|
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 |
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My doctor had me come in for an xray and on my way back I was contacted about the posting (below) that was posted in the MP defective Moome card thread, that claims a non-sync problem on a Moome card that was modified more than a year ago by me had failed..
I didn't give a lot of thought to this posting, so I'm really glad about the contact to let me know what I need to still look at. And concerning the Moome card, to include, this same card came up in a very similar started thread, but that one talked about a better modified card that produced a better image. So the thread went on to say that my modified card was removed for the better one. That was months ago, and here we are again, the same card that was supposed to have been replaced by a better card is now also being replaced by a better card because it failed..
But as pointed out to me in the post below: "that was tested here, which we found impossible to save/ reuse as the quality of the work done is to poor, and key components replaced with troublesome parts that degrade performance"
The part that says "we" who are the "we'' and where was this testing done. Who did the testing and how did they reach the listed conclusion?
Also, on this "key components replaced with troublesome parts that degrade performance" who determined this?
And while you are at this, let me give a little background on the Key Components on my neck board design, which is basically the same and have been for maybe 8 to 12 years.
First let me say that for all of those years, not one of those components has failed. And neither has any of those components caused anything else to fail. Please provide for me parts and or data on this to substantiate your claim on this. And include the person, or persons who made the conclusion and any title they would have to qualify them for this.
And to include, that same design has been tested by four other engineers, that were active design engineers for a projector operation. I'll mention a few of their names later, to include the FACT that I have posted on the forum some years ago about this test/evaluation I had done on the basic structure of my changes to these boards. And after I get a reply I would like to address and make clear what I mean by basic structure, because the accusation clearly indicates that the parts I had changed caused the boards to be worse than in the stock version... this has to be proven!!!
| greg9518lc wrote: |
The vertical lines has been removed and all the usual MP errors corrected, so you now have a noise free VIM for the special LUG neck boards we are going to use to replace your troublesome MP neck boards that was tested here, which we found impossible to save/ reuse as the quality of the work done is to poor, and key components replaced with troublesome parts that degrade performance." |
As pointed out to me, these are very strong accusations against me and what I have been doing for some years, so let the record show that I'm asking for this to be proven fact...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mike- These threads are honestly becoming next to impossible to follow. Between your, Gabor and Greg's threads there are various posts being referenced in multiple locations with a lot of "who's", "they's" and "cohorts" and clips of messages back and forth between god knows who talking about failed boards, mods, etc.
This thread is supposed to be about what you are doing now and I'll be damned if I know what that is. Your OP had 4 new changes of which really haven't been elaborated on followed by a bunch of screen shots from a PJ with mixed tubes, a crappy BD player and a partial set up. You know my position on screen shots; they are total BS and should never be used as a real means for evaluation. And you confuse matters more by posting shots in Cliff's thread and also in this one. If you want to do them for fun I'd suggest keeping them in the official screen shot thread and having this thread focus on the technical merits of your latest and greatest. I understand you probably don't want to divulge all of the secrets but it would be nice to know some further details on what separates the current boards from what you were doing a year ago.
Every time you respond to one of these posts you draw more attention to the wrong thing. As a friend and customer I urge you to implore some structure to this thread and make it about what you are doing.
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | Mike- These threads are honestly becoming next to impossible to follow. Between your, Gabor and Greg's threads there are various posts being referenced in multiple locations with a lot of "who's", "they's" and "cohorts" and clips of messages back and forth between god knows who talking about failed boards, mods, etc.
This thread is supposed to be about what you are doing now and I'll be damned if I know what that is. Your OP had 4 new changes of which really haven't been elaborated on followed by a bunch of screen shots from a PJ with mixed tubes, a crappy BD player and a partial set up. You know my position on screen shots; they are total BS and should never be used as a real means for evaluation. And you confuse matters more by posting shots in Cliff's thread and also in this one. If you want to do them for fun I'd suggest keeping them in the official screen shot thread and having this thread focus on the technical merits of your latest and greatest. I understand you probably don't want to divulge all of the secrets but it would be nice to know some further details on what separates the current boards from what you were doing a year ago.
Every time you respond to one of these posts you draw more attention to the wrong thing. As a friend and customer I urge you to implore some structure to this thread and make it about what you are doing. |
I appreciate what you're saying here, but it has almost been impossible to keep the thread focused on anything, because of the odd-ball posting by others that has nothing to do with the title of the thread. The screenshots we're both on the same page, and that is why I don't get into comparison shots. I still think it is stupid. But as I've said so many time before, posting the shots serve as a means to look at my work. The Cliff thread gets distorted when large shots are posted, so you have to wait until it gets to the next page in order for it to make sense. Asking to have the non relevant stuff removed is also something that won't happen.
However, when someone keeps posting about my work and it is nothing but LIES. I get tired of it, especially if the same people were praising the same work even up to last year, to now seeming to attack and defame me and everything I've been doing. I'm really getting tired of it, so maybe it would help to have those accusations proven. Maybe that will bring a stop to this, and I'm sure you know by now these accusation are not going away. It's stuff you would expect from juveniles.
And if you're really interested in what I'm doing send me your 03 VIM. And let me take it to another level at no cost. that would be the best way I could let you know one of the things I'm doing that's really worth looking at. Or you could play with any of what I'm doing, just let me know what you would want to try. You know I'll do that for you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
digitalayon
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 921
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 09, 2017 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mike,
Don't let ego get in the way. You do not have to prove anything to these guys. I ordered the mods on my cards from you because others that did loved it. Don't do it for free because of some smack talk.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbltecnicspro
Joined: 23 Apr 2016
Posts: 512
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hey Mike - just dropping in to say that the latest screenshots look very impressive. Do you give demonstrations? If I'm ever in the area I would love to see your setup in action.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jbltecnicspro wrote: | | Hey Mike - just dropping in to say that the latest screenshots look very impressive. Do you give demonstrations? If I'm ever in the area I would love to see your setup in action. |
Sure and would love to have you stop by. Just let me know whenever you're in the area.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 12:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
This has also upset others, and that's why I've been asked to post what I did.
Oh and to answer one of the 4 things I mentioned that jbmeyer13 was asking about. I'll pick the 03 VIM for now.
As known, the 03 VIM is the better of the two Electrohome designs. It is known as the sharper between the 02 and 03, but not so easy to come across especially these days.
The 03 has pluses and minuses. The plus is, its known to be sharper and does not have the Line, Dot, etc fixes. It also uses a 500mhz Analog Device gain Amplifier. So one would thing it is higher bandwidth. It is and it can be. It can be tested as being higher bandwidth, and can also be found to fail at higher bandwidth. Kinda complicated, and that's because of the AD834 Gain Amplifier.
The AD834 was the higher bandwidth gain amplifier back when these boards were being designed, but it had a problem when trying to make it perform stable. And that's why it was not used in any other video chain, where it would have made for a perfect higher bandwidth amplifier. The problem with the AD834 was its noisy and getting it to work even at high it's bandwidth was not easy. The Electrohome engineers seem to be the only ones that used it in a video chain becaue of its complexities. almost every else used the AD835 (half the bandwidth). Sony G90, Barco 900 and most of the other better and later Barco CRT projectors had it in the video chain.
So, having a AD834 in the 03 video chain worked, but not what you would want for the cleanest and most noise free performance. Taming the noise was difficult and as one Electrohome engineer told me, they don't have the time to tinker to with not so easy to see noise. That is also, why all CRT projectors have noise in the image problems. It would take forever to solve, that the cost and they needed to move onto the next product.
So with my new Jig, I took on the 03 and its noise problem..
And being true to what I'm usually good at, I figured it out. I was able to fix the AD834 so that it will perform flawless in a video chain. That means that I can make an 03 very stable and do so with it being able to amplify a very clean ) to maybe 500mhz (not really sure about it going full 500) and be able to do it without a ton of parasitic oscillation (invisible or nearly invisible high frequency noise).
And being able to stabilize, increase its linearity and rid it of its noise problem. It makes and MP modified 03 one heck of a video board.
yep, MP stuck a serious folk into the 03 vim problem.. 
But of course, it'll perform better with MP modified neck boards..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cmjohnson
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 5180
Location: Buried under G90s
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cool!
Now, Mike, that brings up the question: Do you think you could upgrade a G90's video chain in the same way, installing AD835s and make them run with stability and low noise?
I could provide a set of G90s boards to test on. I have four G90s but only three run. The fourth, being short a YA board, (which is SLIGHTLY important, I gather....) can be thought of as my spares inventory.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cmjohnson wrote: | Cool!
Now, Mike, that brings up the question: Do you think you could upgrade a G90's video chain in the same way, installing AD835s and make them run with stability and low noise?
I could provide a set of G90s boards to test on. I have four G90s but only three run. The fourth, being short a YA board, (which is SLIGHTLY important, I gather....) can be thought of as my spares inventory. |
The G90's video chain (BA board) is limited by IC404 (video processor). It contains almost all the control features (integrated) inside that chip. But I've already modified some BA boards (still using IC404) for better performance. I think were we able to get it up to 1080 72hz. That's better than stock.
Send me a board and I'll do it up for you..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2802
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | This has also upset others, and that's why I've been asked to post what I did.
Oh and to answer one of the 4 things I mentioned that jbmeyer13 was asking about. I'll pick the 03 VIM for now.
As known, the 03 VIM is the better of the two Electrohome designs. It is known as the sharper between the 02 and 03, but not so easy to come across especially these days.
The 03 has pluses and minuses. The plus is, its known to be sharper and does not have the Line, Dot, etc fixes. It also uses a 500mhz Analog Device gain Amplifier. So one would thing it is higher bandwidth. It is and it can be. It can be tested as being higher bandwidth, and can also be found to fail at higher bandwidth. Kinda complicated, and that's because of the AD834 Gain Amplifier.
The AD834 was the higher bandwidth gain amplifier back when these boards were being designed, but it had a problem when trying to make it perform stable. And that's why it was not used in any other video chain, where it would have made for a perfect higher bandwidth amplifier. The problem with the AD834 was its noisy and getting it to work even at high it's bandwidth was not easy. The Electrohome engineers seem to be the only ones that used it in a video chain becaue of its complexities. almost every else used the AD835 (half the bandwidth). Sony G90, Barco 900 and most of the other better and later Barco CRT projectors had it in the video chain.
So, having a AD834 in the 03 video chain worked, but not what you would want for the cleanest and most noise free performance. Taming the noise was difficult and as one Electrohome engineer told me, they don't have the time to tinker to with not so easy to see noise. That is also, why all CRT projectors have noise in the image problems. It would take forever to solve, that the cost and they needed to move onto the next product.
So with my new Jig, I took on the 03 and its noise problem..
And being true to what I'm usually good at, I figured it out. I was able to fix the AD834 so that it will perform flawless in a video chain. That means that I can make an 03 very stable and do so with it being able to amplify a very clean ) to maybe 500mhz (not really sure about it going full 500) and be able to do it without a ton of parasitic oscillation (invisible or nearly invisible high frequency noise).
And being able to stabilize, increase its linearity and rid it of its noise problem. It makes and MP modified 03 one heck of a video board.
yep, MP stuck a serious folk into the 03 vim problem..
But of course, it'll perform better with MP modified neck boards.. |
I mostly can second this.
Although I never had a new style of 03p VIMs but have a few of the older ones, they oscillate like hell… The interesting thing is that the circuit they used around the AD834 is not a genuine Electrohome design, but it is a copy of the Analog Devices reference design found in the Application Note, with some tayloring of course. On the other hand the AD834 datasheet clearly says do not use ground plane around and under the AD834 (and this is in fact true for all current feedback opamp as well), needless to say the old 03P VIM is full with ground plane even under the critical parts (just like the 02p VIM). I’ve only seen the new 03P on pictures and what I found odd is that they used the DIP package, that is usualy inferior to the SOIC in terms of high bandwidth, perhaps they used the DIP to hold back the thing, but I guess it is still fully poured with ground plane…
My XG-VNB design did not oscillate (the same circuit but with different layout) and it is even using a 800MHz transistor instead of the 2N3906 that is 250MHz, (but it did oscillate with BFT95 ~5GHz transistors).
_________________
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 |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | perhaps they used the DIP to hold back the thing, but I guess it is still fully poured with ground plane…
My XG-VNB design did not oscillate (the same circuit but with different layout) and it is even using a 800MHz transistor instead of the 2N3906 that is 250MHz, (but it did oscillate with BFT95 ~5GHz transistors). |
My thought on this was it allowed the actual chip to be away from the boards ground plane, where the SOIC puts the chip right at the plane, the DIP floats it.
My changes are done using the same transistors (2N3906) because I did not find them to be bandwidth changers. And you're right, the higher bandwidth transistors made things worse. They seem to contribute to the oscillation.
The AD834 when working right is ruler flat at 200mhz. I've not look at anything above that for flat bandwidth though.
The AD835 was easier to work with, but still has it's problems, which seem to be a Analog Device common problem and why you always have to carefully read the documents on the chips themselves when using and be prepared to tweak. They are both odd-balled designed chips that depend on complex external circuitry tuning to make them perform best for video. The AD835 gave me an equal headache in making it do what I wanted. It took me even longer to get it tweaked right. And surprisingly, almost every lead on it needs special attention. FYI, do not use resistors for +/- 5 supply for the AD835, go with either 4.7uh inductors or feritte beads on it's decoupling network.
Out of my two (02/03) redesigns, the 03 does best on my line testing (text and edge test) and it has the absolute best flat response, which really helps it pass the line test and better low end performance. The 02 is no joke here, with my latest upgrades it brings it close to the 03 results, but it's not that perfect in linearity (ramp on scope) testing as the 03. It does even better with noise floor. Though both are now nearly noiseless on screen and testing. The 03 is jump right out at you aggressive pop off the screen (almost looks digital), while at times I still prefer the 02 as it looks more film like (dynamic) and laid back.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | | Though both are now nearly noiseless on screen and testing. The 03 is jump right out at you aggressive pop off the screen (almost looks digital), while at times I still prefer the 02 as it looks more film like (dynamic) and laid back. |
De Javu- Kurt used the same words to describe the differences to me. I think both work great and either are an absoutely massive improvement over stock boards. While the 03 is sharper when we did testing at my place we both found the 02 to be slightly better (and this is really nitpicking). We did two full 1080p/72 calibration memory's (one for each VIM) and mainly used the final Harry Potter film, DVE disc and LOTR: The Two Towers for evaluation purposes. We also had another set up with the Lumagen Radiance as well but preferred using solely the Marquee for calibration. We ran Oppo 83>Lumagen 24hz pass through>HDFury4 1080p/72>Marquee.
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | | Though both are now nearly noiseless on screen and testing. The 03 is jump right out at you aggressive pop off the screen (almost looks digital), while at times I still prefer the 02 as it looks more film like (dynamic) and laid back. |
De Javu- Kurt used the same words to describe the differences to me. I think both work great and either are an absoutely massive improvement over stock boards. While the 03 is sharper when we did testing at my place we both found the 02 to be slightly better (and this is really nitpicking). We did two full 1080p/72 calibration memory's (one for each VIM) and mainly used the final Harry Potter film, DVE disc and LOTR: The Two Towers for evaluation purposes. We also had another set up with the Lumagen Radiance as well but preferred using solely the Marquee for calibration. We ran Oppo 83>Lumagen 24hz pass through>HDFury4 1080p/72>Marquee. |
Not really. The 03 you have is entirely different from what I'm talking about there. That 03, though modified, still has the problem they all had. And that is why I stopped modifying them all together until about a month ago I took another look at one of them, that I changed out for an 02 and was able to finally fix the noise and stability problem they suffer with. And even at that point, my latest 02 would have blown it away. Again, why I gave up on it.
The 03 I'm talking about in this thread is entirely different than anything before. And definitely different than what you have and why i gave up on them.
Here's the thing to understand and is what both Gjaky and I have been talking about. The noise we're talking about, you would not understand if you don't have the proper means of looking at it using the right test gear. It's not really possible to deal with noise without the right scope and testing techniques. This is also what I went through when my test bed was down for the three years. I was shooting in the dark looking only at the noise that was visible on the screen, when I had forgot that hash noise and some harmonic and parasitic oscillation cannot be seen on the screen. They instead have a way of affecting the image and not be visible and when that happens the image is degraded. That is also why, I was at limbo until I not only got the test bed unit, but a jig to properly test while the set is in operation.
Some noise on the screen makes sense, and is not always an attribute of the video chain, it could be source or projector related. And because it shows on the screen also does not mean there's a problem with the video chain, it could be the better video chain revealing what I lesser chain will not.
The subject of noise and what it is and how it plays out in a video chain is very complex. So complex, that only certain people have devoted a lot of time to understanding it. Not something you usually find that was well considered when the product was designed. And there is a reason that noise consideration was not in every design
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: | I was shooting in the dark thinking the noise was visible on the screen, when I had forgot that hash noise and some harmonic and parasitic oscillation cannot be seen on the screen. they instead have a way of affecting the image and not be visible. That is also why, I was at limbo until I not only got the test bed unit, but a jig to properly test while the set is in operation.
|
I assume what you mean is that it's not present on the tube face as a line, sparklies or some other typical distortion. How does this non-visual noise affect the image; i.e. what image parameters are being affected by this hash/parasitic oscillation?
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | I was shooting in the dark thinking the noise was visible on the screen, when I had forgot that hash noise and some harmonic and parasitic oscillation cannot be seen on the screen. they instead have a way of affecting the image and not be visible. That is also why, I was at limbo until I not only got the test bed unit, but a jig to properly test while the set is in operation.
|
I assume what you mean is that it's not present on the tube face as a line, sparklies or some other typical distortion. How does this non-visual noise affect the image; i.e. what image parameters are being affected by this hash/parasitic oscillation? |
This is the kind of stuff you have to read up on and about. To include It would require attending workshops and seminars on the subject. The FCC Compliance Seminar I would highly recommend to start. And there is a ton of reading on both TI and Analog Device website in their applications documents. It is not something you can simply answer, with the right answer to it coming from a source of study.
Lines ans such as I've mentioned are not always an attribute of a noisy video chain, they could be something on the chassis and rails that a better video chain will capture and send to the screen. That is also how and why I was able to do the LVPS power supply mod that is being praised for its results. It was done because of my later access to the innards of the board and chassis while it is in operation. I was able to isolate the noise from the video chain and go right where it was coming from. This is called skill and acquired technique. Once I isolated it to the power supply, I was able to go further and look at both frequency and levels of it. This required the right gear and use of it. And that is how I arrived at using the tiny caps instead of the boutique and larger electrolytic to literally dial the noise off of the power rials going into the video chain.
Likewise and later, I did the same to the HVPS last month.
So the ability to separate the visible noises from the video chain is important, and can be the first stage to go after what may be perceived on the screen.
The invisible noises are what keeps the image from being forward on the screen (hash), and is why there is cloudy areas in the backgrounds that also suppress black levels and destroys image depth. And one of the reasons I post screenshots. it's a good way of also looking at hash noise and letting me know it's in the image. And that also explains why my shots are always so clean looking and have depth..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gjaky
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 2802
Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | I was shooting in the dark thinking the noise was visible on the screen, when I had forgot that hash noise and some harmonic and parasitic oscillation cannot be seen on the screen. they instead have a way of affecting the image and not be visible. That is also why, I was at limbo until I not only got the test bed unit, but a jig to properly test while the set is in operation.
|
I assume what you mean is that it's not present on the tube face as a line, sparklies or some other typical distortion. How does this non-visual noise affect the image; i.e. what image parameters are being affected by this hash/parasitic oscillation? |
If I can also add something...
I don't know of you are into audio, but this is also intermodulation distortion. There is a very high frequency oscillation/instability on the stock circuits, that obviously don't make its way to the screen, but obviously takes the resources from the amplifier so the input signal will be distorted to some extent.
_________________
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 |
|
|
jbmeyer13
Joined: 03 Dec 2010
Posts: 1135
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mp20748 wrote: |
The invisible noises are what keeps the image from being forward on the screen (hash), and is why there is cloudy areas in the backgrounds that also suppress black levels. And one of the reasons I post screenshots. it's a good way of also looking at hash noise and letting me know it's in the image. And that also explains why my shots are always so clean looking.. |
Based one our conversations you resolved the hash issue over a year ago so a bit surprised to hear that come up again; guess I was expecting something different. I would be slightly more prone to accepting screen shots as a component of evaluation if you (and this goes for anyone else as well) had a thoroughly dialed in PJ with a good camera/tripod set up. Glycol issues, mistmatched tubes, soft BD player and partial stig/focus and no grayscale calibration just don't seem to be a logical starting point for means of critical evaluation.
Black level alone can be off because of the grayscale calibration and background details will be minimized if the magnetics set up isn't thoroughly dialed in. If you were able to post two non-compressed screen shots (of same material/scene) from tweaked and calibrated set ups of the same PJ; each showing a particular set of boards then maybe you could possibly see some type of critical difference. All of these variables are why screen shots should be nothing more than a fun time.
IMO, your expertise and thousdands of dollars of diagnostic tools you own are what matters.
_________________
Projector: Modded 9501LC ULtra- MP VIM, Vold VNB, ETECH LVPS, Silver VIM Cables, HD10F's & a V1 case!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jbmeyer13 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: |
The invisible noises are what keeps the image from being forward on the screen (hash), and is why there is cloudy areas in the backgrounds that also suppress black levels. And one of the reasons I post screenshots. it's a good way of also looking at hash noise and letting me know it's in the image. And that also explains why my shots are always so clean looking.. |
Based one our conversations you resolved the hash issue over a year ago so a bit surprised to hear that come up again; guess I was expecting something different. I would be slightly more prone to accepting screen shots as a component of evaluation if you (and this goes for anyone else as well) had a thoroughly dialed in PJ with a good camera/tripod set up. Glycol issues, mistmatched tubes, soft BD player and partial stig/focus and no grayscale calibration just don't seem to be a logical starting point for means of critical evaluation.
Black level alone can be off because of the grayscale calibration and background details will be minimized if the magnetics set up isn't thoroughly dialed in. If you were able to post two non-compressed screen shots (of same material/scene) from tweaked and calibrated set ups of the same PJ; each showing a particular set of boards then maybe you could possibly see some type of critical difference. All of these variables are why screen shots should be nothing more than a fun time.
IMO, your expertise and thousdands of dollars of diagnostic tools you own are what matters. |
When the green LUG goes in, its going to be a different ball game. And with where I am with screenshots, I can't see how calibrations and such could add that much to what's already showing, though I'm sure there will be an improvement.
I was running down hash noise using the screen at time, just doing the best I could at the time with what I had to work with. And also why I kept talking about my test bed being down. Now with it back up and the added options to do more, I've been taking advantage of my better options.
No more screenshots for this thread, but will continue in the screenshot thread..
I want so badly to talk about my neck boards and how I got to the changes that some have been questioning lately...stay tuned.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2017 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gjaky wrote: | | jbmeyer13 wrote: | | mp20748 wrote: | I was shooting in the dark thinking the noise was visible on the screen, when I had forgot that hash noise and some harmonic and parasitic oscillation cannot be seen on the screen. they instead have a way of affecting the image and not be visible. That is also why, I was at limbo until I not only got the test bed unit, but a jig to properly test while the set is in operation.
|
I assume what you mean is that it's not present on the tube face as a line, sparklies or some other typical distortion. How does this non-visual noise affect the image; i.e. what image parameters are being affected by this hash/parasitic oscillation? |
If I can also add something...
I don't know of you are into audio, but this is also intermodulation distortion. There is a very high frequency oscillation/instability on the stock circuits, that obviously don't make its way to the screen, but obviously takes the resources from the amplifier so the input signal will be distorted to some extent. |
Absolutely!!
Well said..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mp20748
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 5689
Location: Maryland
TV/Projector: 9500LC Ultra / Super 02 and 03 VIM
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some of my best work so far.
Going out today, a full set - here you go!
|
|
| 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
|
|
