be a big issue down the road. And when it does occur, its already too late.
I've mentioned a few times that CRTR FPTVs offer the best picture PERIOD, at least when properly calibrated. You'll get no argument from me there. I'd love to see Jonathans setup.
Well, my setup has a long way to go before being considered reference quality. Right now I have weird electrical problem that is making the projector blink on and off about once every two hours, I need to build a new screen, the focus is off, astig is off, convergence is mediocre, and I see a weird blurring effect on motion sometimes. Of course, even with all those problems the image is as good as 90% of the digital setups I've seen and better than 98.1375% of RPTV setups I've seen. I'd say this primarily because 98.1375% of people who own RPTVs don't know what an ISF tech is. I don't know if Ian's RPTV has been ISF calibrated, but to date it's best looking one I've seen.
Jonathan, it seems you need to invite Nils over for a pizza and calibration session. Maybe he never told us he's ISF certified for a reason
BTW: I should add that the hype and misinformation go both ways as there are plenty of CRT owners/sellers who love to stretch the truth about how poorly digital projectors perform. If you ever find yourself over at AVS' Forums Site you'll quickly see what I am talking about. The amount of "CRT vs. digital" threads is ridiculous. If nothing more than to put an end to all the needless bickering and misinformation, I hope that digital projectors will outperform CRTs as soon as possible. Until then, be ready to turn on your filtering devices otherwise you'll find it very difficult to tell fact from fiction from all the various threads and reviews.
Given the very limited adjustments on the LT150, it seems impossible to tweak out the green push without compromising the red/blue (and those PITA yellows). But hey, its a 3yr old business projector that was never marketed for HT. I bought it because a few yrs ago nothing at the price could touch it, despite the color fidelity issues. But AVIA and VE only go so far.
Now, I could get Colorfacts for the LT150 (~$600 with equipment) and break into the gamma tables and set them much closer to 6500K. Mark Hunter of Milori has managed to get the LT150 VERY close in color temp and saturation. Only the reds were off (a little towards blue).
I'm more of a budget HT enthusiast -- I have probably $5-6K total in my setup. I know that pales in comparison to many folks here, but I'd still like to have folks come out and see it. I'm more than happy to trade beers/bbq for any suggestions, ISF certified or not. Perhaps we should start to plan a March event.
But, for now lets just say if I had a $10K Marantz 12Sv2 I'd take you up on your wager Since I don't, lets switch topics....
What do you think of Plasma? (IIRC, I think we agreed on that topic at Colin's...I hope)
"Plasma"... yikes!!!!! Danger Will Robinson, DANGER!
Yes, it may be as skinny as a 60's super model, but the problem is it also looks as good as a 60's super model (unless you happen to be someone who finds anorexic waifs pretty).
I believe that should answer your question on whether or not we agree on Plasma's role in HT systems.
Dave, I would gladly accept an invitation for an Austin Movie Night over at your miniplex. Just send us the details and I'm sure you will get an excellent response.
WoW this discussion is getting big! Much bigger then I expected to understand at this moment .
Nils that is great that we now your an ISF certified calibrationist , I might need some help down the road .
I did call a company called Projection People and a guy name Mike (no the other Mike) help me understand some more about projectors, which you guys were really helpfull also. I did mention to Mike about the Infocus X1 and he said it was no where near the quality as the Sanyo Z1 side by side comparison. He said something about the background was not clear as the Sanyo Z1 pic quality. He highly recommend the SanyoZ1 over the X1, but either way he can sell either of the two me,,, but he felt I will be much happier with the Z1. He E-mailed me this link and I was really impressed with it and what it had to offer. What you guys think?
BTW...... as for screens is it better to make one homemade or buy one? I am willing to learn if it can save me the bucks.
Nils, Colin, Hank, etc....
Since we've trampled the video side of things to death , I'd like to solicit input on speaker placement for my 7.1 upgrade (my Denon 3803 should be here Weds so I should be done by this weekend).
My main concern is the rear 6th/7th speakers (which typically carry the same material, but having 2 rear speakers eliminates sound reversal issues some folks feel distracting in a 6.1 setup).
Both my side surrounds and rear surrounds are the same. Small white speakers with a slanted front, designed to mount flush in a corner and give you a 90 degree firing direction. They can be mounted vertically or horizontally. The drivers are Mid-Tweet-Mid with a metal dome tweeter and 2 3.5"s (if only I could have 6' tall towers for my rears like Colin, sigh...).
My options are to mount them in the back corners along the walls, like this:
OR... to mount them behind the sofa about 6-7' apart, like this:
I think the 2nd scenario might have a better sound to it but then I'd have a plainly visible speaker mounted on the ceiling above my kitchen counter, plus theres no back wall for that side. In the 1st scenario, they'd be hardly noticeable.
I'm not opposed to mounting them in either position, I just would like a few 2nd opinions before I start crawling through the attic
Keep in mind this is just a mockup. The side surrounds will be directly perpendicular to my head when I'm slouching on the couch
PS-Now to find a good DTS ES Discrete DVD I haven't already watched .....
2nd choice gives my two thumbs up .
2nd picture gives my two thumbs up .
Since you are running an 7.1 setup the 2 speakers in the rear will sound more of an rear center and equal out even for dialog. With the rears spread out on the 1st picture I think the dialog sound will sound a little more broken up due to angels. Let the surrounds do that. But that is my take on this setup.
Unscientific opinion is placement #2, because of a few posts I've read, NOT from experience, as I only have 5.1 and am in no rush to do 7.1. I do like the placement of your side surrounds, being just a tad behind the sofa. Also, I prefer dipole side surrounds, but realize that many folks like direct firing surrounds. Did you listen to both during your purchase decision process?
BTW folks, Nils has a nickname: "hot jalepeno"
Nils, you are now my official converger.
I have listened to quite a few setups with multipolar speakers. I was originally thinking of getting the CSW Newton S200s (I think someone here has a set?) but I tend to prefer direct. I think that direct, when positioned properly in a big room, can become diffuse enough for the source to dissappear. I'm hoping that is the case. In smaller HT rooms, I think multipolar speakers work really well. But I also listen to music and I really dislike bipoles in multi-channel music like DVD-A (which is why I'd use the direct rear surrounds for music if I were to go di/bipoles).
If anyone has a set of the CSW dipoles (which can be had on ebay for ~$160/pr) I'd love to audition them. My system would be ideal for a comparison.
I have a really big (~18x24') room, so I think 7.1 will add some more rear soundstage. Plus I needed a receiver with component switching anyways, so it was a good opportunity upgrade.
BTW, anyone want to buy a like new Denon AVR2800 receiver or a DVDo iScan?
Configuration 2 conforms toDolby's specifications for Surround EX speaker placement. The lack of a rear wall may make the speakers stand out visually, but from an acoustic stand point it is actually desirable for accurate imaging.
The dipole/bipole/monopole debate was supposed to be settled with the move from Pro-Logic to AC-3. I believe the AC-3 spec states monopole surrounds, but a great many people still find dipoles to offer the most ambient presentation. Personally, I find that dipoles work best in large rooms, while monopoles generally work better in small rooms.
Mike, I checked out that link that the other Mike from Projection People sent you:
aka Bogus Review
I am going to save this link as a great example of why there are many very angry consumers out there that were told one thing only to discover later on that they got duped.
Here are some memorable quotes from that link that still have me grinning away...
2nd scenario = (although not having a rear wall is unfortunate)
Also I suggest Dipoles for all four surrounds for no other reason than to provide an excellent sound field for all viewers. The problem I had with direct firing surrounds is that those sitting closer to a specific rear speaker get a very unbalanced surround field. However for just two viewers I would then prefer all the surrounds to be direct firing. From your proposed layout, you might get away with direct firing L/R surrounds, but with the additional seating from the raised futon I would suspect dipoles for the rears would be best.
One thing to consider is that CS also offers a Newton Series surrounds that are switchable to any of the three possible configurations, monopole, bipole, and dipole. This might make even more sense for your 7.1 layout thus allowing you to adjust the sound field that best meets your needs at any given time.
In the meantime, I own a pair of the CS Newton S200s (which can be switched from bipole to dipole, but not monopole). You are more than welcome to borrow them to try out with your system and layout. I have personally been very pleased with the results I get from them and would not hesitate in recommending them to anyone.
Thanks man for your opinion I really will take your word for it. I know that sales reps will do anything to make an sale,,,, but thats so sad to hear. I had my hopes on the Sanyo. As I agree patience is what it is going to be. Since I only have about 10 days to either return my 42" 16:9 HDTV to get a FP or just going to have tp keep my 42" since I am still debating which FP to get. The time is ticking and its not getting any slower. So what shall I do, or must I say which shall I get??? Now thats the question.