CurtPalme.com Home Theater Forum

[Mark_A_W]

[Mark_A_W]

[hotbutta]

Mr. Bob, coming to Jersey soon? I've got a lovely g70 that needs help with error code 37 and a set up. I luv my tri-clops and want to keep it going

[hotbutta]

Forget it. This is easy to set-up.

[kaylee18]

Good to know. I was wondering if I should "upgrade"!

[betel]

[JBOB]

I wonder why more people don't just slap a neutral density filter on a digital to bring down the black level? If the problem is not being able to totally block the light source, if the light engine is able to actually get near the black with the engine portion, a neutral density filter should bring it closer, and they are dirt cheap. An ND2 or ND4 should be close, I'd say, sliding the curve downward.

I saw an Optoma HD66 recently (only 720P capable), and was amazed how good it looked for the price ($699 and the 92" screen was free). And I have calibrated and installed CRT projectors for decades (as a living). The brightness was enough to cause your pupils to close down on bright scenes so that the black level was taken care of on those type scenes. Low contrast level scenes were a different thing, but an ND filter could have helped there. There were rainbow artifacts every once in a while, but it was just under the irritation threshold for me for several hours viewing. We were watching mostly 720P content from Netflix streamed from an Xbox 360. And it will be 3D capable for Blu Ray with an approx $400 adapter. At the 12 foot distance that we were watching, the pixel structure was just below my conscious perception. When I moved 8 inches closer to focus the lens, I could just make out the pixel structure (I have a lot sharper vision than most people, possibly excepting those who have had laser vision enhancement surgery).

I have gone in dealers from time to time and looked at the LCD (ugh) and DLP rear-projection sets, and they have not floated my boat. I saw one 65" Samsung that was doing the "smooth motion" frame-insertion deal that looked good on ONE movie: Avatar, but that movie was mostly computer animation anyway. I hate that type of processing for film-sourced stuff. Traditional cel-animation (like Dumbo, Sleeping Beauty, Heavy Metal) might possibly look good with it, don't know. It would be interesting to watch a stop-motion animated film with it and see if say, the walkers from Empire Strikes Back look more like models. I bet they would, and that would pull me out of the fiction of the film.

As someone who got into this industry back in the late 80s, it is just astounding how little one has to lay out to get a really quality experience compared to back then, on the order of ten times cheaper at least, the great majority of that in just the video.

My choices now are for a digital (I'm pretty well set on a Mitsubishi HC3800 or 4000 with a neutral density filter) for the living room area, although I have a Sony G70 with primo tubes I can use, the room orientation kind of dictates that I would have to use a free-hanging screen in front of a 65" Mits CRT rear projector. The 65" can't go anywhere else in the house because it actually can't get around the corners into any other rooms but the kitchen (and there's not quite enough room there, not to mention that to watch it, you would have to take your eyes off the BIG screen for the front projector showing right through the door beside it. Talk about overkill). I couldn't stand using the G70 with the free-hanging screen because the screen mount point is right beside an HVAC output in the ceiling, and even the slight movement of the screen would cause moving mis-convergence errors that would drive me nuts with a CRT (and the screen size I want is too much for the G70 to fill without a whole lot of stress on the tubes for long-term use). Not to mention that the cost of an HDMI input card is only about $120 less than I can get the cheaper Mits projector for. I also want to do some gaming and projection of computer displays on that screen, and even with the G70's orbiting function, I will not risk wearing the tubes with that type of use. Although it would be neat to have the new simulation-grade tubes: https://www.curtpalme.com/forum_archived/viewtopic.php@t=24068.html I also really need to find a HDMI equipped video processor for CRT that will output 72 frames per second that doesn't cost an arm and a leg (judder drives me crazy). The newer cheaper processors don't have frame-rate conversion to 72 frames per second because the digitals don't operate the same way (no decay of phosphors like CRT), so older less expensive ones are the best option for me.

There is also a Barco 1209S I have to put in the basement for a theater room there whenever I get around to it, but who knows when that will be done and I want to upgrade all the boards in it with Greg Eisemann's mods for around $1K (I draw the line at replacing the like-new 1209s tubes with Greg's new higher-res ones, although I know it would improve the picture. That money is for the audio upgrade to the new HD audio formats, and the theater room itself. After all, the room is one of the biggest factors in the audio and video quality). BUT, that $1K upgrade price would almost buy 2 Mitsubishi HC3800s (Hmmm, use 2 digitals with polarization for 3D?). Plus, I plan on a Torus multi-curved screen there so it can be about 12 feet wide (possibly with two CRT pjs projecting on the screen with a blend device if they get cheap enough).

The HC3800/4000 has a 5000 hour lamp life at the low level output I'd watch it at. I'd buy a couple of extra lamps before they stop making them and be set until it's time to throw it away for laser or holographic projection in a few years.

Yes, the two technologies give totally different experiences. It's awesome on a well-setup CRT to walk right up and put your nose on the screen and still see a continuous picture with no pixels (and I will be sitting very close upstairs with a 120" diagonal HD ratio screen). It's going to be fun to take the digital off it's mount, carry it outside, and project a 20' wide picture on the house at night for outdoor enjoyment. Set up some concert-sized commercial venue subwoofers and blow away some aliens in an HD videogame.

I'm just thankful that there are so many options, from the big companies driving the digital prices down to dedicated folks like Curt, Mike Parker, Moome, Greg Eisemann, etc. It's really an awesome time to be interested in home theater. I can almost still feel the anxiety of wondering if this or that movie would be out in HD (or even trying to imagine HD reading about the analog HD in Japan in the 80s), and now over satelite there is so much available that I have to archive it on external terrabyte hard drives to watch at some later time. Soon it will all be available over the internet at 1080P (or higher, good lord-Japan has that right now), and probably I'll get rid of the satellite service.

Here's a memory ("like tears, in rain") for you experienced guys like me: I remember setting up a Frox system and watching Blade Runner (the then-newly-released "Director's Cut" on Laserdisc, so about 1992), and even using the S-Video output (with a hellacious amount of processing by that Frox unit), by my memory (at a farther distance than I watch nowadays) in a HiFi Buys in Nashville: that picture is impressive to me even today that it had way back then.

I would love to see what those Frox engineers could do now with our video and audio.

[WanMan]

The use of a neutral density filter, which I had suggested 7-8 years ago may benefit the black level and impact the maximum light output of the projector. So, if you have 0.5 ANSI trying to get to 0.25 using an ND filter if the maximum light was 1,000 you knock it down to 500. Of course the first thing needing consideration is using color filters to maximize contrast and then weigh the benefits against the drawbacks for your personal taste.

BTW, the only operational CRT that has been in my home was the GE knockoff of the NEC 601, and the 2.5 year old digital I bought last June beats it without the use of any color of ND filtration. Yes, I am talking black level, CR, etc. Now I doubt I can say the same for the XGLC, but the cost to getting that thing up and running is more than what I just spent on another B-stock digital that will be a disposable item for HDTV/gaming (under a grand).

[JBOB]

The projector has more than enough light output to take a halving of the brightness with an ND filter; in my opinion, the light output is too much for my very light-sensitive eyes (most of my time is in the dark and on late 2nd-3rd shift). It also reduces visibility of rainbow color-wheel artifacts (possibly not a factor, I think the Mits has more segments than the Optoma I watched). The room's walls in my living room are covered with a felt-like black material that sucks light into nothing (probably dissipates it as heat). People upon first coming to the threshold often lose their sense of balance and grab at the doorframe to the room because there is no sense of the room being there with no light and no sound reflection. It's funny.

Was your NEC set up by a professional so that the guns actually cut off at black? Of course, the room being completely dark and non-reflective is a factor in being able to really see the difference. Anyone in my opinion who doesn't have a completely blacked-out light-absorbing room with all equipment lights and any other light pollution other than the projector killed is compromised; but I'm picky by nature and profession; even the ceiling fan blades in the room have black felt applied to them.

The digital projectors that I've seen that appeared to have good blacks usually were exposed by low-contrast scenes, where the high-power whites that were missing from the scene didn't cause the iris to close down and therefore make the dark areas appear darker. I love film noir movies, deep space movies/documentaries/science shows, horror, mystery, stuff with a lot of low average picture level stuff. so it's taken a long, long time for anything digital to approach what I was looking for, and it still may not be there, but I'm checking with a toe in the wallet, so to say.

[WanMan]

I wasn't responding to your application, but rather in general. Most folks buying high output digital projectors are not looking for the low black levels as a chief the priority. Also keep in mind, JBOB, I am the resident lazy person and most around here know I pay the professionals to do the setup and calibration. One only needs to acknowledge it is an air-coupled product.

Additionally, the room the CRT is in has jet black carpeting, flat black screen wall, and all walls, ceiling, and trim were painted in the darkest purple-blue SW offered. Why you think that a two year old digital cannot perform as well or better than an air-coupled entry level CRT is amusing. Then again, experience is everything.

[JBOB]

WanMan, I've never messed with the low-level CRTs like the 601, I was always working with the high end of the pool like Madrigal and some of the other hot-rodding projects of the Ehome 9500, and other 9 and 12 inch based units, etc; priorities had to be with the highest-paying projects.

It's also good to know that someone else is headed in the right direction re: room reflection, although it sounds like you may have compromised with only the darkest purple : ). I personally like to wear all black and a facemask and gloves in the theater, especially when taking baseline readings for comparison : ). As I am involved in the industry, I prefer to do things myself and know it was done to my standards.

I was thinking of a floating theater room like the nice recording studios with equivalent STC ratings, but then the Smyth Research SVS system makes even needing a real analog acoustic accommodation for sound a moot point when one can emulate the finest venues in the world with headphones, doesn't it? I can now have a room totally empty of amps and speakers that still sounds exactly like Skywalker Ranch Stag Screening room except populated with Cello Stradivari Grand Master speakers for every channel (even the height channels). And an exotic headphone isn't required, even a $100 headphone will work. When the virtual goggles catch up, a room won't even be needed, and 3D implementation will be much simpler.

[WanMan]

Hmm, why bother being in the room?

[JBOB]

I always thought it would be neat to listen to the Skywalker Stag Screening room while having a soak in the tub. Watching a horror movie at night miles from anywhere in a dark forest seems interesting also, or listening to a DVD-Audio while lying in a hammock on a beautiful day. Playing a video game with full theater sound at the park would be fun.

[WanMan]

Not the point. If you are going to trust the instruments over your eyes (not questioning this) then why is your presets really needed in the room. You simply step outside with the computer. Also, unless you are watching (using) in the same condition then the calibration condition will never be reached because the room's environment has changed.

[JBOB]

When I wrote "I can have a room ...", I meant a virtual room. The Smyth SVS system uses headphones to completely replace the need for amps, speakers, a room (at least for the audio portion of the experience). Although the processor itself is too bulky right now to carry around like a walkman, as always happens with electronics, VLSI engineering into chips will eventually allow such (like the Sennheiser LUCAS processing for headphones from way back but much more effective), probably becoming an option on surround decoders like the Dolby or DTS suite of processing to be licensed out since that would allow the most efficient profit for each unit of cost for the owner of the intellectual property.

My thoughts are that one can get the sampling for the most commonly-used mixing rooms (this ability is included with the Smyth system) and then have the ability to play them back exactly as the engineer (hopefully approved by the director of the film) heard it (with the room factors exactly reproduced, including the differences in your ears' response to your headphones, since that measurement is included and corrected for with the Smyth SVS system). If the soundtracks, album music, etc, were monitored and mixed outdoors, without a room (uncommon in the extreme), there would be no need to emulate the original mixing environment to reproduce as closely as possible what the mix engineer heard, but logistics usually preclude such options so recreating the monitoring environment is the closest that can practically be accomplished, and now the tech is available, and undoubtedly will become even more affordable over time. Since the system comes with a set of Stax SRS-2050 II headphones, the actual cost of the Smyth part is only about $2300, as a first-gen product. The prices are only a fraction of the price of a state-of-the-art audiophile surround system of 5 to 7 amplifier channels, 5 to 7 (or more, including height channels for Dolby Pro IIz or width channels for Audyssey DSX processing), and aural room treatment to attempt neutral response. Existing surround decoding electronics is fed into the Smyth SVS system processor to provide the Head Related Transfer Functions (HRTF) and head-tracking to emulate virtual speakers in a virtual room, to keep the sound image stable. The center channel on a soundtrack can even come directly from the screen without having to have a perforated screen, since speaker is virtual: http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/viewpoint/0910/aa_chapter_131.htm

[Ridebreck]

Ahhhh....nice to see that the ol' CRT vs digital pissing match is still going strong after all these years. Really takes me back.

[audioalexander]

Crt is still primo on acceptable matching screen sizes, to be true. Of course, running a CRT is almost like owning a car. you gotta maintain, and committ to parking one in your space! - lol. Still, can't beat the 3d realism, deepest blacks possible, and film like images with good digital scaling and rez!
I've owned a number of higher end Digitals. And you gotta spend BIG to really get a good black, solid contrast, etc. Of course, they're also much less bulky, often, need little convergence trouble, and you only replace the one bulb. But then there's that "gray black level" to try and topple with some tricks and gray screens and such. Not to mention the light output for multiple applications, and you can go back and forth with what's best for what application.
Movies?...yeah, CRT 9" and Studiotek is gunna be a chore to conquer

[ElTopo]

Agree

CRT 4 now CRT 4 ever.

ElTopo

[Jeremy112]

Hey if any of you colorometer guys want, you're welcome to come on over and calibrate the colors on my XG1100 I know for a fact that they arent to where they could and should be...

[cmjohnson]

I haven't been active here in a LONG time, but I figured I'd chime in again because I've seen yet again that the venerable CRT projector has longevity that no digital projector can match. My main 9500LC is running and solid after the last round of refurbishment and upgrades (but not as major an upgrade package as I'd originally planned for) and the picture is of course excellent, plus I have a second Marquee chassis and a full set of everything needed to turn it into a second 9500LC with mint tubes, and I'm sitting on a stash of a dozen Thomas tubes that are absolutely pristine and can be used in a Marquee with a pin adapter for the neck socket. Plus I've got a Sony 1292 sitting in storage waiting for...something. It's a very nice unit and it's really in need of a new home and I refuse to trash it. So I'm still firmly committed to CRT.

As for digital, well, the product lifespan of digitals is very brief. Just yesterday I picked up a Panasonic PT-D5500U in excellent shape, missing a lens and one lamp assembly (it can take two lamps) for the price of FREE. It works. By my point of view, the 5500 is still a pretty new unit but they're showing up in surplus.

How many generations of digitals have come and gone since VDC started making Marquees in 2000 or 2001? Five, I'd guess. The world will soon drown under a tidal wave of degraded digital projector chassis, but my CRT units will still be going strong after five more generations of digital projectors are developed, introduced with much fanfare, sold in respectable numbers, wear out, and are retired.

Granted, digitals are getting better in image quality all along, but they seem to universally lack staying power. They're as much a long-term investment as the latest smartphone. Which is not at all. They're still made to be expensive throwaway items.

It's likely that the only thing that will force some CRT users away from their tubes will be when the tubes finally wear out and the spares are all used up, which isn't a condition I'm likely to get into in my lifetime unless I sell my stock of spares.


CJ