| Author |
Message |
Francisco
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 305
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| stridsvognen wrote: | | Fransisco what pixel clock are you running at that shot.? |
Hi Kurt, I don't know because I didn't had my scaler in this chain, but it is standard 1080p@60hz timing from my PS3. Settings on PS3 are 1080p/RGB limited/deep colors off.
Video chain PS3 > HDMI cable > Moome input board for Barco
_________________
Philips vacuum cleaner | Trystar double toaster | Car radio with orange plastic memory arrows | Class A Fridge
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
stridsvognen
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: | | stridsvognen wrote: | | Fransisco what pixel clock are you running at that shot.? |
Hi Kurt, I don't know because I didn't had my scaler in this chain, but it is standard 1080p@60hz timing from my PS3. Settings on PS3 are 1080p/RGB limited/deep colors off.
Video chain PS3 > HDMI cable > Moome input board for Barco |
Ok then its a standard 148Mhz.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gasser
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is what I meant by lines Francisco. As you can see, at lower resolution frequency the vertical hash marks are visible. At higher frequencies, they become less distinct. Are you able to still see vertical hashmarks with your split pack on your HDMI frequencies?
| Description: |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
lines1.jpg |
| Filesize: |
671.87 KB |
| Downloaded: |
416 Time(s) |
| Description: |
|
Download |
| Filename: |
lines2.jpg |
| Filesize: |
719.65 KB |
| Downloaded: |
445 Time(s) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francisco
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 305
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah I get what you mean, but i never use internal test patterns for this. Always use HTPC or laptop to do focus etc. Use Nokia, calman and Nec test patterns for this job. As I see on your second picture, still hash marks visible in the center. Also your astig is off as dot's are not round but oval. (after mechanical astig) The 909 chassis has 4 and 6 pole electronic astig adjustments, so you'll be able to get perfect small round spot size. With the right lenses (HFQ900) you'll determine scan lines and sharpness across the entire screen.
_________________
Philips vacuum cleaner | Trystar double toaster | Car radio with orange plastic memory arrows | Class A Fridge
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gasser
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2014 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Thanks Francisco. The shot came from my cellphone so the quality is poor. I thought that the centers should be dots also, but on the 808s chassis the "middles" are actually lines as far as I can tell.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kal
Forum Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 18114
Location: Ottawa, Canada
TV/Projector: JVC DLA-NZ7
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
After a long time one more comment.
Your first post shows the old situation and the new situation. Clearly the new is improved. But in the old situation you used a moome v2 external and you said that the improvements first became clear when the new moome internal arrived. The Eisemann hdfury was not so good.
From what I have tested the only real improvement on the Barco 909 bandwidth comes from the Moome internal. It is comparable to my vga solution on port 5 now. Improvements on transistors and opamps are hardly visible and I think that is because the 909 used good opamps and transistors already.
This however does not mean that the Eisemann modifications would not improve on picture noise.
I am still hopefull that we will discover some real bandwidth improvements on video chain or neckboards but my feeling is it would require more profound changes than are done now.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
You can improve the 909 video chain, but you'll need to remove the limiting IC on the neck boards. They put it in the video path to allow gain and black level limiting before the final stage. The chip that's being used for that purpose is a terrible bandwidth chip
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From what I tested so far you might be very right there. With the internal moome and regular switcher somewhere on the driver and neckboards the most bandwidth is lost. There is a ad835 on the rgb driver. The AD835 is 250MHz and that opa688 is 530MHz. But I guess the opa is easier to replace or skip than the ad835 
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gasser
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Opa wouldn't like to be replaced.
Either would Oma 
Bedankt
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gregstv
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 628
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I think the 9 series has a lot less noise in the switcher and driver than the 8 series due to the better board layout.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gregstv wrote: | | I think the 9 series has a lot less noise in the switcher and driver than the 8 series due to the better board layout. |
From what I have seen the older 909's come with the same switcher as the 808s later 909's come with a switcher that has all components layout on one side of the board. Also the connectors are close to the top making port 3 connection easier on the 909. In my tests both switcher had the same bandwidth but I did not look at noise levels yet. It might be that having the older version with chips on both sides gives less interference? Eisemann modifies caps and from what I heared that is very vissible in noise and black.
I know that port 5 vga solution has comparable bandwidth to the internal moome when very short cables are used but the internal moome has far less noise and looks better.
The port 3 cable from the moome is of consern to me. Making it longer drops bandwidth. Replacing with coax might improve noise. I even had the image starting to shake with that cable long and on the wrong place.
About the driver. Eisemann improves caps there too probable giving less noise.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gregstv
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 628
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Also the 9 series have the video boards as far away from the power supply as possible. The 8 series are right next to the power supply in the middle of the board line up.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
km987654
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Posts: 2874
Location: Australia
TV/Projector: Barco BG809s
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | | gregstv wrote: | | I think the 9 series has a lot less noise in the switcher and driver than the 8 series due to the better board layout. |
From what I have seen the older 909's come with the same switcher as the 808s later 909's come with a switcher that has all components layout on one side of the board. Also the connectors are close to the top making port 3 connection easier on the 909. In my tests both switcher had the same bandwidth but I did not look at noise levels yet. It might be that having the older version with chips on both sides gives less interference? Eisemann modifies caps and from what I heared that is very vissible in noise and black.
I know that port 5 vga solution has comparable bandwidth to the internal moome when very short cables are used but the internal moome has far less noise and looks better.
The port 3 cable from the moome is of consern to me. Making it longer drops bandwidth. Replacing with coax might improve noise. I even had the image starting to shake with that cable long and on the wrong place.
About the driver. Eisemann improves caps there too probable giving less noise. |
Its the Cine 8 that has the same switcher as the 909/Cine9 the 808s can accept that board but its not standard. The Cine 8 also has the PFC board as the 909/Cine9. There is a post somewhere here where MP says he did not notice any difference in performance between the standard 808s switcher and the Cine9 switcher.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francisco
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 305
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| redfox001 wrote: | After a long time one more comment.
Your first post shows the old situation and the new situation. Clearly the new is improved. But in the old situation you used a moome v2 external and you said that the improvements first became clear when the new moome internal arrived. The Eisemann hdfury was not so good.
From what I have tested the only real improvement on the Barco 909 bandwidth comes from the Moome internal. It is comparable to my vga solution on port 5 now. Improvements on transistors and opamps are hardly visible and I think that is because the 909 used good opamps and transistors already.
This however does not mean that the Eisemann modifications would not improve on picture noise.
I am still hopefull that we will discover some real bandwidth improvements on video chain or neckboards but my feeling is it would require more profound changes than are done now. |
My experience is that with standard original video chain and only the internal moome used I don't get 1:1 smtp as good as with modified video chain. I found that it's the combination of modified video chain with the internal moome giving the best results. I also modified the port3 wiring keeping them short and high-res mini coax.
_________________
Philips vacuum cleaner | Trystar double toaster | Car radio with orange plastic memory arrows | Class A Fridge
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| km987654 wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | | gregstv wrote: | | I think the 9 series has a lot less noise in the switcher and driver than the 8 series due to the better board layout. |
From what I have seen the older 909's come with the same switcher as the 808s later 909's come with a switcher that has all components layout on one side of the board. Also the connectors are close to the top making port 3 connection easier on the 909. In my tests both switcher had the same bandwidth but I did not look at noise levels yet. It might be that having the older version with chips on both sides gives less interference? Eisemann modifies caps and from what I heared that is very vissible in noise and black.
I know that port 5 vga solution has comparable bandwidth to the internal moome when very short cables are used but the internal moome has far less noise and looks better.
The port 3 cable from the moome is of consern to me. Making it longer drops bandwidth. Replacing with coax might improve noise. I even had the image starting to shake with that cable long and on the wrong place.
About the driver. Eisemann improves caps there too probable giving less noise. |
Its the Cine 8 that has the same switcher as the 909/Cine9 the 808s can accept that board but its not standard. The Cine 8 also has the PFC board as the 909/Cine9. There is a post somewhere here where MP says he did not notice any difference in performance between the standard 808s switcher and the Cine9 switcher. |
Yes I agree that both switchers perform likewise. Having the connectors on top is convenient when using nice coax for port 3.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Francisco wrote: | | redfox001 wrote: | After a long time one more comment.
Your first post shows the old situation and the new situation. Clearly the new is improved. But in the old situation you used a moome v2 external and you said that the improvements first became clear when the new moome internal arrived. The Eisemann hdfury was not so good.
From what I have tested the only real improvement on the Barco 909 bandwidth comes from the Moome internal. It is comparable to my vga solution on port 5 now. Improvements on transistors and opamps are hardly visible and I think that is because the 909 used good opamps and transistors already.
This however does not mean that the Eisemann modifications would not improve on picture noise.
I am still hopefull that we will discover some real bandwidth improvements on video chain or neckboards but my feeling is it would require more profound changes than are done now. |
My experience is that with standard original video chain and only the internal moome used I don't get 1:1 smtp as good as with modified video chain. I found that it's the combination of modified video chain with the internal moome giving the best results. I also modified the port3 wiring keeping them short and high-res mini coax. |
Might be there is more to gain from changing the coax also between switcher and rgb driver.
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redfox001
Joined: 16 Mar 2009
Posts: 2257
Location: The Netherlands
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just for fun comparing different switchers.
1-my own
2-Eisemann
3-old model 909
4-new model 909
I did not have the feeling there was a difference 
_________________
701s->runco933->8500ultra->cinemax->9500mp->919 splitpack + cinemax
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gregstv
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 628
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
You only gain a little from each mod. Some a little more than others. The results come from a combination of the mods working together.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
