# What is the best CRT Projector out there



## Kamel407

I keep seeing Marquee 8500

What's the best?

I'm gonna keep an eye out in the local classifieds


----------



## Clarence

I love my Marquee 8xxx, but it's not the "best". It uses 8" tubes. Typically, 9" projectors are considered the best.


I think you'll be looking for a VERY, VERY long time if you limit your search for the "BEST" CRT to your local classifieds! 


Here's my standard good/better/best matrix:


PROJECTORS:

- GOOD: Electrohome ECP3000/3100/4000, Sony VPH-1031/1252/127x, Barco 800/801, Ampro ($500-$1500)

- BETTER: Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500, NEC PG or XG, Barco 808+, Sony 1292, Sony G70, Ampro 3600 ($1000-$5000)

- BEST: Sony G90, Marquee 9500LC ($5000-$15000+)


Input Sources

- NOT SO GOOD: composite VCR

- GOOD: s-video DVD from set top box (480i)

- BETTER: s-video doubled using cheap line doubler ($60-$120), DVD with HD DVI-I scaling ($199)

- BEST: HTPC, HD (720p or 1080i from cable box or $150-$400 HDTV PC card)

- BEYOND: $1000+ videophile components and scalers


Screen

- GOOD: existing wall, bright-white flat/matte paint

- BETTER: wall painted with DIY mix from Screens forum, ScreenGoo, or 4x8 sheet of parkland

- BEST: you can spend $200-$2000+ on commercial screens, see the Screens forum


Cables

- GOOD: S-video

- BETTER: VGA to 5BNC to hook up from HTPC's video card ($15-$150)

- BEST: you can spend lots on cables (if you want to)


Mounting

- GOOD: on a folding table in your basement

- BETTER: Coffee table hush box on your floor

- BEST: Ceiling mounted

- BEYOND: Ceiling mounted with hush box, external venting, finished and receded into the ceiling as much as possible with only the lenses peeking out; or rear projection from an equipment room with a elaborate stage and motorized curtains


HTPC

- GOOD: almost any PC (probably 1GHz+) and it's existing video card, and DVD drive ($29-$129) (total: free-$500)

- BETTER: 2GHz+ CPU, 256Mb+ RAM, ATI Radeon (or nvidia)

- BEST: 3GHz CPU (to play those HD WM9 movies), Radeon with Mike Parker Mods, HDTV card (I love my $159 FusionHDTV-II) for viewing and recording Over-the-Air HiDef TV (aka OTA, i.e. free broadcast).


----------



## MYoung

Sony Vidimagic.


----------



## Kamel407

you are the bomb

Thanks


Which is better the Sony G90 or the Marquee 9500LC


What price should I purchase it for if I find under $5000?


----------



## Tinman

Quote:

_Originally posted by MYoung_
*Sony Vidimagic.*
Mike, that's just wrong.... LOL

Although...with a liquid coupled lense and a couple of tweaks....


Marc


----------



## kal

_Originally posted by Kamel407_
*Which is better the Sony G90 or the Marquee 9500LC*


You might as well ask: What tastes better? Apples or Oranges?

*What price should I purchase it for if I find under $5000?*


$5K is too cheap for either of these. Add about $8-10K and you have a more reasonable price IMHO.


Kal


----------



## ThurmanWitte

Quote:

_Originally posted by Kamel407_ *

What price should I purchase it for if I find under $5000?*
If you come across one for under $5000, you better pick it up in person.


----------



## Cousin.It

I'm keeping my eyes open for a $5000 Barco Cine 9 myself....


Mark


----------



## Clarence

>> What price should I purchase it for if I find under $5000?


As low as the seller is willing to sell it for. If you find G90's for


----------



## Negative Design

Great, List Clarence.I think that portion should be stickied with some more CRT models added.This is going to my favorites folder 


-Jim


----------



## Clarence

I'd like to see other inputs for the Projector part....

*PROJECTORS:*


- NOT SO GOOD: (video grade units limited to 480i) Sony Vidimagic/VPH-722/1000/1020/1030/104x (


----------



## alan halvorson

According to C R T C i n e m a, it's this projector, http://www.c r t c i n e m a.com/ref9.html (remove the spaces), based on an Electrohome 9500.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*I'd like to see other inputs for the Projector part....


PROJECTORS:


- NOT SO GOOD: (video grade units limited to 480i) Sony Vidimagic/VPH-722/1000/1020/1030/104x (*


----------



## jhawk92

marco-

That's a great, consolidated list. Certainly will help me in building out my HT. Thanks!


----------



## xanatos

THE BEST PROJECTOR IN THE WORLD

THATS EASY . ( THE EBAY SUPER PROJECTOR)

USING A GENUINE 100 PERCENT PLASTIC 6X LENS

WITH A SCREEN SIZE UP TO 200 INCHES

NO TUBES OR LAMPS TO CHANGE

NEVER NEEDS TO BE CONVERGED

AND IF A PROBLEM EVER HAPPENS JUST GO TO

WALL MART AND BUY A NEW 13 INCH PROJECTION TUBE

TO REPLACE THE OLD ONE

AND YOUR READY TO GO FOR ANOTHER 10 YEARS


HOWEVER IF YOUR TO LAZY AND OR STUPID

LIKE I AM TO BUILD THIS ULTIMATE PROJECTION SYSTEM

YOU WILL JUST HAVE TO SETTLE FOR SECOND BEST AND

GO WITH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING PROJECTORS



BARCO CINE 9


SONY G90


SONY 1292


EHOME 9500LC


BARCO 1209


AMPRO 4600


NEC 10PG


XANATOS


----------



## Negative Design

does anyone on this forum actually own a Cine9? I never seen the ellusive beast.


Doesnt matter any ways I have my 6X lens! ahah envy me!!


-J


----------



## xanatos

ENVY YOU I DO

BUT BEING TO LAZY TO BUILD A EBAY SUPER SYSTEM

MYSELF

I WANT A RUNCO DTV 1200 WITH IS THE SAME AS THE CINE 9

THREE TIMES I HAVE BEEN CLOSE

BUT THE DEAL FELL APART

THERE WAS A FORTH TIME HAMMERHEAD HAD ONE FOR SELL

AT A GOOD PRICE BUT SOME ONE ELSE BOUGHT IT BEFORE I COULD

I AM JUST GOING TO HAVE TO PUT THE MONEY ASIDE

AND WAIT FOR A DEAL AND STRIKE

IF I AM GOING TO GET ONE


XANATOS


----------



## Negative Design

Whats your current CRT?


I'm currently looking for a Reference 8...their great and pretty cheap...A machine blessed by the gods....


----------



## xanatos

sony 1292 with a dvp 5000

the faroudja way to expensive for what it does

i would have been better off with a rock plus


you might as well go all the way and get a reference 9 you will never be happy if you dont


XANATOS


----------



## Negative Design

Well I would but I cant afford it now,I'll be happy.. trut me..lol

I was happy with my Barco 600 and ECP4000 and even with an...l...l...LCD! yes I said it! lol My standards fluctuate from time to time, I'm happy with what I can afford.



well my Quadrupler just came here Via Fedex...I'm gonna go fix my Barco G801s now...wish me luck 


-Jim


----------



## xanatos

LUCK


----------



## Gainead

I would go with the Sony Vidimagic as well. It looks cute like a little digital PJ. (ABOUT THE SAME PICTURE QUALITY TOO...)


----------



## Kamel407

 http://www.monroe.net/~alyle/PalmeCRt.pdf


----------



## kal

I split your "good" category into two by creating a new "reasonable" category. added a few PJ's as well.


*PROJECTORS:*


- NOT SO GOOD: (video grade units limited to 480i, ES focus) Sony Vidimagic/VPH-722/1000/1020/1030/104x, anything with analog convergence (


----------



## Negative Design

how about the VisiOn 0nE?



Oh yeah...how about Selecos..? are they crap? Ge imagers...410 (im thinkin about one...need opinions..lol)


----------



## RobertWood

Quote:

_Originally posted by kal_



- BEST: (9" tubes, graphics grade, EM focus) Sony G90, Marquee 9500LC, Barco 1209 ($8000-$15000+)



There's still many missing, and a lot of it's IMHO!

- BEST ON A BUDGET: (9" tubes, graphics grade, EM focus) AmPro 4200, AmPro 4300, AmPro 4600


IMHO!


----------



## Clarence

>> Ge imagers...410 (im thinkin about one...need opinions..lol)


GE Imagers are same as NEC PGs (good)


Kal: I was tempted to add Barco 1209 earlier but I hear so little about it


EM focus is a good discriminator to separate good from better


I like the "REASONABLE" category because that captures the good $500-$750 starter units which will blow the socks off of a $1299 RPTV that you can buy at BB or CC.


----------



## kal

Quote:

_Originally posted by Negative Design_
*how about the VisiOn 0nE?
*
Vision one is simply a rebadged Marquee 9500LC (already on the list).


Kal


----------



## Negative Design

Ohhhhh, jeez why cant companies make their own stuff!  I thought Vidikron was a respectable company..lol


----------



## RVonse

OK, where would a 9" Ampro 4000 ES focus projectors be put on the list? Do the NEC pg's with ultra small 7" tubes really deserve to be where they are?


----------



## MYoung

The jump from a video-only CRT projector to an entry-level data-grade CRT projector is much more signicifant than the jump from an entry level data-grade CRT to the best CRT projector. Granted that is in large part do to low resolution DVD being the standard format for movies right now.


----------



## Clarence

It might be easier to post your own "Top 20" list...


Here's *my* first cut...


18. Sony VPH-1031

17. Barco 801

16. Sony VPH-1252

15. Sony VPH-1272

14. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

13. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

12. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

11. NEC PG9200 Xtra

10. Barco 808/808s

9. NEC XG75/85/110

8. Ampro 3xxx/4xxx

7. *Electrohome Marquee 8000*/8500

6. Sony 1292

5. Sony G70

4. Barco 1209

3. NEC XG1352LC

2. Sony G90

1. Marquee 9501LC Ultra


----------



## Phil Smith

I was waiting for this, as I knew it would happen. The shootout proves that their's no appreciable difference between the Sony G70 and the XG1352LC, yet the G70 still gets no respect. That's ok, it keeps them cheap.


How I would rate the top 5:


4. Sony G70

3. Barco 1209

4. NEC XG1352LC

1. Sony G90

2. Marquee 9501LC Ultra


I'd also put a powerful HTPC over any other scaler, regardless of price.


----------



## kal

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*It might be easier to post your own "Top 20" list...


Here's my first cut...


18. Sony VPH-1031

17. Barco 801

16. Sony VPH-1252

15. Sony VPH-1272

14. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

13. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

12. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

11. NEC PG9200 Xtra

10. Barco 808/808s

9. NEC XG75/85/110

8. Ampro 3xxx/4xxx

7. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

6. Sony 1292

5. Sony G70

4. Barco 1209

3. NEC XG1352LC

2. Sony G90

1. Marquee 9501LC Ultra*
The problem with lists like this is that you're really making up 20 separate categories. I think groups are better (IMHO) as you can separate by "technology" since many of the units perform more or less the same. I think the 4-5 different groupings you came up with originally is still the better idea.


Though I do have a few problems with your top 20 list though: A NEC 6PG/9PG (7" EM) is miles better then an E-home ECP 3xxx/4xxx. (7" EM).


While technology (ES vs EM, 7" vs 8" vs 9") can be one indication of overall quality, it's not the overall indicator of where to place a unit on this list.



Here's my updated groupings with the G70 and some Ampro 9" ES units added:

*

PROJECTORS:


- NOT SO GOOD: (video grade units limited to 480i, ES focus) Sony Vidimagic/VPH-722/1000/1020/1030/104x, anything with analog convergence (*


----------



## Clarence

No fair using ties!


Phil Smith's list:

- 4. NEC XG1352LC (tie?) 4. Sony G70

- 3. Barco 1209

- 2. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

- 1. Sony G90


I had a tough time deciding between G90 and M9500, but decided to give the ehome my nudge since I love my M8000 so much. I wouldn't kick the G70 out of my basement!


On a lesser note, I noticed I didn't include the Sony D50, maybe 11.5?


Nobody wants to defend their 1252/1272 or 6PG over my ECPs?


----------



## cpurvis

this could get as nasty as one of those crt vs digital threads...

Quote:

14. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

13. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

12. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)
Hey - PG's are EM focus and way less ugly than an ECP... Curt says he won't even sell those dinosaurs any more


----------



## Clarence

Ah, Kal challenged my ECP over 6PG at the same time that I posted. (EDIT: and cpurvis too.)


If someone offered to trade me a 6PG for my back-up ECP3101 , that'd be a tough call. But in my typical "frugal hobbyist" manner, I think my ECP3101 was well worth the $225 I paid for it.


I certainly don't mean to bash anyone's projector. Submit your own lists to float your choice higher and mitigate my arbitrary opinions.


I think it's important to disclaim that I've only seen 2 of these projectors... my ECP3101 and my Marquee 8000.


So these lists are *both useless and invaluable*, especially to newbies. Same as screenshots. Not really useful for true comparisons, but hopefully better than no info at all.


Condition, seller, and setup can each move any projector up or down 3/4/5 notches on any list (e.g., a properly setup 1031 in good shape from a reputable seller can *easily* be a better buy than an ECP3xxx in unknown condition from an unknown seller).


----------



## RobertWood

Quote:

_Originally posted by kal_



Is a NEC 6PG/9PG [7" EM]better then an Ampro 4200 [9" ES]?
Actually, my 4200 is EMF. I think it was one of the earliest CRT projectors with EMF. AmPro was ahead of it's time. Also made one of the very few 7" projectors with EMF (the model 2300).


----------



## Phil Smith

Clarence wrote: "So these lists are both useless and invaluable, especially to newbies."


Yeah, but fun for us! 


PS: I truly believe if you did a shootout between a brand new G70 and a brand new XG1352LC it would be a tie. That's why I rated them the same.


As for the G90 or 9500 at #1, that could go either way too I guess.


----------



## ChrisWiggles

You also need to differentiate between stock 9500s(mp9/vision one), and MP/KBK 9500s, or other such modded 9500s like the chris stevens 9500s.


----------



## cpurvis

it's the 4000 that is the 9" ES model, yes?


----------



## RobertWood

yes


----------



## Clarence

You're right. I took another look at the 6PG. It should be higher than any ECP...


19. Sony VPH-1031

18. Barco 801

17. Sony VPH-1252

16. Sony VPH-1272

15. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

14. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

13. Sony D50

12. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

11. NEC PG9200 Xtra

10. Barco 808/808s

9. NEC XG75/85/110

8. Ampro 3xxx/4xxx

7. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

6. Sony 1292

5. Sony G70

4. Barco 1209

3. NEC XG1352LC

2. Sony G90

1. Marquee 9501LC Ultra


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by MYoung_
*The jump from a video-only CRT projector to an entry-level data-grade CRT projector is much more signicifant than the jump from an entry level data-grade CRT to the best CRT projector. Granted that is in large part do to low resolution DVD being the standard format for movies right now.*
Amen. I totally agree.


And as soon as you make it into the data-grade level, then the condition of the tubes is the important factor. An 8" ES projector with perfect tubes will shoot a better picture than a 8" EM projector that has worn tubes. I know this for a fact because I actually own a Barco 800 that beats my Marquee 8000 (it has wear on green and blue).


----------



## Jimakros

Someone mentioned which is the best CRT projector in the world.It has to be the 12"BARCO.


----------



## Negative Design

Quote:

_Originally posted by RVonse_
*Amen. I totally agree.


And as soon as you make it into the data-grade level, then the condition of the tubes is the important factor. An 8" ES projector with perfect tubes will shoot a better picture than a 8" EM projector that has worn tubes. I know this for a fact because I actually own a Barco 800 that beats my Marquee 8000 (it has wear on green and blue).*
how about a worn ES vs a worn EM? if EM is better only with new tubes then its pointless in my view to rank them above ES,but thats IF its better only with new tubes.


also I hear no talk about seleco.. they dont make their own CRTs?


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by Negative Design_
*how about a worn ES vs a worn EM?*
I would think that worn EM is better because the focus can still be made tight even though the picture is dimmer. Neither is good to watch though.


----------



## Negative Design

hmmm... I see


----------



## ChrisWiggles

I'd go worn EM over worn ES, as long as the wear on the EM is even and large.


----------



## kal

The number of questions brought up really goes to show again that it's really impossible to make a definite ranking of projectors... even if all we consider is all "new in the box" models.


Use these group rankings as "general guidelines" only please!


Everyone will have their own special requirements that will cause all of the PJ's the drift around a bit on the list.


Trying to make a ranking list of "best PJ's" is as crazy an undertaking as trying to make a list of "best cars" or "best wines". It all depends on what you're after to some degree.


As for the comments on worn tubes vs. un-worn tubes, I think we all have to assume that the list assumes that all the PJ's are basically in the same state as far as wear is concerned. The list would be 10x longer if we had to list different levels of tube wear for each type of PJ!


Kal


----------



## Negative Design

Yeah lets not forget Tubes types.. Orignals rebuilds etc...


I've read many ppl say originals are better..07MS are better than SD187 toshiba's,are better than sony etc..just what I read.



No one commmented on Seleco/Sim2's ...do they just put their names on VDC or Barco or are they original?


-Jim


----------



## Chuchuf

Hers the way I would put the list based on picture quality, reliabiliyu, setup and servicability.


23. Sony VPH-1031

22. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

21. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

20. Barco 801

19. Sony VPH-1252

18. Sony VPH-1272

17. Sony D50

16. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Barco 808

13. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

12. 808s

11. NEC XG nonLC

10. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70 NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90


Terry


----------



## Clarence

I like Terry's list better than mine. Especially since he's probably seen and tweaked everything listed!


Interesting to see 808 and 808s straddling my M8000.


Also notice you wussed out and tied G70 with XG-LC


----------



## RobertWood

None of my projectors are even in Terry's top 23. They must really be no good. 

They were finally starting to get some respect in the earlier posts. But now they've been slapped down again. 

Even lower than a 1031.


----------



## xanatos

seleco makes there own projectors but they use sony and Toshiba

tubes i have yet to see a seleco in use

but i am sure they put out a great picture



XANATOS


----------



## xanatos

YEAH GUYS

HOW DID THE AMPRO 3600 AND 4600

BECOME THE DOGS OF HOME THEATER LAND


XANATOS


----------



## Negative Design

Thanks XANATOS, I was just surfing their site and all their models are 7" and most claim 1080i their cheapest one is 8,000$ And I dont see many on eBay...I bet their more common on Europe.


-Jim



Also, All SIM2's have 3 color settings and D6500K is one of them...no need for colorfacts


----------



## Clarence

Bob-


But maybe your Ampros are better than Vidimagic?

Where would you squeeze them in?


82. Vidimagic

...

135. DLP

...

265. LCD


----------



## MYoung

Quote:

_Originally posted by kal_
*The number of questions brought up really goes to show again that it's really impossible to make a definite ranking of projectors...
*
I agree. It's like comparing cars. Some cars have great handling and are better for evading the police in moderate traffic with lots of turns. Some cars have great top speed and are better for evading the police on the highway.


Oh, and a Vidimagic is a rusted out 1986 Ford Escort -- good for outrunning the elderly and trees.


----------



## Negative Design

...

302. Plasma


...

CRT...PRICELESS!


sorry for the cliche...lol


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by RobertWood_
*None of my projectors are even in Terry's top 23. They must really be no good. 

They were finally starting to get some respect in the earlier posts. But now they've been slapped down again. 

Even lower than a 1031. *
Thats still no problem anyway because you bought them cheap.


----------



## RobertWood

Quote:

_Originally posted by xanatos_
*YEAH GUYS

HOW DID THE AMPRO 3600 AND 4600

BECOME THE DOGS OF HOME THEATER LAND


XANATOS*
If you look at eBay completeds right now, a 3600 sold for a little over six hundred bucks. That's actually less than dagamepimp just got for his 1031. I'm going to be selling a 4200G which is a 9" liquid coupled projector with EMF. It's working and has good tubes. I'll probably get less than a grand for it.


----------



## MYoung

...


10^282736. 100" BIG SCREEN TV KIT


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by Chuchuf_
*Hers the way I would put the list based on picture quality, reliabiliyu, setup and servicability.



Terry*
Where would you rate the Barco 1208?


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by RobertWood_
*If you look at eBay completeds right now, a 3600 sold for a little over six hundred bucks. That's actually less than dagamepimp just got for his 1031. I'm going to be selling a 4200G which is a 9" liquid coupled projector with EMF. It's working and has good tubes. I'll probably get less than a grand for it.*
Nobody likes American made products anymore.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

_Originally posted by MYoung_
*...


10^282736. 100" BIG SCREEN TV KIT*
No. I've seen "real" screenshots of these kits. They're incredible!


----------



## xanatos

YEP

I REALLY LIKED THE ONE THAT HAD THE HULK IN IT


XANATOS


----------



## Phil Smith

Terry's list looks good to me, although as Bob pointed out, he failed to include the 1208. But that's why the number 9 is missing. Perfect place for the 1208s.


Bob, I think Ampros aren't included because there doesn't seem to be many of those around, and consequently no one ever discusses them or knows anything about them. I can't recall one thread about them.


----------



## MYoung

Fabio had an Ampro. Bob, you are in good company, even if you are a bi-boy. Fabio could kick my ass, big time! So if he wants me to not believe it's not butter, well I'll agree with him for the sake of my own life! A spread is not worth dying for.


----------



## Clarence

barco 1208 #9?

better than 1292?


I agree about the Ampro's. I did a search in this forum. Not much traffic. Is that because they're so reliable that no one screams for help? Or just that they're so rare (thus hard to get experienced troubleshooting and parts?). Bob's 4200G sounds good on paper... 9". LC, EM, good tubes.


Bob- pick a number for the Ampro. Do you think it's better than the 1208 and 1292?



23. Sony VPH-1031

22. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

21. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

20. Barco 801

19. Sony VPH-1252

18. Sony VPH-1272

17. Sony D50

16. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Barco 808

13. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

12. 808s

11. NEC XG nonLC

10. Sony 1292

(9? barco 1208)

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70 NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## MYoung

Why is the D50 being placed before the 1272Q? The 1272Q can resolve more detail with its larger phosphors, higher scan capability, and higher RGB bandwidth, even though it has titty bit less light output. And the 1031Q puts out an image pretty comparable to the 1252Q, except that the 1031Q weighs half as much and can run almost silent w/o a hushbox. Again, WAY too many factors for this to be objective. But a list is fun to look at I guess. Just like it's always fun to say that CRT spanks digital.


----------



## Kamel407

Is there such thing as an aftermarket modded 8xxx?


Whats a "great price" for an 8500?


----------



## Clarence

$7.98 is a "great price" for an 8500. 


The last two sold on fleabay for $1800-$2000. That's probably a fair starting point. Pay more for good condition from a good seller. Pay less to risk unknown condition from an unknown seller.


Just my 2c.


----------



## Clarence

>> But a list is fun to look at I guess


I still say any given projector could argue it's way 3/4/5 spots up or down based on condition and setup.


But I'd agree this list is about as entertaining and useless as:

4. Floyd

3. Stones

2. Beatles

1. Zeppelin


----------



## RobertWood

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_



Bob- pick a number for the Ampro. ?


Well, here goes...


23. Sony VPH-1031

22. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

21. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

20. Barco 801

19. Sony VPH-1252

18. Sony VPH-1272

17. Sony D50

16. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Barco 808

13. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

12. 808s

11. NEC XG nonLC

10. Sony 1292

(9? barco 1208)

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70 NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90

0.5 AmPro


Seriously though. Ampro fell out of favor when the company went bankrupt in 1999. All of a sudden everybody figured they couldn't get Ampro parts anymore. But the thing that always puzzled me about that was I never figured most of us bought parts at retail from manufacturers anyway (they're very expensive). And there are plenty of Ampro parts around (ask Curt).

To be fair about it, Ampros have good points and bad points. The bad is more than average failure of the high voltage power supplies. And a little more convergence drift than normal. But they throw a very good picture (ask Fabio).


I can't comment on how the 9" Ampros compare to a 1292 or 1209 because I've never seen either one perform.


----------



## Clarence

>> I can't comment on how the 9" Ampros compare to a 1292 or 1209 because I've never seen either one perform.


That didn't stop me (properly disclaimed, though) from ranking 18 unseen projectors!


----------



## Phil Smith

I think the knock on the 1292 is it's very low on brightness.


I've only seen 6 or 7 crt pjs in action and shouldn't be commenting on any of this, but I'm certainly not letting that stop me either!


----------



## xanatos

max out the rasters and run the projector at 960p with a good scaler

and you will find it bright enough


XANATOS


----------



## MYoung

And there's also the 15 gain curved Vutec screen option too.


----------



## Curt Palme

I'm not posting my favorite projector, but I'm currently on the prowl for one and will not sell it, ever, if I find a minty one..


Curt


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by RobertWood_
*

Seriously though. Ampro fell out of favor when the company went bankrupt in 1999. All of a sudden everybody figured they couldn't get Ampro parts anymore. But the thing that always puzzled me about that was I never figured most of us bought parts at retail from manufacturers anyway (they're very expensive). And there are plenty of Ampro parts around (ask Curt).

To be fair about it, Ampros have good points and bad points. The bad is more than average failure of the high voltage power supplies. And a little more convergence drift than normal. But they throw a very good picture (ask Fabio).
*
The failing power supply would not be any big deal to me but convergence drift sure is. Theres no way you can get a decent picture if the convergence is going to be off.


Its no wonder you are fed up with crt projectors if your looking at bad convergence all the time. I would give up watching it too.


----------



## RobertWood

Obviously that's why they come in way below the 1031. 


But you know, I don't know why we're bothering with any of these fancy pancy projectors of any kind when we can get this picture for fifteen dollars

(that's one you can add to your screenshot collection, Clarence). 

http://www.fevrish.com/tv.jpg 

http://*******.com/3ydbx


----------



## Negative Design

Lmao


wow I cant belive that guys using his kid for a scam..lol


even more amazing is how this thread has grown so big in less a day...lol

add this to the never ending thread list


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

_Originally posted by Negative Design_
*Lmao


wow I cant belive that guys using his kid for a scam..lol


even more amazing is how this thread has grown so big in less a day...lol

add this to the never ending thread list *
I was SHOCKED, especially since this is my first post in the CRT forum

wow, I had no idea this place had such a following.

Anyone live in Denver?


----------



## MYoung

Dude! I bought my fresnel len from Fevrish!!! What a ****ing scam! It was more of a waste of time and effort. Though I will say this, the ****tiness of that TV kit was precisely the resolve and motivation I needed to ante up for a REAL projector. 


How come the potty mouth filter catches **** but not ******? I mean, I can say **** and it catches that. I can also say ****face and it catches that too!


I can also say shat. You know, anyone who finds a way to use the word shat in their everyday discourse immediately earns my respect and honor.


----------



## xanatos

let the ampro have more warm up time

that will take care of the drift


1 turn projector on

set contrast to almost zero


2 let sit for 24 hours


3 converge projector


4 leave projector on for 100 hours

with contrast set low playing video at the scan rate your

going to be using


5 after 100 hours set contrast to normal your red will be out a little

adjust it and your done

you now have a drift free crt projector



XANATOS


----------



## xanatos

I USED TO SELL BIG SCREEN TV KITS

IN GET RICH MAGAZINES

I WOULD WHOLESALE 1 DOZEN LENS AND PLANS FOR 60.$$$$$$$ + SHIPPING

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHA


XANATOS


----------



## RobertWood

Fevrish has been peddling that thing on eBay for over two years. He's probably sold thousands of em. What I've never been able to figure is all the positive feedback. I just looked over his list. Most of all of it is singing his praises. There's only a very small smattering of negatives. One tickled me. The guy says "I've been waiting for my widescreen for two weeks" like he musta thought he had a real widescreen TV coming or something. Unreal.


----------



## Petran911

Just two questions....


How the d50 fares against the Nec PGs? and where do you exaxctly put the recent Barco 7" (like the Cine 7 or 708)


Peter


----------



## Philip Tan

4. Barco Cine9 Â£31,990

3. Runco DTV-1200 US$44,995

2. BarcoReality 812 US$105,000

1. BarcoReality 912 nevermind (best of the best?)


5. AIT Accurate 9 US$50,000

4. Crystal View 1+ US$69,999

3. Visual Dynamics Reference 9 US$55,000

2. 9500LC moddedâ€“minus the vanity cover >US$18,000

1. RI CinePro 9x Elite US$69,500


1. SONY VPH-G90


0. Nothing beats economy class Hawaiian Airlines crt projectors. 



I have relative depravation disorder thinking of all these fine instruments.


----------



## kal

Quote:

_Originally posted by Curt Palme_
*I'm not posting my favorite projector, but I'm currently on the prowl for one and will not sell it, ever, if I find a minty one..
*
We forgot to add a NEC 10PG to the list! (Sorry Curt!) 


Kal


----------



## Chuchuf

Robert,

Surprisingly I have never seen an ampro.

Yes forgot a few. Revised:


24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. NEC PG9200 Xtra

15. Barco 808

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70, NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90


Terry


----------



## Kamel407

Wow, keep this up and this thread will be the 2nd highest in no time


----------



## emdawgz1

My vote goes to Feverish w/ the "Frensal" lens. Especially since the idiot cant spell Fresnel!


But what do i know, i'm working like an idiot for a living and he is scamming people, living the high life.


----------



## RobertWood

There was a thread on this forum about Fevrish's "100" TV" a couple years ago. They were beating up on him pretty bad and someone sent him an email and linked him to the thread. He posted a couple times to give his side. His story was that the value in what he's selling is not in how well the thing works or the quality of the picture. Instead he emphasized how it let's a father and son bond with each other while building a do-it-yourself project together. Said he's received a lot of testimonials from his customers who talked about the father/son bonding thing. According to him it's gotten a bunch of kids off the streets and off drugs and turned em to the straight and narrow.


----------



## Kamel407

Fevrish doesn't look straight or narrow


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*No. I've seen "real" screenshots of these kits. They're incredible! *
Can you mount this to a CRT Projector to make it 100'???


----------



## jhawk92

Kamel407-

I am basically in the Denver area; Highlands Ranch specifically.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

_Originally posted by jhawk92_
*Kamel407-

I am basically in the Denver area; Highlands Ranch specifically.*
I might be PMing you in a few weeks

I'm in Orlando

Thanks for the heads up


----------



## Clarence

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by marcorsyscom

No. I've seen "real" screenshots of these kits. They're incredible!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote:

Can you mount this to a CRT Projector to make it 100'???
Just to clarify, because I forgot to use the [sarcasm] tags in my quote above.


It was an inside joke because a scammer used my screenshots last week to sell a similar kit.


I do not endorse these kits nor the sellers.


-Clarence


----------



## MYoung

The kit is ****, Nuff said.


----------



## RobertWood

I don't know. It would be a shame to see all those kids go back on the streets and back on drugs because we're too cheap to invest $15 to help them get their heads on straight. Where are our priorities?


I've got it. Let's get them an Ampro. They're about as cheap as the fresnal lens. And make almost as good a picture.


----------



## emdawgz1

Robert, when he told the story did his eyes well with tears? Did violins play in the background???


Kids off the street....he should be more ashamed of that story than the crap he's selling!


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by Chuchuf_
*

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. NEC PG9200 Xtra

15. Barco 808

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70, NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90


Terry*
Your list seems very reasonable to me at least of the ones that I have seen.


Its kind of interesting glancing down the list because it is glaringly obvious that the best bang for the buck has to be the Marquee 8000 by far. Marquee is half the price of a Barco 1208 and better than NEC pg's yet is cheaper to buy.


A Marquee is not quite as cheap as a an Ampro but it does have stable convergence.


----------



## RobertWood

Notice we Amproers are so confident in the superlative performance of our excellent projectors that we are not even phased by the ridicule we're subjected to.

Tube wear and burn-in will break our bones, but words will never hurt us.


p.s. but if the ridicule gets to be too much we can bring in Fabio to knock some heads.


----------



## RVonse

Please forgive me Robert, I wasn't intending to step on your toes or put down the Ampro's.


Its just my point was that Ampro would probably be best bang for buck, but not really because as you mentioned convergence issues, which in my mind is a very important issue for crt projectors.


I mean, what good is 9" tubes and perfect focus if the convergence is bad? Nobody wants to be fiddling with convergence when you are supposed to be watching the movie.l


----------



## RobertWood

I can take it. 


I didn't mean to give the impression that it's as bad as all that. Actually one person is telling me that if you're careful to set them up with geometry adjustments that don't make them work too hard, you will not experience unusual convergence drift.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by marcorsyscom

No. I've seen "real" screenshots of these kits. They're incredible!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Just to clarify, because I forgot to use the [sarcasm] tags in my quote above.


It was an inside joke because a scammer used my screenshots last week to sell a similar kit.


I do not endorse these kits nor the sellers.


-Clarence*
actually I was being sarcastic, but it didn't work


----------



## RobertWood

If you're thinking of getting you a 100" ebay TV, here it is for $1.79

Or 78 cents if you want a thousand of em.

http://www.3dlens.com/enter.html (when you get to that page, click on "fresnel lens" on the left hand side).


There are dozens of different eBay sellers peddling these things. There's a way to put them all out of business if someone wants to bother with it.

Just list an eBay auction for "100 inch TV - $1.79"

Then in the auction description just link people to where they can buy the lens.

And if you do a google search you can find pages which show illustrations and directions on how to construct the box it goes in. Link them to that too.

Be sure and add that the picture is so dim that they won't be able to see it.

And tell em if you were them you just would forget the whole thing.

Then Fevrish and the rest of his ilk will have to get a job.

But if you've a mind to do it you better do it in a hurry. Because I'm tempted to order a thousand lenses and give Fevrish some competition.


----------



## Negative Design

Quote:

_Originally posted by RobertWood_
*There was a thread on this forum about Fevrish's "100" TV" a couple years ago. They were beating up on him pretty bad and someone sent him an email and linked him to the thread. He posted a couple times to give his side. His story was that the value in what he's selling is not in how well the thing works or the quality of the picture. Instead he emphasized how it let's a father and son bond with each other while building a do-it-yourself project together. Said he's received a lot of testimonials from his customers who talked about the father/son bonding thing. According to him it's gotten a bunch of kids off the streets and off drugs and turned em to the straight and narrow.*


ahah wow! you guys on AVS forums should be in gangster movies you got some HUGE ones! wow he came here and gave his side of the story!? lol he probably wanted to clear his name so he can scam more ppl

This is the second time a 3 days I heard an AVS member spoiling an evil scammer's plan! lol


Sadly I too sold some of those plans on ebay but I wasnt succesfull my price of 50$ didn't appeal to them I guess  but my friend did it and he sold 10 of them for 50$


Now I sell legit stuff  Like broken CRTs 


Anywho I still heard nothing about the 500 ANSI Barco Reality 812...thats my dream CRT...**dreams**


----------



## RobertWood

Here's another little tip for you. Have you ever wanted to read an eBay seller's negative feedbacks but discover that you have to wade through a hundred pages of feedbacks to find the negatives.

Not any more. This will do it for you.
http://*******.com/23hmg 


As a test, plug in Fevrish's user ID: fevrish-dot-com


----------



## MYoung

You think we could put some projectors before the 1031Q? I don't like seeing it last in the list.


----------



## xanatos

DONT FEEL BAD MIKE MY TRUSTY OLD NOVABEAM

AND ADVENT VIDEOBEAM 1000 DID NOT EVEN MAKE ANY ONES LIST NOT EVEN MY OWN




XANATOS


----------



## Kamel407

Anyone live near CAMPBELL HALL. NY


----------



## Kamel407

ok


Sony G70 or Marquee 8500


how much would you be willing to pay for each?


Given moderate usage used


----------



## Negative Design

cambel hall? hmm you must of seen that auction...lol


----------



## Kamel407

of course, need to weigh out my options


----------



## RobertWood

Don't keep is in the dark here. This Campbell Hall thing, what is it Government Liquidation or eBay?


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

_Originally posted by RobertWood_
*Don't keep is in the dark here. This Campbell Hall thing, what is it Government Liquidation or eBay?*
Ebay

no shipping

I was gonna see if it was worth buying if one of you lives close by

Sony G70


----------



## RobertWood

Oh I see. The eBay one.

Yea, you better get someone to look at the tubes. "Lightly used unit" can be eBayspeak for just about anything.


----------



## RobertWood

If you run across what looks like a real good opportunity and the seller specifies no shipping, there may be a way around that.

You can use North American Van Lines. It's not as expensive as you might want to think. And they'll come in and pick it up and relieve the seller of any effort.


A lot of people I know who ship jukeboxes and pinball machines recommend calling Michelle Bianchi at (800) 949-8880. She's the North American rep they really like to deal with.


----------



## Kamel407

oh cool idea, I don't think I'm gonna go for this one since its ending so soon and I don't know the status of the projector for sure.

But fare game to anyone who wants it


----------



## Negative Design

I'd go for it but im broke...I try my best not to surf ebay when im broke..not always easy 


Even is the G70 doesnt work its still has value ..thats how most of these sellers here works, buy something broken and fix it to make big $$


Anyone else see that Marquee 8501 go for 900$ !!? another reason why I had extra $$ oh well..lol


----------



## Kamel407

well I've got a $2500 credit limit


should I go for the G70 or the 8501?


Or should I wait?


----------



## Negative Design

that 8501 is gone...unless you want another one for much higher?


Well to me it doesnt matter matter a High end machine is a High end machine,I go for what I can afford.If you can afford a G70 and an 8501 and you have an eye for the best then you should consult the lists above from the people who have owned/seen them in action.


I'd go for best performance for dollar


----------



## caryt

To everyone who gives a low rating to the Ampro 4600 a big thanks  it helps keep the prices down for those of us that know better

Cary


----------



## WD-40

Not sure I like any of these lists..



The good/better/best lists:

Putting the Sony 104x in the same category as the Vidimagic? C'mon. Have you seen a properly set up 1042, or are you just working off of the "sports bar" stereotype?   


And calling it the "NOT SO GOOD" category??? sheesh...


I own both a Sony 1041Q and a 1042Q. The 1041 is hurting from the plastic lenses, and the 1042 has some tube wear, but either one just kills just about anything you can buy at your local electronics store, even the big flat panel displays. I'd rather own it than 98% of the Digital projectors on the market (even the $5k+), just because the picture is so smooth and free of scaling artifacts.


"NOT SO GOOD".... Anyone who thinks these projectors aren't up to the task, are welcome to come over to my place sometime. I bet money you'd be suprised.



As for the "top-2x" lists:

I'm amazed that the 1031Q made everyone's list, but the Ampros started out barely represented, then slid off the list! With the 2000's digital convergence, memory storage, remote control abilities, and STEPLESS SCHIEMPFLUNG, I think it should definitely be ranked above the 1031Q. Even the tube angles are infinitely adjustable.. None of that spacer/shim rubbish the other machines have.


I only have experience with the 2000 series Ampros, but the fact that none of the higher Ampros made the list, I believe, is a huge oversight.


- David


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by WD-40_
*

As for the "top-2x" lists:

I'm amazed that the 1031Q made everyone's list, but the Ampros started out barely represented, then slid off the list! With the 2000's digital convergence, memory storage, remote control abilities, and STEPLESS SCHIEMPFLUNG, I think it should definitely be ranked above the 1031Q. Even the tube angles are infinitely adjustable.. None of that spacer/shim rubbish the other machines have.


I only have experience with the 2000 series Ampros, but the fact that none of the higher Ampros made the list, I believe, is a huge oversight.


- David*
Yes, but will the 2000 Ampro hold its convergence? If not then Schiempflung would not matter. The projector could have Schiempflung supersonic boosters and that would not matter if it can't hold convergence. On the other hand, it is my understanding that even an entry level Sony holds its convergence very well.


And besides all that, its kind of fun to give RobertWood a hard time.


----------



## Kamel407

 http://cgi.*********/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...tem=3078893520


----------



## Clarence

David-


That's exactly the *only* benefit of these lists... to invite discussion on the overall benefits of these projectors, ideally based on relative comparison to what we've owned or seen vs. just specs.


I invite you to copy any list and edit it to include any under-ranked or over-looked projectors.

*Where would you place your 104x's?*


"Not so good" was only a generic recommendation for newbies shopping for a projector. It's generally recommended that they look for a unit that can handle 480p+ instead of just video grade 480i.


But I've always said that the 1020/1030/1040 would be great starter/learner units at the right price. For me that would be


----------



## aspec2

Clarence


A 9PG with .02 hours on it??? Isn't that like 1 minute 12 seconds. I guess it must be new????


Walt


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Clarence


A 9PG with .02 hours on it??? Isn't that like 1 minute 12 seconds. I guess it must be new????


Walt
Took me a while to figure out what you were talking about...

Then I read up the thread and saw the ebay reference for auction #3078893520 (NEC 9PG) from Kamel.


I guess I still don't understand the connection.


Is this proposed as the "best" CRT?


I have no affiliation with this auction (or any NEC). Not that I wouldn't mind having one. But $820 is beyond my budget.


It also says "This projector *shows* 0000.02 hours of runtime."

I think there are several threads that imply how to reset the counter on NECs.


???  ???


-Clarence


----------



## Negative Design

whoa..if 820$ is beyond your budget I'd liek to know where you got your Marquee  I too want a Marquee fo rless than 820$


----------



## Clarence

From a little old lady who only drove it on Sundays.


And my backup ECP3101 with pristine tubes and ACON for $225 from fleabay.


I was prepared to receive junk both times. But I got extremely lucky. I only gamble what I can afford to lose. 


-Clarence


----------



## Negative Design

whoa...what a coincidence I just bought an ECP 3101 with ACON for around the same price on fleabay 


Im still waiting for that day that I can get a Marquee for super cheap... lol


-Jim


----------



## Clarence

Congrats! I think it's a great machine.


I feel guilty sometimes because I never use it, but in our new house, I'm setting it up for my boys in their playroom.


Here are a couple of ECP screenshots I took from it.


I think those were taken on about 10' screen. It's set up now on a 4x8 sheet of Formica (Formica sucks as a screen).


What was your ECP's ebay number?


-Clarence


----------



## Negative Design

Wow, your boys have the greatest dad! lol my dad doesnt even know what a projector is...


anywho it was a "off ebay" deal most of my ebay buys are off record.But I do have the # for my ECP4000 2221408567 (265 shipped), I recently sold it becuase of some problems.


Also,I saw your ECP pics already they look amazing! I'd like to see more if you have any,also I may get a 19$ Digicam soon  lol


-Jim


----------



## Clarence

I don't have many ECP pix. I have a lot of the $19 digicam pix in my AVS Gallery 


I'd recommend that $19 Che-ez camera to anyone. I would've bought 'em all at Fry's and given them to you guys for Christmas if I knew it'd be this much fun!


-Clarence


----------



## Negative Design

Well you know now so get buying  just make sure it doesnt go over your budget..there are over 10,000 members  lol


-Jim


----------



## Clarence

I was on a business trip to San Diego. They don't have Fry's in DC.


They had a 2-3 in SD and 5-6 in Anaheim. I could've afforded that many gifts. I think the other 99,991 members are tired of my screenshots.


----------



## geisemann

I dont know the "Big Deal " of a G70. I retubed a couple and I never liked the picture really. Nice looking case. I fell a barco 1209, 1208 and even a 801s and most electrohomes are better than G70.. Now I have not seen a g90 but I have heard they are the best.


www.eisemann-theater.com


----------



## eledhel

I haven't seen a whole lot of "middle-of-the-road" projectors on Ebay lately. Seems like everyone is off-loading the 480i machines for big bucks, or selling expensive machines for a fixed buy-it-now price.


I did like the .02 hours, however. That would have meant it was fresh out of the box, but the case looked otherwise. Remind me to reset the counters on the next PJ I sell.


----------



## Kamel407

ok so is this the latest unofficial list? Or does it need to be updated?


What about price ranges for each PJ?


24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. NEC PG9200 Xtra

15. Barco 808

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70, NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## Clarence

Too many variables in pricing: hours, condition, seller trust, risk, post-sales support...


But how about a linear scale from $200 (VPH1031) to $20000 (G90).


----------



## Kamel407

OK


Another couple questions



14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500



What is the advantage of the 8500 over the 8000?


Also where would the Barco 801S fall? I don't see it in there


----------



## magking

Quote:

_Originally posted by Kamel407_
*ok so is this the latest unofficial list? Or does it need to be updated?


What about price ranges for each PJ?


24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. NEC PG9200 Xtra

15. Barco 808

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70, NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90*
You guys keep forgetting the Barco Cine 9.

IMO it should be up there at the top.

And I have seen one running at "The Event II" in London for the English forums. At the same event I also saw a 1209s, 808s, Cine 8, but not a G90 I'm afraid. But they also had a 3 Chip DLP and a JVC D-ila there.

I also saw a G70 that weekend at a friends house.


----------



## ChrisMcCarthy

Guys... the Ampro 4600 is better than EVERY 8" machine out there, and better than most 9" CRTs.


If the fact that Ampro no longer exists bothers you, remember that Elite Video ( www.elitevision.com ) actually still makes them!! Will service them too.


And, since Ampro is gone, you can get a 40,000.00 projector for 5000.00 if you look hard enough (or are lucky like me).


Chris


----------



## Kamel407

OK, then why don't one of you guys who knows about Ampro rate the Ampros in the list


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by Kamel407_
*OK


Another couple questions



14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500



What is the advantage of the 8500 over the 8000?


Also where would the Barco 801S fall? I don't see it in there*
I believe the 8500 is newer and has an updated high voltage supply, also is supposed to be a little brighter. It still used the same crts as the 8000 though.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by ChrisMcCarthy_
*Guys... the Ampro 4600 is better than EVERY 8" machine out there, and better than most 9" CRTs.


If the fact that Ampro no longer exists bothers you, remember that Elite Video ( www.elitevision.com ) actually still makes them!! Will service them too.


And, since Ampro is gone, you can get a 40,000.00 projector for 5000.00 if you look hard enough (or are lucky like me).


Chris*
That they no longer exist would not bother me in the least. But according to RobertWood in an earlier post on this thread, the Ampro line is prone to convergence stability issues and defective high volt supplies.


Now if a high volt supply blows, that can just be replaced no problem. But does your projector hold the convergence well? I can put up with a lot of things but IMO, theres nothing more agravating then drifty convergence. Perhaps other people feel the same way to have caused Ampro's not to be worth as much.


----------



## Tim in Phoenix

Quote:

_Originally posted by RVonse_
*I believe the 8500 is newer and has an updated high voltage supply, also is supposed to be a little brighter. It still used the same crts as the 8000 though.*
The 8500 is a tad brighter due to 34.9kv high voltage versus 34.0kv in the 8000 but also offers zone stig correction, for better corner/edge focus, where the 8000 has passive magnet rings.


----------



## Doug Baisey

Im bias,

I dont see how Barco 808 got in front of a NEC Extra or how the G70 is even with the XG LC. I wouldnt even consider the Ampro because of MTF and the NEC 10PG should be in there solid. Move the Sony 1031Q up a bit with 144 lenses just because.


Source can change so much of what your seeing, match it up in bandwidth / resolution and a good set up and everything changes in purity.


The 'Good ol days' of the Imfocom shoot off are gone but everything was even, same signal, same test patterns, same motion video, same resolutions, same screen sizes and gain. Signal output was sent via Extron distribution and scoped.


Great learning experience, it came down to the best set up and signal switching, many fell flat some excelled, some couldnt last a day. It ran continuous. Some were not on the main floor but up in hotel rooms.


Those were good days but long forgotten, it was the ultimate shoot off. Doug


----------



## RobertWood

I don't know what MTF is but I know our AmPros must have it in spades. And the AmPro convergence drift is so bad you can see it moving right before your eyes. Not to mention they've been known to give their owners painful electric shocks.

p.s. to AmProers: this should help us to be able to buy em even cheaper.


----------



## Doug Baisey

Robert,

Happy Birthday if it is your birthday.


MTF is 'mean time failure' rate of the projector, we tried them before and I had nothing but head-aches, crt power board rebuild kits all over the place. Finally just pulled them out and replaced with 10PGs. No more problems after that. Critical client. Doug


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

_Originally posted by Doug Baisey_
*


Source can change so much of what your seeing, match it up in bandwidth / resolution and a good set up and everything changes in purity.


The 'Good ol days' of the Imfocom shoot off are gone but everything was even, same signal, same test patterns, same motion video, same resolutions, same screen sizes and gain. Signal output was sent via Extron distribution and scoped.


Great learning experience, it came down to the best set up and signal switching, many fell flat some excelled, some couldnt last a day. It ran continuous. Some were not on the main floor but up in hotel rooms.


Those were good days but long forgotten, it was the ultimate shoot off. Doug*
Yeah, those were the days. Infocom was the show to make. That's when I first got to see HDTV. The unit they used as the HDTV processor was the size of small refrigerator.


The fun at Infocom was to walk into the very large dark display room where all of the manufacturers were connected to the one source, and it was even better when they were using the Extron Shoot-out CD. I think that when digital became so popular, they had to do away with the Infocom shoot-out format, mainly because they would have never been able to sell a digital if they were placed on the same line with the CRT's.


I also aqgree that the G70 should not be on the same line as the NEC XG. The G70's are brighter, but the NEC XG's will definately display a sharper image.


I also think that Elite video has solved the chronic failure problem of the earlier Ampros. They must have, otherwise there's no way that they could still sell the Ampro's. Beside the high failure of the neck boards and power supplies, they could not handle heat environments above body temperature. But if you got your hands on one of their later version 8" or 9" projectors, it would give anything on that list a real challenge. They were excellent performers, but it was stressful wondering if you'd get to finish the setup before the projector failed.


----------



## Doug Baisey

Mike,

Thats the room I was talking about. Totally dark environment with evenly matched mfg and units all side by side. At any given time you could stand back and view most all of them around the room, wasnt hard to see the differences in purity with the resolution patterns, and colors, its what sold the projectors in environments that had multi resolutions and sources.


The ability to multi-sync fast for the continuous patterns was the big challenge and where I saw weakness's, some couldnt and failed, they wouldnt let you change units so it sat there off for the rest of the day.


The processor / scaler section had the same rules.


The invite only rooms was the fun thing, you got to see the prototypes for the next year, tweaked to perfection. Alot of processing 'cheating' going on in these rooms also. Not under the same rules as the "Shoot-out' floor. What you saw there wasnt what you got. This was where I first saw the Ampro's from the Graytaug (sp) era when it was becoming Ampro.

Same as you say, it was a roll of the dice to make it to the end of a set up.


This wasnt aimed at consumers but for the mfg's to show to dealers and Corp clients mostly. Many of the R&D improvements were compared here for the first time with their competitors, thus 'Shoot-out' had real meaning for the advancement of display devices and for sales.


This is what we are lacking today and the downfall for the 'Shoot-out', you couldnt have digitals and CRT in the same room, to bad because you lost what reference was or could be. Doug


----------



## Clarence

Geez, you guys sound like you're scared to take a hack at this list yourself without permission...


25. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. Barco 808

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70

6. NEC XG-LC

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## Doug Baisey

To make a good comparison Id have to sit down and write a list from memory. I cant remember where I left my coffee cup right now. Doug


----------



## Phil Smith

The G70 trash talk continues. All the forum experts (including you guys) used to bash the G70's colors. They were so bad the pj near unwatchable. At least that USED to be the knock on the G70s. Now that the shootout showed the G70 colors were near perfect, and on the same level color-wise as the XG, now the G70 is not as sharp as the XG. It seems I used to read comments about how sharp the G70 was. Bad colors, but sharp. Now the G70's sharpness is lacking.


Before the shootout, there was so much talk by experts of poor G70 colors, I considered selling my G70 and buying an XG. I took what read here as the gospel and everyone had me convinced the G70's colors sucked. I know now that would been a sideways move. I also know now that even the experts (maybe especially the experts) have opinions that are very much influenced by their own personal bias'.


For now on I will take EVERYTHING I read on AVS with a grain of salt.


----------



## Clarence

Yep. Tom Cruise is mad at People magazine for the same thing...

he married Nicole Kidman because she rated so high on the "Most Beautiful People" list, then a couple of years later she fell a couple of notches.

So he dumped her.

Now she's back up on their list, so he's wanting her back...


From now on, Tom Cruise will read People magazine with a grain of salt.


----------



## Phil Smith

I don't know if you poking fun at me or not, but that's hilarious Clarance!


----------



## Clarence

I just didn't want the list to be taken too seriously, much less have someone use it as a basis for a buying decision.


It was originally intended only as a rough guide for newbies. But then I got chastised for telling newbies that 480i PJs were "not so good".


But it reminds me of those celebrity ranking lists. The DJs here call their list "who would you do?" Would I turn down their #14 hoping that I get a better opportunity at a higher rated celebrity?


I'd take any projector on this list. And I think it's oddly accurate as far as my hypothetical willingness to "trade up" for anything higher on the list (especially if condition is comparable and price isn't a factor). I'd probably trade my M8000 for a XG135LC or a G70 or a 1209/Cine9. Certainly for a 9501 or a G90.


But that's just me daydreaming...

Sorry Nicole, I'm happily married. 


25. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. Barco 808

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70

6. NEC XG-LC

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## Phil Smith

You're right Clarence. The list is purely subjective.


Due to it's superior brightness, and lack of a flimsy chassis that crushes under it's own weight during shipping, I have made appropriate adjustments to the list:


25. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. Barco 808

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## Doug Baisey

Phil,

Im not trashing the G70 at all, its just my opinion. Doug


----------



## MikeReilly

When I bought my Esprit (AmPro) 2000G from Curt, we checked it out side by side (er.. not side by side, but one after the other) with a 1270. Frankly, I preferred the 2000G. Not perfect test condictions, but certainly enough for me. As for drift, it's really not too bad (sorry to let the cat out of the bag, AmPro crew!). As a rookie, I set this PJ up 6 months ago and am just now thinking about doing another convergence. On DVD's it's still an excellent picture except on something like the Futurama DVD's I just got where you can start to notice a bit of misconvergence since cartoons are basically composed of large areas of a single color (whereas with a movie like Seabiscuit, the natrual coloring blends in the misconvergence much better and still looks stunning).


Anyway, in the budget arena, I'd heartily endorse the AmPro based on what I've seen so far. I'm sure Curt would have a lot more experience and ability to give feedback on them.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by Doug Baisey_
*Phil,

Im not trashing the G70 at all, its just my opinion. Doug*
Doug, I have never seen either a G70 or NEC XG LC in action but I did read with great interest the recent shootoff. How do you explain what happened? After reading all about the XG's here I just can not make any sense any of this.


I mean the XG literally got run off the road into a ditch yet the G70 stood its ground well. Do you think Guys XG was broken? He told me the tubes were in almost new condition from the manufacturer. Or do you think Guy did not have it set up properly? I mean honestly, how else can you explain the findings?


I really think this is a question that deserves a decent answer before you claim the XG above the G70. Don't get me wrong as I stated before I have never seen either projector and maybe it is better then the G70. But then why did Guy's projector make such a flop of a showing?


----------



## RobertWood

I have no way to know for sure, Bob, but my guess is that one factor which might go a long way toward explaining that might be Faroudja vs Radeon. Obsolete Faroudja that is.


----------



## Phil Smith

Doug,


Fair enough.


Bob,


I agree with Robert. That was not a case of the G70 besting the XG, that was a case of HTPC outdoing Faroudja. That's a perfect example of why picture quality is the result of the entire system, not just the pj.


Of all people, Guy's system was lacking, and he didn't even know it was lacking. That just goes to show that there may be flaws in even the best of the forum's experts opinions. And that's not a knock on Guy, who is obviously brilliant, and as far as I'm concerned numero uno of the forum experts. The Steven Hawkins of HT. 


The G70 and the XG use the same tubes, and unless one of them really dropped the ball in developing their product, common sense says that they should be very similar in performance. There's no reason to think Sony couldn't figure out how to eke as much performance from the tubes as NEC.


The G70 color issue has been put to rest. The color analyzer results do not lie, and Guy's results proved that there's no significant difference color-wise between the two. As much as everyone seems to hate it, the XG is now sharing the color king thrown.


Puzzling as it is, I guess the new knock on the G70 will be sharpness. I've never read that complaint before, but I'm sure I'll be seeing it a lot now. I wonder when, by whom and how that myth will eventually be disproved.


----------



## CaspianM

The shoot out really was damaging to XG135LC. From what I understood, the set up was geared more toward convenience than performance.

This afternoon, I tried the GeForceFX 5700 Ultra, (BFG version) and it really looked awesome. The sharpness and contrast was definitely went up one notch. Color also a bit better as well as background noise in low level detail. One word of caution about the saturation of this card which is set way too high by default. I had originally a radeon 9500 pro in my HTPC. Overall it is a very good card any my XG1352LC is happier than ever.


----------



## Doug Baisey

RVonse,

Deserves a good answer? I wasnt there so I dont know what was wrong with Guys signal.


I dont base my opinions off anyone-anything except my own opinion and what I actually see. The good part of this is I dont have to explain or debate it to myself. It is in fact MY opinion.


What did you see while you were there? Doug


----------



## RobertWood

Yes, but you've seen and know how good HTPC is. All of us who've seen it know that. And also know that those old scalers just don't compete with it.


----------



## Doug Baisey

Robert,

Yes I know, its hard to justify taking it out of a system when you can buy a whole 'new system' for a little under the price of the scaler alone. Doug


Actually a good progressive DVD will be sending the HTPC to the same place.....soon. User friendly required. WF. Doug


----------



## xstanbx

OK, let me ask the stupid question..... realizing the two use the same or similar tubes yet the specs have some major differences....

The G70 sightly more brightness and more contrast, but less HScan by 25kHz and less VScan by 10Hz, less RGB bandwidth by 30Mhz, and less resolution by 800X800, and 72 fewer convergence points, etc.....

So, what makes the G70 better than the specs make it appear (or the 135 worse, etc...)

Thanks


PS I currently have a Sony 1272 and am looking to trade-up and am having trouble deciding what to get... I am going to use 2 primary sources, a HTPC and HD cable/sat......


----------



## ChrisWiggles

"I mean the XG literally got run off the road into a ditch yet the G70 stood its ground well. Do you think Guys XG was broken? He told me the tubes were in almost new condition from the manufacturer. Or do you think Guy did not have it set up properly? I mean honestly, how else can you explain the findings?"


I can't speak for myself since I was not at the first shootout and thus I did not see Guy's XG. However, in the meantime I will say that the consensus of those who did see both seemed to be that Guy's sources(DVD player via Faroudja 3000 were not up to snuff compared to steve's HTPC. The second thing is that the room was significantly different in both cases, Guy's was very black, while Steve's was very light.


What Guy was getting at especially was the benefit of ANSI contrast within a scene, not merely ON/OFF contrast. Steve's room spill hit the DLP in this area since this was the strong point there, and the room seemed to knock it back.


This is why some of us went back to Darin's to view the DLP again in a totally black velvet room, and as expected in-scene CR was much improved and black level detail was very impressive, along with a 3-d effect that was much better over the DLP in Steve's room. The huge negative for me in this setup was rainbows though.


hopefully that helps, and I think I acurrately characterized their reactions, maybe they will chime in here as well. Basically it seemed it was a poor room at Steve's that hurt the DLP more in comparison, and no HTPC so poorer video at Guy's matched with a superior room that helped the DLP out. The latter about Guy's is secondhand info.


----------



## mp20748

Le me start by saying that I'm not an NEC projector fan. I've never been a fan of the NEC projectors. But out of all the NEC CRT projectors manufactured, there are two that has got my attention. The XG series and the Extra series are seriously underated, with the XG135LC probably being, if not the best performing 8" CRT projector ever, or second only to the Marquee 8500LC. The NEC XG135LC's performance is only reached based on the level of experience used during setup. I have no doubt that Guy's NEC XG is probably one of the best tweaked projectors on the planet. Not sure why it did not perform well at the first showing, but as indicated in my post, I challenged the processor, because I knew without a doubt that digital technology was not ready for that XG135, And I meant a Guy Kuo setup NEC XG135.


If the showing was done again, and if there were 3 projectors (DLP, G70, Nec XG135) displaying on the same size screens using the same or similar input sources, the NEC XG would come out as being the best performer.


Nothing against the G70, but I've had one in my shop that I put two new tubes in it. And it was the first time that I had put tubes in a G70. The first thing on my agenda was to find out why the tubes did not produce sharp lines. I got my answer from two sources. One was from a Sony source, the other was from a very reputable forum member. And it was also appearent with Dr. Phelps (WM), because he has developed a procedure to get the lines on the G70 tighter. The G70 that I had in my shop, did not produce the same tight lines that I've seen on the NEC XG135's.


And let me mention a few things about the XG135 that supports it's ability to be a much sharper CRT projector. It has been reported to be the only 8" CRT projector that has been setup in 1200P, with visual satisfaction. It has the highest "Sync To" rate. Meaning that it will actually sync to scan rates above what it has in the specs. Not that this means anything for our applications, but it does say a lot about the power of electronics (handle with ease), and the ability to maintain tight lines at usable scan rates.


Plus out any of the 8" CRT projectors out there, it's the ONLY one that has the most flexable mechanical and electronic adjustments for setup, meaning that it has the best capability for the best setup.


I'm not a G70 or XG135 fan, I think they both have a weak chassis design, to include a weak LC optical assy. I would jump over both for a Marquee. but of all the 8" CRT's out there, I got to give the XG135LC its props - it's as good as a Marquee 8500LC Ultra, or it's pretty close behind. I don't know of another 8" CRT projector that has really gotten my attention.


But this is only my personal opinion.


----------



## Doug Baisey

Mike,

On the 1200P thing (MSB modded Sony DVD) I have done that set up a few times out of what the customer (Forum member) wanted and what he had to work with, the 9" wasnt an option in that application but the results even surprised me for a 8", Id say it tops at 1050P but in these applications it does it well.


The mechanical needed to be done from scratch and porch settings needed tweaking in the MSB mod but it came out well with all the electronic functions still within normal range. These have been running fine the last couple of years. Doug


----------



## CaspianM

Quote:

_Originally posted by Doug Baisey_
*Mike,

On the 1200P thing (MSB modded Sony DVD) I have done that set up a few times out of what the customer (Forum member) wanted and what he had to work with, the 9" wasnt an option in that application but the results even surprised me for a 8", Id say it tops at 1050P but in these applications it does it well.

*
That is exactly why I get a better result with 1440x960p vs 1280x720p. Scan line very visible even in the corner, but not as good as center at 960p. I switch on the fly, and difference is much smoother and same sharpness. Give it a try if have the nec. Of course IMO and with my unit.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by tim_
*The 8500 is a tad brighter due to 34.9kv high voltage versus 34.0kv in the 8000 but also offers zone stig correction, for better corner/edge focus, where the 8000 has passive magnet rings.*
Apart from the things you mention, it also has updated circuitry on a number of the boards compared to the 8000 and the "color correction" board was added to adjust light balance and shading.


----------



## Guy Kuo

I'd caution against trying to obtain a A vs B vs C type of comparison from the BLOG events. There simply are too many variables and indirect data to arrive at an NEC XGLC vs Sony G70 rating. My interest in the events was seeing if a late model DLP can rival a CRT in image reproduction. I think the events showed that DLP can no longer be called "unusable" out of hand. We didn't try to arrange for a real G70 vs XG comparison. I liked Steve's HTPC more in terms of image cleaness. That's always been true when I've seen his system. The Faroudja DVP-3000 isn't exactly a cheap piece of equipment, but it is noisier than the HTPC. That aspect of the image was very important to a lot of viewers, but I don't think you could use that to say the XG was worse or better than the G70.


----------



## filecat13

I usually follow a thread like this without comment as I soak up the experience and technical expertise of the erudite among us. Since I have not seen all of the projectors on the list, it's impractical to make more than relative judgments, and some of the posters have seen many, if not all, of them at one time or another, so I read and learn.


There are a couple of things that slightly bother me about lists like this. One is that the projectors are not compared equitably and are never likely to be. Even within the same model, "my Marquee XXXX running through my HTPC looks better than the XXXX that I saw that was running in native resolution without HTPC, doubler, tripler, scaler, etc." is common. It then gets converted to "my Marquee XXX running through my HTPC looks better than any XG I've ever seen," which could mean I saw one or two and neither was running the same set up as my Marquee. Only those folks who have seen a lot of PJs over the years and seen them running in diverse locations and set up configurations can give us much information here, and I'd defer to them on this issue.


The other bother I have is the sameness of the list. It really is the "best of the more popular CRT projectors." If it purports to be more than that, then where are the lesser known PJs? I don't believe that there was never a lesser known PJ manufacturer that didn't produce a projector that belongs on this list. (Yes, that's *three* negatives, but they're all in separate clauses.  )


Where are the entries from Zenith, Panasonic, Mitsubishi, and Seleco? Have all of their owners been driven into the sidelines because their models never get a line's mention in these forums? Or are they all convinced that they've got second rate PJs and there's no point in drawing attention to their shame? Perhaps they've adopted that most dangerous of stances: my choice is so clearly superior it does not merit discussion? Whatever the case, I think these missing PJ lines call the completeness of the list into question.


Anyway, since the thread participants have very fairly sought modifications and recommendations to "the list," I decided to throw the fact that I'm not qualified (see #1 bother above) out the window because I do know something about one of the lesser known brands, Seleco. I own a Seleco SVD 500 Plus, and it's a very nice PJ that might in my opinion on its best day in the right set up be able to pick off one or two of the bottom feeders on the list. However, I've also seen the SVD 800 HD and the SDG 900 Plus, both of which are superior to the SVD 500 Plus, and from the few PJs on the list I've actually seen, the SDG 900 Plus could easily be in the mid to lower teens on the list. In fact, I think it could easily whip the Sony 1272, which I have seen in several wonderful installations by devoted fans.


Does the fact that it's not well known and is scarce in this country make Seleco unworthy of a place on the list? Is there a reason that more experienced posters know that precludes Seleco (or Mitsubishi, etc.) from consideration? Or is it simply unfamiliarity?


Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## techman707

filecat13,


I think you might have made a mistake. Did you mean to say that SDG 900 Plus could whip the Sony 1292? The 1292, when new, put out a picture that could compete with virtually any top of the line 9" projectors (not including the G90 of course). That's not to say it is also probably the noisiest projector ever made also.


The problem with so many comparisons on the forum seem to be skewed by people giving their opinions based on old or worn projectors getting compared to new or re-tubed projectors that have been tweaked up the kazoo. What made the G70 comparison interesting was that it was a fairly low tube hour unit (2000 hours). If it had been a 7000 hour unit, the results probably would have been useless. In addition, as has been pointed out, when making comparisons, the same processing equipment should be used to avoid more misleading results.


Bruce


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*Yep. Tom Cruise is mad at People magazine for the same thing...

he married Nicole Kidman because she rated so high on the "Most Beautiful People" list, then a couple of years later she fell a couple of notches.

So he dumped her.

Now she's back up on their list, so he's wanting her back...


From now on, Tom Cruise will read People magazine with a grain of salt.*
You're a little confused, SHE dumped him. She must have gotten tired bending over for a midget.


----------



## filecat13

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*filecat13,


I think you might have made a mistake. Did you mean to say that SDG 900 Plus could whip the Sony 1292? The 1292, when new, put out a picture that could compete with virtually any top of the line 9" projectors (not including the G90 of course). That's not to say it is also probably the noisiest projector ever made also. Bruce*
Yeah, 1272 is what I meant. I've corrected the post. The SDG 900 Plus is an 8" machine.


You're right, the 1292 is a very noisy beast, and I've frankly never seen one that was well set up, so overall it was intolerable. I've seen two, and in their current set up, I'd prefer my SVD 500 Plus. However, if someone wanted to trade me their poorly set up 1292 for my Seleco, I'd consider it.


----------



## Phil Smith

A lot of people on AVS have strong bias' toward whatever pj they own. That's fine, but like the Chevy-Ford thing, it's not based on fact. It's like your favorite football team. In your mind they're usually a lot better than they really are. Mike I think you suffer from this a little. I can't recall anyone ever rating the 8500 higher than the XG.


For the record, I'm not attached at the hip to my G70. I'm not championing it's cause because I own one. If I knew what I know now when I bought my pj, I'd probably buy a 9500 or G90 (a 1209 would be on my list as well, but I'm leery of the reliability issues). At this point I'm happy enough with my G70 that I'm not going to go to the trouble of changing pjs until my current pj bites the bullet. I must say, I'm really, REALLY glad I didn't waste the time and money switching to an XG.


My comments are motivated by the undue criticism that the G70 has endured and continues to endure. It was universally bashed for bad color. It wasn't a few people, it was virtually everyone. It was the in vogue thing to do. Now it's sharpness. But that was never the case before everyone had to concede that the colors were as good as the XGs. As best I can remember, it's had a good rep in that regard. If it's truly lacking in sharpness, then I would willingly accept that. But there's an unwarranted bias against the G70, and now that I know that, I can't help but be skeptical of any comments made about it.


----------



## Doug Baisey

Quote:

_Originally posted by Guy Kuo_
*I'd caution against trying to obtain a A vs B vs C type of comparison from the BLOG events. There simply are too many variables and indirect data to arrive at an NEC XGLC vs Sony G70 rating.*
Guy,

So true, even if both were new out of the box, on the same screen and being fed the same signal the variable would be the difference in set up and knowing how to get the most out of each model. This is where the Infocom shoot off came in.


Then theres also the variable of the viewers preference times how many are viewing. This is where the Infocom voter survey came in to judge the best image in each category. Thats a lot of variables, how many thousand's would you guess passed through there to make their vote? Doug


14,000 went threw the Shoot-off in 2000, earlier years were better


----------



## Phil Smith

I agree too, though the color analyzer results can be taken as fact. The G70 might measure even better in Guy's HT, but it already had virtually perfect readings, so there's really no room for improvement.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by filecat13_
*Yeah, 1272 is what I meant. I've corrected the post. The SDG 900 Plus is an 8" machine.


You're right, the 1292 is a very noisy beast, and I've frankly never seen one that was well set up, so overall it was intolerable. I've seen two, and in their current set up, I'd prefer my SVD 500 Plus. However, if someone wanted to trade me their poorly set up 1292 for my Seleco, I'd consider it.*
In that case you're right, I think the SDG 900 Plus is MUCH better !!


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Doug Baisey_
*Guy,

So true, even if both were new out of the box, on the same screen and being fed the same signal the variable would be the difference in set up and knowing how to get the most out of each model. This is where the Infocom shoot off came in.


Then theres also the variable of the viewers preference times how many are viewing. This is where the Infocom voter survey came in to judge the best image in each category. Thats a lot of variables, how many thousand's would you guess passed through there to make their vote? Doug*
Truer words were never spoken !!!


----------



## Phil Smith

I want to apologize for my earlier posts. For all I know, the XG is several times sharper than the G70. Even if I somehow knew that the G70 is as sharp or sharper (which I don't), there still was no reason, or excuse, for me to make such harsh posts. Again my apologies to everyone.


----------



## mp20748

Phil,

it's perfectly OK for you to express your opinion, and for the most part, no one is ever offended (or should be). An apology is proper if it was a personal attack against an individual (that we should avoid). An opinion should always be welcomed, but because of our strong atachments to our loved products we sometimes take offence. This is just an area were we sometime come up short.


That's what's so entertaining about the CRT/Digital debates, most of us care less about the advancement of digital. It'll either not happen soon or it'll be too expensive in comparison to used CRT, but it's going to happen. The thing that makes the debates fun is pissing off the opponent, and putting them on the defense.


This is were QQQ and Bob shines - they detach themselves from the debates.


----------



## Per Johnny

"The G70 trash talk continues. All the forum experts (including you guys) used to bash the G70's colors. They were so bad the pj near unwatchable. At least that USED to be the knock on the G70s. Now that the shootout showed the G70 colors were near perfect, and on the same level color-wise as the XG, now the G70 is not as sharp as the XG. It seems I used to read comments about how sharp the G70 was. Bad colors, but sharp. Now the G70's sharpness is lacking."


I have had two brand new Nec XG-LC projectors and two brand new Sony G70 projectors and several more used ones. The G70's have always been quite sharper than the XG's, not so visible watching DVDs, but very visible watching HiDef 1080i. DVD content looked much better on the XG though - why I dont know.


Per Johnny


----------



## caryt

Quote:

_Originally posted by RobertWood_
*I don't know what MTF is but I know our AmPros must have it in spades. And the AmPro convergence drift is so bad you can see it moving right before your eyes. Not to mention they've been known to give their owners painful electric shocks.

p.s. to AmProers: this should help us to be able to buy em even cheaper. *


  Thanks Robert, we don't want everyone out there looking for a 4600. More for us


Cary


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Per Johnny_
*"The G70 trash talk continues. All the forum experts (including you guys) used to bash the G70's colors. They were so bad the pj near unwatchable. At least that USED to be the knock on the G70s. Now that the shootout showed the G70 colors were near perfect, and on the same level color-wise as the XG, now the G70 is not as sharp as the XG. It seems I used to read comments about how sharp the G70 was. Bad colors, but sharp. Now the G70's sharpness is lacking."


I have had two brand new Nec XG-LC projectors and two brand new Sony G70 projectors and several more used ones. The G70's have always been quite sharper than the XG's, not so visible watching DVDs, but very visible watching HiDef 1080i. DVD content looked much better on the XG though - why I dont know.


Per Johnny*
When it comes to DVD content, some of the DVD's being released could make the best CRT projector in the world look like it was never focused when it was setup. Because I have collected film my whole life and over the last couple of years have been trying to replace some of the non-Technicolor film that have started to lose it's color with DVD's, many of the DVD's I have bought are older classics. While some of the DVD's could make even cheap digital projectors look good, others, particularly DVD's from "UNIVERSAL HOME VIDEO". They have consistently used bad prints and misrepresented "letterbox DVD's as being "widescreen". As a result their DVD's look like they were transmitted off the bad side of the Empire State Building.


Maybe we should compile lists of old and new DVD's and rate them for print quality, color, focus and overall quality. It doesn't have to be complicated and should only require one opinion per title, unless someone disagrees with the rating. This would avoid buying DVD's that are totally unsuitable for projection.


Bruce


----------



## Phil Smith

I appreciate that Mike. Good natured debating and arguing can be fun, and I sometimes really enjoy it. But sometimes I get caught up in the moment and take it too far, and I felt like in this instance I had crossed that line. I'm glad to know at least you were not offended, because that never was my intention.


Per Johnny,


That's an interesting observation. 1080i looks amazingly sharp on my G70 as well--sharper than I think should be possible. I made post about this in the past.


Bruce,


You own a bunch of film, and a film projector? That's pretty cool! I believe Vern Dias does as well.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Phil Smith_
*I appreciate that Mike. Good natured debating and arguing can be fun, and I sometimes really enjoy it. But sometimes I get caught up in the moment and take it too far, and I felt like in this instance I had crossed that line. I'm glad to know at least you were not offended, because that never was my intention.


Per Johnny,


That's an interesting observation. 1080i looks amazingly sharp on my G70 as well--sharper than I think should be possible. I made post about this in the past.


Bruce,


You own a bunch of film, and a film projector? That's pretty cool! I believe Vern Dias does as well.*
Phil,


Apparently it wasn't "cool" enough when I moved a couple of hundred prints to Florida, otherwise I wouldn't have been left with "red" prints. Fortunately, the IB Technicolor prints don't lose the color like prints made on Eastmen film. With DVD's, the color stays put and the sound is always the same. With 35mm magnetic prints, even if you degauss all the metal parts on the projector, you lose some HF response every time you run them.


Bruce


----------



## Phil Smith

Bruce,


What are you saying--the Florida heat caused them to tint red?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Phil Smith_
*Bruce,


What are you saying--the Florida heat caused them to tint red?*
Absolutely, the heat and especially the humidity, EVEN WITH air-conditioning. Everything goes bad down there. I opened up a VCR that went bad, only to find that the belts had turned to mush. I had an expensive RTR recorder and the capstan rollers turned to mush. It could sit in NY for years, but take it to Florida and it's ruined in a couple of years. I even think it's turning me to mush.


Bruce


----------



## Petran911

Quote:

_Originally posted by Phil Smith_
*You're right Clarence. The list is purely subjective.


Due to it's superior brightness, and lack of a flimsy chassis that crushes under it's own weight during shipping, I have made appropriate adjustments to the list:


25. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. Barco 808

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90*
Well, I did ask this before, but I still haven't got a reply, and I think that it might interest people intending to buy budget crts. Where exactly do you put the Barcos 7" models in this list? (701, 708 etc.) They do seem popular, so I would like to know how they fare compared with other "small" pjs.


----------



## techman707

I would guess the Barco 701,708 would go either before or after the Sony 1031.


----------



## kal

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*I would guess the Barco 701,708 would go either before or after the Sony 1031.*
I disagree- the Barco 701/708's are much a newer chassis with EM focus. They are more similar to something like a Sony D50. I'd stick them there...


Kal


----------



## Clarence

On paper, the specs of the 708:
Quote:

5.5", 1200 peak lumens, 15000 contrast, 210 Vscan, 1280x1024p, point conv, EM
look comparable to the 1252/1272/D50


Anyone familiar with both BD708 vs VPH?


----------



## kal

Sony 1252/1272 are ES focused and a much older chassis design then the 708.... The 1252/1272 are not comparable to the D50. The D50 is a much newer design (as is the Barco 708).


So the following are comparable:


Barco 800/801 = Sony 1252/1272


Barco 708 = Sony D50


Kal


----------



## Clarence

25. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx (add points for xxx1 [ACON])

22. Barco 800/801

21. Sony VPH-125x

20. Sony VPH-127x

19. Barco 708

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. Barco 808

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## penticton102

i think a much more accurate rendition of what is the best pj is which one has the least amount of repair probelms and issues, also the availibilty of parts and replacement cost, i think if you throw that into the mix it would transform your "lists" quite considerably, for purposes of illustration; the sony 12xx series grant you doesn,t have the best picture but it is built like a tank and are very dependable and reliable, also if they do need parts they are readily availble anywhere at reputable crt outlets. its like buying a new car, a diablo might beat anything on the road at( 350US a copy) but try to find parts for it at your local auto salvage.you would also have to mortgage your first born, so IMHO performance or picture quality shouldn,t be the only criteria when these lists are made up, lets see your repair bills first then we,ll see who is number one...................


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by kal_
*I disagree- the Barco 701/708's are much a newer chassis with EM focus. They are more similar to something like a Sony D50. I'd stick them there...


Kal*
I once had a 701 and it didn't have EM focus. I checked it out and only the 701 "S" has EM focus. I just figured the 708 was the same, but apparently the plain 708 is EM focus.


Bruce


----------



## Clarence

I don't think that anybody who spends $350K on a Diablo is too worried about it being easier to find a 1995 Honda alternator in the salvage yard.


With all other things being equal, I'd still take the "troublesome" (hard to find spares) Ampro 4600 over a dependable (with easier spares) Sony VPH.


----------



## penticton102

thats your choice and right , i would sooner have anything i own to be as trouble free as possible and if it does require parts they would be easy and accessible to obtain without breaking the wallet so what good is a machine that is troublesome and is breaking all the time ? keep your head in the service Manuel and on the net looking for parts while i will continue to watch the latest flicks on my "not worthy Sony".................


----------



## penticton102

p.s. didn,t ampro go broke?


----------



## xanatos

yes they did the light valve broke them

millions spent on rad


XANATOS


----------



## Clarence

I never intentionally, explicitly, or implied that your Sony or anyone's projector was "not worthy".


I have an Electrohome Marquee, so I too enjoy watching movies instead of keeping one eye on the service manual and the other eye on a spare parts search.


I also have an ECP3101 and I don't feel defensive that it's at #23. If there are 22 or more projectors that can give their owners better images than these , we should all be happy.


I still think people are putting too much faith in these lists and getting too defensive or upset about their own machine's placement.


How would you rank them?

Does your VPH belong at #1 because that's what you own and Sony's never need repairs?


I never imagined VPH vs Ampro would be as hotly contested as CRT vs digital, Ford vs Chevy, Dale Jr vs Jeff Gordon, Coke vs Pepsi, Yankees vs Mets, Beatles vs Zeppelin.


----------



## penticton102

don,t be silly i know bettter than to qualify any of them on how they rate, that would be better left to the crt gurus or techs on this page who see these machines on a regular basis and are definetly more qualified than you or i on how they perform and what is the best picture/bang or the money and most important of all how reliable they are, lets face it when the consumer ventures out in the market place to purchase products they want the best value that they can afford, i don,t know anybody that thinks a troublesome car or appliance is a much sought after feature in any thing that you buy at least around in my neck of the woods "if it don,t work get rid of it"



p.s. you forgot


oilers vs the flames, eskimos vs the stampeders


----------



## techman707

So the bottom line is.......the best projector is one that works good with NO trouble AND that you can find in great condition. For under $1,000, the ECP 4xxx is one of the best bargains out there. While the D50 may be a little better, they will also run much more money in great shape. The bottom line is, the tubes, the tubes, the tubes.......................


However, if you're really serious about setting up a HT, the Marquees would probably be the best price/performance projector out there. Mind you, not that there aren't others, but the Marquees are probably the easiest to find.


Bruce


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

p.s. you forgot


oilers vs the flames, eskimos vs the stampeders
Nah. I didn't forget. NHL is going bankrupt like Ampro and comparing CFL teams is like comparing dPJs... even the best aren't worth watching.


----------



## penticton102

good job you done your home work, i am shocked that in a educational system where most grads can,t even find their own country on a map or read their diplomas you know canadian football league teams, and nhl teams, go to the head of the class and you shall get a gold star beside your name for today........


p.s. if they aren,t worth watching why are you aware of them?


----------



## Clarence

Don't confuse my Google skills with a good education (or an awareness of the Great White North)...
Google: +eskimos +stampeders


----------



## penticton102

hehehe.......touche!.............


----------



## Brian Hampton

"Sony 1252/1272 are ES focused and a much older chassis design then the 708.... The 1252/1272 are not comparable to the D50. The D50 is a much newer design (as is the Barco 708)."


newer design = better? I don't think so.


Thank again I would have ranked um like this


3 Zeppelin

2 Beatles


Big gap here



1 Floyd


(Stones don't belong on this list unless it's somewhere around 346 near Yes and ZZTop).


-Brian


----------



## Clarence

Wow - a reference back to Post #74 !


I think it's easier to rate PJs than rock bands because you at least have specs for CRTs (albeit non-standardized manufacturer specs), but for bands, all you have is sales. Which hopefully we can all agree is not a good measure of performance.


I actually agree with your rating for Floyd. But old ZZ would be much higher than 346.


But I'd lose all credibility when I rank SRV, Cheap Trick, and Drivin' 'n' Cryin' higher than Springsteen and The Who.


And I'd struggle trying to decide if Alison Krauss and my bluegrass favorites should be included on the list.


To get really obscure, I was watching "Lost In Translation" a couple of weeks ago and one of the soundtracks reminded me of "Tangerine Dream" (a few of you might know them from the "Risky Business" soundtrack - "Love on a Real Train")...


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Brian Hampton_
*"Sony 1252/1272 are ES focused and a much older chassis design then the 708.... The 1252/1272 are not comparable to the D50. The D50 is a much newer design (as is the Barco 708)."


newer design = better? I don't think so.


Thank again I would have ranked um like this


3 Zeppelin

2 Beatles


Big gap here



1 Floyd


(Stones don't belong on this list unless it's somewhere around 346 near Yes and ZZTop).


-Brian*
What is it you're trying to say?


I like the D50, but newer design or not, I like the pq on the 1272 better. As for the plain 708, I'd take the D50.


All of these units, including the plain 708 are ES focus.


Bruce


----------



## Brian Hampton

Bruce,


Part of my post was a quote from Kal but I failed to mention that. I really have no experience with the D50 but I thought that he was trying to suggest newer design=better.


If that's where he was going then I counter that with LCD pjs which have much newer designs.


And if you confused to my rock band part of the post that's a reference to a much earlier part of the thread.


I really need to get out of here as I've only seen 2 projectors in action and I can't comment on reletive merits of machines I haven't seen.


-Brian


----------



## techman707

Brian,


Sometimes newer is better, but more often than not, newer means CHEAPER. The D50 is a great projector fort what it is and while it is newer and sleeker, I would still prefer an NEC PG-9100 for less money.


For some reason, people spread a rumor (which is untrue), that the NEC's are very hard to setup. They must have started that rumor to keep all the NEC's to themselves (heh, heh).


Bruce


----------



## Brian Hampton

Hey,


The only thing about the NEC's that I keep seeing is spot burn due to failure of spot kill circuit which is pretty dramatic.


-Brian


----------



## Krobar

Just out of Interest, where do you think the Barco Cine 8 Onyx would be on that list?


----------



## kal

Quote:

_Originally posted by Krobar_
*Just out of Interest, where do you think the Barco Cine 8 Onyx would be on that list?*
Who knows! I doubt anyone here has ever used one!


Odds are it would probably sit somewhere near the middle/upper end of the 8" EM units. That is, somewhere between 14-6. Who knows though, it may throw a better image then the 1209/1209s in a smaller screen setup.



14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Which of these projectors can display 1080p?


----------



## kal

Quote:

_Originally posted by Kamel407_
*Which of these projectors can display 1080p?*
That's a loaded question because the result depends a lot on how well the projector's been set up. The answer's not black and white.


Though I can pretty safely say, for best results doing 1080p, stick to the 9" machines and get a pro to do the astig/flare/focus setup.


Kal


----------



## Clarence

Hi Kamel-


There's also a huge difference between which projectors can "display" 1080p (several, if not most of them, especially 8"+), vs. which projectors can "resolve" 1080p (1080 distinct scanlines), which would be much fewer, if any, such as an extremely well setup 9"+ PJ as kal describes.


My Marquee 8000 can "display" 1920x1080 (1080i and 1080p), but I can only "resolve" scanlines at or below 720p.


-Clarence


----------



## Prometheusbound

I was just curious as to why you guys rate the Marquee 8500 behind the Barco 808s? Is it a matter of reliability, image, or both? When you say Barco 808s you mean the BG808s correct? The BD808s doesn't have lens flapping adjustment and also has a lower max horizontal scan frequency. I know I'm a late comer to this thread. I just found it!


----------



## ChrisWiggles

Because I have a barco and it's the greatest! .


I beleive the G808s has sony tubes that have better color than the MEC tubes in the other 808 versions and the 8500s?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by ChrisWiggles_
*Because I have a barco and it's the greatest! .


I beleive the G808s has sony tubes that have better color than the MEC tubes in the other 808 versions and the 8500s?*
That may or may not be true, but one thing we know for sure is that Guy measured the tubes in the G70 and they were virtually perfect with the CIE coordinates.....and that's an MEC tube, so who knows.


----------



## Per Johnny

But the crts in the G70 are color-filtered, and even if all primaires are close to the CIE, the green which are the most important is still some off on the G70.


Per Johnny


----------



## Per Johnny

Best projector ever:


PremierDivision:

Cine 9


StandardDivision:

The rest


Per Johnny


----------



## Clarence

25. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx (add points for xxx1 [ACON])

22. Barco 800/801

21. Sony VPH-125x

20. Sony VPH-127x

19. Barco 708

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. Barco 808

15. NEC PG9200 Xtra

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90

Quote:

I was just curious as to why you guys rate the Marquee 8500 behind the Barco 808s?
Because I have a Marquee and didn't want the cost of potential back-up machines to skyrocket.


And because Barco agreed to sponsor full page ads. Oh wait, that's only a criteria in Road & Track's Top 10 Cars list.





-Clarence


----------



## Kamel407

Any Updates to the list?


----------



## Clarence

From the agenda notice for the next Quarterly Review:


[ ] Deron needs to submit a suitable place for his 10PG.


[ ] The lower AmPro's are still unrepresented.


[ ] I should be getting a M8500 soon, so it might warrant a separate spot above the M8000.


-Clarence


----------



## raoul

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*What is it you're trying to say?


I like the D50, but newer design or not, I like the pq on the 1272 better. As for the plain 708, I'd take the D50.


All of these units, including the plain 708 are ES focus.


Bruce*
I'm more worried about his placement of Pink Floyd at 1. You saying that Pink Floyd is the G90 of the music world? For real???


----------



## mikelyw

Quote:

_Originally posted by kal_
*Who knows! I doubt anyone here has ever used one!


Odds are it would probably sit somewhere near the middle/upper end of the 8" EM units. That is, somewhere between 14-6. Who knows though, it may throw a better image then the 1209/1209s in a smaller screen setup.


14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Ampro 4600

4. Barco 1209/1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


Kal*
Not possible, I have owned a BG808s (600 hours and NO visible wear on 3 tubes off the lens!) and then upgrade to 1209 (5000 hrs but very clean tubes), while the former still on ceiling and the latter on table top, frequently compared by A/B shootout on my relatively small size 80" wide Stewart screen (80"x60"). I always thought with the like new G808s it aleast give 1209 a close challenge but with more than dozen of guests and myself on 3 shootout, the 8" not even come close especially on HD. The 1" advance + All glass lens + 9" LC tubes tell a much bigger difference than the extra 1" gain on 8" vs 7"er (I also own a brandnew Cine 6 before I meet this low hours G808s.


G808s with Sony Tube is very sharp (sharper than a 808 non-S with MEC tube in A/B shoot at saler shop before I brought it (it may help by better tube condition vs the MEC's which was 1500hrs). The negative is unrebuildable by VDC.


Next is I have never agree on the bottom part (top 3) ranking on the list which I believe partly was (the Cine 9 at least) just base on imagination whom have never get a chance to watch a Barco current flatship model Cine 9 (or Cine Max) in action, there are couple of Cine 9 in Hongkong and 1 G90 for demo vailable here at local Barco &l dealer demo room as I have visited many times. While I have not never seen a Mod 9500LC here ub HK and can't comment (I did see the terrify picture of Mod Vidikron in last year HK HiVi Expo - the best show of the event while Barco only represented by Cine 7 not its CRT king), the Cine 9 is certainly better than a G90 in every way with excellent Color/3D Film/Crystal clear and Rock Black details.......with its exclusive lens, it's also super quiet in fan, you only have to see it to believe it will beat any HT purpose 9". The only negative of Cine 9 may be you can only get them in new at $40K, perhaps G90 is my first choice for upgrade to 1209 for its quality and deserved the used price in surplus market (still lower than a new 8" Cine 8).


----------



## kal

Actually Mike, I was replying and commenting that I didn't know where a 'Barco Cine 8 Onyx' would fit on the list, not a 'Barco Graphics 808s'. (Though the two may be more similar then I know... I don't know a thing about about the Cine series at all).


Kal


----------



## mikelyw

Hi, Kal

I have talked to Henry in England last year regarding the special made limited version Cine 8 Onyx, actually it is a Cine 8 employed with some 9" technology (LC tubes and Color Filtered lens). Cine 8 itself are 90% similar to a G808s in chassis electronics with improved in optical with color filtered lens and new Toshiba Tube (which I think the former Sony Tube is better). From the local Barco dealer and Barco Pro who come to calibrate my 1209, the overall PQ from a Cine 8 is NOT obvously better to a G808s, advantage is corrected color plus advance in picture setting software.


However, I trust the this rarely made Cine 8 Onyx should be in different class as I heard (never seen honestly), it should be the first and probably only 8" LC model Barco special made for it. But with that price you can get a decent 1209 (or 1209s if lucky enough) unless you prefer Brandnew option.


However, I do think most of the mid range ranking on list are very close for those 8" easily found in HT and surplus market. The only big question is the postion of Cine 9 which is clear cut winner to even G90 if cost factor is not considered. I will put G90 on top if it is a "Best Buy List" with price and performance are both critical to weight, more of $ for value.


If it's a "Top PJ in surplus market", Based on what I have watched a lot, I will do in sequence :

1. Cine 9 (if any)

2. Mod Vidikron (if U are lucky)

3. 1209s / G90 (sorry I haven't seen a Mod 9500LC so must be excluded)

4. ..........


----------



## kal

Thanks for the info Mike!


I've always found it odd that many of the Barco's (ex: 808/808s) don't even have any sort of colour correction at all... The Cine 8 at least sounds like a step in the right direction for HT use (though I suppose it's easy enough to add a couple of coloured gels to an 808/808s as many people here have done).


Kal


----------



## Clarence

A few requested additions:


40. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

29. Sony VPH-1031

28. NEC 1200

27. Sony VPH-125x/1270

26. Barco 800/801

25. Sony VPH-1271

24. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx (add points for ACON)

23. Sony VPH-1272

22. Barco 708

21. Sony D50

20. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

19. Barco 808

18. NEC PG9200 Xtra

17. Electrohome Marquee 8000

16. Electrohome Marquee 8500

15 Barco 1208

14. 808s

13. Barco 1208s

12. NEC XG nonLC

11. Sony 1292

10. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

9. Barco 1200

8. NEC XG-LC

7. Sony G70

6. Ampro 4600

5. Barco 1209

4. Barco 1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


----------



## Kamel407

Awesome list!

Any Price Ranges available with those?


----------



## Chuchuf

I hink you prices are a bit low on some.


Terry


----------



## WTS

I think you should get Curt to look over and comment on your prices


----------



## Clarence

There's a fair and reasonable difference in the risks and prices I hunt for and gamble on vs the consistency and dependability and support that the professional resellers and A/V technicians provide.


----------



## deronmoped

On the 10PG, it is of course a step above all the 8" PJ's thanks to the larger available phosper and better optics.


Placing it in among the other 9" PJ's could be more subjective.


It has awesome colors so it beats out all the other 9" PJ's that are not color filtered.


The convergence is classic NEC which allows more controll over the image, which is a plus.


Puts out a super sharp clean image. I have no way of comparing it to the other 9" PJ's on the list, so until I'm proven wrong I will have to say it is "Number One" on the list


Deron.


----------



## Clarence

On your screen, I'm sure it's envious indeed.


----------



## deronmoped

Where is the unmodded 9500 on the list?


Deron.


----------



## CMRA

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*On the 10PG, it is of course a step above all the 8" PJ's thanks to the larger available phosper and better optics.


Placing it in among the other 9" PJ's could be more subjective.


It has awesome colors so it beats out all the other 9" PJ's that are not color filtered.


The convergence is classic NEC which allows more controll over the image, which is a plus.


Puts out a super sharp clean image. I have no way of comparing it to the other 9" PJ's on the list, so until I'm proven wrong I will have to say it is "Number One" on the list


Deron.*
I can attest to Deron's argument. I have seen it first hand on multiple occassions. I have also seen bblue's M9501/StudioTek 130 setup. Both are exemplary.

When he says 'super sharp clean image' he does not exaggerate...even at 160 inches, corner to corner. I'm still amazed how he gets DVDs to look that good that big.

Everyone reading owes it to themself to see his setup, if they can. It's that good.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by ChrisWiggles_
*Because I have a barco and it's the greatest! .


I beleive the G808s has sony tubes that have better color than the MEC tubes in the other 808 versions and the 8500s?*
And worse spot size than the MECs supposedly.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by kal_
*Thanks for the info Mike!


I've always found it odd that many of the Barco's (ex: 808/808s) don't even have any sort of colour correction at all... The Cine 8 at least sounds like a step in the right direction for HT use (though I suppose it's easy enough to add a couple of coloured gels to an 808/808s as many people here have done).


Kal*
I think the reason was that the Barco 808/808s were not color filtered is that they were not intended for the home theater market. There were used in conference rooms, controls centers and the the like where absolute color rendition was not a priority (unfortunately). I have been thinking of trying the gels but unfortunately they impact the focus so I have been scared away by that so far.


----------



## VideoGrabber

secstate commented:

> I have been thinking of trying the gels but unfortunately they impact the focus so I have been scared away by that so far.


----------



## VideoGrabber

On Clarence's latest list:
Quote:

26. Barco 800/801

25. Sony VPH-1271

24. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx (add points for ACON)

23. Sony VPH-1272
I think I'd put the Barco's ahead of the Sony's, if for no other reason than the availability of lens flapping adjustments. No idea on the ECP's, which I have never seen.


- Tim


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by VideoGrabber_
*secstate commented:

> I have been thinking of trying the gels but unfortunately they impact the focus so I have been scared away by that so far.*


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

_Originally posted by gn2_

I've had an Ampro 4600 and several NEC XG LC's and I can tell you for sure, no question, the Ampro is NOT better, not by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, the Ampro 4600 is not better than the 8500LC, or anything past the 1208. It is not as good as a 1208s/2, it is not better than a Marquee 8000 even.
I'll have to look through the old thread to see who lobbied for the high 4600 ranking (probably someone about to list a 4600 ), but if I go back to my original basis of this list... would I trade one of my projectors for another one listed higher (in equal condition)... I agree with you... I probably would not personally trade my M8000 for an Ampro 4600. Certainly not an Ampro over an XGLC or G70.

_Quote:_

Your list is very subjective, of course, which should be a permanent disclaimer attached to it.
Yep, feel free to attach whatever disclaimer you want to it. From day 1 I've said I've only seen or owned half of these projectors. Comparison of specs only helps a newbie so much. Condition can move any of the projectors up or down as much as 10 positions. Quality of setup can also move a projector up or down the list... I suspect Jason's 1031 might've embarassed a few poorly setup PGs if set side-by-side.

Quote:

_I'd really like a group structure to crt "rankings" where extremely similar crt projectors are put in groups, rather than ranked individually.

In that manner, the majority of your top 20 would be in a single group, and only the top three would be in a separate group._
Go for it... I'd like to see your list.


But it sounds like it'd only be to the level of:

7. anything 480i

6. Ampros

5. ECPs

4. 7" ES

3. 8" EM

2. 8" LC

1. 9"


What fun is that? 


-Clarence*

* Disclaimer: my list is based only on subjective opinions.


----------



## Clarence

Looks like ChrisMcCarthy was the initial 4600 advocate in post #147 ...
Quote:

Guys... the Ampro 4600 is better than EVERY 8" machine out there, and better than most 9" CRTs.
I'm looking forward to Curt's personal assessment of his 4300:
Quote:

_Originally posted by Curt Palme_

Well, I'm about to disprove Paul's theory. My PG Xtra is coming out this weekend, and an Ampro 4300 is going up. I rank the overall pix of the AmPro 9" LC machines right up there with the others, Marquee, BArco 1209, perhaps not at the G 90 level.


Reliability is not as good as the others though.


Curt
And I'm hoping my bargain 3400 powers up for my first personal Ampro assessment.


But to demonstrate how arbitrary this list is, I'll move the Ampro down until I get convinced that I should crave one more than an XG or G70...

* Disclaimer: my list is based only on subjective opinions.


40. Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

29. Sony VPH-1031

28. NEC 1200

27. Sony VPH-125x/1270

26. Barco 800/801

25. Sony VPH-1271

24. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx (add points for ACON)

23. Sony VPH-1272

22. Barco 708

21. Sony D50

20. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

19. Barco 808

18. NEC PG9200 Xtra

17. Electrohome Marquee 8000

16. Electrohome Marquee 8500

15 Barco 1208

14. 808s

13. Barco 1208s

12. NEC XG nonLC

11. Sony 1292

10. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

9. Ampro 4600

8. Barco 1200

7. NEC XG-LC

6. Sony G70

5. Barco 1209

4. Barco 1209S

3. Barco Cine9

2. Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

1. Sony G90


-Clarence


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

_Originally posted by Phil Smith_

I'm sure there's many that are still omitted, but I added some PJs to Clarence's list. The order can be taken with a grain of salt. I'm only familiar with a couple of different models, so I really can't rate them. I used Paul's comments to rate the 4600.
I like that list, especially without the numbers...


And now I really want to see a 4600...

give me a few days, I'll buy one just to see how it stacks up. 


I threw in Deron's 10PG... no particular justification for it's initial position...


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040 (480i)

Sony VPH-1031

NEC 1200

Sony VPH-125x/1270

Barco 708

Barco BD 800/801

Sony VPH-1271

Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx (add points for ACON)

Sony VPH-1272

Barco BG 800/801

Sony D50

NEC 6PG

NEC 6PG+

NEC 6PG Xtra

NEC 9PG

NEC 9PG+

NEC PG9200 Xtra

Ampro 4600

Barco BD 808

Barco BD 808s

Barco BG 808

Barco BG 808s

Barco BG 1208

Barco BG 1208s

Electrohome Marquee 8000

Electrohome Marquee 8500

NEC XG nonLC

Barco 1200

Sony 1292

Electrohome Marquee 9000

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

NEC XG-LC

Sony G70

Barco 1209

Barco 1209S

NEC 10PG

Marquee 9501LC

Barco Cine9

Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP modded

Sony G90


----------



## CZ Eddie

How can the 9000 be seven spots below the 9501LC when it's essentially the same projector? They are both LC and most 9000's had the same tubes as the 9501. Both provide essentially the same picture as only slight changes were made between the models, after the change from Thompson to current tubes.


----------



## WTS

wow, this list changes like the weather around here. First you had all the barcos (s series) ahead of the 8000/8500 and now it's the other way around. Months ago I was thinking 8000/8500, then I was thinking barcos and now 8000/8500 again. As you can tell I've never seen either of these units in action, but I'm getting more confused as to witch one to buy as time goes on. But its all good info none the less.


----------



## Clarence

Were all M9000s LC'd?

I'd assumed it was more like a M8000 except with P19's.


WTS, please don't use this as a primary factor in a purchase decision...

condition, locality, price, and seller all should count more than an arbitrary rack and stack opinion.

You won't go wrong with either a Barco or Marquee.


I think it's main value comes from the accompanying discussions on the features and specs that exist on the different models.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by VideoGrabber_
*On Clarence's latest list:

I think I'd put the Barco's ahead of the Sony's, if for no other reason than the availability of lens flapping adjustments. No idea on the ECP's, which I have never seen.


- Tim*
I like Sony's, but in terms of parts availability and reliability, the ECPs, especially the latest 45xx plus' are the best buy all around. For some UNKNOWN reason, they don't get the respect they deserve. They're built like tanks, easy to service and practically never die.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

_Originally posted by secstate_
*Yeah, I had forgoten that idea. I guess the only problem with that is you wouldn't know how much colored dye to add without some sort of colormeter (or whatever they are called). Too much or too little wouldn't do it. I am pretty sure that BH did the coloring himself. I don't think you can buy pre-dyed gycol anymore. Still that would be the best option for an 808. With the gels the experimentation had already been done so you could just go purchase it.*


All the data you need to make the colored glycol for 808s tubes are on my Web Page in the Ink Project section, and i can even supply you with colored glycol if you wouldn't make it yourself


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by B.Hegelstad_
*All the data you need to make the colored glycol for 808s tubes are on my Web Page in the Ink Project section, and i can even supply you with colored glycol if you wouldn't make it yourself *
I would advise anyone who has to remove "fungus" (not really fungus, but a chemical reaction to the metal) from a tube MAKE SURE they don't reuse the original colored glycol (filtered or not) and replace it with FRESH new glycol. It only takes a few drops of ink to do it. BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY!


----------



## secstate

BH,


Wow! I hadn't looked in detail at your page for a while. You do provide all the information. Now I am itching to try it . The only difference is that my 808s is a Data and thus has MEC tubes. However even using your measurement for Sony tubes will probably get me closer to correct color than clear gycol. It seems I might have a new fall project!


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

_Originally posted by secstate_
*BH,


Wow! I hadn't looked in detail at your page for a while. You do provide all the information. Now I am itching to try it . The only difference is that my 808s is a Data and thus has MEC tubes. However even using your measurement for Sony tubes will probably get me closer to correct color than clear gycol. It seems I might have a new fall project!*
If you just get a toasted MEC tube from a Data 808s you can cut of the front glass and measure the chambers thickness.


The problem is that i have a lot of toasted sony tubes but no MEC tubes to work on.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*I would advise anyone who has to remove "fungus" (not really fungus, but a chemical reaction to the metal) from a tube MAKE SURE they don't reuse the original colored glycol (filtered or not) and replace it with FRESH new glycol. It only takes a few drops of ink to do it. BETTER SAFE THAN SORRY!*
I agree i would never use old glycol for anything, i only use new and fresh glycol for every job i do.

When i mix the colored glycol i always use new glycol.


----------



## Clarence

Any additions or corrections?
Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p ES
Ampro 2000....................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768..ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960..ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024 ES
NEC GP-5000................ 7"..900 1280x1024 ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024 ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768..ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768..ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200 ES
Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx..5.5"..725 1280x1024 ES
Sony VPH-1272.............. 7"..700 1600x1200 ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200 ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200 ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024 ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024 EM
NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024 EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024 EM
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200 EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200 EM
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Ampro 3400..................8"................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 EM
Ampro 4600..................9"................EM
NEC XG nonLC................8" 1100 1600x1200 EM
Barco 1200..................9" 1230 1600x1200 EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
NEC XG-LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 EM
NEC 10PG....................9"......1600x1200 EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 EM


-Clarence

_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## CZ Eddie

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*Were all M9000s LC'd?

I'd assumed it was more like a M8000 except with P19's..*
Don't have the experience with them yet, but my research says they are all LC. Found this by Curt:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...09#post4152009


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*Any additions or corrections?
*
According to an auction on ebay, Ampro 4600 is 1200 lumans, 2500 x 2000.


Barcos 800/801 were advertised 8" tubes even though Sony said they were 7". The 800 tube actually measures bigger then tubes in the Barco 1208.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*Any additions or corrections?
*
*Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i ES Analog*
*Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p ES*
*Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p ES Analog*
*NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p ES*
*Ampro 2000....................................ES*
*Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768..ES*
*Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960..ES*
*Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024 ES*
*NEC GP-5000................ 7"..900 1280x1024 ES*
*Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024 ES*
*Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768..ES*
*Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768..ES*
*Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200 ES*
*Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx..5.5"..725 1280x1024 ES*
*Sony VPH-1272.............. 7"..700 1600x1200 ES*
*Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200 ES*
*Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200 ES*
*Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024 ES*
*NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024 EM*
*NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024 EM*
*NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024 EM*
*NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200 EM*
*NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200 EM*
*NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 EM*
*Ampro 3400..................8"................EM*
*Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM*
*Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM*
*Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM*
*Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM*
*Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM*
*Barco BG 1208s..............7" 1250 1600x1200 EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 EM*
*Ampro 4600..................9"................EM*
*NEC XG nonLC................8" 1100 1600x1200 EM*
*Barco 1200..................9" 1230 1600x1200 EM*
*Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 EM*
*NEC XG-LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 EM*
*Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 EM*
*Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 EM*
*Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 EM*
*NEC 10PG....................9"......1600x1200 EM*
*Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 EM*
*Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 EM*
*Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 EM*
*Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 EM*
*

-Clarence

* Disclaimer: my list is based only on subjective opinions.*
Your opinions coincide with mine EXACTLY.


----------



## secstate

[*]Barco BG 1208s..............7" 1250 1600x1200 EM

-Clarence

_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._ [/b][/quote]


I think the 1208s an 8" projector? Otherwise great list.


----------



## CMRA

Not to stir things up too much, but, where do the smaller players fit in? Like GE, Zenith, Vidikron, Runco, Madrigal, Seleco and the like? Heck, didn't JVC and Panny participate in the CRT projection market once upon a time?


----------



## Clarence

When "the list" was numbered, I left spaces from #30-#39 to allow for those little guys.


I really did that to separate the 480i boxes from the HD capable PJs.


But another serious consideration... if/when something goes astray with one of those more obscure models, help and parts are much harder to obtain.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by CMRA_
*Not to stir things up too much, but, where do the smaller players fit in? Like GE, Zenith, Vidikron, Runco, Madrigal, Seleco and the like? Heck, didn't JVC and Panny participate in the CRT projection market once upon a time?*
Virtually all the Vidikron, Runco, Madrigal and GE projectors are made by Electrohome and NEC, so most of the parts are interchangeable with their other models.


----------



## onlink

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_

- BEST: 3GHz CPU (to play those HD WM9 movies), Radeon with Mike Parker Mods, HDTV card (I love my $159 FusionHDTV-II) for viewing and recording Over-the-Air HiDef TV (aka OTA, i.e. free broadcast). [/b]
Hey marcosyscom, what's the Mike Parker Mods? I've got a Radion 9800pro.


----------



## deronmoped

1000 lumens on the 10PG, that is from the service manual. Even though the XG's are rated at 1100, the 10PG was quite a bit brighter.


Deron.


----------



## Clarence

I decided that I'd rather have an Ampro 4600 over a 1292, so I moved it back up a few notches.


And I filled in Deron's 10PG specs.


But can anyone confirm if CRT Cinema is correct when they show

BG 1208s 7 07MFP2?

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p ES
Ampro 2000....................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768..ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960..ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024 ES
NEC GP-5000................ 7"..900 1280x1024 ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024 ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768..ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768..ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200 ES
Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx..5.5"..725 1280x1024 ES
Sony VPH-1272.............. 7"..700 1600x1200 ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200 ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200 ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024 ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024 EM
NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024 EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024 EM
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200 EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200 EM
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Ampro 3400..................8"................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 EM
NEC XG nonLC................8" 1100 1600x1200 EM
Barco 1200..................9" 1230 1600x1200 EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 EM
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
NEC XG-LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 EM


-Clarence

_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Phil Smith

I think the older 9" PJs, the NEC 10PG (probably too high?), Marquee 9000 (too low?), Ampro 4600 (too low?) and possibly the Barco 1200 (slightly too low?) ratings need further discussion.


Also the 5.5" PJs.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*I decided that I'd rather have an Ampro 4600 over a 1292, so I moved it back up a few notches.


And I filled in Deron's 10PG specs.


But can anyone confirm if CRT Cinema is correct when they show

BG 1208s 7 07MFP2?

* Disclaimer: my list is based only on subjective opinions.*
Well they are wrong one way or the other. Because they show the Barco Graphic 808s which uses the same Sony tubes as an 8". So it is either one or the other ;-). I have never measured one though and all my Barcos are MEC based. BTW, to further complicate your list the Barco 1208 model went through several more iterations than you show. Probably not really germane to your rankings but here are the diffs as I understand them.


1. Barco 1208 (relatively uncommon) 8" 180DVB MEC tubes, no digital astig.

2. Barco 1208/2 (most common) 8" 180DVB MEC tubes, digitial asitg.

3. Barco 1208s (newer firmware with more gemoetry adjustments and gamma). All or most appear to use Sony tubes.

4. Barco 1208s/2 (newest/rarest), 8" MEC P16s (all or most), same adjustments as 1208s.


----------



## Clarence


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p ES
Ampro 2000....................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768..ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960..ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024 ES
NEC GP-5000................ 7"..900 1280x1024 ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024 ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768..ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768..ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200 ES
Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx..5.5"..725 1280x1024 ES
Sony VPH-1272.............. 7"..700 1600x1200 ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200 ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200 ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024 ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024 EM
NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024 EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024 EM
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200 EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200 EM
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Ampro 3400..................8"................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208/2............ 8" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208s..............?" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Barco BG 1208s/2............?" 1250 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 EM
NEC XG nonLC................8" 1100 1600x1200 EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 EM
Barco 1200..................9" 1230 1600x1200 EM
NEC XG-LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 EM
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 EM _LC?_
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 EM


_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


Phil, which 5.5's did you think were too high/low?


Rod, check out http://wisdom-technologies.com/ for info on Mike Parker's MP-1... and search this forum for lots of info. Mike does incredible work with beautiful results.


-Clarence


----------



## gn2

Tube size is "nominal" like lumber sizes, its only a competetive reference point among manufacturers most of the time. The tubes in the D50 are physically slightly larger than the tubes in an NEC XG, and the tubes in the PG Xtra are exactly the same as the tubes in an NEC XG. Also, the MEC tubes in the Marquee series are within 6mm of the size of the NEC tubes in every model. There is no inch difference in physical size. Also, the MEC tubes used in Marquee's are smaller than the tube used in the Barco 801s, for instance, yet they are described as "8"inch tubes whereas the Barco's are describes as "7" inch tubes.

I think we should get rid of tube size altogether and just note WHAT tube is used since there are only a handful of tube bell sizes.

The em vs es distinction is far more important than size.

PS: I've had an NEC 10PG, and I can assure you, it deserves to be in the top five, it is the equal of the 9500LC(but with better colors and focus), which I've also owned.


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*Phil, which 5.5's did you think were too high/low?*
Clarence,


Heck I don't know. It seems they should be a bit lower to me, but it was more of a question than a statement.


As Paul brings up, maybe it's best not to get too caught up in tube size.


This list poses a lot of problems. As owners, we have experience with a very limited number of PJs (other than Clarence of coarse), and tend to be biased towards what we own. The resellers have a lot of experience with a lot of different makes and models, but they're...well they're salesmen! They're biased toward what they normally have in stock.


No one is truly is knowledgeable AND unbiased. That person just doesn't exist.


----------



## deronmoped

Phil


What does older have to do with anything? The PJ can be a newer design with newer electronics and still be putting out a lesser picture.


Clarence


I say we go off of Paul's experience in seeing these different PJ's in action. Why, because that is all we have to go by till someone tells us different.


Deron.


----------



## Clarence

I really need to see 10PG and a 4600.


Anybody East Coast got either?


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*The PJ can be a newer design with newer electronics and still be putting out a lesser picture.*
Deron,


Sure, that CAN be true, but I don't think there's anything to indicate that it IS true. I think most will agree that Sony, Eletrohome and Barco consistently improved their product and produced better and better CRT PJs. I find it hard to believe that NEC took a step backward when they introduced the XG series.


But as I've mentioned, I don't really know.


----------



## NTHEZONE

Well as for the #1 projector would that be the Barco 912 



Has anyone seen one??


----------



## WTS

Clarence;


Well one thing I can say for sure is that when I do pick one, 99% chance it will come from Curt (he's in Vancouver and I'm in Calgary, not far from Van). And it depends on what kind of deal he'll give on any particular unit. Can I assume that the ranking for the 8000/8500 are stock units(only factory service bulletin mods done to it and no MP or otherwise mods done). Also would I be correct in assuming that the difference between the 8xxx and the Barco 1208/808 are very slight(lets assume both have new tubes), and it would take a side by side comparison or is the difference more memoriable.


If the 8xxx is modded with the various MP or other mods, where would it place then?


----------



## gn2

I think its a Barco Reality 812, actually, and I'm sure it would be the best projector possible, what with 12" crt's and such huge light output.

BTW, I've owned at least one example of 32 of the projectors on the list, and many of them, I've owned more than one example. Every one I've owned has been completely setup with at least three sources, and run for a minimum of 40 or so hours with DVD and HD material, in case anyone was wondering where my opinions come from.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by gn2_
*I think its a Barco Reality 812, actually, and I'm sure it would be the best projector possible, what with 12" crt's and such huge light output.
*
Actually there is an 812 (basically an 808 with 12" tubes) and 912 (basically a 909 (simulation version of Cine 9) with 12" tubes):


912: http://www.barco.com/simulation/en/p...sp?element=886 


812: http://www.barco.com/corporate/en/Pr....asp?GenNr=336 


I have seen some messages from folks in the European counterpart to these forums that have seen the 812 in action and supposedly they are much brighter than our typical 8"/9" CRTs but "no more detailed." I don't know how accurate those impressions are, but more than one person has posted the same thing. I would still like to see one.


----------



## deronmoped

Phil


Are you saying Paul is wrong? I believe him when he says it is one of the best PJ's out there for image quality.


Sony, Barco and Electrohome "had" to improve there 9" PJ's just to catch up with the NEC 10PG. Sony did a excellent job going from the dim, loud, 1292 to the G90. It took Barco a while before they added color correction to their line of 9" PJ's. They now have the Cine 9 which should be up there with the G90. Electrohome still has not produced a better 9" PJ then the NEC 10PG.


And, yes, NEC did take a step backwards when they introduced the XG series, they left out a 9" version of the XG. The 10PG is brighter, sharper, with better optics and will resolve HDTV.


I'm still disappointed that NEC did not make a 9" XG, could very well have been as good as a G90 or a Cine 9 or better.


And that they stopped making improvements in CRT PJ's. Rear Projection TV's have been advancing with better guns, phosper coating, LC fluid, optics, electronics...


Oh well


Deron.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*


Sony, Barco and Electrohome "had" to improve there 9" PJ's just to catch up with the NEC 10PG. Sony did a excellent job going from the dim, loud, 1292 to the G90. It took Barco a while before they added color correction to their line of 9" PJ's. They now have the Cine 9 which should be up there with the G90. Electrohome still has not produced a better 9" PJ then the NEC 10PG.


Deron.*
The NEC 10PG spec's were lower than the NEC XG's. Actually the NEC XG's were much better than the 10PG. The 10PG had 9" tubes, but it was much lower in bandwidth, resolution and scan rate than the XG's.



The Barco CINE 9 is very similar to the Barco Reality 909. Both are very high bandwidth CRT projectors (180mhz).


The Sony G90 has an RGB bandwidth of 135mhz.


The Marquee 9500LC Ultra has an RGB bandwidth of 150mhz.


The NEC 10PG has an RGB bandwidth of 100Mhz


When determining the the best CRT projector, something in the specs should always be used as a reference for video performance, and the most important number in the specs is the RGB bandwidth.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

When determining the the best CRT projector, something in the specs should always be used as a reference for video performance, and the most important number in the specs is the RGB bandwidth.
Yep! Especially on the cheap projectors, you really have to keep an eye on max bandwidth... a huge limitation in the VPH1270 vs 1271/1272.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

When determining the the best CRT projector, something in the specs should always be used as a reference for video performance, and the most important number in the specs is the RGB bandwidth.
Yep! Especially on the cheap projectors, you really have to keep an eye on max bandwidth... a huge limitation in the VPH1270 vs 1271/1272.


Here's a handy bandwidth calculator for the RGB Max Bandwidth MHz column.


And here's an update...


mp, would you rate the M9000 better than the 10PG?
Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000...........................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 7"..900 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM
NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024..80MHz EM
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200..80MHz EM
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 125MHz EM
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM


-Clarence

_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## deronmoped

Mike


I have plenty of bandwidth, only needing 36MHz for HDTV. Well actully you need a little over twice that to be on the safe side.


Plenty of scan rate too.


Are you telling me the XG series can do 2500X2000? Yeah right. My XG1100 could do 768 (16X9) my 10PG does 960 (16X9) with room to spare.


You can have all the specifications you want, I look at the final result to make my judgement and the 10PG is quite a bit better then the XG series.


You guys can beat up on me and my old timer 10PG, but I going to defend it kicking and screaming


Deron.


----------



## deronmoped

Oh, and the Sony G90 is junk because of it's low bandwidth of 135MHz as compared to the Cine 9's 180MHz bandwidth?


Just breaking your eggs


Deron.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

The only way to find out which projector is the best is to place all of them side by side with the same source, and one technician calibrating them all.


Until i see that i think mine BarcoGraphics1209s is absolute the best projector out there


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Hi,


I'd like to add some thoughts too:


Regarding older 9" units:

From my experience the Barco 1200 and the Marquee 9000 are not that close to the later units of the next generation (i.e. 1209s and 9500 ultra) and deserve to be placed lower.


Then as Deron mentions specs don't tell the whole story, as a projector may be crisp despite being rated lower in bandwidth and even substantially more so than a higher rated model, a case in point may be the NEC 10PG that compares favorably in this regard with the Sony 1292/G70 and all newer 8" units I have seen while being rated at 70 MHz in my NEC manual vs. the 100+ MHz bandwidth claimed for all the others.


And then there are always tradeoffs to be made - one projector my be easier to get a correct greyscale with, another unit might get blacker and yet another may have the least streaking.


After having seen all units higher on this list with the exception of the G90 and Barco Cine9/909 and having set up most of them, too I'd say that the Barco 1209s is the closest to perfection I have seen. The 10PG, Sony 1292 and Marquee 9500 all fall short of the 1209s in one regard or another but I'd probably still prefer them to all the 8" units out there because with 1080p HD their larger phosphor size really counts.


And nice to mention MP's modded 9500 in the list, but I think this is rather unfair to include here as I am sure there is potential for improvement in the other 9" units, too. It is also very difficult to rank the first three units as the only persons who may have seen all of these are probably WM and Art Sonneborn.


Oliver


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Bjorn,


me thinks that your idea isn't too bad, but we would need more than one technician as there are different specialists for NEC, Sony and Electrohome at least, not sure about Barco and Ampro.


And did I mention we'd need a huuuuuge room 


BTW: Is your projector the one Per Johnny used to rave about ?


----------



## MikeReilly

I like the AmPros. The Rodney Dangerfield of CRT's. The lowly 2000's have huge bandwidth compared to their CRT size. I don't have the specs available for the higher models, however, the 2000G is rated at Horizontal 15-80khz and vertical refresh of 40-150hz, 70mhz bandwidth and 1280 lines of RGB resolution. Of course, most of this is academic, as I've not been able to go past 1024x768 and keep the ability to see scan lines in a 4:3 aspect ration (using as much raster as is safe).


You gotta think that with all the PJ's going through Curts house, there has to be some reason he's hanging a 9" AmPro. Of course, I really should just learn to be quiet, since I'd like to upgrade to an 8 or 9" ampro some time. Forget anything I've said. Ampros are horrible pj's. I bet they explode regularly.


Anyway, from what I understand, it's good to have a nice buffer of extra bandwidth over top of what you wish to project. Apparently it gives a better PQ.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Bjorn,


me thinks that your idea isn't too bad, but we would need more than one technician as there are different specialists for NEC, Sony and Electrohome at least, not sure about Barco and Ampro.


And did I mention we'd need a huuuuuge room :biggrin:


BTW: Is your projector the one Per Johnny used to rave about ?*
I agree with you there, it had to be specialists for each brand.


Its the one Per Johnny had and after i fitted red and green c-elements I just can't imagine any better, its the best picture i have ever seen.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Bjorn,


Glad you mentioned the colored c-elements.

Without them I wouldn't even consider a projector to be competitive, so this goes for all Barcos, Ampros and E-Homes near the top of the list: I evaluated all projectors I used or have seen with color filtering on red and green.


I think a G90 or Cine9/909 will probably be a step up from a 1209s but the 1209s is a tad above the rest of the crop IMO. Myself I currently I use a 10PG or a 1292 so I think I am impartial about this.


Oliver


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Oliver,


As you can see on my web page color filtering CRT's is one of my missions and i could never live with a projector without color filtering and gray scale calibrations.


----------



## Per Johnny

Oliver,


Bjorn's 1209s is stunning. I compared it to a brand new Cine9, and even if the edge of course went to Cine9 it wasnt very much behind. Both are far better than a stock Ehome 9500 in my book. Have yet to see a G90, but as I now uses a G70 - I can imagine that the G90 are equal and possible better than the rest(please anyone send me a G90 so I can verify that).


Per Johnny


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*Are you saying Paul is wrong?*
Deron,


Are you saying Mike Parker is wrong?


You've managed to convince Clarence to give the 10PG a higher rating than most would CRTers would probably rate it, which is fine with me. I'm sure it's a great PJ.


PS: Have I mentioned that the G70 is the best PJ ever made? That I own one does not influence on my opinion. Just stating the facts.


----------



## gn2

I don't think this is a right or wrong, black or white, good or bad discussion. Its a refinement of a gradation based on a collection of opinions.

I think the list looks better after the bandwidth figures were added. I do, however, think there are other things to consider than simple bandwidth. For instance, I've noticed with many Barco's that they seem to have more noise in the raster than other projectors, as well, I personally think the 1292 is just too dim to get full credit for the quality of its image.


----------



## deronmoped

Phil


Yes.


Mike is making a statement based on specifications. He pointed out that the 10PG has spec's lower then the XG's. I pointed out that I have had a XG and now have a 10PG. The image the 10PG puts out is brighter more resolved and sharper. Now this is doing it with all these lower spec's that Mike refers to.


He goes on to point out the MHz rating of Cine 9, the 9500LC, the 10PG and the G90. Well the G90 is not on top of the heap by a long shot. Does that mean the G90 is a lesser PJ and should be lower on the list?


The whole purpose of this thread is to rate the PJ's according to how good they can produce a image.


My input and Paul's input (Paul said the 10PG should be in the top five according to what he has seen) helped put it up there. It does also have better colors then some of the lesser 9' PJ's produced by the color filtering the other PJ's lack.


Do you really know how CRTer's "that have seen these different PJ's in action" would rate the 10PG?


Actually we are on the same page here, you have the best CRT ever made and I do too, they just happen to be different


Deron.


----------



## deronmoped

What is the big deal about the MHz rating of the PJ all of a sudden?


If you have enough MHz to do the signal and all the equipment up and down the line has enough MHz too, there should be no problem.


I know all about lesser equipment that either fudges the figures or degrades the signal badly, but who of us owns any of that junk equipment?


The CRT PJ's we own are top of the line, this is not consumer grade stuff. So the video path through these PJ's should be very good. I do not hear any of us asking about where we can get the cheapest cables. The source is usually the biggest problem. DVD playback is dam good. The rest of the stuff still is growing.


MHz smegaHz, look at the figures all these PJ's have plenty.


Deron.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*Phil


Yes.


Mike is making a statement based on specifications. He pointed out that the 10PG has spec's lower then the XG's. I pointed out that I have had a XG and now have a 10PG. The image the 10PG puts out is brighter more resolved and sharper. Now this is doing it with all these lower spec's that Mike refers to.


He goes on to point out the MHz rating of Cine 9, the 9500LC, the 10PG and the G90. Well the G90 is not on top of the heap by a long shot. Does that mean the G90 is a lesser PJ and should be lower on the list?


The whole purpose of this thread is to rate the PJ's according to how good they can produce a image.


My input and Paul's input (Paul said the 10PG should be in the top five according to what he has seen) helped put it up there. It does also have better colors then some of the lesser 9' PJ's produced by the color filtering the other PJ's lack.


Do you really know how CRTer's "that have seen these different PJ's in action" would rate the 10PG?


Actually we are on the same page here, you have the best CRT ever made and I do too, they just happen to be different


Deron.*
Deron,


Bandwidth will determine how high a frequency you can run and still have a watchable picture. It's not an absolute, meaning that if you exceed it, you will STILL get a picture, but it will be degraded in one form or another.


For our purposes (Home Theatre), you don't really need that high a bandwidth, however, I have found that the higher the bandwidth, the better the picture appears EVEN if you're running at a frequency well below the maximum bandwidth.


I have never seen a 10PG setup, so I can't comment on how it compares with other 9" projectors. However, remember this, whether you're talking about s/n ratio or bandwidth, it's something that a manufacturer is "claiming" and some manufacturers are more conservative than others. Also, like anything else, there is a tolerance to parts used, that's why sometimes, even with identical models, one will look better than another.


Bruce


----------



## deronmoped

Bruce


You hit the nail on the head.


Picture!!!


Talk about taking things out of context


Deron.


----------



## deronmoped

Oliver


I see you run a 10PG, why?


How does it compare to the 1292 you also run?


Deron.


----------



## CMRA

I cast my vote for Deron and his puny 100Mhz 10PG. Coupled with his knowhow, he's got setup hard to beat and 160 inch sharp image to boot.

Many a G90 owner would love to have his results. Don't take my word for it. GO SEE IT!


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by CMRA_
*I cast my vote for Deron and his puny 100Mhz 10PG. Coupled with his knowhow, he's got setup hard to beat and 160 inch sharp image to boot.

Many a G90 owner would love to have his results. Don't take my word for it. GO SEE IT!*
100Mhz isn't "so" puny. Like I said, very high bandwidths really aren't necessary for HT, but if you "could" run 1980x1080P @ 60Hz, you would need a bandwidth of nearly 190Mhz. While it "might" be desirable in a 9" pj, it's totally unnecessary in an 8" pj.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Deron,


the 10PG has a crisper picture, the streaking is much less (surprise, surprise ), black gets blacker while still retaining shadow detail and it is less noisy than the 1292. I also compared the 10PG to a Marquee 9500 I used to own which had mint tubes and eventually kept the 10PG as for watching movies it looked at least as good as the Marquee.


The 1292 is smoother, has a more even focus especially at higher contrasts and is easier to dial in.


Biggest downside to the 10PG: I am desperately looking for a new green tube for it for almost two years now 


Oliver


----------



## techman707

Who makes the tube for the 10PG, is it MEC?


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Nope - it WAS Toshiba. Apparently they don't make them anymore.


----------



## deronmoped

Bruce


The tube Oliver is looking for is a 951N5651. Has a sticker that says NEC with "made in Japan" under the NEC. Not sure if that means what it says.


Oliver


So are you saying the 10PG with a green tube that is worn looks as good as the 9500 if not better?


Is the 9500 color filtered? I know there is the option for the green, but can it come standard for the red and green?


What contrast are you running the 10PG at? I try to keep mine at 30 with the boost off. You drop the contrast down on these PJ's and the sharpness just goes way up. High gain screens are where it's at.


Have you tried Hammerhead? They do not show any available, but to contact the sales department. I returned a green that was leaking to them quite a while back. They might have never fixed and resold it so that might be a option. I would ask about that tube and see if it is still around.


Deron.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Deron,


I did not figure in the state of the tube in my evaluation as back then I figured it would be possible to still get a new tube. FWIW the NEC tube is still very sharp even with some wear on it (we're talking light wear here) ad grey scale and color balance are not affected either.


The 9500's I have seen had green filtered but not red, I added the filtering before I even tried to set it up after having seen the unfiltered reds of an E-Home before. The 9500 has more problems getting really black in dark scenes than the 10PG which has G2, bias and gain adjustments, whereas the Marquee only has G2 and drive. That is important for me and won me over to the 10PG, that and the nicer selling price for the 9500 , overall it was almost like tossing a coin with regard to center focus, greyscale and shadow detail it all depends on your preferences I guess.


I will immediately contact hammerhead about that green CRT but I am quite sure they fixed it, thanks for the tip.


I am running the 10PG somewhere between 50 and 70 contrast depending on the source and it is plenty bright but it can be seen that there is already some booming at this point. 30 is not an option however as with 30 I#d have like 2.5 ft-lamberts  Detail on test patterns really is compromised at higher contrast setting but with movie APL's which are comparatively low there is no problem. And yes, at 30 contrast my 10PG is sharp as a tack, too.


Oliver


----------



## techman707

Oliver,


Do you know the actual Toshiba tube number? The number that Deron has given is the NEC number.


The reason I asked if it was an MEC is because I understand that Panasonic is still making tubes, but like the NEC XG's and Sony G70s, those companies take the plain tubes and put them in their own flapping hardware. Sometimes you can get the plain tubes. I once got an uncooled Hitachi CRT tube for a Pioneer RPTV that Pioneer only sold with the whole assembly. When you look at the assembly that the G70 tubes go in, the prices are pretty fair, however, it's just a waste to have to replace the whole thing when all you need is a tube.


Bruce


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Bruce,


I don't know the Toshiba number, but I asked Doug Baisey and he says they don't do them anymore at Toshiba, not even the plain tube 


I will inquire for the number though, can't hurt and maybe somebody will have a few lying around - you never know...


Oliver


----------



## stefuel

So who actually makes the tube (envelope and gun) for the G70?


Chip


----------



## Oliver Klohs

matsushita


----------



## stefuel

If that's the case. could the blanks be ordered direct from Matsushita and swap your own hardware onto them? Or will they not sell them to us smucks?


Chip


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Bruce,


I don't know the Toshiba number, but I asked Doug Baisey and he says they don't do them anymore at Toshiba, not even the plain tube 


I will inquire for the number though, can't hurt and maybe somebody will have a few lying around - you never know...


Oliver*
I realize they don't make them, but if you don't know the actual tube number, if a surplus place was "dumping" them we might not know what they were used for.

Quote:

_Originally posted by stefuel_
*So who actually makes the tube (envelope and gun) for the G70?


Chip*
The G70 tubes are made by MEC/Panasonic. Some tube stickers say Panasonic and some just have a lot of Japanese writing and NO English company name. MEC was the ONLY company that made the tubes for all the late series Sony projectors (D50, G70 and G90).


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Bruce,

hopefully I'll get the Toshiba-number one of these days and then hopefully you'll find some of those at a garage sale 

Oliver


----------



## deronmoped

Here is another number I have for the10PG tubes. E8517A


Oliver


Here is a option. Get a real high gain screen and lower that contrast. With the green still being good you can add some life to it by lowering the contrast and you will get the added benifit of a sharper image.


Deron.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*Here is another number I have for the10PG tubes. E8517A


Deron.*
Deron,


Is that a NEC number or do you think it's a Toshiba number? It looks like an NEC number.


Bruce


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Deron,

high gain is an option I am thinking about. I like the Stewart ultramatte 300 and plan on a curved screen with it. How high is your gain ?

I want however to get a new or very good used green tube as I am used to go for the full raster width on all my CRT's and the tube with the wear has the wear on an area that is simply too small.


Bruce,

E8517A is the number on the tube package as it comes from NEC, probably an NEC number. Deron, is it on the tube also ?


----------



## JMSE

I also agree the 10PG has a stunning piture.

I have not seen another 9 inch, but have 2 XG's now as well and have had a half dozen others in the past ( LC and non LC'd ) and none of the XG's compare to the NEC for sharpness, and deep contrast. The image from the 10PG is is much more 3D and lifelike. It is also a bit brighter than the XG's even though it is rated at 1000 lumens only.


I think that since they are so rare that not many others have had a chance to see one in action.


As for the leaking green 10PG tube from Hammerhead, It is in my posesion, fixed and sitting pretty with a brand new blue and red waiting for the day that I need to replace my originals, which may be a while as these 10PG tubes are HUGE and wear very slowly.


Jim


----------



## deronmoped

The sticker that is on the tube that says NEC on it with made in Japan on it also has the E8517A number on it.


I have to say, after comparing other screen materials to my screen it has to be 3+ in gain. I plan to redo it and it should be a touch higher in gain, maybe approaching 4 gain. The best seats are the center and one on each side of center, you start to get into the cheaper seats after that. And the cheaper seats are really not a problem if you like the people enough to turn up the contrast past 30 to 45. And that's on a 161" screen.


I will keep my eyes peeled for a green for you. I will buy it and sell it to you for three times what I bought it for


Deron.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Deron,


no problem with you charging me three times of what you pay for a new green - if you can get it for 50 bucks it would still be a nice deal 


Oliver


----------



## deronmoped

What is the latest breakdown in the 9" race?


As I see it the G90 remains at the top, with the Cine 9 right there with it and the 10 PG is third.


The Barcos and the Marquees do not have the awesome colors that is a big minus.


The Marquees need some heavy mods besides the color filtering.


The 10PG besides having the best colors out there has the best convergence capablities of all these 9" PJ's.


What puts the Sony on top is the sharpness and brightness.


And lets not get into bang for the buck!!!


Deron.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*What is the latest breakdown in the 9" race?



The Barcos and the Marquees do not have the awesome colors that is a big minus.



Deron.*
I don't know that I really agree with the statement above. The Marquees are not that far off. I think people are looking for artificially deep color tones and saturation that aren't necessarily what is actually on the original material. All my reference is comparing the color with the actual film. Even between release prints there is a tolerance and they aren't all the same.


Bruce


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*What is the latest breakdown in the 9" race?


As I see it the G90 remains at the top, with the Cine 9 right there with it and the 10 PG is third.


The Barcos and the Marquees do not have the awesome colors that is a big minus.


The Marquees need some heavy mods besides the color filtering.


The 10PG besides having the best colors out there has the best convergence capablities of all these 9" PJ's.


What puts the Sony on top is the sharpness and brightness.


And lets not get into bang for the buck!!!


Deron.*
This sounds like some of the same stuff the NEC sales rep's used to preach... And it was not long after those sermons that they were preaching about how much better the 6PG and 9PG EXTRAS were to the 10PG. I remember them saying that the 'Xtra" models had better convergence and more setup features. And not long after that they were praising the XG as being the best... Hmm, maybe you're right afterall.


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*What is the latest breakdown in the 9" race?


As I see it the G90 remains at the top, with the Cine 9 right there with it and the 10 PG is third.


The Barcos and the Marquees do not have the awesome colors that is a big minus.


The Marquees need some heavy mods besides the color filtering.


The 10PG besides having the best colors out there has the best convergence capablities of all these 9" PJ's.


What puts the Sony on top is the sharpness and brightness.


And lets not get into bang for the buck!!!


Deron.*
Come on Deron, now you're completely out control!  The 10PG has better colors than the G90, G70 and XG? Rates higher than the 9500 and 1209? Has the best convergence of any PJ, bar none? I don't think so! 


I think you'd have a hard time finding a G70 or XG owner that would trade their PJ for a 10PG. I know I wouldn't trade my G70 for one. G90, 9500 and 1209 owners would probably laugh out loud at the proposition.


But, you're a likable guy, so here's a new list that hopefully placates your "unbiased opinion".
Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000...........................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 7"..900 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM
NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024..80MHz EM
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200..80MHz EM
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 125MHz EM
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (wink, wink...gotta keep our buddy Deron happy)


_* *Disclaimer*: This list is based solely on Deron's opinion._


----------



## techman707

Hey Deron,


I have to smile when I think that SOMEWHERE is this BIG country, in a warehouse or someone's basement, there are lots of NEW 10PG tubes sitting there and someone is saying "if we can't find someone to buy this junk we should throw it out." 


Bruce


----------



## deronmoped

Bruce


I'm set, with a pristine set of tubes with 500 hours on them in the PJ and a brand spankin new set on the ready


And I bet you are right about tubes sitting around in some warehouse, not only 10PG tubes but G70 tubes. This is a big planet and I bet if you look hard enough some Sony repair shop, corperate office, college... somewhere has those sets of G70 tubes tucked away that they forgot about or just don't know what to do with them.


Phil


Now were talkin.


But on a serious note.


Colors can be subjective (as long as they are pretty close to being correct), that is why I threw that out there. Anyways the NEC's always have been know for their killer kolors, so until someone can give me their nonsubjective judgment that these other PJ's have better colors, I'm going to be subjective and say the 10PG's look the best


What puts the 9500 and the 1209 over the top of the 10PG? Is it their orange red's?


As far as convergence the NEC's have more options for dialing it in. On my 10PG there is absolutely no warm up required.


I guess I'm a nobody, I took down my XG1100 sold it and never looked back. Would have loved to trade it stright out, cost me quite a few $ to make that trade.


I knew if I was to kick and scream loud enough I could get the 10PG's into the place they deserve, but being on top is even better


Deron.


----------



## CMRA

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*Bruce


And I bet you are right about tubes sitting around in some warehouse, not only 10PG tubes but G70 tubes. This is a big planet and I bet if you look hard enough some Sony repair shop, corperate office, college... somewhere has those sets of G70 tubes tucked away that they forgot about or just don't know what to do with them.


Deron.*
And, I wager you wouldn't have to go any further than the DOD (US Gov't) to find boatloads. But, as said, they are tucked away and forgotten in some storage area. And knowing the DOD, about five years from now some brilliant employee will come to the conclusion "nobody uses these anymore" and they'll get tossed with true-to-form 'government efficiency'.

That's my take.


----------



## Tim in Phoenix

Guys!


I haven't waded thru every post here, but how much importance does the crowd here place on Factory Support and simple Modular Design??? When contemplating a big investment, I want to know that a factory stands behind the product I am considering.


----------



## deronmoped

Tim


Right now we are battling it out over image quality.


Throw too much stuff into the mix and the thread will end up in outer space somewhere.


As soon as I get everyone to agree (with me), we can start on what you are talking about.


Deron.


----------



## Curt Palme

Has anyone pointed out in the last 17 pages that the max resolution of the spec sheets is absolutely USELESS?


An 8" set runs best at 720p or line tripling, a 9" set is best at 960p or 1080p. I don't know of anyone running any ultra mega super duper tweaked out set (the 10PG..) at anything more than 1080p. THe 2500X 2500 specs are there to show that the CHASSIS will lock to 135 Khz, but a 9" tube will never display it.


The rest is purely subjective as the last 339 posts have shown.





Curt


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Come on Curt - calling our highly objective discussions subjective 

BTW: How do yo like you Ampro - is t all you expected it to be and did you put in colored C-elements ?


Deron,

is very easy to put colored c-elements in the Barco 1209s and all the pople that I know to have one have it done to their unit. After putting in the c-elements the colors are about up to par with the 10 PG and the 1209s is better in a few other areas so I would certainly give it the nod over the 10PG, alhough I own the 10 PG myself.


Oliver


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Bruce,


You are killing me with stories of 10PG tubes sitting around in some warehouse. I think I need to get a projector with good tubes fast - looking for those tubes drives me crazy after all that time 


Oliver


----------



## NTHEZONE

Ditto!!!


So far I like my Barco 808 better than my nec XG75. It must be the simple setup of the barco for me.



Instead in 3 categories

what is the best 7" projector, then 8" projector, then the 9" and then wish for the only 12" projector barco (biased) unless anyone knows of another 12"er.


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*Colors can be subjective (as long as they are pretty close to being correct), that is why I threw that out there. Anyways the NEC's always have been know for their killer kolors, so until someone can give me their nonsubjective judgment that these other PJ's have better colors, I'm going to be subjective and say the 10PG's look the best*
Deron,


Not true! Color preference may be subjective, but a PJ's color accuracy isn't. It's something that can be measured, so opinion is not necessary.


It has been proved that the G70 has near perfect colors. A lower hour machine may have measured perfect, but that's speculation. The XG uses the same tubes and is color corrected, so it's likely the G70 and XG are about the same. I think we all agree the G90 is in this category. Your 10PG may or may not be in this group, but to say it has better colors further undermines the credibility of your argument for the 10PG.


But you've managed get your beloved 10PG rated at the top of heap, and that all that counts! You should be a campaign manager.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Phil,


a friend of mine and I have measured our projectors (G90 and 10PG) the 10 PG is more accurate than the G90 which has slightly more yellowish green.


Can't comment on the G70, although I will say that the XG LC units have very accurate colors.


Oliver


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*is very easy to put colored c-elements in the Barco 1209s and all the pople that I know to have one have it done to their unit. After putting in the c-elements the colors are about up to par with the 10 PG and the 1209s is better in a few other areas so I would certainly give it the nod over the 10PG, alhough I own the 10 PG myself.*
Now, now Oliver, you said including the MP modded 9500 on the list was inappropriate. No color "modded" PJs allowed when discussing the merits of our PJs. 


Seriously, I imagine any PJ is capable of near or perfect colors with the right correction. This is the first thing I'd do if my PJ wasn't already color corrected: http://www.crtht.com/ink_project.htm


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Phil,


you got me here 


Honestly I think that something that is as easy to do as adding colored c-elements to the 1209 should not be compared to the much more complex mods necessary for the Marquee chassis done by Mike Parker.


Last I heard the MP-mods are nothing that you or I could do ourselves, but color filtering is easy to do even for the non-technician, on the 1209s at least and also, where would those poor Ampros, Barcos and Marquees be without the filtering they need, probably last after all the NEC's and Sony's 


Oliver


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Phil,


a friend of mine and I have measured our projectors (G90 and 10PG) the 10 PG is more accurate than the G90 which has slightly more yellowish green.


Can't comment on the G70, although I will say that the XG LC units have very accurate colors.


Oliver*
Oliver,


You don't need first hand experience to comment on the G70, unless you don't trust Guy Kuo. He found the G70's green was dead on, as was red. I believe blue was slightly off. The PJ had over 3K hours (if I remember correctly) and lower hour machine may have better results, although there's only room for a very slight improvement in blue accuracy. Guy's XG LC didn't do as well, but that was probably attributable to a problem he later rectified.


If a G70's green is perfect, it's likely the G90's is as well (I wish Art would comment--I imagine he's not following this thread). I think your results were probably an exception rather than the rule.


----------



## deronmoped

So I'm right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The 10PG has the best colors of all the 9" PJ's!!!!!!!!!!!


Excuse me while I do a little victory dance around the theater.


Deron.


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Phil,


you got me here 


Honestly I think that something that is as easy to do as adding colored c-elements to the 1209 should not be compared to the much more complex mods necessary for the Marquee chassis done by Mike Parker.


Last I heard the MP-mods are nothing that you or I could do ourselves, but color filtering is easy to do even for the non-technician, on the 1209s at least and also, where would those poor Ampros, Barcos and Marquees be without the filtering they need, probably last after all the NEC's and Sony's 


Oliver*
Oliver,


I agree with you. I was just kidding around with you.


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*So I'm right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The 10PG has the best colors of all the 9" PJ's!!!!!!!!!!!


Excuse me while I do a little victory dance around the theater.


Deron.*
Deron,


Don't wear out your dancing shoes just yet! I'd like to here what Ken has to say about Art's G90s first.


----------



## deronmoped

As for all the modified PJ's, I vote to leave them off the list.


Doing that helps to put "me" up there with the Cine 9 and the G90


10PG.


----------



## Art Sonneborn

My impression is that the color reproduction of my 9PG extras were better in the green than the G90. I've never seen a 10pg but I've heard they look similar in color to the 9PG extra.( also I've seen an XG135 and the color looked essentailly identiacl to my 9PG extras though the image was sharper) The G90 has a little more subtle less saturated green but still it looks green green , I wouldn't call it lime green.The greens of foliage are the place where I see it. A good example is in the waterfall scene in AOTC the difference in what NEC and Sony looks like here is striking.


Art


----------



## Phil Smith

Well hell Art, I'd have never dreamed the G70 has better colors than the G90, but if it does it does. Deron I guess you can put your dancing shoes back on.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Phil,

told you so


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Phil,

told you so *
Oliver,


Yes you did! I HATE eating crow! (taste like chicken)


----------



## deronmoped

I still feel as long as the PJ puts out good flesh tones and is not to far off in other colors it can be a little subjective.


I mean how can you really tell what the color of say a shirt is supposed to look by the time it gets to the screen?


What color was the shirt in the first place, how was the lighting when it was shot, was there any filters on the cameras, how was the post processing done, what happened in the transfer...?


PS. If any one wants to see a DVD with awesome colors, get the Santana Supernatural Live. One of the best Concert DVD's in the way of sharpness and colors.


Dancing Girls too


Deron.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*I still feel as long as the PJ puts out good flesh tones and is not to far off in other colors it can be a little subjective.


I mean how can you really tell what the color of say a shirt is supposed to look by the time it gets to the screen?


What color was the shirt in the first place, how was the lighting when it was shot, was there any filters on the cameras, how was the post processing done, what happened in the transfer...?



Deron.*
Everything you say is true, especially when it comes to the reproduction of film. Since they color correct all film transfers, you're seeing what the colorist "believed" it should look like, which may be a far cry from the original negative (or more properly inter-negative). Some of the older pictures, where the color has gone south, are really subjective color corrections and are usually only release prints anyway.


The real problem reproducing accurate color with video is the limited dynamic range. While everyone is looking at primaries, when they proclaim projector X has better color than projector Y, they are only looking where the CIE primaries fall. That doesn't mean much when your source material is coming from motion pictures...and especially OLD (1950-1980) motion pictures.


Now get back to your 10PG burn burn that phosphor.


----------



## Phil Smith

Well I don't agree with either one of you. For some reason many people think there's some kind of unquantifiable influence that some PJs possess that result in magical color reproduction. ALL colors are a product of some combination of the 3 primary colors. ALL of them, including flesh tones. If a PJ has accurate primary colors, accurate gray scale tracking, ample dynamic range (CRT PJs have plenty of that), it will have color that can't be improved upon. Accurate color reproduction results in great flesh tones, green greens, etc. etc. Bottom line--you can't improve on perfection. All you can do is make it less perfect.


There's NOTHING subjective about that.


Bruce, what does the inadequacies of the source material...what does source material PERIOD have to with this?


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Phil,


I can't resist so here it goes: Do you know that the G70's are not all created equal with regard to color accuracy ?


Per Johnny who is also a frequent poster here has had himself two G70 that had noticably different green - so better measure your G70 BEFORE you buy it 


Maybe Per Johnny can chime in here as he is the one who owned the two G70's.


Oliver


----------



## Phil Smith

Oliver,


I wasn't approaching this as being about G70s or any other PJ. I was speaking about PJs and color reproduction in general.


But that's interesting. I have two G70s as well. One of them, I replaced a 6k green tube with a 3k green tube. Afterwards it was like an entirely different PJ! I couldn't believe it made such a difference, but it did. This was mainly due to an unbelievable improvement in sharpness. Point is, tube age probably has a lot of influence on color accuracy.


----------



## JCP1740

Well you guys have me going at it with all this "better talk". So, I just bought a G70 yesterday from ebay and I hope it is as good as you all say. It has 2700 hours. I have been using a Sony 1270 and a 1272, and I must admit there is a difference in those two projectors, so I hope I will see a better difference in the g70.


----------



## mikelyw

Regarding what is the best 9"er, I never agree the top of the list base on what I saw and own.


I do have a clean tubes BG1209 & G90. The 1209 brought from PSI one year ago, it gives a great PQ and I could hardly believe my ex-lover, an almost new 600 hrs G808s can never even come close in A/B shoot out (1 on ceiling & another one table stand). So I sold beloved 808s to my friend and following so many highly rated threads on this forum eventually I got a G90 from Sony Demo centre 2 months ago which is only 500 hrs on chassis like new condition with Sony Serial #00001...... now the Barco 1209 still reigns on the ceiling and G90 has taken the 808s' table waiting to seize the throne (see pic attached), well if U like to listen to a G90 + 1209 owner without too much subjective stuburn preference (one with better image is always my preference not any specific model).


My 1209 was calibrated by a local Barco expert with 12 years in Barco, so is my G90 by another Sony Pro where I got my G90. Now I belive what Curt Palme said many times in too many occasion, either one 9"er with good tubes condition won't tell too much different either one can produce stunning picture. All the 9" are superior to any 8" I have seen (it is obvioiusly lead a bigger gap to 8" vs 7"). But they still have some characteristics among its strength and weakness (not much), or says different in blood.


1) Color: I never seen a MP mod 9500LC, so not included. But did see 9500LC from my friend HT. All the three 9" have different color temp while the 1209 has much warmer than Sony. Yes, G90 green doesn't look that great although I don't have adequate device to measure it (I can only use a SONY mon to do visual compare with same source output).


2) Sharpness: I avoid comment too much on 9500LC (non-mod) as it is not fair as no chance for detail compare side by side with the other two 9" I have in my HT, just impressed by 9500LC by its very sharp image close to G90 & solid black. However, G90 is even slightly sharper and the brightest of the 3 with very fine detail (may be too much detail on everything) on whole screen image.


3) For color, I can tell the Barco is not that "accurated" from Mon - trend to be warmer but if U ask me which color I prefer, for sure I want 1209 to either G90 or 9500LC on color. Correct color or not, I just admire its fresh tone, nice rich and saturated Barco' feel warn image with the best 3D filmlik of all, although it is not as sharp of the other 2.


4) Overall image on all aspects, I find they are very close and G90 is slightly better above on top which may attract more fan (votes) if U are not specially prefer to Barco typical image style like me, but neither one are really a clear cut winner should take the crown. That is I won't suggest to 'upgrade' 1209 to a G90, nor trade a G90 for a 1209 (not sure if it is wise to have both now). Improvement is not that far one sided. I will only do upgrade to Cine 9 (if I can afford it).


5) Since you have listed the lastest Cine 9, I always doubt if anyone has seen it in action. IMO and live impression, Cine 9 is the only HT CRT (not include the commercial model of 909) definitely the best 9" and deserved the HT throne even I don't own it. I have seen ample enough of Cine 9 performance from Barco demo room & dealer and even once time its combat to a G90 in a AV show, Cine 9 definely better in every aspect, U will believe what I tell if U have seen it.


Still today I can offer to trade my 500hrs G90+ clean 1209 for a Cine 9 with good tubes of course.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

_Originally posted by mikelyw_
*Regarding what is the best 9"er, I never agree the top of the list base on what I saw and own.


Still today I can offer to trade my 500hrs G90+ clean 1209 for a Cine 9 with good tubes of course.*
Is it a 1209 or a 1209s because there is a big difference, the 1209s is a huge upgrade from the 1209.


----------



## mikelyw

Mine is only a 1209 non-S with clean tubes (give up looking for 1209s after unsuccessful search for 6 months last year).


I believe 1209s is better with more adjust features to make it focus tight but never see one in good tubes (saw one in toast Green & wear tubes so not counted). Not sure how close a 1209s to Cine 9 , but for 1209 itself it is still obviously behind a G90 in overall perform (if not for one used to Barco style color as I said). However, I am sure Cine 9 is a major ugprade from 1209s when Barco redesign Cine version of HT models, due to completely new design in electronics component and special and unique make Hybrid+glass comb lenses make its optical system exceptional with improved electronic digital chassis. Cine 9 has remarkable RGB bandwidth 180MHZ while most 9" are 130 or 135, with all glass lenses.  :


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by JCP1740_
*Well you guys have me going at it with all this "better talk". So, I just bought a G70 yesterday from ebay and I hope it is as good as you all say. It has 2700 hours. I have been using a Sony 1270 and a 1272, and I must admit there is a difference in those two projectors, so I hope I will see a better difference in the g70.*
I hope you're not talking about the G70 from the guy in Connecticut? If it is, you're going to have to replace all three tubes. I warned about that listing and another one a few days ago. I bought another G70 from that guy about a month ago to use as a parts machine.


Although it's supposed to have 2800 hours, all 3 tubes have burns on them, which you can see in the pictures. Although the Blue tube appeared to have light wear, the green was toast.


I hope it works out for you.


----------



## REWJR

IMHO two is better than one double your pleasure double your fun.

Two vision one Chris Steven's x moded Marquee 9500LC 's with a TERANEX processor and D5 HD master source .


This can be improved once Silicon Optics gives an OEM box with 1080P processing mixed with blend pro capability shot on Stewart matt white 14' wide ( 2.35 : 1 ) using 9500LC's on each half !!


The future's so bright I got wear shades.


----------



## Graham Johnson

All this talk about colour rendition is bit of a misnomer. So I will stirr the pot 


ALL these machines that have HD10 lenses use the 3M LC C elements. Therefore their colour rendition is the SAME. Regardless of tubes.


My 1292 has the same colours as a G90, which is the same as the Barco, which is the same as the Ampro 9 inch !! End of story


They use the same coloured C elements !!!


The only comparision about colours that is reasonable is between 3M C element LC projectors and other sorts of lenses and C element combinations.


As the tubes are the same between the XG LC and the SONY G70. I would wager that the C elements and the lenses come from the same company. If that is the case I bet the colours between them are the same as well.


3M dont have a selection of different colour c elements for you to choose from. They have a CRT green, red and clear!! THATS ALL.


The only variable that is left is linearity of the video chain that drives the tubes. provided the machines each have a tweaking for correct coliur temperature. They should all yield the same results.


----------



## gn2

Some manufacturers allegedly use different phosphor.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Maybe Paul,


I would bet MEC use the same red and green phosphers in EVERYTHING


The Sony made tubes would also be the same. What do you recon the chances of the phospher changing colour between tube in the same factory would be??


The Japanese aint stupid. Their production people and engineers know the value of keeping inventory small as possible. IE: use the same phospher in the LOT wherever possible.


Does anyone know how many different phosphers VDC have in their inventory for RED ? would bet its ONE.


----------



## gn2

VDC tubes are not being considered here. From the posts in this forum, we already have a pretty good idea of their ideas on tube building.

I don't have first hand knowledge of this, of course, as I'm not an engineer at NEC Japan, but, in a StereoPhile Guide to Home Theater review years ago, Joe Kane was quoted as stating that NEC used a non-standard red phosphor which was more appropriate, which was part of the reason NEC's looked so good. Seeing so many of the contenders in the ranking, I would have to believe him.

I seem to also recall a brochure for the G90 which touted the phosphor, specifically designed for the G90. If I was a betting man, I would bet they spec'd a brighter green phosphor at the expense of absolute color fidelity.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Hi,


there are different tubes and different phosphors used in 9" designs.

There are also 4 factors that influence color reproduction:


- phosphor

- coupling liquid

- c-element

- lenses


I have measured a Marquee 9500 that was filtered on green with the same equipment that a friend measured his Sony G90 with and the primaries were indeed different. I suppose we both used the same c-elements and we definitely used the same lenses (HD10f), so obviously the coupling liquid and the phosphor of the tubes itself make the difference.


Oliver


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

_Originally posted by gn2_
*Joe Kane was quoted as stating that NEC used a non-standard red phosphor which was more appropriate, which was part of the reason NEC's looked so good. Seeing so many of the contenders in the ranking, I would have to believe him.*
Does this mean we can basically rule out all NEC projectors in 12 months time as the new tubes are no longer being made??


I would beleive that the phosphers that VDC use would be the same for all tubes, therefore any advantage NEC may have had is now GONE!


----------



## JCP1740

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*I hope you're not talking about the G70 from the guy in Connecticut? If it is, you're going to have to replace all three tubes. I warned about that listing and another one a few days ago. I bought another G70 from that guy about a month ago to use as a parts machine.


Although it's supposed to have 2800 hours, all 3 tubes have burns on them, which you can see in the pictures. Although the Blue tube appeared to have light wear, the green was toast.


I hope it works out for you.*
Yes it is the same one. I read this column and I never seen your post warning about this projector. In fact, I looked all over for a post about a projector from Ct. and couldn't find one. I did notice you had bid on it also. It looks like the blue tube is ok, and as for the green, the picture isn't good and I will know more when I look at it later today. I am supposed to pick it up about 3 pm. There was no mention of burn lines, and if I see any, I won't accept the projector and take the negative instead. I figure sooner or later due to normal wear, to replace the green/blue tubes, but if all 3 have burn lines, I sure don't want it.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by JCP1740_
*Yes it is the same one. I read this column and I never seen your post warning about this projector. In fact, I looked all over for a post about a projector from Ct. and couldn't find one. I did notice you had bid on it also. It looks like the blue tube is ok, and as for the green, the picture isn't good and I will know more when I look at it later today. I am supposed to pick it up about 3 pm. There was no mention of burn lines, and if I see any, I won't accept the projector and take the negative instead. I figure sooner or later due to normal wear, to replace the green/blue tubes, but if all 3 have burn lines, I sure don't want it.*
I didn't mention it by name, but said there were 2 G70s on Ebay that needed new tubes and that I thought that the hours were doubtful on one of them. What I have said OVER & OVER, is that there's NO FREE LUNCH. Of course I bid on it, I bid on ALL G70s, but it's with the knowledge that the tubes will have to be replaced, that's why I didn't bid any higher. Since I would sell a G70 with new tubes for between $5,000-$5,500 (depending on case condition) and a set of new tubes is about $3,000, you can see about what the projector is approximately worth with worn out tubes. If that projector had good tubes and only 2800 hours on it, you certainly wouldn't have gotten it for that price....I would have outbid you.


The only way you can really appreciate the picture quality of a G70, is to see one with new tubes.


----------



## CZ Eddie

JCP1740, if you don't pay for it, at least give the guy money to pay for his auction fees. You bid and won, it's your responsibility to pay for the item. The only way I would reneg is if the lister lied about the condition. If it has heavy wear, then you should pay because he posted pictures of the wear. If it has burns (taskbar burn, CNN burn, etc) then it was your responsibility to ask about this before bidding.


What if he were depending on that money to pay his bills on time?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by CZ Eddie_
*JCP1740, if you don't pay for it, at least give the guy money to pay for his auction fees. You bid and won, it's your responsibility to pay for the item. The only way I would reneg is if the lister lied about the condition. If it has heavy wear, then you should pay because he posted pictures of the wear. If it has burns (taskbar burn, CNN burn, etc) then it was your responsibility to ask about this before bidding.


What if he were depending on that money to pay his bills on time?*
The pictures were there to see. The Green was really bad. I guess if you didn't know, you might think the burn was a flash reflection, but it was in the same place on all three tubes, including the Red.


The only thing that he said that might have misled someone was something like "the tubes should be good for another 10,000 hours", however, anyone buying a G70 should know that if the tubes were NEW, that statement wouldn't be true.


----------



## JCP1740

I would have paid for all the fees, as I am a seller on ebay with over 1k positives and I know what it is to lose on something, and I would have told them to contact the underbidder instead. I took another closer look at the ebay pictures and I think it was what I figured it would be, and decided to keep it no matter what. I did bid, and as they say, it is a contract, and although the buyer could have been misleading about it, I doubted she was due to 100% positive feedback. I don't need to pay attention to someone basicly telling me I wasted my money. I am not as a perfectionist as some others on here and being 61, my eyesight and demands aren't as important as someone selling a projector to a customer. I blow more money gambling in a couple months then this projector cost me. At least this way I got something to show for it. And if the projector was better than it is in the pictures, I would have bid higher also. My money is just as good as the next mans. Also I got a remote with it, which helps bring down the price overall. As I see on here, they are worth about $200.


I just got back from picking it up, and though I haven't even taken it out of the car yet, I am happy that the person who sold it to me, is as I suspected, and an honest person. She would have mentioned if there were burn lines on it, as she did on another she had previously sold. I am not worried about normal tube wear, and that is what I saw, not toast to me. My real problem is where to put it now. 3 other projectors are in my way. Oh, well now the fun begins.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by JCP1740_
*I would have paid for all the fees, as I am a seller on ebay with over 1k positives and I know what it is to lose on something, and I would have told them to contact the underbidder instead. I took another closer look at the ebay pictures and I think it was what I figured it would be, and decided to keep it no matter what. I did bid, and as they say, it is a contract, and although the buyer could have been misleading about it, I doubted she was due to 100% positive feedback. I don't need to pay attention to someone basicly telling me I wasted my money. I am not as a perfectionist as some others on here and being 61, my eyesight and demands aren't as important as someone selling a projector to a customer. I blow more money gambling in a couple months then this projector cost me. At least this way I got something to show for it. And if the projector was better than it is in the pictures, I would have bid higher also. My money is just as good as the next mans. Also I got a remote with it, which helps bring down the price overall. As I see on here, they are worth about $200.


I just got back from picking it up, and though I haven't even taken it out of the car yet, I am happy that the person who sold it to me, is as I suspected, and an honest person. She would have mentioned if there were burn lines on it, as she did on another she had previously sold. I am not worried about normal tube wear, and that is what I saw, not toast to me. My real problem is where to put it now. 3 other projectors are in my way. Oh, well now the fun begins.*
I just hope your eyesight is as poor as you say it is. However, for everyone else, here are pictures of the tubes on a 2800 hour machine. If anyone feels they would want them in their projector, contact me so I can sell you a G70. I've thrown out tubes better than these.


P.S., I'll even give you the remote with it! Someone says it's worth $200.


----------



## onlink

Quote:

_Originally posted by WTS_
*wow, this list changes like the weather around here.*
Aside from the subjective nature of 'good, better, best' consider you are purchasing used. LIke a vehicle you have to consider where it's come from and how it was used/abused. I looked at the decent models and looked for bargains from there. Bargain was based on price, seller confidence, parts availabilty, usage, etc. Again, you'll find those factors vary on YOUR budget, technical competency, location, risk tolerance, etc. Use all this advise as guidance only. Pick one and go with it otherwise you'll drive yourself nuts striving for 'the ultimate' rather than being in your happy place watching movies.


----------



## overclkr

Quote:

_Originally posted by JCP1740_
*Well you guys have me going at it with all this "better talk". So, I just bought a G70 yesterday from ebay and I hope it is as good as you all say. It has 2700 hours. I have been using a Sony 1270 and a 1272, and I must admit there is a difference in those two projectors, so I hope I will see a better difference in the g70.*
Um, basically the difference between the 1272 and the G70 is like a Ford Focus vs. a BMW M5.


Nuff said.


Cliff


----------



## JCP1740

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*I just hope your eyesight is as poor as you say it is. However, for everyone else, here are pictures of the tubes on a 2800 hour machine. If anyone feels they would want them in their projector, contact me so I can sell you a G70. I've thrown out tubes better than these.


P.S., I'll even give you the remote with it! Someone says it's worth $200.*
Well I took off the lenses and took a better look now that it is here, and Techman, your pictures do a nice job of circling the reflections that were in the background of where they took the picture. I am glad to say, there is no line/static burn on these tubes, typical burn wear yes, but not static burn lines. I went over the pictures they had put on and from my perception, they were reflections and I was right. I am well satisfied. Sometimes the pictures people take can hurt the sales of their items. I just lit this up for a few minutes and notice already the sharpness and brightness on the wording. The contrast and brightness were at factory settings. I won't get to setting it up for several days, but look forward to the picture anyway. It still will be better than my 1270 and 1272. And by the way, I'm not blind, but I use reading glasses and know my old 20-4 vision is now about 20-30 for distance over ten feet. Thanks for your concern anyway.


----------



## techman707

For your sake, I'm happy you don'y see any static burn, however, the Green tube is pretty nasty. As for focus, that will look good long after the tubes are shot because of the EM focus.


Don't run the projector at the "factory default" setting of "80 contrast", try to keep it "65" or below. A projector with 2800 hours shouldn't have tubes that look like that Green tube, it must have been run flat out for the whole 2800 hours.


btw- I didn't say you were blind. You're the one that brought your eyesight into question. As for reading glasses, I've been wearing them for 20 years, but still have 20/20 vision for distance.


----------



## CMRA

>>> What is the best CRT Projector out there


----------



## techman707

If ever there was a Curt nightmare projector with no parts available, the Ampro 4600 would get the award.


It's the type of pj that someone like Curt would give to his Bee-otch, since they both agree that it's the closest Curt will come to giving her a real 9 incher.


----------



## gn2

Sorry, I've owned a 4600, do NOT believe the hype, they are NOT the sharpeset 9" er, and are bested, IMHO by even the air coupled 8500. The 10PG is wayyyyyy sharper, as is the 9500LC, and easily beaten by any XG for sharpness. Maybe some who've really liked the 4600 have some to sell and it may, perhaps, have colored their opinion ? Not saying that is the case, just perhaps its possible.

But then again, like this entire list thing, its just my opinion, based on my experience with the above listed projectors.

PS: The 4600 isn't a "sleeper", no, in fact, its dead, blown power supply, or neck board, or was it the low voltage power supply ? Or maybe the horizontal output board ? I know it must be one of those......


----------



## WTS

Are these rating performances based on a large screen, like 100" to >120" diag. How much smaller would the gap be between the 7" and 8", 8" and 9" if the screen size was 82" diag. Would a 7" NEC 6pg look closer to a 8"NEC 852 or 110 on a smaller screen for example providing both are equal in tube quality. How would an ECP compare when on a smaller screen.


----------



## deronmoped

WTS


Throw in seating distance too. On a larger screen the chances are greater that you may be sitting a little closer. This will change the perceived sharpness.


The smaller the screen the more you can turn the contrast down, the lower the contrast the sharper the image.


I would think that as you go down in screen size the benifits of a larger tube go down. If you are pushing a 7" onto a larger screen it will start to bloom and sharpness will go down pretty fast, where as the 8" will be able to handle a larger screen before blooming and a 9" a even larger screen.


Deron.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_
*

Throw in seating distance too. On a larger screen the chances are greater that you may be sitting a little closer. This will change the perceived sharpness.
*
Once they move to projection many people arrange for the biggest subtended field of vision that works for them so this isn't the case.


My first setup used a 72" wide screen which I ultimately ended up 9' from. I wanted my first row at 11' so I picked a 87" wide screen to subtend the same angles.


----------



## WTS

Deron, I was thinking of using a 72" wide screen, floor mounting the crt under the coffee table, so my seating distance would be about 12' I'm guessing. Pj distance from screen for 72" wide would be about 8' I think. How far off the floor would the bottom of the screen be, say for a NEC6. Ya for a 72" screen, I don't want to go overboard if I'm not going to have any big improvemnet, so if a NEC 6 or 9 pg+ or 8100 or EPC will give the same performance as a NEC 75/85 or 8500 then thats what I want. Any thoughts or sugesstions.


----------



## Clarence

An ECP or 6PG will not "give the same performance" as an XG or Marquee 8500.


But all will give a nice image at 72"w.


I wouldn't narrow your choices too early. Seeking the right condition (especially the tubes) at the right price from the right seller is almost more important than the particular model.


----------



## WTS

I'll get one from Curt and I'll be looking for one with mint tubes, which ever one I buy. I just figured that having a smaller screen would allow me to get a lesser pj for the same PQ. I want either a NEC or Ehome because of the smaller sizes.


----------



## ChrisMcCarthy

I have a 4600. I have been told it was 'average' for a 9" CRT.

I have not had problems other than some drift on convergence every few months. But my machine is not that old (less than 1500 hours).


When Curt sold me the projector, he said it was a good projector. Once I received it I had to repair a blown seal and have Elite Video repair the Red Neck Board (trauma from transport). Other than that, I have not had issues.


I have not owned any other 9" projectors, but it seems better than any 8" I have ever seen.


Chris.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

_Originally posted by WTS_
*I'll get one from Curt and I'll be looking for one with mint tubes, which ever one I buy. I just figured that having a smaller screen would allow me to get a lesser pj for the same PQ. I want either a NEC or Ehome because of the smaller sizes.*
OK. I think you'll be happy with any of those projectors especially since you're staying at a reasonable screen size. The ECP will still be ES focus, whereas the Marquee or XG are electromagnetic (and brighter).


Maybe I'm just paying too much attention to semantics when you keep saying "the *same* PQ".


But I love my lowly ECPs...

If I set one of my ECPs and one of my Marquees side-by-side on matching 72" screens, 92.1% of the US population would agree that the ECP image was just as good especially if at 1/2 to 1/3 the price.


----------



## WTS

Thanks for your thoughts and input.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by marcorsyscom_
*If I set one of my ECPs and one of my Marquees side-by-side on matching 72" screens, 92.1% of the US population would agree that the ECP image was just as good especially if at 1/2 to 1/3 the price.*
And probably would be, if the ECP had a new set of tubes.


----------



## WTS

I believe the 6pg and 9pg are EM focus too.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by WTS_
*I believe the 6pg and 9pg are EM focus too.*
Yep.


----------



## CMRA

Speaking of what's best, did anyone else get a solicitation for a 12" Barco from someone in San Bernadino?

I immediately deleted the offer thinking it was a fraud. Did I react to quickly in error? Anyone have a similar experience?


----------



## deronmoped

I always though the PG's were one of the best deals out there.


Cheap (even with good tubes), excellent colors, EM focus (sharp) and no mods required.


Deron.


----------



## Clarence

I've been looking for a PG for a year... they're nice, but not "cheap". At least by my standards. They seem to fetch $600-$1200. That's more than some Marquees. 2x-3x more than ECPs (PGs are certainly better than ECPs).


But your average newbie will be able to get a better picture out of an ECP in 3 days to 3 months, but after the initial NEC learning curve, the PG will be able to rise above in the long run.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by CMRA_
*Speaking of what's best, did anyone else get a solicitation for a 12" Barco from someone in San Bernadino?

I immediately deleted the offer thinking it was a fraud. Did I react to quickly in error? Anyone have a similar experience?*
I haven't seen one. It is possible that it is legitimate. The scammers haven't, so far, started advertising 912 and 912 Barcos on Ebay. There would have to be a pretty good story of where it came from before I would buy it though. Those would have pretty limited uses. BTW, from what I have read elsewhere there focus is not better than the average 8" EM set but their light output is signficnatly better than either an 8" or 9" unit.


----------



## WTS

Well I know Curt had some pg's for sale and from what I've seen, they're not cheap, at least by the way you guys talk.


----------



## CMRA

Quote:

_Originally posted by secstate_
*I haven't seen one. It is possible that it is legitimate. The scammers haven't, so far, started advertising 912 and 912 Barcos on Ebay. There would have to be a pretty good story of where it came from before I would buy it though.*
Yikes...now you have me second guessing my decision.

Does any AVSer own a 12 inch 912? It must weigh 300+ lbs!


Well, bid on the bay for 9" Barcos and you'll probably get a solicitation too.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by CMRA_
*Yikes...now you have me second guessing my decision.

Does any AVSer own a 12 inch 912? It must weigh 300+ lbs!


Well, bid on the bay for 9" Barcos and you'll probably get a solicitation too.*
I think Curt started a rumor that he had a 12 incher, but, Bee-Otch said he's FOS.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

_Originally posted by CMRA_
*Yikes...now you have me second guessing my decision.

Does any AVSer own a 12 inch 912? It must weigh 300+ lbs!


Well, bid on the bay for 9" Barcos and you'll probably get a solicitation too.*
Yep it is amazing what they will try to sell you. I would acutally like to see one of these things in person. BTW, I called Barco this week and all the CRT stuff is now support by the Barco Reality divsion so I don't think their sell off of home theater assets included the CRT line.


----------



## CMRA

Quote:

_Originally posted by WTS_
*Well I know Curt had some pg's for sale and from what I've seen, they're not cheap, at least by the way you guys talk.*
As a reseller Curt's prices are very much in line with like competition. You pay a premium because these units are serviced to spec, sometimes upgraded, and often modded. Most are fully tested, often pre-configured, and come with excellent tubes and the associated hardware. Some even come with warranties up to one year. Service after the sale is also part of the package.

Other members, Clarence holds the high ground, are adept at gambling on underbid units and fairing well. Their experience and knowhow owns the day.


----------



## gn2

Quote:

and often modded
Absolutely not true.

Curt does NOT mod projectors, nor does he officially support others doing so. He has stated this explicitly on the forum.

Repair yes, upgrade occasional components as per service bulletins, yes as well, but mod ? No.

You pay extra from dealers for warranty coverage.


----------



## WTS

I'm not saying Curts' pricing is sky high, and yes from what I understand of Curts dealings, is that he stands behind his sales because the units are brought up to snuff-so to speak- before he sells them and you can't beat his after sales warranty work from what I've heard from some of his customers I've convesred with.


----------



## ChrisWiggles

But Paul,


I think there is a fuzzier line between "repair" and mod.


The anamorphic squeeze mod on marquees, or maybe even the LVPS fix are more towards mod.


Also, going over problem points that aren't broken is less of a fix, and more of a preventive measure. This is something like a modification, since many places will do no such thing, as long as the unit works. (or maybe sell you a non-working one).


----------



## gn2

Clarence: Nitpicking, but the NEC GP5000 is a 9"LC machine, with only 600 lumens light output.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

_Originally posted by gn2_
*Clarence: Nitpicking, but the NEC GP5000 is a 9"LC machine, with only 600 lumens light output.*
Those are the kind of nit-picks I'm looking for... I remember seeing the 9" spec on some earlier threads, but I didn't know they were so dim. I guess the lens size offset the lumens, so I won't move it higher or lower until I see one compared to a VPH or if anyone wants to vouch that it should be higher or lower.


I'd trade an ECP for a running GP5000, but only because I have so many ECPs.


----------



## Graham Johnson

You guys are way funny.


Ampro 4600 infront of a 1292, AND all the 8 inch LC machines.


hehehehe I would like to see the 8 inchers trying to project 1080p !!


In your dreams !! LOL


----------



## Mark_A_W

Clarence, I think you need to shuffle the PG's around - I'd order them:


6PG

9PG

6PG+

9PG+

6PG Xtra

9PG Xtra


Basically, all things equal, I'd take a 6PG+ over a 9PG, and a 6PG Xtra over a 9PG plus, and so on. But they're all pretty close.


----------



## Clarence


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000...........................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM
NEC 6PG+....................7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..800 1600x1200..80MHz EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024..80MHz EM
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 125MHz EM
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._

Graham, the 1292 suffers from it's stereotype of being too dim and too loud. My final decision factor is which projector would I pick if someone offered me a choice in comparable condition... sorry, but I'd still pick a XG-LC or G70 over the 1292.


Mark, I moved the 6PGx up, but what features did the 6PG+ add to rate above a 9PG?


-Clarence


----------



## gn2

The 6PG Plus has zone keystone and pincushion which make convergence FAR easier and accurate, as well as red and green zone electronic astig which makes it sharper than the 9PG by a long shot. The 9PG is a great little machine, but the PLUS machines are both better than the plain PG's.

And I've owned a couple of 1292's, they really, really are dim and unabashadly hovercraft loud.


----------



## mikelyw




> _[*]Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM[*]Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM[*]Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> Correction on the spec listed, Cine 9 has exceptional extra high RGB bandwidth=180Mhz (not 120MHZ) and full digital chassis, with its exclusive Hybrid+Glass compo lenses altogether make it ultimate terminator of the best 9" model in HT (excluding the Reality commercial model which still in Barco production). I have owned a G90, 1209, G808s in my HT, none are close to Cine 9, even my 500hrs G90 brought recently from local Sony showroom. Cine 9 simply has better color, very sharp and dept rich image that clearly better than the top ranked G90.
> 
> 
> After Barco sold its Cinema business, Cine 9 will be collector items as the ever best HT CRT model due to no more succeesor.
> 
> 
> Some reference from those who has live expereience with a Cine 9.
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=387934 _


----------



## Graham Johnson

The bandwidth in a 1292 is 135meg not 120 meg


----------



## Chris Bigos

Clarence,


Great list, especially in the new format! Thanks for all your efforts â€“ only those who have tried it will know what a PITA it is to get bits of red text without changing the fonts (a bug in the parser?)!


For the next revision, can I suggest the amendments below? The spec changes are from the actual NEC installation manuals. The general data out on the web is contradictory and often wrong.


I think the alternative branding and model numbers is a useful addition to a reference list.
NEC 6PG .....(PG6000)...... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (GE Imager 601, Runco 900)
NEC 6PG+ ....(PG6100).......7"..

850

1280x1024..75MHz EM
NEC 9PG .....(PG9000)...... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (GE Imager 901, Runco 980)
NEC 9PG+ ....(PG9100).......7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC 6PG Xtra (PG6200).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM
NEC 9PG Xtra (PG9200)...... 7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (Runco 980 Ultra)


Hate tax, love taxonomy! 


Chris


----------



## Chris Bigos

Whoops- meant to attach this to save you a bit of typing, but forgot. It's just the text for the above in all white, so no need for anyone else to bother opening it.

 

necs.txt 0.4228515625k . file


----------



## gn2

Thats very nice, except that part of the ranking needs to be redone as the 6PG Plus is a better projector than the 9PG. The PG's need to be ranked, 6PG,9PG,6PG+,9PG+, 6PG Xtra,9PG Xtra. The Plus's are materially better than the plain PG's, both in light output(slight) and convergence controls(somewhat significant).


----------



## Clarence


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000...........................................ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)
NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024.100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)
NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Clarence_
*Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog*
*Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES*
*Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog*
*NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES*
*Ampro 2000................5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES*
*Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES*
*Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES*
*Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES*
*NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES*
*Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES*
*Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES*
*Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES*
*Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES*
*Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES*
*Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES*
*Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES*
*Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES*
*Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES*
*Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES*
*Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES*
*Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES*
*NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)*
*NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)*
*NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM*
*NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM*
*NEC 6PG Xtra................7" 1000 1280x1024.100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)*
*NEC PG9200 Xtra............ 7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM*
*Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM*
*Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM*
*Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM*
*Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM*
*Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM*
*Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM*
*Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM*
*NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM*
*Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM*
*Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM*
*Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM*
*NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM*
*Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM*
*NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM*
*Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM*
*Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM*
*Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM*
*Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM*
*Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM*
*Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM*
*Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM*
** Disclaimer: my list is based only on subjective opinions.*


----------



## Clarence

Bruce, was there a correction or change in your post?


I did a quick scan but don't see anything different.


----------



## techman707

Yes, I added to the Ampro 2000. Also, it uses the 07MS tubes.


----------



## Clarence

Oh, good. I see Curt has those all the time. Looks comparable to an ECP. Do you think it needs to float higher, or does the Ampro stigma haunt it for due reason?


----------



## techman707

While it's better than a Sony 1031, it ain't no ECP (by a long shot). I may have the bandwidth wrong, but I'm certain it's at least 50MHz.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Hi,


I am sitting here with my two PG+ and PG extra service manuals and I'd like to post a few corrections to the PG's:


1. My plus service manual gives the resolution of the 9PG+ with 1500 x 1200


2. The 6PG extra is rated with 80 MHz bandwidth, although I'd be surprised if there really was a difference to the 9PG extra.


3. NEC and Runco: In general when a Runco model used the PG chassis it had a scan rate that was comparable to the 6PG not the 9PG, but there are exceptions:

Runco 900: NEC 6PG

Runco 900A: NEC 6PG+

Runco 980: NEC 6PG extra

Runco 980 ultra: 9PG extra

It is maybe of interest that Runco rated both the 980 and 980ultra as 100MHz bandwidth and 1600 x 1200 resolution, together with a light output rating of 1100 lumens.

Then there were also a Runco 930 and 933, both only scanning to 50 kHz and rated at 80 MHz bandwidth, the 933 only different in that it came in a package with a scaler, both were based on the extra chassis and also had the 1100 lumen rating.


Other Runcos based on NEC projectors are the 991/991 ultra that were based on the XG751/1101 and the Runco 990 that was based on the NEC 10PG. As I have a 10PG for some time now I have looked a bit into "Runcorizing" it and it seems there is really more to the Runcos than the snazzy black case (note that the Runcos could also be ordered in white). Predominantly there are often small boards added, together with changes on certain boards and added color filtering.

I suspect that these were done to cut fan noise or help the gamma curve predominantly and of course to achieve better colorimetry.


Ok, this is all I can think of for now, didn't intend this to be so long.


Oliver


----------



## deronmoped

I would like to know who's subjective opinions this list is based upon when it comes to the 9"er's.


I have had to fight for position for the 10PG and it is still getting short changed.


Why?


Right now we know that the 10PG has colors as good if not better then the G90. And better colors then all the other PJ's with lime greens and orange reds (can anyone say Barco 1209 or Marquee?).


Anyone that has set up these PJ's knows that the 10PG has the best when it comes to dialing in convergence. And I can tell you even with totally maxing out the usage of phosper the convergence it is rock solid from start up to shut down.


We have had people that have responded here say this is one of the better PJ's and better yet, chose the 10PG over other 9" PJ's that are listed above it right now.



So what gives, is the numbers posted on the right of the PJ making a differance, when we know none of those PJ's will do 2,500 X 2,000 (the 10PG was the only one being honest 1,600 X 1,200). As for lumens who in their right mind is running these PJ's with the contrast turned up to the max? First it will soften up the image (have you ever seen how much sharper the image gets when run at a very low contrast) and second it will wear out the tubes faster then you will ever want to.


Bring out the guys that have actually seen these PJ's in action, I have yet to read someone that has had this experience say these other PJ's are better then the 10PG.


Besides that, lets get some life back into the thread


Deron.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Deron,


I hear you and having seen all these in action save for the 909 would be me. In my opinion the 10PG is clearly producing a better picture than the Barco 1209 and the Marquee 9000 I have seen. With regard to the Marquees and Barcos that are still placed higher, assuming that you add red and green c-elements I'd say these are projectors with far more control of the beam spot and focus and convergence and an improved newer design, so they should be placed over the 10PG (1209s, 909, Cine9, G90) or can be placed above it (9500).


And coming mostly from the XG, plus and extra chassis I am NOT of the opinion that the control over convergence of the 10PG is so nice, but rather a PITA, but like in any good relationship I love my 10PG despite of its shortcomings


----------



## CZ Eddie

In regard to the 9000, it does have the green c-element. I don't understand why it would be placed lower than the 9500, when the only changes were a couple of resistors.


If you count the early 9000, then yes you might move it lower than a 9500, but the last of the 9000's to roll off the assembly line were virtually identical to a 9500 (from what I have read). And yes, the 9000 is LC, with the same tubes/lens as the 9500.


It also seems odd that an 8000 and 8500 would have so many projectors between them, as they too are the same, except for the added stig control in the 8500.


I am curious though, as to how the projectors are placed in the order they are. Is this by how it looks when properly calibrated by a top-notch tech, or by how the average Joe can get his to look?


----------



## gn2

Quote:

* Disclaimer: my list is based only on subjective opinions.
You can throw a small blanket over virtully the top 20 machines in this list, they are virtually identical in overall quality when considered with equal tube conditon and professional setup.

Really, this list is pretty meaningless, in the greater scheme of things. I think it started out as one members rank of projectors they've tried, and/or would like to try.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Paul,


there are differences and while it depends on your standards if you consider them substantial or not it is with HD1080p that they are much more pronounced.


Also, the top 14 of those projectors are all liquid coupled, which is a very nice thing IMO. There are probaly not too many forum members that would go back to non-LC from an LC'd unit.


----------



## Graham Johnson

I already brought up the ability to resolve 1080p but obviously people didnt think that that was a criteria that was relevant.


In my mind the ability to have accurate colours and resolve 1080P is paramount. Guess what. None of the 8 inch machines can do it.


So go figure how the structure of the list is arrived at. CAUSE IT AINT RIGHT !!


All of a sudden the Ampro 4600 is ahead of a 1292, LOL, I dont think so !!


----------



## CZ Eddie

I'm still new here and learning about true video reproduction, but I don't think I understand why 1080P is paramount at this point in time. Yes, five years from now it probably will be, because "HDTV" will be somewhat mainstream and 1080P will be the next "cool thing" to have, so 9" PJ's will probably make a return to glory at that time.


But today, the only 1080P material I have is from Windows Media.


As a relative newbie, I would place edge to edge sharpness and color above all else.


offtopic: Wow, it's raining in LA for the first time in four months. This is REALLY cool.  It's 2:27AM and I'm on a nice rum buzz and the rain pelting against the roof is almost deafening.


----------



## Graham Johnson

if it hasent got 1080p now it wont have it in the future. Its easy as that. 


As this is a pecking order of attributes that surely must be high on the list


----------



## CZ Eddie

Quote:

_Originally posted by CZ Eddie_
*the last of the 9000's to roll off the assembly line were virtually identical to a 9500*
Actually, isn't the lumen rating you have down for the 9000 incorrect, according to the last of the 9000's to come down the line? These should have the same lumen rating as the 9500 I think?


----------



## CZ Eddie

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*if it hasent got 1080p now it wont have it in the future. Its easy as that. *
lol, true


----------



## Chris Bigos

Donâ€™t want to get too [email protected] about this â€“ would rather be arguing the pros and cons of the higher PJs from personal experience like you guys, but Iâ€™m not yet in that heady world. BUT let me try and get the NEC PGs right one final time.


Agree with Paul that the ordering is now correct â€“ that one slipped by me.


Also agree with Oliver that the manual SAYS 1500 x 1200 for the 9PG+ but thatâ€™s obviously a misprint as itâ€™s a â€œnon standardâ€ resolution, and they would hardly go backwards from the plain 9PGâ€™s 1600 x 1200.


WRT bandwidth, again I think Oliverâ€™s 6PG Xtraâ€™s 80 MHz is a misprint, as he suspects himself. This is backed up by the Runco versions stating 100 MHz for both.


So I think the listing is correct as it is, except (pretty please!) â€œPG9200 Xtraâ€ really should be â€œ9PG Xtraâ€ for consistency. Itâ€™s like that tiny aberration on a picture that no-one would really notice â€“ or even care about - until pointed out, but once youâ€™ve seen it sticks out like a sore thumb and really bugs you!


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

_Originally posted by deronmoped_

I would like to know who's subjective opinions this list is based upon when it comes to the 9"er's.
It's MY list and it's infallible. Bwah, ha, ha. 
Quote:

I have had to fight for position for the 10PG and it is still getting short changed.

Why?
Because I wanted to keep a few projectors under-rated until I had a chance to hunt for one. If I ever get around to listing my excess projectors, you'll notice that they'll temporarily float to the Top 10. Again: evil laugh.
Quote:

I am curious though, as to how the projectors are placed in the order they are. Is this by how it looks when properly calibrated by a top-notch tech, or by how the average Joe can get his to look?
A few times in the previous 400 posts in this thread, I've estimated that a good setup can move a projector 5-10 spots up in the list. I've also emphasized that good tubes can move a projector up 5-10 spots over a higher model with worn tubes.
Quote:

You can throw a small blanket over virtully the top 20 machines in this list, they are virtually identical in overall quality when considered with equal tube conditon and professional setup.

Really, this list is pretty meaningless, in the greater scheme of things. I think it started out as one members rank of projectors they've tried, and/or would like to try.
Yep. And a starting point for newbies. But it's also a good cheat sheet for me when I was deciding whether or not to take a quick gamble on a listing. And for the few models I haven't seen, it has helped me to hear rants and justifications by owners like Deron to where I know that I should be willing to gamble a little more if I see one become available. Anybody that knows the projectors on the upper end of this list doesn't need this chart to tell them what it is capable of.
Quote:

offtopic: Wow, it's raining in LA for the first time in four months. This is REALLY cool.
I lived in So Cal several years ago... be careful on the streets of LA right after a rain... months and months of oil and grime on the streets pile up without being washed away and they become freakishly slippery when slightly wet.
Quote:

Actually, isn't the lumen rating you have down for the 9000 incorrect, according to the last of the 9000's to come down the line? These should have the same lumen rating as the 9500 I think?
Similar to my comments above... I originally thought that the M9000 was just a M8000 with 9" tubes. But as we started to learn more about it, for a month there I had a few opportunities to jump on one at a killer price. But their capabilities have now been revealed. My chances at moving up to 9" are now as slim as ever.


----------



## Clarence


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)
NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)
NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM (Graham says it should be ranked higher)
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (Deron says it should be ranked higher)
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM (CZ Eddie says it should be ranked higher)
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 130MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## gn2

Quote:

*Also, the top 14 of those projectors are all liquid coupled, which is a very nice thing IMO. There are probably not too many forum members that would go back to non-LC from an LC'd unit.*
I have sold several LC units for the specific reason that I could not be satisfied with the perception that I had of a lack of sharpness. Among them was TWO 9500LC's, an Ampro 4600, and TWO Sony 1292's.

I DO NOT PREFER LC. I realize I am in the minority, but even some professionals (Doug Baisey specifically) agree that for absolute sharpness, an air coupled projector is superior to an LC unit.

I agree with this, as my own eyes and experience with many LC machines has always told me that an air coupled projector is ultimately sharper, and that is one of my personal preferences.

So this list will never be "absolute" , it will always be an ordering of very, very similar items, by personal preference.

For instance: I would rank all of the PG Xtras, and Plus's and XG's over the 1292 because the 1292 is so dim. As well, I would rank all the XG's over the Ampro 4600 because the Ampro is so very unreliable, and IMHO, not sharp enough for a 9" projector.

Also, the ONLY 9" LC machine that I've owned that was sharp enough to please me, in real terms, on the same screen that all the others have been displayed, is the NEC 10PG. It is/was a surreally sharp projector, despite its liquid coupling.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Gee the 1292 isnt Dim (for the 20 th time),


Like Deron said in an earlier post. The damn thing doesnt bloom, If you want to burn tubes like the others. Turn up the contrast !!!! Or drive the input harder.


This old wives tale is growing tiresome, perpetuated by this myth planted by god only knows who.


Make a choice significant wear on the blue and green in 2500 hours like the others, or 5000-6000 hours before it is an issue, using the 1292 default settings.


By the way Paul, you are right about the 4600 Ampro. It aint that sharp !!Hence my comment earlier about why it is where it is in the list.


----------



## techman707

You're right Graham. While it's not a G90, the 1292, with new or low hour tubes, has average brightness, not any dimmer than many other projectors that nobody has mentioned.


----------



## Graham Johnson

I can only imagine where this rumour started.


Probably somebody said " Wow this 1292 is so very very sharp, what a shame it isnt brighter"


We all want the brightness of light bulb PJ's. But the fact is these are bright enough !!


----------



## techman707

Graham,


It seems everyone has an ax to grind. If they sell projectors but don't have a 1292, then it "DIM". If they buy projectors and want to buy them cheap, "it's DIM". I really don't pay any attention to what someone says if I know different first hand. I didn't pay any attention when some people said the G70 color wasn't good, yet, they claimed the NECs using the same tubes were "the best". It wasn't until Guy Kuo said the color was on the money that the myth was debunked. Now there are people putting filters in Marquees "claiming" to correct the color. I think that if they put in a NEW oem set of tubes, they would see what the color REALLY looks like.


So Graham, what's the difference WHAT they say? Some day those "rumors" may make it possible for you to buy a 1292 CHEAP, when you REALLY need it.  When these people "discovered" the G70, it pushed up the prices making it harder and more expensive for me to buy. They still don't understand that I have to buy them cheap enough so I can install new oem tubes in it ans STILL sell it for a reasonable price. Since the tubes are nearly $3,000 a set, so you can see that I can't pay $2500 and sell it for $5,000 unless I get the projector cheap enough.


Bruce


----------



## gn2

Graham: Its not a rumour. I've owned two 1292's, one of which had under a thousand hours. I've also seen Sony's own literature which states the light output is 700 lumens.

At the time I owned the low hour, pristine 1292, I also had a Marquee with wear on the tubes, and a PG Plus with wear on the tubes. The 1292 had lower light output than both of these, in the same room with the same screen, and the same source. This was at normal operating ranges. If you turned up the 1292 to maximum, it just made as bright an image as the two 8" pj's, but they were well within normal operating ranges, and had burned tubes(so they would be quite a bit brighter with tubes as good as the Sony had).

I will not argue the quality of the image on a 1292, you really can't get much finer an image, but it is a fact that it puts out less light than many other projectors.

I'm not arguing about image fidelity, or tube life, only brightness of the image. For me, and this is of course, subjective, the 1292 is not bright enough for me. I wish I could find the Sony documentation that states the light output as 700 lumens, that would perhaps take the subjectivity out of it.

I really do try to only post about things I've had hands on experience with, and virtually all the projectors I've owned I've used with the same source and screen. I run one on the ceiling and one underneath, often, so I can A/B them pretty easily. At one time, I also had a second screen with two projectors going in another room, which I could see both screens at the same time. So, when I give my impressions of a projector, it is one I've owned, and used, and compared directly with others I've owned.

My whole quest is to find the best projector FOR ME. So I've tried every one I can get my hands on to find that one.

What I say about a projector is only my impressions based on what I see with my own eyes, and what I can glean from reading. I've got a collection of service/installation and user manuals in paper for about 20 different projectors, as well as electronic manuals for about another 20 different ones. These manuals are an invaluable resource for arcane things like light output ratings, etc.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by gn2_
*Graham: Its not a rumor. I've owned two 1292's, one of which had under a thousand hours. I've also seen Sony's own literature which states the light output is 700 lumens.

At the time I owned the low hour, pristine 1292, I also had a Marquee with wear on the tubes, and a PG Plus with wear on the tubes. The 1292 had lower light output than both of these, in the same room with the same screen, and the same source. This was at normal operating ranges. If you turned up the 1292 to maximum, it just made as bright an image as the two 8" pj's, but they were well within normal operating ranges, and had burned tubes(so they would be quite a bit brighter with tubes as good as the Sony had).

I will not argue the quality of the image on a 1292, you really can't get much finer an image, but it is a fact that it puts out less light than many other projectors.

I'm not arguing about image fidelity, or tube life, only brightness of the image. For me, and this is of course, subjective, the 1292 is not bright enough for me. I wish I could find the Sony documentation that states the light output as 700 lumens, that would perhaps take the subjectivity out of it.*
Paul,


The 1292 is NOT quite as bright as a Marquee, but Marquees happen to be one of the brightest 8" pj's out there, even with hours on the tubes. However, that doesn't mean the 1292 is "DIM". I'd be the first to admit that it certainly is NOT up there with the G90 or other 9" pj's, but I sure would avoid a like new 1292 because it was "too DIM". I would just use it with a 1.5 or higher gain screen and be in 7th heaven with the clear sharp bright picture. Also, I'm waiting to see what MP does with the 1292 smearing problem because I was speaking with an old friend who used to work as a engineer for Sony and he mentioned some interesting things about his belief of smear on the 1292 and OTHER Sony projectors. When I get some free time after New Year's, I'm going to look into some of the things we discussed, it should prove to be interesting.


Bruce


----------



## Graham Johnson

The default contrast settings may well be 700 lumens !! It has about the same light output as a 1272.


I know that G70's are brighter, I think they spec at 1100 lumens at their default settings.


I had a Barco BD808s that was speced at 1100 lumens. It was brighter but not horendously brighter.


The point I was trying to get across is that the defining factor here is how hard you can drive it before it blooms !! Like I said, the 1292 will burn tubes with the best of them. Turn the contrast up.


The difference in our arguments is that you say you are not discussing tube life time. But this brightness issue is directly related to it.


If I tweaked the internal video gain in the 1292 so that it was driving the tubes as hard as the G70 was. It would be plenty bright believe me.


The issue is how hard you drive it before blooming occurs !! As I said you can drive it flat out and it doesnt bloom.


Now if I was doing that to an XG, the thing would bloom terribly as the contrast was raised. Apparently the G70 doesnt  ( cool)


Maybe I should start a business telling people I can make their 1292 heaps brighter. Then jack up the internal gain so its a bright as a XG.


Forget I said that ! ( money making idea !!! ) 


Seriously, this discussion is based on where the manufacturer sets their default contrast level.


For a standard 0.7volt video signal. The manufactuerer could set the default contrast at 50 (out of 100) cause they want to maximize tube life, or at 80 cause they want to maximize brightness.


Which one is right ???


If I set up a 1292 at 1000 lumens and an XGLC at 1000 lumens I know which would be better, and by a big way.


Its about lumens per square centimeter on the tube face. Not brightness on the screen. The projector with the biggest tube face and doesnt bloom will win.


----------



## techman707

Graham,


ALL projectors "bloom" or at least lose some beam focus if they are turned all the way up. While maybe better then some, the G70 is NO exception. All these rumors are just that, rumors. Basically, all CRT tubes behave in a similar manner, to say or think differently is just plain silly. Let's not turn it into a "mine is bigger than yours". You're right though, the 1292 can be pushed MUCH harder than they come from Sony. One of the reasons they look so sharp is because they DON'T push them.


Bruce


----------



## Graham Johnson

Bruce by bloom, I mean, "Totally fall apart due to power supply limiting."


Yes, you are right, they all dont focus as well as they are driven harder.


But I think my points are valid. Who is it that says any default setting is correct??


Thats the determining factor.


----------



## techman707

Well, "default" is, and should, be left as the domain of the manufacturer since all their specs are, in all likelihood, based on those "defaults". I don't have a problem with that, it really doesn't change anything. I don't think anyone is attacking the picture quality of the 1292. Paul is simply saying it's not bright enough for "his" tastes, he's entitled to that opinion. I just don't think the word "dim" should be used to describe the 1292, but it's perfectly fine for someone to say it's not bright compared to other 9" pj's. Saying DIM makes it sound defective or shot tubes I think.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Agree with the DIM comment 100%.


Default !! well maybe it depends on the aims of the designer. If the aim was to have a super sharp pic, then you could reduce the contrast on any of these projectors and get a sharper picture.


If the aim is to have a bright pic, then the tubes will be driven harder.


If the default was sacrosanct then there would be no need for a contrast control !!


It is there to adjust to peoples tastes. If Paul likes bright. Dial it up, it can do it.


----------



## Clarence

So Graham... where would _you_ put the 1292?


Above the XG-LCs? Above the G70?


I better stop there... Deron would go ballistic if you suggest above his 10PG!


----------



## Mark_A_W

Fix the 1292 streaking problem Graham 


Then it will go up the list! (The one I saw recently streaked pretty badly...)


----------



## Graham Johnson

It should be in front of the Ampro, thats for sure, And when the streaking is fixed in front of all the 8 inch machines.


The fact is the only real determining factor that spreads the 9 inch machines apart is colour filtering and bandwidth/ resolution


I would be happy with any of the top 8. What would sway me is. ( in no paticular order)


1) colour filtering out of the box

2) rebuilding of tubes or cheap tubes.

3) ease of servicing

4) ability to easily change lens flapping

5) noise

6) size

7) ease of getting spares


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Hi,


obviously I won't argue the merits of putting the projector in any particular order, although I have seen and/or owned at 9 out of the 10 supposedly best projectors and my opinion differs a lot 


I think however that we should at least concentrate on picture quality and nothing else. Parts availability for different projectors can vary substantially from case to case and there are obviously hush boxes to take care of the noise etc... So when all is said and done there is the question: How good is the picture and that's what is the most important thing for a CRT'er me thinks.


At the risk of beating a dead horse: The 1500 x 1200 resolution of the 9PG+ and the differing bandwidths of the 6/9 PG extras is what is stated in the NEC specifications and as all the specifications listed are from the manufacturers I think we should include their numbers. It has been mentioned before that these numbers don't match real world applications and experiences so I would rather not include them at all, but if it is still done we should stick to the (wrong) numbers given by the manufacturers all the time and not mix this up even further. AND: the Runco 980 is still listed as a 9PG clone, this is not the case.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*


I think however that we should at least concentrate on picture quality and nothing else.*
I dont disagree with this at all Oliver.


Can we please have your version of the top 10 as it seems that of us all, you may well have owned more of them than anyone else.


----------



## MC Maniac

Quite an interesting exchange Bruce and Graham on the brightness of the 1292..


I went from a Barco 808 to the 1292 and though it's going back a few years, I didn't perceive that the 808 was any brighter..


I had KBK do some neckboard and input card mods on my 1292, and this upped the brightness quite noticeably..


My scaler recently added a feature called "Voltage Pump'" and this again upped the brightness which is easily seen by turning the option on and off..


I presently run the crt using the default values on both the CRT and scaler - I could easily up the contrast values on the scaler but haven't felt any need to..


Is it safe to say here that the mods and voltage pump are in effect raising the 700 lumen rating of the CRT to some higher value?... and that by doing so, I am just pushing the tubes equivalent to what another 9" crt is doing when it's spec's state a higher lumen?


----------



## Oliver Klohs

The talk about the 1292's brightness is really getting to me. There is mainly one reason the 1292 is not perceived as being as bright as other projectors: Sony sets them up so that there is very little blooming even at 100% contrast.


So of course when the 1292 and another projector are driven at 60% contrast projectors that bloom to any degree at 100% or even before that will be substantially brighter than the 1292. Then there might also be projectors that are surprisingly bright AND that do not bloom or at least less than expected and wear down the tubes so fast that this does not really matter after the first superbright 500 or 1000 hours. By several accounts the G70 and the XG series fall into this category and while they might start out brighter this is not really of significance as they are down with their light output pretty fast if really driven to make use of the seemingly superior output from the start. To get my point just look at pictures of G70's and XG's on ebay where you can see the tubes and you get my drift.


When set up properly so that the amount of blooming and tube longevity is comparable between projectors the 1292 is about as bright as your next 8 or 9" EMF unit with the exception of the G90 and probably Cine 9/909 which are/should be brighter.


----------



## Brian Hampton

Hey,


I confess I haven't read this entire thread and I've only seen 2 CRT projectors in action (my 1271 and WM's G90) but I like the discussion about LC being less sharp. I really would like to believe that..as an owner of a non-LC 8500 


-Brian


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Graham,


here is an attempt at a projector ranking, groups are ranked by best unit first, but differences are so small between some units that I prefer to group certain projectors:


group Nr. 1:

Cine9/909/G90/1209s


the Cine9/909 I don't know but they have the potential to be a brighter and more resolving version of the 1209s from what I heard, the G90 is well known and the 1209s is perfect in itself in ALL regards, although from what I have seen not as sharp as the G90 and certainly not as bright


group Nr. 2:

Marquee 9500LC, NEC 10PG


The Marquee is more complete, with much more features but does not get as black as the 10PG from what I have seen. The 10PG is even a tad sharper in the screen center where it counts, but it is hampered by the more dated 6/9PG chassis. These projectors I'd prefer not to rank relative to each other as I own the 10PG, but note that I also had a Marquee at the same time I had the 10PG and I sold the Marquee. Of course the Marquee is also the most hotrodded projector of them all and I cannot comment on what these mods do to its picture, maybe I'll see one of those units soon and can say more about his, but then maybe I will be doing some hotrodding with my 10PG, too 


group Nr. 3:

Sony 1292, Barco 1209I/II, Marquee 9000, NEC XG LC


These projectors all have strength and weaknesses with the notable streaking of the 1292 the best known weakness in this group. The Marquee 9000 and Barco 1209 I have seen all did rub me the wrong way as they looked somehow dull and worse than I expected, but I also saw potential for improvement so they are here mainly due to the fact that they have "bigger brothers" that are really good projectors. The XG chassis is still the best 8" chassis for me and it is available liquid coupled. Very detailed for 8" but with quite a lot of quirks.


group Nr. 4

Sony G70, Marquee 8500 LC


The feel-good 8" LC units, much easier to set up than the XG and probably most users will get a better picture out of them than out of the XG's


The 4600 Ampro I have not included as I have not seen it AND the Ampro 3600 which uses basically the same chassis did not compare too favorably to other 8" units from the major manufacturers when I saw them.


Also note that I expect all these units to be equipped with colored red and green c-elements, if not this would be a completely different ranking with the Barcos and Marquees losing some ground to the NEC's and Sony's.


Lastly, these projectors have different strengths and weaknesses where if one quality is more important than another the ranking could be different. I watch a lot of HD and for me being able to make the best out of it is a criteria that is used for my evaluation, others might only watch DVD, where the lesser resolving capability of the 8" units is not that much of a factor, and so on...


----------



## gn2

I would wholeheartedly agree with the "grouping" idea of a collection of the best regarded projectors. I would suggest that the groups not even be ranked, after the unequivocal "first" group. Just put all the very similar projectors with very similar capabilities in the same randomly designated groups, for example, the Marquee's and PG's would be in group F, and so on.

At the end of the day, the deciding factor will be personal preference.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*The talk about the 1292's brightness is really getting to me. There is mainly one reason the 1292 is not perceived as being as bright as other projectors: Sony sets them up so that there is very little blooming even at 100% contrast.


So of course when the 1292 and another projector are driven at 60% contrast projectors that bloom to any degree at 100% or even before that will be substantially brighter than the 1292. Then there might also be projectors that are surprisingly bright AND that do not bloom or at least less than expected and wear down the tubes so fast that this does not really matter after the first superbright 500 or 1000 hours. By several accounts the G70 and the XG series fall into this category and while they might start out brighter this is not really of significance as they are down with their light output pretty fast if really driven to make use of the seemingly superior output from the start. To get my point just look at pictures of G70's and XG's on ebay where you can see the tubes and you get my drift.


When set up properly so that the amount of blooming and tube longevity is comparable between projectors the 1292 is about as bright as your next 8 or 9" EMF unit with the exception of the G90 and probably Cine 9/909 which are/should be brighter.*
That is EXACTLY what I was trying to convey.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Graham and Bruce,


oops - I wanted to mention you two in my post on 1292 blooming, but forgot to do so 


I even have done some measurements with regard to light output with window white and full field white and in both regards the 1292 when just set up by amount of blooming and not numbers really compares very favourably. Unfortunately I did not write down any of my measurements, but the numbers were impressive with the 1292 being capable of 8 to 12 ft-lambert on a 100 inch wide unigain screen depending on how hard you drive it.


----------



## deronmoped

Or how about rating the PJ's this way.


Use a five star rating for each category in the way of image quality.


1. Sharpness.


2. Depth of image.


3. Blackness.


4. Color.


5. Convergence.


6. Brightness.


Then you could include any negatives about image quality.


I will start with my 10PG.


Sharpness four stars if not five. Have not been able to compare it to the G90, Cine 9, 1209s or 909.


Depth of image five stars. From what I have read it should be up there with the best of them.


Blackness five stars.


Color five stars. NEC colors set the standard.


Convergence five stars. NEC's are more difficult to set up, but the payoff is the ability to controll the convergence better.


Brightness four stars.


Negatives. ANSI ratio not as good as I wish it was. Of course this is common to CRT's, do not know if some are better or worse. Some extremely minor streaking, not sure if it is the way I have the PJ set up or just a super minor problem with the 10PG.


Deron.


----------



## Graham Johnson

I think Bruce, Oliver and I have a corum here.


The 1292 comments are exactly what I have been trying to get across for some time.


The fact is the machine has been character assasinated !!!


I could pull a series of quotes out of my earlier posts that say almost exactly what these two gents have reiterated.


here here !!!!!!!!


----------



## emdawgz1

I dont understand, what flaw in the Sony 1292 would cause it to be rated below a Sony G-70?


I've seen a 70, it's really good but i would have thought the 1292 would be better?


----------



## edsuski

Graham,


Please STOP IT! I am enjoying picking up 1292's, slightly used, for $2-$5K.


I want to remind everyone that the 1292 is:


Very Heavy (100Kg)!

Very Loud (63 dB)!!

Can't rebuild tubes (yet).

Perceived to be quite dim!

Did I mention the 12 or 14 fans?


Graham - just quietly work with Mike to fix the streaking problem and keep telling people that the 1292 is loud, heavy and not very bright. That will help insure replacement units at unbelievably good prices 


Ed


----------



## Graham Johnson

The only flaw is the streaking issue.


To be quite honest with you, the streaking isnt apparent in 85% of the viewing that is done, it is vaguly apparent in 10% and blatant in 5% of the viewing time.


Some machines are better or worse. I havent ever seen a really bad one. Of the 8 or so I have had in my possesion over the last 6 months. They have all be quite good.


I still belive this is fixable. Once it is, the real 1292 attributes will stand out. It had fantastic colour, close to the best hi rez picture, Hi bandwidth, and once understood, not that hard to work on. Long tube life.


Negatives apart from streaking, A bit noisey, heavy and big. OEM Tubes are expensive (till VDC start making them) Lens flapping adjustments are difficult to use. ( but better than some)


The negatives I can live with.


For the price it is by far the best value 9 inch LC projector available and can put out a stunning image when set up correctly, (and that isnt all that easy).


It can also resolve 1080p in the screen. Easily, if you have HD-10F lenses on it.


Once the streaking has been resolved, The projector should jump significantly in value and should stand up there amonst the best. Very close to the rank one group of Olivers.


Ultimately it would have a better picture than a G70 by quite a margin especially at high resolutions.


In my experience, less than 20% of installations have had the requisite amount of time spent on them to maximize performance, hence most people will never really see what it is capable of.


If you dump them on the table and do a 10 min setup, you are 50% of the way there.


----------



## Graham Johnson

You forget Ed, I have a shed full of em to sell !!!


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Graham,


you are getting a little ahead of yourself 


The 1292 will be a contender for group two, but not one, as it lacks a bit in bandwidth, resolution, light output, deep blacks and greyscale/gamma, but only compared to the very best.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Forgot to mention: I can second Graham's assessment of the resolution capabilities of the 1292 relative to the G70 - it is blatantly obvious with HD 1080p that the 1292 plays in the big league with the G70 quite a bit behind.


It always surprises me that with 1080p just around the corner not more importance is placed on spot size and capablity to handle 1080p.


----------



## Graham Johnson

As I said Oliver, "very close"


I dont think it noses in there, thats for sure.


I am content with a group two ranking for it.


I think the bandwidth is better than the average in the group on Pj's. 135 mhz is the same as the G90 isnt it ?? the only one better is the Cine 9 !!


Can we start to talk down the G90 now !! I still want one of them you know.


Did you guys relize the G90 is over 200lbs !!


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by emdawgz1_
*I dont understand, what flaw in the Sony 1292 would cause it to be rated below a Sony G-70?*
I don't know...maybe because it streaks more than Haley's Comet, and is half as bright? Some say they're so dim, viewing requires a telescope.


And this crap about an XG being rated higher than G70...who started that? There are a lot of G70 owners with XGs sitting in the garage collecting dust. I bet you won't find many XG owners with G70s in storage. That just doesn't happen.


Daren and his 10PG! Will it ever be more than a one man campaign? Will it ever end?


PS: I'm just kidding!  The only thing I'm poking fun at is that you guys have been arguing about this for a LONG time! You'd think you guys would want to discuss something else at some point. 


One problem: The G70 is rated way too HIGH! Take it from me, I own two of them, and as many have pointed out, they're not that good. I wish I had the money get something better.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Bah, don't get me going - the G90 is an ugly beast, it weighs 242lbs and did I mention that it is so bright it hurts the eyes ?


----------



## Graham Johnson

Keep it up Oliver !! another two weeks of G90 bashing and one will be mine for $2000.


Muhwaaaaaaaaa


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*Keep it up Oliver !! another two weeks of G90 bashing and one will be mine for $2000.


Muhwaaaaaaaaa  *
I wouldn't hold my breadth on that.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Graham,


I am working on it. Now did I mention that the G90 increases your chances of divorce by 300% when you build a dedicated HT room with it, by 1000% mounted to your living room ceiling and by 10000% when you also paint the whole room black ?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Graham,


I am working on it. Now did I mention that the G90 increases your chances of divorce by 300% when you build a dedicated HT room with it, by 1000% mounted to your living room ceiling and by 10000% when you also paint the whole room black ? *
I'll take my chances!


----------



## edsuski

Oliver Klohs,


Were those consequences meant to be negative?


Ed


----------



## Oliver Klohs

You women haters - always fondling your CRT's 

Seems I have to come up with a new strategy ...


----------



## B.Hegelstad

It's all about finding the right women that can live with you and your projectors.


Here is a picture of what my wife have to live with from time to time sometime two or three days in a row.


By the way this is all the BG1209s located in Norway 

http://home.c2i.net/Graphics/1209s%20double.jpg


----------



## Graham Johnson

What you talking about Oliver ?????


A Sony 1041 did that to me !!! LOL


She never got the 1041 in the settlement either.


Bjorn, you havent painted the room black yet, there is hope for you yet.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Graham,

if you got rid of her for a 1041 that's not saying much of hear 

Bjoern,

so these are two 1209s ?


----------



## AVWERKS

Graham, what are the internal controls to push past the default settings for G2 on the 1292?


I find myself agreeing with Paul on this issue of dynamic swings from bright to dark -but not the 4600 at all -


David


----------



## Graham Johnson

Do you know I have never looked for them !!!


The G2 setting is largely automatic and correct so I have never had to delve deeper.


I do however have a 1292 here now that may have issues with it. I have been putting off looking for the problem. Maybe now you pushed me a bit I will have to find time.


Give a me a few days


Dynamic range is an interesting issue. ( i keep trying to find parralells between audio and video stuff as it helps me grasp some of the concepts easier)


Generally this is about having a low noise floor. It is, not the G2 that is the real issue. There are a lot of misconceptions about how to set G2 and what it actually does.


I did contribute to a thread a while ago that I actually did some diagrams for. You might want to search. Its not the G2 that sets the lower threshold. Its the gain settings.


The G2 sets the start of conduction point of the tube, and generally its set to a point when the transferr characteristic of the tube starts to become linear after it turns on.


A lot of G2 fiddling isnt actually to set that point, its a misguided attempt to lower the level of black and get brightness settings back to what they beleive is correct. Thinking the G2 is crushing blacks.


The bias settings are what you fiddle to do that.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Yes! it's two 1209s but only one is mine the other one came from the US and needed a lot of adjustments to perform right.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

That's beautiful - hopefully you have carefully selected a new owner that also uses it frequently


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*That's beautiful - hopefully you have carefully selected a new owner that also uses it frequently *
I don't know if he is yet but as i tell everyone i calibrate or sell projectors to if they don't use it over 1000 hours a year i will return and take it with me


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by B.Hegelstad_
*......if they don't use it over 1000 hours a year i will return and take it with me *
LOL !


----------



## AVWERKS

Graham,

Dynamic range is a better way for me to explain than saying dim. There's alway's this hanging feeling when using the 1292 when watching movies or HD.


I want to push it as much as the tubes can take without blooming. A needle pulse test will see whether the power supply can take it at the same time.

Gamma would have been a plus


Sony must have set the light output limit for some reason and either one of these must have been the reason?


David


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*This discussion is based on where the manufacturer sets their default contrast level.


For a standard 0.7volt video signal. The manufacturer could set the default contrast at 50 (out of 100) cause they want to maximize tube life, or at 80 cause they want to maximize brightness.


Which one is right ???*
I will just pull this quote from previously to answer your question.


The fact is that all projectors will focus more sharply at lower contrast levels. For all we know the Sony designers may have had a brief that it had to resolve 2000x1600 4:3 and the only way they could get it to do it was to set the default contrast at the level they did.


The setting of the contrast is a sort of nominal point. As with all tubes they lose focus as the beam current goes up but they are brighter. The power supply on the 1292 seems to have heaps up its sleave so its not limiting the brightness. If you want brighter just drive it harder.



Had an interesting night last Sat, Did a alignment of a 1292 at a friends place. It had normal HD-10's.


We used the test pattern from a Mitsubishi program on a HTPC that had 1 pixel lines displayed at 1080p.


We could get it to do 1080p on the screen just fine. The interesting thing is that these machines are from a 4:3 era in terms of video.


When I expanded the 16:9 image up to fill a 4:3 screen. The 1 pixel lines where very very well defined.


If a 4:3 aspect ratio was used I beleive that a well setup 1292 (and some of the other 9 inch machines) would probably resolve over 1300 lines !!


At high beam currents maybe this wouldnt have been possible. Thus outside their design brief.


----------



## AVWERKS

This makes sense. Maybe that was the design application when Sony designed it. Ultimate resolution at the expense of other issues


David


----------



## ChrisWiggles

Quote:

I like the discussion about LC being less sharp. I really would like to believe that..as an owner of a non-LC 8500
IMO, the ANSI problems of non LC is outweighed by the improvements with LC'd units. The ANSI on my non-LCd crts is acceptable, but could certainly be better. This is more important to me than any slight loss of sharpness. I never noticed sharpness differences with LC/non-LC, but I've not seen units in comparison.


----------



## Graham Johnson

I have just finshed working on an XG85 non LC unit. (a reseller did a crap job fitting the HT leads on the tubes and it was arcing over)


See the Kaanage "pop goes the XG" thread


After I got it going and had a look at it with the lenses off. I was stunned to see the size of the Halos on the tube face !!! It was as bad or worse than the BD808s I found unacceptable.


This is the precise reason I went liquid coupled.


Its easy to see that the majority of these where designed for data use.


If it was designed for Home Theatre these sort of compromises would not be made.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*I have just finshed working on an XG85 non LC unit. (a reseller did a crap job fitting the HT leads on the tubes and it was arcing over)


See the Kaanage "pop goes the XG" thread


After I got it going and had a look at it with the lenses off. I was stunned to see the size of the Halos on the tube face !!! It was as bad or worse than the BD808s I found unacceptable.


This is the precise reason I went liquid coupled.


Its easy to see that the majority of these where designed for data use.


If it was designed for Home Theatre these sort of compromises would not be made.*
Graham,


Yet, some people keep "claiming" that non-LC projectors are sharper. I don't know how they figure that. To me, LC means better contrast and no halo, which in MY book equals BETTER sharpness not worse. 


Bruce


----------



## Graham Johnson

Dey is on druggs dude !!!


No competition


LC RULES !!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*Dey is on druggs dude !!!


No competition


LC RULES !!!!!!!!!!!!*
Ahhhhhh, SAY IT AGAIN!


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

_Originally posted by techman707_
*Graham,


Yet, some people keep "claiming" that non-LC projectors are sharper. I don't know how they figure that. To me, LC means better contrast and no halo, which in MY book equals BETTER sharpness not worse. 


Bruce*
Yes, non LC is sharper. And no, LC is sharper. I happen to agree with both, but I look at it this way:


- Non LC is sharper in that it reveals edges/lines better.


- LC is sharper because it produces a more defined image. Because of the better contrast ratio, the sharpness is not only on the edges and lines, it brings out sharpness in darker areas of the image where subtle detail and truer image quality resides.


My .03 cent


----------



## gn2

Thanks Mike for sticking up for the non LC(or at least clearly explaining why its "sharper") .

Personal preference is rearing its head yet again in regards to "LC vs non LC " debate. It is simply that, personal preference.

Chris states" This is more important to me than any slight loss of sharpness" in regards to the increased contrast range effect of LC.

My preference is the OPPOSITE. I am always bothered by a perception of a lack of sharpness, and the softening of the edges of characters that LC produces will ALWAYS drive me crazy. Obviously, others are not bothered by this.

Personal preference.


----------



## emdawgz1

Thanks for answering the question about the 1292q.


Where can i get one???


I'm jonesing for a new crt.


----------



## Per Johnny

Quote:

_Originally posted by gn2_
*Thanks Mike for sticking up for the non LC(or at least clearly explaining why its "sharper") .

Personal preference is rearing its head yet again in regards to "LC vs non LC " debate. It is simply that, personal preference.

Chris states" This is more important to me than any slight loss of sharpness" in regards to the increased contrast range effect of LC.

My preference is the OPPOSITE. I am always bothered by a perception of a lack of sharpness, and the softening of the edges of characters that LC produces will ALWAYS drive me crazy. Obviously, others are not bothered by this.

Personal preference.*
It is somehow true about 8 inchers that use HD18 lenses, because they arent quite could good enough. Thats why 8500LC uses the HD10 lenses. LC projectors should be sharper, if they arent, it is due to other factors like optics.


Per Johnny


----------



## onlink

Quote:

_Originally posted by WTS_
*wow, this list changes like the weather around here. .*
What's better a Ford 4X4 or a GMC 4X4? Even if you know squat about trucks you can get info from the arguements between two mechanics. If there is confusion as to specific details then challenge the posters and learn some more - or get more confused. Consider that most of the dialogue is free opinion.

No disrepect intended to the posters - I'm enjoying the dialogue.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by mp20748_
*Yes, non LC is sharper. And no, LC is sharper. I happen to agree with both, but I look at it this way:


- Non LC is sharper in that it reveals edges/lines better.

*
(lol) A politician !!!


----------



## mp20748

Yeah Bruce, but it was a technical "flip Flop"


----------



## deronmoped

I do not get it, the image starts out on the face of the tube and ends up on the screen after going through a set of lenses, this is ture for LC and non LC.


Is there someone that could explain how LC lenses would be worse then non LC lenses?


Maybe someone that has extensive knowledge of optics.


Deron.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Deron,


I think it's the LC tank including the c-element that would make the difference, not the lenses.


That being said 8" non-LC units will look sharp, but not as detailed as a 9" LC unit. You don't get that "liquid" look from them and that is where the magic begins for me


----------



## stefuel

This debate is what prompted my question of a few weeks ago about projection coolant quality. I asked if there was a prefered manufacturer of optical coolant and Curt razzed me for the question. Something about being too picky. I used Ashland Chemicals fluid to do my Ampro 4600HD.

Even though this fluid was way clearer than the old fluid I removed, I did not feel that this was as clear as it could be. In my mind, it should be as clear as distilled water. This stuff kind of looks like baby oil. I'll bet if you did a thorough cleaning and filled them with distilled water, you would see a difference. You could not leave it this way though as the water would quickly turn to green pond water. and even if it did not contaminate, you could not ship it for fear of freezing.


Chip


----------



## techman707

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Deron,


I think it's the LC tank including the c-element that would make the difference, not the lenses.


That being said 8" non-LC units will look sharp, but not as detailed as a 9" LC unit. You don't get that "liquid" look from them and that is where the magic begins for me *
Yes, but the C-element is actually an optical element of the lens and if properly designed, really shouldn't have any negative effect on the image.


----------



## AVWERKS

I think MP said on the Marquee's they use a mix of glycol and distilled water.

I did the same on the 4600, about 70% glycol and 30% distilled. I tried 50/50, but you get small bubbles that attach to the top surface of the C element that take forever to disappear. No problems so far.


If someone has any research on optical resolution that passes through this coupling a new tread should be started.


This LC vs AC debate is ridiculous, All the best and sharpest PJ's made didn't end up with air coupling.


David


----------



## techman707

It's not a good idea to add water to the glycol because it changes it's expansion properties. On tubes without expansion chambers, it can cause the glass to crack.


----------



## BullFire

Water has also a different refraction index then glycol. The perfect optical fluid would have the same refraction index as glass. Glycol refraction index is closer to glass then water is. That is also why it looks like baby oil. The problem with non LC is when light passes from glass to air.


----------



## deronmoped

Chip


Hitachi says they have excellent fluid, they even have a page talking about it.


I wonder if the position of the C-element has to do with the overall sharpness of the image. On a non LC there is no focusing of the image till it gets to the lens, so you have the ablity to focus the image with the lens. Now I wonder if the C-element was not in the perfect position it would throw the focus off. There by giving a bad reputation to LC units in the way of sharpness.


Deron.


----------



## Clarence


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)
NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)
NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM (Graham says rank higher)
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (Deron says rank higher)
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM (CZ Eddie says rank higher)
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC/Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## darqice

nice list..


----------



## Oliver Klohs

The list might be nice, but when overall picture quality is concerned the Barco 909/Cine 9 probably is king and it is obvious that the list is more influenced by the popularity of a chassis on this forum then by actual projector performance.


That being said it is always nice to get a Cine9/909 cheaper than a Marquee 9500/9501/ultra - after all the list clearly says it is not as good


----------



## Graham Johnson

Oliver you are entirly correct !!!


Given the choice the Cine 9 is the ONLY choice.


Unfortunately this forum has a few coloured opinions not entirly based on fact or in this instance a Viewing !!!


If you look at the thread I started about who uses what 9 inch projector.


There is not one Cine 9 !!!!


I rest my case. These preferances are not based on fact but rather unsubstanciated impression of the actual class leader. It is the only actual projector designed for Home theatre. The the limitations of the rest who are DATA projectors are not apparent in the Cine 9.


Because of this I would suggest that the list should be largely be looked at from the view that this are a list of "Who thinks what" rather than the "Who knows what".


Cine 9 is king because it is the only projector that has a bandwith that can even come close to doing 1080P justice !!!


Until people actually see one, does that mean it isnt any good ?? I dont think so.


It should be number one withoput question.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Graham,


yes, the Cine 9 looks like "it" and I hope to be able to see one, soon.


Another observation: I know nobody who has seen the 1209s and a Marquee 9500 who did not like the picture of the 1209s better - go figure...


Now there are definitely other things the Marquee has going for it, not the least being parts availability and support but still for PQ the 1209s seems to surpass it, if only for better blacks and a higher light output.


I have seen myself a 1209s and 2 Marquee 9500 and the 1209s was better in greyscale, light output and black level, despite having the oldest tubes of the three projectors.


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*Unfortunately this forum has a few coloured opinions not entirly based on fact or in this instance a Viewing !!!*
Indeed we do, and thier names are Graham and Oliver!


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Well well Phil,


I feel honored to be a member of the colored opinion club, but only if you accept your nomination as chairman 


There are certain things that I hear a little too often, like "the G70 is built like a tank" or "the Marquee has a modular design", "the projector has resolution specs of 2500 x 2000". What does that have to do with image quality ? In many cases very little, when compared to other projectors that seem to be inferior in those regards but have better or equal picture quality/real world performance.


----------



## Per Johnny

Quote:

_Originally posted by Graham Johnson_
*Oliver you are entirly correct !!!


Given the choice the Cine 9 is the ONLY choice.


Unfortunately this forum has a few coloured opinions not entirly based on fact or in this instance a Viewing !!!


If you look at the thread I started about who uses what 9 inch projector.


There is not one Cine 9 !!!!


I rest my case. These preferances are not based on fact but rather unsubstanciated impression of the actual class leader. It is the only actual projector designed for Home theatre. The the limitations of the rest who are DATA projectors are not apparent in the Cine 9.


Because of this I would suggest that the list should be largely be looked at from the view that this are a list of "Who thinks what" rather than the "Who knows what".


Cine 9 is king because it is the only projector that has a bandwith that can even come close to doing 1080P justice !!!


Until people actually see one, does that mean it isnt any good ?? I dont think so.


It should be number one withoput question.*
I agree with you, but have to comment that the Cine9 is not made due to the HT market. The Cine9 is basically a 909 with colored c-elements. The only reason the 909 was made, was because Barco got some large orders for the simulation market. The only difference between them beside the c-elements is the software, and that earlier versions of the Cine9 had the HD120 lenses instead of the superior 904 lenses.


I have done a setup with a Cine9 with the HQF904 lenses and image-quality was of course the best I have seen with good margin. I have only done one setup of a Ehome9500 also, and it was not even close to the Cine9.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Well yes,


But I draw a parrallel between HT and simulation. They are both meant to protray an accurate "Picture" ie they are meant to display images.


The others where meant to display DATA ie: windows desktop with the exception of maybe the Marquee.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

_Originally posted by Per Johnny_
*


I have done a setup with a Cine9 with the HQF904 lenses and image-quality was of course the best I have seen with good margin.

*
Yep, Barco gets the award. I hate to agree with this, but it was told to me by someone that works for a company that uses the very best in display technology in their systems.


I know it's been said over and over in this thread that resolution has nothing (or very little to do with image quality). Now, if we look back over the list, you'll notice that the projectors on low end of the list, are low resolution projectors. And you'll also notice that the low end projectors are also ES focus, so low resolution and ES focus seems to go together. As well, the higher performing projectors seems to have the highest resolution (and are EM focus)... Now the highest resolution projector on the list, also has the highest bandwidth. And for some reason, high bandwidth and high resolution go hand in hand.


I asked that these numbers be associated with the projectors on the list because the winner (colors exempt) should have the highest bandwidth figures.


The Barco Cine9/909 has a bandwidth of 180 mhz.


----------



## Clarence

I agree with Mike... higher numbers don't necessarily make any projector better; but the better projectors tend to have better specs.


You won't get an argument out of me... I haven't seen a G90 or a Cine9. I'd love to have either.


I think you'd find more support and parts for the G90 if you posted a problem here. But supportability is more of a factor for the lessor performing projectors.


So let's see if we can ruffle up some defensive rants from the G90 owners...
Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)
NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)
NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM (Graham says rank higher)
Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (Deron says rank higher)
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM (CZ Eddie says rank higher)
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Phil Smith

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Well well Phil,


I feel honored to be a member of the colored opinion club, but only if you accept your nomination as chairman *
I accept! I always wanted to be the chairman of something, and this is a position I'm certainly qualified for. 


I think it would matter more if at least one AVS member actually owned one, but I'm fine with the Cine 9 being #1. And someone's cousin being told by a friend that overheard a conversation on the subway where someone said the Cine 9 is the finest pj ever made is proof enough for me! 


Seriously, it's just a list. Even the author of the list doesn't view it as anything more than just a list to have a little fun with. Why do some people so worked up about it?


----------



## Art Sonneborn

Oh no !!!! The G90 has dropped.


Just so you folks now why I went the way I did was based on somethings which I had heard, seen and read about the Runco 1200 and G90s.


1) G90 was reported to have a tighter beam spot

2) G90 was considered brighter by most reports

3) Attempts to stack Runco 1200s side by side found that they did not have the convergence range to pull it off.


Number three was the deal breaker for me.


Art


----------



## Tom.W

Has anyone ever tried to modify a 1209s to a Cine 9 or is this not possible ?


----------



## Per Johnny

"3) Attempts to stack Runco 1200s side by side found that they did not have the convergence range to pull it off."


The 909 and the Cine9 has extreme geometry and convergence range. Maybe Runco disabled them? Or maybe the statement came from someone that didnt really know?


PJ


----------



## mp20748

Now, if I was looking for a projector that produced the smallest spot size, which of the listed spec's would be the best reference for spot size determination?


----------



## Graham Johnson

Every projector I have seen that was used for simulation had enormous range of adjustment for convergence and geometry by virtue of the fact that it was needed by the quite bizzare shaped screens that some of these run on.


I have seen the oddest wear patterns of some simulation projectors to get the geometry correct.


I would actually think ( but dont know) that the top end of the list would all have enough geometry adjustment to achieve what would be needed Art.


I wish I did know this as a fact as then I would have seen them !! 


As long as the Barco converged on Green, ( which is does) I would beleive that it would have have enough to do your stack Art.


PS: all the top end Projectors would have been bright enough in my opinion.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Mike,


from the specs the newer 9" projectors are all very close so I'd rather look at the projectors themselves.

In case the data would be available the bandwidth would be nice to know, but I am sure this is measured different between manufacturers as is resolution. Also of interest would be resolving capability of the lenses and width of the usable phosphor area and if there is 6-pole astig.


----------



## mikelyw

Quote:

_Originally posted by Art Sonneborn_
*Oh no !!!! The G90 has dropped.


Just so you folks now why I went the way I did was based on somethings which I had heard, seen and read about the Runco 1200 and G90s.


1) G90 was reported to have a tighter beam spot

2) G90 was considered brighter by most reports

3) Attempts to stack Runco 1200s side by side found that they did not have the convergence range to pull it off.


Number three was the deal breaker for me.


Art*
I just called local Barco HK office to my friend who is their sale and marketing manager and he reconfirms that Cine 9 can be stack and done before for special display purpose (two on each side of a curved screen). Barco is focus on professional visualization and simulation display market and they are specialize of such feature, not sure of Runco 1200 but added usually Runco only change to its case and install Runco internal scaler/line quad board on it (this is the nice part) and won't do any alternation. You might get wrong info from some 'expert', like the previous listing where Cine 9 well behind even an inferior 9500LC until special member and anti-colored eyes big guy urged the correction. Thanks God!


The Cine 9 I always saw in local demo room, with a HQF9004 lenses (depends which revision some has HQF900 I think) and 6 pole magnetic astig to each CRT, 9x9 81 zone make it very tight and sharp in extremely precise focus. actual performance even my 500hrs G90 cannot compare except for brightness. I am looking forward to the first used Cine9 in local surplus as record show there are about 10 sets being sold to private HT in past 2-3 years......


----------



## pasey25

guys, a few pages back I taked about seeing a 6 x 909 array of 3 x over/under stacks edge blended. I don't really think that Barco would have neglected to make the Cine9/909 capable of full side by side stacking.


In fact I think that in the majority of 909 installs (I'm guessing that simulation makes up the VAST majority of installs), there will be more than one unit in use.


----------



## Oliver Klohs

As far as I know the Cine 9 software just is not suited as much for simulations and multiple projector installations as the 909 software. This could be the reason why the 909 could do a side by side stack and the Runco 1200/Cine9 can't.

To add to this even the 909 stacks I know of aren't side by side either but a special design that aims to achieve as little offset of each tube as possible in a multi-projector setup.


----------



## Per Johnny

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*As far as I know the Cine 9 software just is not suited as much for simulations and multiple projector installations as the 909 software. This could be the reason why the 909 could do a side by side stack and the Runco 1200/Cine9 can't.

To add to this even the 909 stacks I know of aren't side by side either but a special design that aims to achieve as little offset of each tube as possible in a multi-projector setup.*
The Cine9 has all the features of the 909. The HT-software is just added in front, but when you access the adjustment mode, it is exactly the same.


Per Johnny


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Per Johnny,


that is good to hear so it is not really different software but additional software that the Cine 9 has - very nice !


Puzzling though why the Cine)/909 chassis should not be able to do side by side - maybe because the tubes cannot be moved in as much as needed ? But with an 11ft wide screen as Art uses difficult to imagine.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*

Puzzling though why the Cine)/909 chassis should not be able to do side by side - maybe because the tubes cannot be moved in as much as needed ? But with an 11ft wide screen as Art uses difficult to imagine.*
Side to side stack, would be an off AXIS setup. The 909 (not sure about the Cine9) was designed for off axis setups:


Unequalled Flexibility

â€¢ Mosaic geometry correction: Flat, Curved, *Off axis*

â€¢ Digital Image correction optimized for curved screens and multi-channel setups

â€¢ Different lenses are available, optimized for a wide range of screen sizes from 2 m (6.6 ft.) to 8.8 m (29ft.) wide, including curved screens

â€¢ Digital AutoImage &TM automatic alignment system

aligns all geometry and convergence parameters

â€¢ *Built-in Scheimpflug optical correction, with stepless

adjustment, for optimal optical focus for off-axis projection*

â€¢ 3D & Stereoscopic optimized phosphors available (upon request*Built-in Scheimpflug optical correction, with stepless* *Mosaic geometry correction: Flat, Curved, Off axis*


----------



## Per Johnny

Quote:

_Originally posted by Oliver Klohs_
*Per Johnny,


that is good to hear so it is not really different software but additional software that the Cine 9 has - very nice !


Puzzling though why the Cine)/909 chassis should not be able to do side by side - maybe because the tubes cannot be moved in as much as needed ? But with an 11ft wide screen as Art uses difficult to imagine.*
The angle adjustment for the red and blue crts have good range, so I dont think that should be a problem.


The 909 is used in stacked applications - I have seen it myself.


With earlier Barco-projectors companies like Seos/Prodas made major modifications for stacking and simulation. The 909 dosent need such modifications.


Per Johnny


----------



## Graham Johnson

for a commecial applkication side by side stacking probably wouldnt be the preferred option anyway. When the appreance isnt so much of an issue inverted stacking would always be a prefereance performance wize.


Its just for out HT applications that side by side would be the prefereance. I would think.


----------



## Graham Johnson

for a commecial applkication side by side stacking probably wouldnt be the preferred option anyway. When the appreance isnt so much of an issue inverted stacking would always be a prefereance performance wize.


Its just for our HT applications that side by side would be the prefereance. I would think.


----------



## Art Sonneborn

Here is a pic of the reference theater project using Runco 1200s in an over under arrangement and RP ( Jimmy Doolittle , the set up man and calibrator , pictured) This was the project in which the potential for side by side stacking issues were brought up.


----------



## Kamel407

Wow


Thought I would need to come back to this thread to bump it, guess not.


You guys are rockin


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Art,

very interesting photo, seems like a good solution for a rear projection setup.


----------



## RoBro

NEC DP-1200 is EM!

NEC GP-5000 is also EM!

Where is the NEC GP-3000 (also EM)?

Roland


----------



## SirJMon

Quote:

_Originally posted by ÂºÃ¾Ã–ÃÃÂ¡ÃˆÃŽÂ£Â¡_
*Why not include all CRT projectors?MITSUBISHI,VIDIKRON? *
Well I know that Vidikron is in the list. Just with their real names. I know Vidikron is a rebadged E-Home if i'm not mistaken. And E-Home's are in the list. Not sure bout Mitsu's though


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W*
I wouldn't swap a PG Xtra for a Barco 808 of equal condition*.


* Disclaimer: this comment is based only on my subjective opinion.


Edit: Ok, maybe for a BG 808s (120mhz bandwidth), but only when Curt gets the tube swap issue sorted 


Edit 2: Only if the BG-808s had HD-144 or 145 colour filtered lenses fitted.
Yeah, I think you're right... if I saw those side by side in equal condition, I'd take the 9200.


And I keep thinking the ECPs should be higher than the 1271...

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..40MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Ampro 3400..................8".......................EM

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM (Graham says rank higher)

Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (Deron says rank higher)

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM (CZ Eddie says rank higher)

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Brian Hampton

Clarence,


If the ECP's let you do mechanical aiming and shlep (


----------



## Clarence

Yes, I consider the ECP's scheimpflug and smaller size to be the key attributes over the 127x.


----------



## kschmit2

The NEC GP-5000 is an EMF machine, and according to the spec sheet it has a bandwidth of 70 MHz.


The NEC GP-3000 is EMF as well, and has a bandwidth of 50 MHz (again taken from the spec sheet).


The NEC DP-1200 is also an EMF machine (RoBro has the details on that one).


Kai


----------



## Clarence

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM (Graham says rank higher)

Ampro 4600..................9" 1200 2500x2000........EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM (Deron says rank higher)

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM (CZ Eddie says rank higher)

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Clarence

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000........EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Clarence

I received a PM asking for the BD600 to be added. I've never played with a BD600, but I'll just toss it in initially based on bandwidth. At the low end of the list, hopefully you're looking at a really low price (under $400) on a local machine (shipping could more than double the effective cost) in decent condition (7" projectors are dim enough with good tubes). But if you find one at a university auction or at a yard sale for $100 or so, grab it and have fun with it... you'll learn a lot setting up _any_ CRT, and it'll be a lot more fun than a 32" TV, even if you just use 480i composite.

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s..............7? 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000........EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG110/135 LC........... 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## cmjohnson

The very best possible? Though it would be very costly, I'd imagine that it would be custom built.


Start with a Chris Stephens Reference Imaging 9. Let Chris and Mike Parker collaborate

on it for a while. Send the chassis to me for a unique set of fan box mods that quiet down

the fan section a lot more than you would think possible. (GE Silicone II is your friend!) Send it back to Chris.


Install the tubes in it that are used in the Cine 9.


Have Ken Whitcomb set it up.


Run it with a Teranex.



It can get no better. Unless you have a pair and double stack them.



I figure there's 100 grand or so.





CJ


----------



## Semisentient

Well, looky herey... The 1292 is now in the top ten, finallly getting some respect!


Just a thought, but it might be useful to add a column for maximum resolvable resolution.


James


- OK, I just noticed that the projectors at the top are listed that way (540P etc...). The yyyy X zzz resolution is fine, but maybe a bit misleading for HT...


----------



## Chuchuf

You can move the G90 to the top of the heap now. I just got done building two of the best G90's on the planet, bar none. Colors are perfect, grey scale tracking is spot on, and the focus is the best ever seen on a CRT.


Terry


----------



## tse

For 2500 x 2000 resolution the pixel clock is running close to 400MHz if the refresh rate is 60Hz. The video bandwidth required to properly display that would be well over 200MHz at -3db. This is the most technically challenging part of the projector. Many higher end projectors are capable of scanning at the required 123 or so KHz. The video bandwidth is much more difficult to do. From what I've seen Sony is the only manufacturer that doesn't use a little salesmanship with their specs.


----------



## cmjohnson

I've reconsidered: A modded Barco 912, the monster with the 12 inch tubes.


That'll do stupid high resolutions, at least if the video bandwidth is high enough.


CJ


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
For 2500 x 2000 resolution the pixel clock is running close to 400MHz if the refresh rate is 60Hz. The video bandwidth required to properly display that would be well over 200MHz at -3db. This is the most technically challenging part of the projector. Many higher end projectors are capable of scanning at the required 123 or so KHz. The video bandwidth is much more difficult to do. From what I've seen Sony is the only manufacturer that doesn't use a little salesmanship with their specs.
Go interlaced and it should be possible with a Cine9/909.

I found out that rise and falltime seems acceptable if the pixel clock and RGB bandwidth is on par (forget about pixel clock divided by two).

2500x2000p should be around 360MHz pixel clock, and if you go interlaced you get 180MHz, just what the Cine9/909 is specified.

At that resolution you surely have to compromize flicker for resolution.


Still not sure if the tubes can resolve 2500x2000 due to spot size...

Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

You remember those odd tubes that were up at auction on .gov a while back? The ones

with the metal shrouds and round faces?


I bought five SETS of them. Several of them came with their checkout sheets in the boxes,

and are new, unused tubes. The checkout sheets list, among other things, the beam spot

size, as measured in the center of the tube face with some fancy, expensive measurement

tool. The spot size is measured across a scan line from the 50 percent luminance point on

one side of the scan line to the 50 percent luminance point on the other side of the scan line.


The checkout sheets describe the spot size as 1.2 mils. That's 1.2 thousandths of an inch.



I'm VERY interested in getting these suckers up and running in a Marquee. They have great

potential, based on the data sheets.


CJ


----------



## RoBro

OMG

If that spotsize is true and you get them working you must have the ultimate resolution!!!

Roland


----------



## deronmoped

NEC 10PG all the way!


Well I have another reason why the PG10,000 should be higher on the list of desireable PJ's. I just bought a PG9,000 and the parts are interchangeable. There are even quite a few parts that can be used from the PG 9100, PG 9200, PG 6000, PG 6100, PG 6200.


My ginnie pig (9PG) cost less then $300.00 shipped. So now I have a test machine to check for interchangeable cards, mods and repair. I already have found out that a few cards are swapable by testing them in the 9PG.


With the 10PG, as long as you have a set of good tubes and with all the cheap parts out there you should be set for life.


Deron.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Has a 10PG got dynamic astig? You should try and turn it into a PG-10100 with 9100 bits ;-)


----------



## cmjohnson

Correction....2.4 mils on the spot size. Brain fart.


Still, it's a pretty big tube face. It should deliver a raster that is substantially larger

than that of a P19 (assuming a 4:3 raster) and should be able to deliver at LEAST as good

a total resolution as a P19LCP07.


The lenses are going to be a real challenge!




CJ


----------



## Mark_A_W

Mils?? What the hell is a mil?


When are you lot gunna start using proper measurements like microns and millimeters??


It's only the US, Liberia and Burma using ENGLISH measurements. I thought you fought some war ages ago with Great Britain, but you still use English/Imperial units....crazy...


I notice CSI uses Metric.


But Mythbusters mix them up - the 1.7 gram playing card was stuck 1/4" into the foam block - they do that to drive me nuts...it's a conspiracy led by the Stonecutters...


Oh - and back to the topic - Clarence, The 6PG Xtra should sit next to the 9PG Xtra - there's no real difference apart from the point board.*


*Usual disclaimer about this being my subjective experience.


Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Correction....2.4 mils on the spot size. Brain fart.


Still, it's a pretty big tube face. It should deliver a raster that is substantially larger

than that of a P19 (assuming a 4:3 raster) and should be able to deliver at LEAST as good

a total resolution as a P19LCP07.


The lenses are going to be a real challenge!




CJ


----------



## cmjohnson

Mil: One thousandth of an INCH. Twelve inches to a FOOT. Three feet to a YARD.

1,760 yards, or 5,280 feet to a MILE.


39.35 inches equals one meter.


25.4 millimeteters equals one inch.


62 miles is 100 kilometers.


One avoirdupois ounce is roughly 28.35 grams.


One TROY ounce is roughly 31.10 grams.


12 troy ounces makes a troy pound.


Sixteen avoirdupois ounces makes a standard pound.



Why bother with metric when I understand my own system so well

and think in it? Start throwing metric measurements at me and I have to

convert them (which I do in my head) before they make sense to me.


We crazy Americans, we're rugged individualists. We checked out your metric system

and came to the healthy conclusion that it sucks. So we pretty much forgot about it

and returned to our contrary ways.



Heck, our system works well enough. I note that the only human footprints on the moon

are AMERICAN. If the system was good enoug to do that, SIX TIMES, then it's good

enough for anyone.


CJ


----------



## Tom.W

In my humble opinion a Full Mike Parker mod on a Cine 9 or 909


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Heck, our system works well enough. I note that the only human footprints on the moon

are AMERICAN. If the system was good enoug to do that, SIX TIMES, then it's good

enough for anyone.


CJ
 its was just the great system that led to the satelite crashing into was it Venus wasnt it?


I wish you guys would make up your mind !


----------



## 316

This list is why I am a CRT junkie. 


I have personally seen (owned):


801s

1208/2

8501

4600 HD

G-70 on its way.


Thus far the 4600HD is the class of the bunch. My ultimate goal is a G-90, 1209s and a 9500LC. The G-90 may just be a dream, but then again the 1020 was a dream at one time too.....


----------



## RoBro

I know at least one who made a PG10100...


CJ,

If the Spotsize is 2.4 mil to 50% the resolution should be similar to the P19LCP.

Roland

P.S.:

The real problem with imperial units is that if you just read ounce or pound you never know which one of them is meant. Btw. has the Troy pound been invented by "our" Troy?


----------



## Mark_A_W

1000 Microns in a Millimetre

1000 Millimetres in a Metre

1000 Metres in a Kilometre


1000 Grams in a Kilogram

1000 Kilograms in a Tonne


1000 Millilitres in a Litre

1000 Litres in a Kilolitre


1 gram = 1 ml = 10 mm cubed


1 Newton per square meter = 1 Pascal (pressure)


Which is simpler CJ?


Using your arguement we'd still be using stone axes - they work ok too...


I believe your military is metric now. Get used to it, you'll have to change one day.



Graham - it was Mars. One contracter was using N/m (or more properly Pascals) for pressure, the other was using Furlongs squared per Stone or something stupid like that. I also believe NASA has gone metric now....




Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Mil: One thousandth of an INCH. Twelve inches to a FOOT. Three feet to a YARD.

1,760 yards, or 5,280 feet to a MILE.


39.35 inches equals one meter.


25.4 millimeteters equals one inch.


62 miles is 100 kilometers.


One avoirdupois ounce is roughly 28.35 grams.


One TROY ounce is roughly 31.10 grams.


12 troy ounces makes a troy pound.


Sixteen avoirdupois ounces makes a standard pound.



Why bother with metric when I understand my own system so well

and think in it? Start throwing metric measurements at me and I have to

convert them (which I do in my head) before they make sense to me.


We crazy Americans, we're rugged individualists. We checked out your metric system

and came to the healthy conclusion that it sucks. So we pretty much forgot about it

and returned to our contrary ways.



Heck, our system works well enough. I note that the only human footprints on the moon

are AMERICAN. If the system was good enoug to do that, SIX TIMES, then it's good

enough for anyone.




CJ


----------



## cmjohnson

That probe would never have gone CRUNCH if everyone had kept the metric system out of it! 


CJ


----------



## RoBro

We should measure everything in lightyears or astronomic units...

Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
The checkout sheets describe the *spot size as 1.2 mils. That's 1.2 thousandths of an inch*.



I'm VERY interested in getting these suckers up and running in a Marquee. They have great potential, based on the data sheets.


CJ
It's the electronics that generates the spot size. It's just that you'll need a tube that's capable of displaying it.


----------



## RoBro

I disagree here.

The undeflected spotsize is dependent of the cathode geometry, the geometry of the G1 electrode and the quality of the focus coil.

The cathode emits electrons just like a glowing point on the phosphor emits light. The focus coil "projects" the picture of the cathode tip onto the phosphor surface like the lens projects the light of the phosphor point on the screen.

If the tip of the cathode (or the hole in G1, dependent of the cathode working prinziple) is not fine enough, the projected spotsize will also be big, just like the point on the screen is big if the phosphor spot is not fine enough.

Also, if the quality of the magnetic field generated by the focus coil is not good enough you will get a larger spotsize, just like you get with lenses that do not have enough resolution or too much aberrations (6lp/mm instead of 10 or 12).

Of cause, too gross phosphor grain degrades spotsize.

Electronics can degrade spotsize even further, if there is noise on the focus coil voltage or in the deflection circuits.

The tube itself controls spotsize by gun design (high resolution guns n the P19LUG types) and phosphor grain.

The magnetics control spotsize by quality of magnetic field of the focus coil and aberrations caused by the deflection yokes (can be compensated for with dynamic astig to some extend).

The electronics control spot size by noise on the focus and deflection voltages.

Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

You're both right. There is an intrinsic limit to spot size which is determined by the

geometry of the electron gun and the grain size of the phosphor, but also, the

quality and design of the magnetics are of great importance as well.



CJ


----------



## mp20748

A $5000.00 (price guess) NEW special cathod 1 Mil CRT, using very special $1000.00 (guessing again) magnetics, coupled to a 90 Mhz (actual bandwidth due to age of projector) bandwidth video chain, will not produce that 1 Mil spec'd Spot size, regardless of the expertise of the setup.


----------



## Chuchuf

Robro,


So are you saying that the P19LUG in a G90 would have a better resolution capability than the standard P19LQF that is provided stock in the G90.

After all the magnets and yokes on the G90 certainly provide for a superior focusing system with the stock tubes.


Terry


----------



## Mark_A_W

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
A $5000.00 (price guess) NEW special cathod 1 Mil CRT, using very special $1000.00 (guessing again) magnetics, coupled to a 90 Mhz (actual bandwidth due to age of projector) bandwidth video chain, will not produce that 1 Mil spec'd Spot size, regardless of the expertise of the setup.


You mean 25 microns  A mil to the rest of the work sounds like a millilitre...


At least call it a thou - that's pretty well understood.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Spot size is not the only factor that determines the ability ti display a high bandwidth picture. You could have a very small spot size but still not be able to display a decent pic due to bandwidth limitations.


All you would see is scan lines but no more picture information.


The smallest spot size you need to be able to display is a spot small enough so that the scans dont overlap on the screen at 1080p. (or whatever resolutionyou ned to acheive)


To have a smaller spot size than that isnt required or even desirable.


The limited bandwidth will have the effect of squashing the projectors dynamic range as it draws the spot across the screen within a line. The transistion between full black and full white will take longer to occur, leading to a smearing effect. This is how a bandwidth limitation will manfiest itself. A very sharp transistion shows good bandwidth ability ( and will look very crisp) a black via grey to white transistion will show as a softer picture due to bandwidth squeeze.


Spot size is largely irrelevant up to a point, until it gets too bad (as in a G70 trying to display 1080p) It just cant draw a line narrow enough to stop overlap. Then the spot size is relevant.


----------



## onlink

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Heck, our system works well enough. I note that the only human footprints on the moon

are AMERICAN. If the system was good enoug to do that, SIX TIMES, then it's good

enough for anyone.


CJ
uh, it was dollars that put them on the moon - not pounds. hehe


----------



## RoBro

Hi,

of cause the horizontal resolution depends on the RGB bandwidth and the horizontal sync frequency. My comments were on the achieveable spotsize depending on tube, magnetics and the drive for that magnetics. Even if you scan 110kHz with 10MHz bandwidth, the spot, as it moves across the phosphor, is still the same small size, it just changes its brightness too slow to see it.

For my comments on RGB bandwidth please read post #559 of this thread.

Roland

BTW. if you run [email protected], then 90MHz RGB Bandwidth is way enough to not influence spotsize very much.


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Chuchuf*
Robro,


So are you saying that the P19LUG in a G90 would have a better resolution capability than the standard P19LQF that is provided stock in the G90.

After all the magnets and yokes on the G90 certainly provide for a superior focusing system with the stock tubes.


Terry
I have never seen a P19LUG operating. I read here some comments that these are the tubes in the Cine9/909 and the most recent 1209 (don't remember if it was a /2s or some other suffix type) and that they are sharper than the standard P19. And there are those tubes in the 9500LC Ultra SIM (Don't know if they are LUG or another type)..

Roland


----------



## Stepan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W*
1000 Microns in a Millimetre

1000 Millimetres in a Metre

1000 Metres in a Kilometre


1000 Grams in a Kilogram

1000 Kilograms in a Tonne


1000 Millilitres in a Litre

1000 Litres in a Kilolitre


1 gram = 1 ml = 10 mm cubed


1 Newton per square meter = 1 Pascal (pressure)
Just a remark.


We often use:

centimetres: 1 cm = 10 mm = 0.01 m

dekagrams: 1 dkg = 10 g = 0.01 kg


There is no such thing as kilolitre! 


1 ml (1 cubic centimeter) OF WATER APPROXIMATELY weights 1 gramm.

(one liter (10 cm cubed) of water is approx. 1 kilo)


----------



## Mark_A_W

Shut up Stepan, I was trying to make it look simpler...


..but I think your wrong.


from here:

http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/dictL.html 


"liter or litre (L or l) the common metric unit of volume. The liter was originally defined to be the volume occupied by a kilogram of water, and the gram as the mass of a cubic centimeter of water. This would make the liter equal to exactly one cubic decimeter, that is, to the volume of a cube 0.1 meter (or 10 centimeters) on a side. Unfortunately, the physical objects constructed to represent the meter and kilogram disagreed slightly. As measured by the standard meter and standard kilogram, the standard liter turned out to be about 1.000 028 cubic decimeters. This discrepancy plagued the metric system for a long time. In 1901 an international congress accepted the discrepancy and formally defined the liter to be exactly 1.000 028 dm3. No one was particularly happy with such an awkward definition, and in 1964 the CGPM repealed the definition. In the SI, volumes are to be measured in cubic meters or power-of-ten multiples thereof, not in liters. However, the SI states that the liter "may be employed as a special name for the cubic decimeter." Throughout this dictionary, the liter is used as a name for exactly 1 cubic decimeter, 1000 cubic centimeters, or 0.001 cubic meter. In its renewed guise as the cubic decimeter, the liter is approximately 61.023 744 cubic inches. Compared to the customary volume units, the liter is a little more than a U. S. liquid quart (1.056 688 qt or 33.814 fluid ounces) but a little less than a U. S. dry quart (0.908 08 qt) or a British imperial quart (0.879 89 qt or 35.195 fluid ounces). Its name comes from a French volume unit, the litron, which was in turn derived from the Latin litra. Both the lower case letter l and the upper case L are accepted as symbols for the liter, but the U.S. Department of Commerce specifies that L be used, at least by businesses, to avoid confusion with the numeral 1. The unit is spelled liter in the U.S. and litre in Britain; there are many other spellings in various languages (see Spelling of Metric Units)."


And

http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/dictK.html 


"kilo- (k-) [1]

a metric prefix meaning 1000. The prefix is a modification of chilioi, the Greek word for a thousand.

kilo- (k-) [2]

in measuring the memory of a computer, the prefix kilo- often means 210 = 1024 instead of 1000. By a 1998 resolution of the International Electrotechnical Commission, the new prefix kibi- (Ki-) should replace kilo- for 210. However, this doesn't seem to be happening."


I can still kilo in front of whatever I damn well please


----------



## Stepan

YOU shut up!

Nothing is wrong. Kilogram is defined as a weight of that piece of metal they have in France.

Liter is defined as volume equal to 10 cm cubed.


Centimeter is the most often used small scale measure.


Term "Kiloliter" is theoretical and is NEVER used. Hectoliter ( 100 l ) is used just rarely.

When talking about high volumes cubic meters are used.


Another often used measure:

deciliter: 1 dl = 100 ml = 0.1 liter


----------



## kschmit2

hectoliter is the standard measurement for wine and beer.


----------



## RoBro

Hey,

please stop agueing about measures here. This thread is about the ranking of CRT PJs.

If you want to talk about metric or imperial measures, you may do that in the hijacked thread about american politicians or somewhere else, but NOT HERE.

Otherwise I will have to play rASter (even though I would not like to do so) and report your posts and have a moderator deleting them.

Roland

P.S.:

I am still missing the EMF NEC GP-3000 somewhere around the Sony 1272

Roland


----------



## Stepan

I WAS NOT THE FIRST ONE who begun to talk about measures!!! 

I just wanted to make it clear.


I hope it is clear enough now so please go on in your CRT ranking thread.


----------



## REWJR

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70, NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Sony G90

3. Marquee 9501LC

2. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

1. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

0. 2 - Marquee 9501LC/MP modded and displayed via blendpro giving 2 - 7 ft wide

pics together for a total 14 ft of 1080P glory


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Hi,

of cause the horizontal resolution depends on the RGB bandwidth and the horizontal sync frequency. My comments were on the achieveable spotsize depending on tube, magnetics and the drive for that magnetics.
You're still focusing on the magnetics. The 909 has the same magnetics as the 1209, yet the bandwidth and resolvability of the two projectors are far apart.


I'm sure the drive for the magnetics is important, but I'm even more sure that it's not as important as the video chain.


----------



## cmjohnson

FYI, the tube type used in the 9500LC SIM is indeed the P19LUG type.


CJ


----------



## Dion^Swamp

Yes, around here we often hear: "Hello barkeep, I'd like 4 hectoliters of stout and a hectoliter Merlot for me lass".



kilo is common slang for kilogram, that doesn't make it a sin to prefix random units with kilo though, even if it does sound strange to talk about one kiloliters when a cubic meter is so much more common.


----------



## RoBro

First resolution limit:

Cathode fineness (min beamspot size on the phosphor is the dimension of the cathode tip multiplied by the ratio of the distance from focus magnet to phosphor divided by the distance from focus magnet to cathode tip)

second limit:

Phosphor grain (imho even if the beam is narrower, the whole phosphor particle that is hit by the beam is illuminated due to light reflections at the border of the phosphor particle that is caused by the high refractive index of the phosphor materials).

third limit:

Quality of the magnetic lens influenced by the construction of the permanent magnets inside the focus magnet/coil assembly and the construction of the windings.

fourth limit:

quality of the astig magnets and their adjustments (we all know what happens with misadjusted astig magnets, or that we can not cancel out triangularity without a 6-pole magnet)

fifth limit:

Quality of the signal that drives the windings of the focus coil (if there is noise or jitter on the voltage, or the dynamic voltage waveform does not follow the required shape as the beam is deflected across the tubeface, the focussing will not be at its optimum.

sixth limit:

As soon as the beam is deflected by the deflection yokes there will be geometric aberrations to the electron beam as the beam is not focussed at the point it passes the yokes and so they act differently to the various regions of the beam. This can be compensated for with the dynamic astig coils if the PJ has (and drives) them.

seventh limit:

quality of the drive of the deflection yokes (if the deflection drive is noisy the spot will not be stable and illuminate a larger phosphor area than with clean deflection signals.

eighth limit:

the signal that drives the dynamic astig coil may also be noisy or not correctly shaped so there may be suboptimum dynamic astig correction

ninth limit:

video bandwidth (if rise and fall times of the cathode (or G1) driving amplifiers is worse than 30% of the pixel clock, then the horizontal spotsize is virtually increased as the intensity of the beam can not be modulated fast enough to display each single pixel separately.

Roland

P.S.:

Feel free to add other remaining limits for spot-size


----------



## Mark_A_W

Robro - does your first limit mean a longer neck is better?


What about neck diameter? Surely a narrower neck will allow the magnetics to have much greater effect as they are closer to the beam?


----------



## Chuchuf

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
I have never seen a P19LUG operating. I read here some comments that these are the tubes in the Cine9/909 and the most recent 1209 (don't remember if it was a /2s or some other suffix type) and that they are sharper than the standard P19. And there are those tubes in the 9500LC Ultra SIM (Don't know if they are LUG or another type)..

Roland
But that is my point. I asked a few months ago if anyone had any technical specs on these tubes because they had been touted as "sharper, higher resolution" tubes than the rest of the P19 variations. Do they indeed have a smaller spot size?? better cathode and other mechanics in them to produce a higher resolution picture?

Sure they are the tube used in the 909/Cine9 and some late 1209S's, but as discussed it isn't just the tube that creates higher resolutions.


Terry


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W*
Robro - does your first limit mean a longer neck is better?
That depends on the position of the focus coil.

Assuming the same gun design it is favorable to have the focus magnet/coil as forward on the tube as possible.

Of cause you can not influence that very much as the permanent magnetic strength of the magnets (the "focal length" of the magnetic lens) is fixed (you would need more static focus current to alter that parameter), and usually it is already as forwasrd as possible. With a longer neck tubes and the same magnetics you could indeed increase the gun-magnet distance while keeping the magnet-phosphor distance the same, and so decrease spotsize.
Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W*
What about neck diameter? Surely a narrower neck will allow the magnetics to have much greater effect as they are closer to the beam?
This seems to be the reason the XGs and G70 are so sharp. Seems the magnetic lens can be made of higher quality if the neck is thinner.

Roland


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Chuchuf*
But that is my point. I asked a few months ago if anyone had any technical specs on these tubes because they had been touted as "sharper, higher resolution" tubes than the rest of the P19 variations. Do they indeed have a smaller spot size?? better cathode and other mechanics in them to produce a higher resolution picture?

Sure they are the tube used in the 909/Cine9 and some late 1209S's, but as discussed it isn't just the tube that creates higher resolutions.


Terry
The electron gun looks quite different viewed throuch the neck glass (I know where to find pics, but do not know if I would be allowed to post a link to them).


If they are the tubes in the Marquee SIM edition then they should have 30% smaller spotsize according to VDC.

If they could have achieved that with just other magnetics or electronics, why would they have used these very expensive tubes?

Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
If they are the tubes in the Marquee SIM edition then they should have 30% smaller spotsize according to VDC.

If they could have achieved that with just other magnetics or electronics, why would they have used these very expensive tubes?

Roland
Ah, you fell for that marketing hype on the VDC website.. 


I noticed that you said "should have 30% smaller". Can that be verified?


let me explain where i'm going with this. The SIM tube it rated as "addressable resolution", which basically means what it's capable of....and the real funny thing that happens with marketing hype, the company will always use the "addressable' figure rather than the ANSI number. The ansi number involves more than the tube itself, while the addressabilty has nothing to do with anything else in the projector.


Marketing hype:

Before the Marquee 9500LC/Ultra was sold to VDC, it had an RGB bandwidth of 130Mhz. As soon as VDC was able to get their name on the case, it's bandwidth had increased to 150Mhz. Plus, Christie/Electrohome listed their resolution in ANSI. VDC uses ADRRESSABLITY. it's like praising a bullet, with no mention of the gun that it'll be fired from.


That same VDC 9500LC used a particular VIM that has an 02 as the last two numbers. And of course, they have made some changes to that same 02 VIM, but if I told you that the changes were that they simply added a tunable cap and resistor to each of the first op amp stages, would you accept that this upgrade would qualify these boards as 150mhz VIM's?....I won't!


Further, if your theory is correct, the 1209 uses the same tube as the 909 (supposibly), so why did barco bother to make the 909 and give it so much higher ratings than the 1209, if it's only the tubes?


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
...The SIM tube it rated as "addressable resolution", which basically means what it's capable of....

...while the addressabilty has nothing to do with anything else in the projector.
The adressable resolution is only dependant on the deflection circuits (and maybe the inductance of the yokes).


If I put an old Gp-5000 tube inside a 9500LC it will have the same adressible resolution as before.


You would change the tube for two reasons only. Spotsize and light output.


Would be interesting to see two green P19 in a 9500LC ultra, one being a LCP ant the other one a LUG. Magnetics and electronics the same.

And then look at the spotsize...

Roland


CJ, do you have a LUG?


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
The adressable resolution is only dependant on the deflection circuits (and maybe the inductance of the yokes).
No, it's simply one of the specs of the tube itself. Now ANSI is a different story...


----------



## Curt Palme

This has turned into a very interesting thread.


But how much you wanna bet if you set up a bunch of high end 9" sets (oops, I mean 22.86 cm), tweaked out like crazy by professionals, all in the same room, and had every contributor to this thread there to judge, the fur would start flying within 10 minutes.





REgardless of specs, I'm a true believer that the 'best' still comes down to what the individual prefers personally.


Curt


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
No, it's simply one of the specs of the tube itself. Now ANSI is a different story...
So if there are two PJs, one saying adressable 2500x2000, ANSI 1600x1200, and one saying adressable 2200x1800, ANSI 2000x1600, which one would have the higher scanrate electronics, and which one would have the sharper tube?


Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

I have a red one. Very minor 4:3 wear on it.


No cell assembly. But if I run it at LOW output levels, it should be just fine for comparison's sake.


I have a red P19LCP that's pristine except for that danged beam strike, also without a cell,

so I could wire both up and do a level playing field comparison.



CJ


----------



## tse

"If they are the tubes in the Marquee SIM edition then they should have 30% smaller spotsize according to VDC.

If they could have achieved that with just other magnetics or electronics, why would they have used these very expensive tubes?

Roland "


At 2048x1536 at 7fL on a 22.2 square foot screen the P19LUG tubes will have at least 20% better MTF than the standard 9500 CRT.


"Marketing hype:

Before the Marquee 9500LC/Ultra was sold to VDC, it had an RGB bandwidth of 130Mhz. As soon as VDC was able to get their name on the case, it's bandwidth had increased to 150Mhz. Plus, Christie/Electrohome listed their resolution in ANSI. VDC uses ADRRESSABLITY. it's like praising a bullet, with no mention of the gun that it'll be fired from.


That same VDC 9500LC used a particular VIM that has an 02 as the last two numbers. And of course, they have made some changes to that same 02 VIM, but if I told you that the changes were that they simply added a tunable cap and resistor to each of the first op amp stages, would you accept that this upgrade would qualify these boards as 150mhz VIM's?....I won't!


Further, if your theory is correct, the 1209 uses the same tube as the 909 (supposibly), so why did barco bother to make the 909 and give it so much higher ratings than the 1209, if it's only the tubes?


__________________

mike parker "



Electrohome may have claimed 130MHz BW but that was very optimistic. The neck cards came close but the VIM was actually the bottleneck. The variable cap/resistor added by VDC worked wonders on the system bandwidth. Increase of almost double.


----------



## fetz

Hi There


to compare a 1209s and a 909 is crazy. There is no important Board in the Unit that is equal except a few ones which are not really need for performance

Its a total new design.Look at The parts list, than you know


VDC did more changes on the Marquee, not only in the VIM. Also they changed more than the 3 cap/resistors on it.


If you ask me, the only reason why you talk so negative about them is that a VDC Ultra dont need any further mods  as an older one need for sure

Its good that a company now makes improvements on the Marquee chassis, Christie did nothing and the Design from the Marquee is not the newest one



regards


Thomas


P.S For the Bandwith i checked the max. Resolution it can Display without overlapping the Scanlines. I made Fotos even of 2048 x 1536 seeing lines horizontal and vertical


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fetz*
Hi There

to compare a 1209s and a 909 is crazy. There is no important Board in the Unit that is equal except a few ones which are not really need for performance

Its a total new design.Look at The parts list, than you know
Go back and re read the thread




> VDC did more changes on the Marquee, not only in the VIM. Also they changed more than the 3 cap/resistors on it.
> 
> [
> 
> 
> 
> Really, and what other parts would that be?
> 
> Quote:
> 
> If you ask me, the only reason why you talk so negative about them is that a VDC Ultra dont need any further mods  as an older one need for sure
> 
> Its good that a company now makes improvements on the Marquee chassis, Christie did nothing and the Design from the Marquee is not the newest one
> 
> regards
> 
> Thomas
> Because the Marquee is of an earlier design, VDC has been working on a radical redesign of various boards in the Marquee. And for your info, there's still very liitle change from the earlier Ultras and the ones they were selling after they took over the Marquee series from Christie.
> 
> 
> Other than the three resistors and three variable caps, and maybe three other attached resistors on the VIM, could you please tell me what other changes were made?
> 
> 
> And let me be clear here, VDC was not happy with the Marquee as it was from Christie, so they went to work on not only modding it, but with intentions of making very *radical improvements over it's original design*. I applaud them for doing both, but do I agree that the projector has these great specs - no!
> 
> 
> Will it be a much better projector after the newer designs are done- absolutely.... and I say this without mentioning anything I've been told first hand. And when this all takes place, it'll clearly be crowned the king of CRT.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> P.S For the Bandwith i checked the max. Resolution it can Display without overlapping the Scanlines. I made Fotos even of 2048 x 1536 seeing lines horizontal and vertical
> So, if VDC rates the present Ultra at 150mhz, how did you get 2048x1536 without overlap, or are you another one of those folk who think the tube is the only critical device for best spot size?
Click to expand...


----------



## RoBro

248x1536 results in a pixel clock of around 133MHz (here in PAL country). You should get that sharp with a RBG Bandwidth of 135MHz and higher (did some simulations on bandwidth, risetime and pixel clock once). In NTSC country you need 160MHz for the same result...

Roland


----------



## Kamel407

Is it just me? or has the overall tone of this forum changed over the last week or so?


I'm not talking about any single person either, there's been at least 7 or 8 different arguments in a few threads I've read and they don't even include raster.


Honestly, I'd rather have raster anyday over the bickering.


I'm not trying to be a "richard" but its kinda making me not want to come to CRT as often.


Can't we all just get along?


----------



## fetz

Hi


I agree with you that its not a totally new design, thats clear. But if they do minor changes on the right place its all OK.

If they take superior Parts on the right Place its OK.


You do exact the same with your Mods.


With a friend of me, we have checked and pictured every Card from Mine August2004 build MArquee and his one from 2001. There are changes on almost every Board.


Off course not radical new design, sometimes only Service Bulletins made, but minor ones on every Board


For the Bandwith i tested 1080p cause of the endless discussion here. I want to see if the Marquee can handle it. I think he can do it fine.The black Scanlines were narrower than the white ones, good to see in the middle of the picture.


For watching Digiphotos i want to test the max resolution without loosing to much. Due to limitations from my Videocard i cant go wider than 2048. That was not a Problemto resolve.On the other side it had displayed clear 1344. Going to 1380 it begann to overlapp. I think 1536 was the max Resolution i tested, but not the one it resolves clear. On this i was wrong


reagrds


Thomas


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fetz*
Hi


I agree with you that its not a totally new design, thats clear. But if they do minor changes on the right place its all OK.

If they take superior Parts on the right Place its OK.


You do exact the same with your Mods.


With a friend of me, we have checked and pictured every Card from Mine August2004 build MArquee and his one from 2001. There are changes on almost every Board.


Off course not radical new design, sometimes only Service Bulletins made, but minor ones on every Board


For the Bandwith i tested 1080p cause of the endless discussion here. I want to see if the Marquee can handle it. I think he can do it fine.The black Scanlines were narrower than the white ones, good to see in the middle of the picture.


For watching Digiphotos i want to test the max resolution without loosing to much. Due to limitations from my Videocard i cant go wider than 2048. That was not a Problemto resolve.On the other side it had displayed clear 1344. Going to 1380 it begann to overlapp. I think 1536 was the max Resolution i tested, but not the one it resolves clear. On this i was wrong


reagrds


Thomas
VDC has great plans for the Marquee, and from what I've heard from a direct source, they have a very serious team working on the better changes to come. I've always been excited about this, because it will truly put the Marquee on top of the hill. However, this will also far exceed whatever I'm doing with mods, but I'm sure the cost will also justify the performance.


There's only so much you can accomplish with mods, and it's very costly to do a redesign. They chose both, and that says a lot about that company. At present the Marquee is still a CRT challenger, and that's without mods. When VDC gets finished with it, they will make it a perfect match to the super dot pitch tube they have, and that's going to keep it ahead of the higher resolution digitals for industrial applications, as well as make it the best thing out there for 1080 HD.


----------



## VideoGrabber

fetz wrote:

> _On the other side it had displayed clear 1344. Going to 1380 it began to overlap._


----------



## fetz

Hi


It was 16/9 aspect, 250cm wide with 60 Hz.


regards


Thomas


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fetz*
Hi There


to compare a 1209s and a 909 is crazy. There is no important Board in the Unit that is equal except a few ones which are not really need for performance

Its a total new design.Look at The parts list, than you know


VDC did more changes on the Marquee, not only in the VIM. Also they changed more than the 3 cap/resistors on it.


If you ask me, the only reason why you talk so negative about them is that a VDC Ultra dont need any further mods  as an older one need for sure

Its good that a company now makes improvements on the Marquee chassis, Christie did nothing and the Design from the Marquee is not the newest one



regards


Thomas


.


P.S For the Bandwith i checked the max. Resolution it can Display without overlapping the Scanlines. I made Fotos even of 2048 x 1536 seeing lines horizontal and vertical


Christie (I still think of them as Electrohome) did nothing with the CRT projectors in the last years that they had them. They were still shipping them set-up at 31.5KHz (640x480). VDC has made many changes bringing the units up to 2048x1536 capability. Increased video bandwidth, better geometry, better reliability. Many applications needed small modifications for their particular situation. Sometimes it has been a challenge continuing production with a 10+ year old design. There's been alot of parts that have become obsolete since the "Pheonix" project was started.


----------



## RVonse

There is a whole lot more to this than spot size or ability to see scan lines. Having played around with some Barcos and Marquees (all with good tubes) in my garage, I am coming to the conclusion that there are probably a lot of crt projectors out there could be performing a little below par and not noticable. Such a small difference in performance until an identical unit is side by side coming from the same source. I have compared a couple of Barco 808's which look stellar until you start to examine them closely against a Barco 1209. The 1209 shows scan lines at 1080i and also some anomalies of the icons and mouse curser of my laptop that either of the 808s fails to pick up. These anomalies I speak of are very minute noise artifacts and I am convinced it is valid source video coming off my computer video card. So I am thinking what I have seen so far is probably to be expected.


Now here is the part thats gets hard to believe. I have a Barco 800 in my theater that can not show scan lines at 1080i (unless there is fast motion). Furthermore the 800 can not focus scan lines nearly as well as either of the 808's. Yet the 800 CAN show the anomalies of the mouse curser! Maybe not quite as good as the 1209 but way way better than either of the 808's or the Marquee I own. Go figure.


I have not had a chance to sort all this out but my gut feeling is that there must be some electrolytic capacitors that are not performing up to spec in the RGB video chain of the 2 808's or Marquee. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the 1209 and 800 are relatively low hour projectors but the 808s are both high hour chassis. This is definitely something would never have occurred to me all unless I had gone to all this trouble since all the projectors look extremely good by themselves hooked up to an HD tuner. But I firmly believe Mike Parker is correct about the tremendous importance of the video chain. Spot size and thin scan lines are not going to do diddly squat unless all of the details of the video makes it to the cathodes of the tubes. As far as I can tell there just seems to be a little much emphasis about focus and spot size and not enough attention given to video amplification quality IMHO. Probably because spot size is easy to measure and bandwidth isn't I guess.


----------



## tse

Set-up/alignment is all important. The best CRT, the best magnetics being misadjusted by a few thousands of an inch can make a premier projector look worse than an old electrostatic focus model that is properly adjusted. It's real easy to make a crappy picture, very difficult (time consuming) to make every thing perfect enough to make that image pop.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Robert, This is what I have been saying all along. Everyone seems to be harping on about spot size. As long as it allows 1080p without line overlap the spot size is adequate.


It doesnt need to be better than that or all you get is the ability to see scan lines.


What matters is the horizontal resolution across the screen. This is where you can see bandwith limitations very easily with a 1920 line test pattern.


Horizontal resolution at 1080p is easier to get than the 1920 verticle lines across the screen ! try it yourself.


----------



## RVonse

Tse, while I don't completely dissagree with you, I am the same person that set up all the projectors. So when it comes to setup I could be just a hack, but OTOH I was very successful stacking the same 808s I talked about above. They both were converged well and did not drift even at higher scan rates which AFIK no one else on this board has ever accomplished. So it could be possible that I can converge good but not the focus/dynamic astig part but then how do you explain the difference between the 1209 and 808's? The setup menues are nearly identical. Logically if I can't do one right I shouldn't be able to do the other. Right? The 800 is lacking with focus adj. but the 808 and 1209 are basically the same animal. Furthermore, I have been at this for a couple of weeks at least with the Barcos so I would expect my skills should be at least fair to decent. And I don't think focus is the issue anyway because of the visibility of scan lines is as expected.


I really think there is more to my observation than just setup.


----------



## RVonse

Graham, I agree completely.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
Tse, while I don't completely dissagree with you, I am the same person that set up all the projectors. So when it comes to setup I could be just a hack, but OTOH I was very successful stacking the same 808s I talked about above. They both were converged well and did not drift even at higher scan rates which AFIK no one else on this board has ever accomplished. So it could be possible that I can converge good but not the focus/dynamic astig part but then how do you explain the difference between the 1209 and 808's? The setup menues are nearly identical. Logically if I can't do one right I shouldn't be able to do the other. Right? The 800 is lacking with focus adj. but the 808 and 1209 are basically the same animal. Furthermore, I have been at this for a couple of weeks at least with the Barcos so I would expect my skills should be at least fair to decent. And I don't think focus is the issue anyway because of the visibility of scan lines is as expected.


I really think there is more to my observation than just setup.
Please excuse my ignorance of projectors other than Ampros or Marquees. I've never worked with brand "B". Sorry, I had to say that. Barco has been my nemisis from just about day one of my projector career. Hey, they wouldn't still be here if they didn't deserve it. What are you trying to say?


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
it. What are you trying to say?
That the RGB video chain is very important even though often overlooked. Also that many projectors (even the higher ended ones) are probably not performing up to original specifcations on the RGB amps. Possibly because of aging electrolytics.


And that up to a certain point spot size does little more for you unless you are bringing quality video to the cathodes.


----------



## VideoGrabber

RVonse commented:

> _Probably because spot size is easy to measure and bandwidth isn't I guess._


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
VDC has made many changes bringing the units up to 2048x1536 capability.
Is this a product of their re-design, or is this from the changes (mod) made to the 02 VIM, with the addition of the three variable caps and resistors?


----------



## fetz

Hi


If you want to see 1080p/60 HZ setup, go to http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer 

Go to / Marquee


look at the last 4 Pictures, named in German. There are measurements on the Screen made in cm so you can count the lines both ( horiz./ vertik)

"mitte" is important the other two werde made on the right lower side

The pictures are limited due to the digitalkamera. Its not easy to make photos from this


regards


Thomas


----------



## RoBro

I wonder how VDC makes those neckboards today. I think the MRF 548 and MRF 549 have been discontinued. Either they use different transistors now or they must have a huge stock on them...

Roland


----------



## fetz

Hi


They have much in Stock. .......... I asked them the same some weeks ago, cause these MRF are on the newest Neckboards too.


Thomas


----------



## cmjohnson

However, there is at least one new Marquee neck board being designed. I guess there

might be more than one, given that they bought the Sony 9" projection tube line. I figure

they have some definite purpose for buying that line.


BTW, VDC doesn't build most of their circuit boards in-house. They use a contract

manufacturer, and it's the same one that has built boards for them since the Electrohome

days, in Canada.


CJ


----------



## RoBro

hmm...

if they have enough of them in stock, then they might use them on the new desing also. i am not aware of any other available transistors that go so high in voltage and frequency as these.

MS Kennedy seems to have some better ones, but I do not know the type and maybe they are also just consuming up their stock.

Unfortunately all transistor manufacturers discontinued their high voltage high frequency transistor lines :-(

Roland


----------



## Graham Johnson

Those screen shots look just like my 1292 showing 1080x1920 !!


But you see my point about the bandwidth limitation here. The 1920 verticle lines are the tell tale part of the system.


They are always way less defined than the horizontal lines. This is due to the bandwidth being rolled off.


So those pics illustrate my point exactly.


When someone can show me verticle lines as well defined as horizontal ones them I will beleive the bandwidth bottle neck has been solved on that machine.


This is the main reason that the HD2K looks better on test patterns using the DVI input.


These verticle lines are very well defined. I will see if I can find Willaims screen shots of the G90 versus the HD2K and you will see what I mean.


----------



## Graham Johnson

OK here is what I am talking about.


1080p test pattern courtesy of Willaim Phelps.


The first is a G90. second is the JVC HD2K


Have a close look and see how well the 1080p horizintal lines are defined, Now you guys tell me where the vertical 1920 lines are ? Very poorly defined


Shame we cant get this test pattern cause it is close to the optimum test of how well your projector is set up.


This is where bandwidth limitations become apparent.

http://www.meier-phelps.com/temp/G90.041018-154946r.jpg 



This is a HD2K JVC

http://www.meier-phelps.com/temp/HD2...18-155917r.jpg


----------



## cmjohnson

Consider that the 2K has an intrinsic pixel structure. Either an individual pixel is on or

off at any given time, but no matter what, it can only be on or off. It will always look the

same, and its position will never change.


This is what I like to call a sharpness artifact. All fixed pixel displays have them.


I'm not going to say that there's necessarily anything WRONG with having fixed pixels,

but you must consider that the vertical lines are well defined but the reason for it is NOT

a matter of bandwidth or even pixel response time.



CJ


----------



## Graham Johnson

I agree CM , But the point of the post was not the HD2K but to point out the lack of easily definable verticle resolution due to bandwidth, compared to the horizontal resolution on a G90.


I put the HD2K there cause the photo looks cool.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
....definable verticle resolution due to bandwidth....
Case closed!


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
That the RGB video chain is very important even though often overlooked. Also that many projectors (even the higher ended ones) are probably not performing up to original specifcations on the RGB amps. Possibly because of aging electrolytics.


And that up to a certain point spot size does little more for you unless you are bringing quality video to the cathodes.


You are 100% right. If the projector can resolve the horizontal lines that shows the CRT and magnetics are capable of doing what they need to do. If the vertical lines are not there the video bandwidth isn't good enough.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
OK here is what I am talking about.


1080p test pattern courtesy of Willaim Phelps.


The first is a G90. second is the JVC HD2K
Graham, I'm not sure I understand what you put up. Are those 2 images supposed to be the same test pattern? I see the difference in vertical lines but how come the top one (G90?) has alternating white and black but the JVC does not. They don't even look like the same pattern to me.


BTW is this pattern available anywhere to put on our HTPC? I would like to give it a go on my 1209.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Is this a product of their re-design, or is this from the changes (mod) made to the 02 VIM, with the addition of the three variable caps and resistors?
The cap/resistor mod is about 90% of the improvement. Now, this is on the latest revision units. I don't know how it would work with older projectors. Tiny little change, huge improvement.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
Are those 2 images supposed to be the same test pattern.
After studying these pictures I think I get it now. They really are the same but its just that the G90 leaves out the verticals so terribly bad the patterns don't look the same.


Pretty dramatic demonstration to say the least. Thats what I call leaving out a serious amount of video information!


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
hmm...

if they have enough of them in stock, then they might use them on the new desing also. i am not aware of any other available transistors that go so high in voltage and frequency as these.

MS Kennedy seems to have some better ones, but I do not know the type and maybe they are also just consuming up their stock.

Unfortunately all transistor manufacturers discontinued their high voltage high frequency transistor lines :-(

Roland
Sanyo still makes the video output transistors, though they have been discontinuing some of them. The CRT monitor industry is shrinking so there is not the demand for these parts as there once was. This does make it harder and harder to continue making CRT projectors.


----------



## tse

Graham,


The HD2K is a LCOS projector? Pretty dramatic comparison. That does show the G90's lack of bandwidth. I'll try to post some pictures of Marquee performance with similar video format.


----------



## cmjohnson

What are the chances of someone posting that test pattern right here, so we can try it out on our own machines?


CJ


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
What are the chances of someone posting that test pattern right here, so we can try it out on our own machines?


CJ
A standard SMPTE test pattern will show the vertical and horizontal resolution. You can draw your own one pixel on, one pixel off as well as one line on, one line off test patterns with Windows paint program with the attributes set to whatever resolution that you want.


----------



## Chuchuf

Guys,


Looking at those test patterns I'm a bit confused. Within each of the boxes on the G90 pattern I don't even see the horizontal lines defined never mind the vertical lines. If this is a 1080 pattern (1920 x 1080) are we saying that the G90 cannot resolve the 1080 lines? That's hard to believe because I have patterns that are horizontal and vertical line (1920, 1080) and I can see the 1080 lines very clearly on a G90. I'll have to have another look at the 1920.


Terry


----------



## Clarence

I posted pixel on/off patterns a few months ago for Terry. (attached)


I could do it for vertical lines, too. I might also replicate the pattern above if no one else posts the original.

 

HD-pixel-lines.zip 17.271484375k . file


----------



## Clarence

Is this close to what the pattern is supposed to look like?

(I enlarged the pixels 6:1 to make it easier to see)

http://img69.echo.cx/img69/4517/testpatterntest5rx.gif 


Actually, that's a really close screenshot from my Marquee


----------



## Graham Johnson

I think there is a lot of issues with the digital camera as regards actually seeing the info in the G90 picture.


But you are ALL right.


Terry, It probably isnt quite as black and white (sic) as I would like. But there is actually a higher resolution horizontally than vertically.


What I was attempting to show is that projectors may be able of showing the 1080 lines with no issues. But the bandwidth will directly affect the ability of the projector to follow and input signal. Its not that obvious horizointally but it is vertically.


Vertically the projector has to modulate the brightness of the image within the line. The spot size in this case isnt that relavant but the ability to modulate the signal sharply (down to one pixel width) is. This is where the bandwidth comes into it and what the affect of inadequate bandwidth will be.


The HD2K doesnt need bandwidth if its using the DVI socket so the issues dont arise there. It is just shuffling Pixels.


Lastly I agree about the 1 Pixel capabilites of the G90. I think the reason it is not all that clear was that Willaim was drawing a comparision between the HD2K and the G90 not just the G90 alone. So wasnt optimizing the pciture to show the deficiencies within the G90 Picture but raather the contrast between the digital and the G90.


The digital/analogue comparision is pretty stark wouldnt you say?


I think a higher resolution photo of the G90 would illustrate this a bit better.


I have asked about getting this pattern but William will not issue it as it was developed under contract for a customer. I have sucked up heaps and it didnt do any good


----------



## Graham Johnson

Just a quick footnote after this last post.


See how the horizontal lines are much brighter than the verticle ones.


The reason is that the projector doesnt have to effectively modulate the horizontal line as it is writing the bright line across the screen. I think this is due to phospher persistance but I am not sure of that.


Now the verticle lines are much duller as the projector is trying to modulate the beam within the line and cant do it fast enough due to bandwidth problems.


This actually shows the amount of High frequency roll off that the projector has at 1080P.


The worse the projector the darker the verticle squares will be.


If that was 1080x1920 @50 hz bandwidth requirement is approx 195 mhz. I think you could draw a direct comparision between the brightness of the verticle line squares (compared to the horizontal line squares) and the amount of H.F. roll off the projector exhibits.


IS everyone understanding what I am trying to show ?


----------



## RoBro

When I look at Thomas' pics I get the impression that his Marquee is quite a bit sharper than the G90 that was used for that screen shot. (maybe its just like you supposed, Graham, that the G0 was not really tweaked for that resolution)

Also, isn't the G90's BW around 135MHz? If Thomas' Marquee is one of the newer ones with really 150MHz that could make a bit of a difference.

Would be interesting to see the pattern on your Marquee, Thomas.


The "I turn black-white into grey due to limited RGB bandwidth" effect is a very cool way to check the bandwidth limitation.

Roland


----------



## darinp2

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
See how the horizontal lines are much brighter than the verticle ones.


Now the verticle lines are much duller as the projector is trying to modulate the beam within the line and cant do it fast enough due to bandwidth problems.


...


IS everyone understanding what I am trying to show ?
That makes perfect sense to me. Sorry if this has been covered, but what I don't understand is why there are horizonal bright lines instead of gray bars above and below the horizontal bright white lines that are supposed to be there. In other words, if we think of the pattern as squares of horizontal lines interchanged with squares of vertical lines, the G90 seems to do well with the squares of vertical lines other than the white part being fairly dim. However, the squares of horizontal lines are way off and I'm not sure why. It doesn't look like anything like the transition time that causes the vertical white bars to be dimmer than the horizontal ones. Basically, if we go from left to right for one scanline, the G90 is showing something pretty bright where it should be transitioning only between black and gray, for the 3 lines above the horizontal white bars and the 3 lines below. Could it be related to the videocard?


--Darin


----------



## RoBro

Darin,

that is just what I meant with the cool method here.

If you have a pattern with alternating 0 and 128 (the one middle bar in each square is 255), then you will get a square wave with 0V and 0.35V limits neglecting the middle bar.

At the cathode this may be 90V and 20V square wave at low resolutions. As the frequency gets higher, the rise and falltimes get more involved and the cathode amplifier does not manage to ger up to 90 and down to 20V anymore, and the signal will look more like a triangle waveform from 70V to 40V. That will result in less defined lines in the first degree.

But as the voltage to current transfer function of the CRTs electron gun is not linear, but has a gamma of 2.2 to 2.6 so the average voltage of the 70-to-40V triangle and the 90-to-20V squarewave may be the same, but the average current of the 90-to-20V sqare wave is much higher.

That lets the horizontal line squares look brighter than the vertical ones.

This should be visible even when the tube is defocussed, and so this effect is only related to bandwidth and totally independent of spotsize.

Roland


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
Sanyo still makes the video output transistors, though they have been discontinuing some of them. The CRT monitor industry is shrinking so there is not the demand for these parts as there once was. This does make it harder and harder to continue making CRT projectors.
Do you know a website of them where one can see which of them they still offer?


Of cause, CRT industry is shrinking, and the newer electron guns require much less voltage swings, but MEMS and piezoelectric actuator industry is growing and they also need high voltages and high frequencies...

Roland


----------



## Mark_A_W

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Just a quick footnote after this last post.


See how the horizontal lines are much brighter than the verticle ones.


The reason is that the projector doesnt have to effectively modulate the horizontal line as it is writing the bright line across the screen. I think this is due to phospher persistance but I am not sure of that.


Now the verticle lines are much duller as the projector is trying to modulate the beam within the line and cant do it fast enough due to bandwidth problems.


This actually shows the amount of High frequency roll off that the projector has at 1080P.


The worse the projector the darker the verticle squares will be.


If that was 1080x1920 @50 hz bandwidth requirement is approx 195 mhz. I think you could draw a direct comparision between the brightness of the verticle line squares (compared to the horizontal line squares) and the amount of H.F. roll off the projector exhibits.


IS everyone understanding what I am trying to show ?
Why push it all the way to 1080p 50hz at 195mhz bandwidth? I've settled on 1920x1080 interlaced at 75hz as my res of choice - as far as I can tell it's 114mhz bandwidth.


My lowly 6PG Xtra shows a 1:1 alternating line test pattern at 1920x1080 (from the Mitsubishi Diamond test patterns) quite clearly in the centre of the screen. (Not the corners though).


Low scan rate, lower bandwidth, cooler projector, no flicker, more detail than 720p at 75hz. Perfect.


You welcome to come and look Graham. In fact JSP may be dropping in this weekend, you should come over too!


Mark


----------



## darinp2

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Darin,

that is just what I meant with the cool method here.

If you have a pattern with alternating 0 and 128 (the one middle bar in each square is 255), then you will get a square wave with 0V and 0.35V limits neglecting the middle bar.

At the cathode this may be 90V and 20V square wave at low resolutions. As the frequency gets higher, the rise and falltimes get more involved and the cathode amplifier does not manage to ger up to 90 and down to 20V anymore, and the signal will look more like a triangle waveform from 70V to 40V. That will result in less defined lines in the first degree.

But as the voltage to current transfer function of the CRTs electron gun is not linear, but has a gamma of 2.2 to 2.6 so the average voltage of the 70-to-40V triangle and the 90-to-20V squarewave may be the same, but the average current of the 90-to-20V sqare wave is much higher.

That lets the horizontal line squares look brighter than the vertical ones.

This should be visible even when the tube is defocussed, and so this effect is only related to bandwidth and totally independent of spotsize.
Thanks. I can see from this how the horizontal bars could be brighter than the vertical ones, but not why the horizontal gray bars would be much brighter with the G90 than with the HD2K, unless it is a compensation in the camera. The horizontal bars of gray and white just don't look that hard (given that their horizontal frequencies are pretty low). Smearing between 2 adjacent horizontal gray bars would make sense to me (basically not much black gap between them), but not being much brighter than they should be. Unless there is an overlap between consecutive scanlines or something like that.


I also hadn't realized that the gray bars were all the way up at 128 (or 50 IRE).


--Darin


----------



## RoBro

Darin,


maybe the contrast of the G90 was just higher than that of the HD2K.

Then all the pic would be brighter, but you would not recognize it because the bandwidth effect makes the vertical line squares dimmer.

Maybe also the camera compensated exposure time for having equal average brightness and so the hor ar brighter and the ver are dimmer...


128 was just an assumption. Could be 64 or 100 too. That would not change the nature of the effect.


Mark,

[email protected] will result in a pixel clock of 93MHz.

As I posted before, the resolution should not be degraded very much by the video amplifier if the 3dB bandwidth is equal to the pixel clock. With your 80MHz you are quite close to the 93MHz pixel clock (maybe you have reduced porch settings to get wider image on the phosphor without cranking up the horizontal width pot, what reduces your pixel clock even more). So you would not loose that much horizontal resolution.

However I doubt that a PGx can get a small enough spotsize to really resolve 1920x1080 on the phosphor. But I would definitely be interested in a close up (so the digicam is not the limiting factor) screenshot of the center screen with this pattern shown here recently. Maybe Clarence can send you a bmp file...


What kind of pulldown do you use with 75i? That must be a juddering image, isn't it?


I think if you have film based movies taken at 24Hz you must display it progressive to get rid of any interlacing artifacts (I think BjÃ¶rn Roy has a nice page that describes it).

It is not a problem if the broadcasters (or DVD producers) give us 1080i only, as you only have to weave the fields to get back the original result.

[email protected] or 48Hz would be waste of transponder bandwidth or DVD space, as every second pic would hold no new information.

[email protected] would be closer to the original as it would not have to be weaved bach, but then you would not be able to use the same stream for higher speed interlaced shot things like football, soccer, hockey. And of cause there are many sets (at least in US or Japan) that can display 1080i but would not go with 1080p.


If you really need [email protected], then you might be able to do that progressive with a Cine9/909, but even then you might be better off with 72Hz.

Roland


----------



## mp20748

I've mentioned this before (but some time ago). You can't take that test pattern comparison as the gospel, unless you've verified the accuracy of the source and cables. The lines bandwidth test would involve the WHOLE video chain, and the biggest breakdown in the chain would more likely be the cables, with the source being the secondary place for question.


If/when doing that test to evaluate a projector, a true high bandwidth generator with short (6' or less) very high bandwidth cables are a must. Williams source for that test pattern was a PC video card. And the only PC video card that I've seen that would have came close in properly handling 1080P with no pattern distortion, was the later model Nvidia cards. The Anti Aliasing circuits on most PC video cards will not allow them to properly pass the finer detail and resolution of a true 1080P pattern. The designer of the PC video cards did not have 1080P in mind. They were thinking more around FCC compliance and roll-off.


So unless the source and cables have been verified as being truly capable of properly handeling 1080P, that pattern is invalid. The lines bandwidth test requires a very seriously clean and non attenuated/rolled-off source at the BNC's of the projector, and a PC video card should never be used for that test.


A better first test would be an alternating pixel test pattern generated from an actual test generator itself. That same generator source should be verified at the BNC's of the projector with a scope. The cleanest of the verified signal on the BNC's will confirm the condition of all things from the source. An improperly crimped cable of mis-matched, or improper impedance connectors could also effect that perfect square wave that's needed at the BNC's, so *a scope must verify the integrety of the source signal at the BNC of the projector first*.


When all things are verified (source, cables, connectors), and when connected to a CRT projector that can truly handle that resolution (and I think the G90 would well). A clean 1080P signal should look much better than 720P and other lower resolutions... at least I've proven that it can.


----------



## RoBro

Full ack !


Woul be interesting to know if the HD2K was connected via DVI.

Roland


----------



## Mark_A_W

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Mark,

[email protected] will result in a pixel clock of 93MHz.

As I posted before, the resolution should not be degraded very much by the video amplifier if the 3dB bandwidth is equal to the pixel clock. With your 80MHz you are quite close to the 93MHz pixel clock (maybe you have reduced porch settings to get wider image on the phosphor without cranking up the horizontal width pot, what reduces your pixel clock even more). So you would not loose that much horizontal resolution.

However I doubt that a PGx can get a small enough spotsize to really resolve 1920x1080 on the phosphor. But I would definitely be interested in a close up (so the digicam is not the limiting factor) screenshot of the center screen with this pattern shown here recently. Maybe Clarence can send you a bmp file...


What kind of pulldown do you use with 75i? That must be a juddering image, isn't it?


I think if you have film based movies taken at 24Hz you must display it progressive to get rid of any interlacing artifacts (I think BjÃ¶rn Roy has a nice page that describes it).

It is not a problem if the broadcasters (or DVD producers) give us 1080i only, as you only have to weave the fields to get back the original result.

[email protected] or 48Hz would be waste of transponder bandwidth or DVD space, as every second pic would hold no new information.

[email protected] would be closer to the original as it would not have to be weaved bach, but then you would not be able to use the same stream for higher speed interlaced shot things like football, soccer, hockey. And of cause there are many sets (at least in US or Japan) that can display 1080i but would not go with 1080p.


If you really need [email protected], then you might be able to do that progressive with a Cine9/909, but even then you might be better off with 72Hz.

Roland


Roland, the 75 (or 72) hz interlaced image does not cause any judder. The PC seems to treat it the same way as a progressive 75/72hz resolution. In fact I think it's deinterlacing anyway, and then the video card is reinterlacing - not carrying it through unmolested. Think of it as a progressive res which just happens to be re-interlaced at the last step.


I use 1080i 71.928hz for NTSC and 75hz for PAL with reclock - there is no judder. Reclock sees it as a 72 or 75hz resolution and works properly.


I do not believe there is a bandwidth difference between the 6pg/9pg Xtra's - everything in the video path is the same. It uses the same VPA13 video amp as all the XG's do as well. This puts it in the 100mhz or higher range, assuming the video amp is the limiting factor. (Does the XG 135 with the 150mhz bandwidth rating have a different video amp??).


I have no doubt that the spot size is not quite small enough - but it's having a decent stab at it. With my Xtra I can see scanlines at 720p 75hz from 3m away. You can just make them out at 816p~824p close to the screen.

My porches are tweaked and my raster usage is aggressive. Many hours have gone into my Astig - but there is still room for improvement.


I will take a photo of the 1:1 test pattern close up, next time I run the PJ - and I'll PM Clarence for that Bitmap. (Not tonight I'm knackered).


Try it for yourself, here are the timings:


75hz


1920,56,128,112,1080,4,10,30,93405,286




71.928ish hz


1920,56,128,112,1080,4,10,30,89666,286



There is no flicker like 48/50hz progressive, or worse 50hz interlaced. Test patterns shimmer a bit as it's interlaced, but video is fantastic.


Mark


----------



## darinp2

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
So unless the source and cables have been verified as being truly capable of properly handeling 1080P, that pattern is invalid.
While I agree with what you are saying as far as testing what the G90 (or a different projector) can do, if a person's question is what they will get (or are likely to get) in their theater then full system tests are valid IMO, as long as the parameters are spelled out. In other words, if just grabbing a regular DVI cable off the shelf and plugging it into a projector that accepts DVI gives one thing, but to get the same thing with a projector that doesn't take DVI requires flying somebody in for system tests and putting all components within 6' of the projector, then this is relevant information to somebody making a purchasing decision. And that is true whether the projector by itself could handle a certain thing or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Would be interesting to know if the HD2K was connected via DVI.
The HD2K projector itself only has a DVI input and accepts only 1080p60 and 1080p50. That is it. So, yes it was connected over DVI. This is one reason I asked if it was the video card. It would be interesting to try this with one of the latest video cards to the G90 and see if the results would be the same. If it would be better, then people would then know they could go that direction for better results with this one (whether they are really visible when watching video is another question though).


Another way to try this would be to connect a Sony Qualia with the same connection as the G90 got and check the results. I think the Qualia should respond pretty much the same as the HD2K and does have inputs for both RGB and DVI.


--Darin


----------



## Chuchuf

If someone is capable of making a copy of that test pattern (I don't have the ability) I could test on a G90 with the latest NVidia card as well as with the DVI input on the G90.


Terry


----------



## VideoGrabber

Graham wrote:

> _1080p test pattern courtesy of Willaim Phelps. The first is a G90. second is the JVC HD2K_


----------



## VideoGrabber

Whoops! Didn't notice there was another whole page of discussion.  Mike already made the point well about the importance of the source, and the fact that the D/A conversion performed there could/would make drawing conclusions from this comparison on the G90 unreliable. And Darin has already confirmed it was DVI to the JVC. The simple fact is that it's not only possible, but likely, that what we're seeing in that test pattern is more a result of limitations in the video card than the G90.


I.e., tse's comment (for example) that "That does show the G90's lack of bandwidth." is unfounded.


- Tim


----------



## Semisentient

You know guys, it's OK if the G90 doesn't win over the JVC digital when it comes to displaying that test pattern, 'cause it will win when it comes to displaying movies.


----------



## VideoGrabber

CJ suggested:

> _What are the chances of someone posting that test pattern right here, so we can try it out on our own machines?_


----------



## VideoGrabber

Semi,


I don't care which one wins, just that the *same* signal is sent to both. The problem is that no conclusion can be drawn about the capability of the G90, because elements in the signal chain differ.


Real-world example. A co-worker picked up a Sony W900 monitor a while back, based on my recommendation (and having seen mine). This is a 24" widescreen CRT monitor (16:10) that can display 1920x1200p at 75 Hz. After he got it, he was somewhat disappointed, and complained that his wasn't nearly as sharp as mine, and he couldn't get anything beyond 1600 wide to look anything but muddy. Even his 1600 looked worse than my 1920. He was sure he just got unlucky with his unit, that simply couldn't be focused as well.


I asked what kind of video card he was driving it with, and it turned out to be a decent, older-generation ATI card (known for fairly heavy filtering on the outputs). I suggested he pick up one of the more recent NVIDIA cards, and he reported back (with a "wow") that the full 1920 resolution now really popped. He had no idea a video card could make that much difference.


Of course, he'd never had a display big enough to drive much beyond 1280 wide before, to expose his card's limitations. Who knew? He's extremely pleased now, with both card and display.


- Tim


----------



## VideoGrabber

Terry asked:

> _If someone is capable of making a copy of that test pattern..._


----------



## cmjohnson

Videograbber, funny you should mention that, because I'm running my 20" Sony monitor

at 1920x1200 at this very moment. That's WELL beyond what you're "supposed" to run

on it, but I'm doing it anyway, and as long as I stick to 60 Hz, it'll go this high...and a bit

higher than that still. This is a Sony GDM20E20, badged for Sun Microsystems, being

used with a VGA adapter and driven by the original video card that came in this Dell P4-2GHz

computer I use. It's an NVidia GeForce MX420. A very basic card by modern standards,

but the card is capable of some pretty amazing resolutions, well beyond what this monitor

will support.


A nice feature of the Nvidia softare is that it allows you to create arbitrary resolutions, so

I've been able to explore the absolute limits of this monitor pretty thoroughly.


BTW, even at 1920x1200, I'd say that readability of this forum is very good.


The limitation on this monitor is mostly on its vertical resolution. 1200 is very nearly the

limit of what it will lock up on.


CJ


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Videograbber, funny you should mention that, because I'm running my 20" Sony monitor

at 1920x1200 at this very moment. That's WELL beyond what you're "supposed" to run

on it, but I'm doing it anyway, and as long as I stick to 60 Hz, it'll go this high...and a bit

higher than that still. This is a Sony GDM20E20, badged for Sun Microsystems, being

used with a VGA adapter and driven by the original video card that came in this Dell P4-2GHz

computer I use. It's an NVidia GeForce MX420. A very basic card by modern standards,

but the card is capable of some pretty amazing resolutions, well beyond what this monitor

will support.


A nice feature of the Nvidia softare is that it allows you to create arbitrary resolutions, so

I've been able to explore the absolute limits of this monitor pretty thoroughly.


BTW, even at 1920x1200, I'd say that readability of this forum is very good.


The limitation on this monitor is mostly on its vertical resolution. 1200 is very nearly the

limit of what it will lock up on.


CJ
FYI. 1920 x 1200 @ 60Hz is about 74.2KHz horizontal scan rate, 60Hz scan rate, 178MHz pixel clock, 5.61nS pixel time. Compare to 2048 x 1536 @ 60Hz. 95KHz horizontal scan rate, 60Hz scan rate, 243MHz pixel clock, 2.06nS pixel time,


----------



## VideoGrabber

A couple observations after carefully comparing Clarence's quick pattern vs. what I could make out from a blowup of the HD2K:


a) Clarence's blocks tend to dovetail too much, probably due to (b)


b) there seems to be more than a single scan line between neighboring blocks, while Clarence's are a bit too "tight"


c) some of the (lite) horizontal lines almost seem pixelated, as if some of the pixels are off. Perhaps this is just an artifact of the JVC, but not all of the horizontal segments seem solid.


[Nope. After more examination, I'd guess it's an artifact from the digicam used to make the shots. The G90 shots, being more diffuse, have almost a "waffled" or lattice look to them, kind of like a shadow mask on a direct-view CRT.]


Ah ha!? Were these shots done on a perf'ed screen?


You'll want closer than full-screen shots, in any event, to minimize the impact of the capture device (digicam) on the process, just as eyeball observations will probably require moving closer to the screen.


- Tim


----------



## Graham Johnson

Wow !! go away for a day and look what I have missed !! 


In answer to a few questions. The HD2K was DVI in according to Willaim.


The video card he was using was a Radion with output filter bypass mods similar to the MP-1.


The cable to the projector from memory was 8 to 10 metres of RG6. The DVI was the same length.


Now to my comments about MP observations.


I sort of agree with you. But you have to realise this is relistiaclly waht a typical person is going to have in their home in terms of setup. So I think the G90 comparision is relevant. This represents the entire video chain to the projector.


Now video grabbers comments about using the same input signal for both projectors. Well I dont think this is correct. We should be using the highest possible quality source the machine should be able to accept.


If that's DVI for the G90 thats fine with me. But it wont will it. The best test available solution for the G90 is 1 metre RG6 cables, and the best solution for the HD2K is DVI.


If I was an owner of either I would use the best possible interconnect method I could.


I can guarrantee you that the IFB-12 isnt a limitation on the video signal. Its bandwidth is over 300Mhz. So even with a DVI input card the bottle neck will still be there within the projector.


Therefore the test is relevant.


Can I just bring you back to the point of my post, Its not the comparision between the HD2K and the G90.


Its just the ability to display high bandwidth signals on the G90.


Now what would be a great comparision would be the Cine 9 vs the G90 on that test pattern. To see what the difference in the roll off characteristics are, and if the bandwidth can be quantified with the brightness issue from verticle to horizontal blocks.


If it can, this would be a useful tool for tracking down bandwidth traps in your system.


Lastly, Mark After you got stuck into me a while off about trying 1080i at 75 hz. I did a month or so ago. Well I didnt like it ! It just wasnt good enough on my system. 1080P still looked very much better even if the 1292 was rolling off the high end response a bit.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Oh did I say how much I am enjoying this thread now ??


This is what the forum should be about. It was getting a bit dull of late.


----------



## darinp2

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
So even with a DVI input card the bottle neck will still be there within the projector.
Yep. Since there is no Sony DVI card for the G90 then feeding it with DVI (as would be required to have the 2 get the same signal) still leaves open the possibility that the add-on DVI card used for the G90 is a bottleneck. Of course, if the test pattern then looks like the HD2K one, then it answers the question about what the G90 can do. But if it looks like it does now then I don't think it completely narrows it down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Now video grabbers comments about using the same input signal for both projectors. Well I dont think this is correct. We should be using the highest possible quality source the machine should be able to accept.
I agree if the goal is to see what is possible. For information that is posted here the highest possible quality source and common sources (based on cost) are relevant IMO. This whole argument that two projectors have to have the same exact source paths to compare them reminds me of when I was basically blamed for cheating by bringing a $200 DVD player to go against a mighty PC (which everybody was happy to let run refresh rates to the CRT that the digital couldn't accept) because the Momitsu had a DVI output that I used. I still think that one is funny since the whole goal seemed to be to not show a competing projector as it is meant to be used (and is likely to be used in real HTs). Almost as funny as when people complained that a Qualia and a CRT would have to get the same exact signal to do any comparisons between them, until I pointed out that this was handicapping the CRT instead of the Qualia since it meant the CRT could not get a 1080p60 signal, but would have to accept 1080i (which the Qualia would then properly deinterlace and display as 1080p) or 720p (which the Qualia would upscale to 1080p). Interesting how fast things changed after I pointed out that what people thought would hinder the digital would actually hinder the CRT more. 


--Darin


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *darinp2*
if the test pattern then looks like the HD2K one, then it answers the question about what the G90 can do. But if it looks like it does now then I don't think it completely narrows it down.



--Darin
I think this is spot on ! IMHO we would find that regardless of the input card used. The limitations of the internal signal path of the G90 would lead the image to be basically the same (or maybe slightly better) as the test picture above.


But the fundamental limitation would be the same.


Just for the record, I think the basic bandwidth bottle neck in almost all the top 9 inch projectors is actually on the neck board and lie's with the deflection amps and transistors used. The DV/DT of the parts is just not good enough for that high a frequency and the large drive voltages it needs to swing for the tube drive.


In the case of the 1292 it is the VPH15a IC's used in the neck boards. Which unfortunately would have to have an entire board redesign to fix it.


Does anyone know what method and parts is used in the Cine9?


I want to charge someone with a G90 with spending his hard earned cash and buying a Sony DVI input card from one of the Europeans to try this out for us.


Can someone ask on "outofsync forum " which one ATM is best?


----------



## Mark_A_W

Now try 1080i at 100hz Graham 


You might find flicker reduced compared to 50z progressive.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Wow !! go away for a day and look what I have missed !! 

The video card he was using was a Radion with output filter bypass mods similar to the MP-1.
I'm aware of the video card that william was using, with or without the filters. It'll never properly handle 1920x1080P.


Quote:

Now to my comments about MP observations.


I sort of agree with you. But you have to realise this is relistiaclly waht a typical person is going to have in their home in terms of setup. So I think the G90 comparision is relevant. This represents the entire video chain to the projector.
What?? The test was supposed to show how well the G90 would handle a particular 1080P test pattern. Not how poorly the G90 would look because of what you might find in an average HT system. If that was thew case, a fair comarison should have indicated that a typical HT system would not likely pass the bandwidth necessary for proper display of such pattern on the G90, therefore a fair comparison is not possible... unlesss...


Quote:

Now video grabbers comments about using the same input signal for both projectors. Well I dont think this is correct. We should be using the highest possible quality source the machine should be able to accept
Actually, that is correct, and based on the rules for fair comparison, they both MUST use the same source.


Quote:

...The best test available solution for the G90 is 1 metre RG6 cables, and the best solution for the HD2K is DVI
The best test for a G90 is the correct signal at the BNC of the projector. How you get it there, or what you use is secondary. The most important thing is that for 1920x1080P, it must be verified at the BNC's.


Quote:

It's just the ability to display high bandwidth signals on the G90
Exactly, but you'll need the right stuff for this.


----------



## darinp2

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Actually, that is correct, and based on the rules for fair comparison, they both MUST use the same source.

...

The best test for a G90 is the correct signal at the BNC of the projector.
The HD2K only has DVI, so this is basically the same as saying that no comparison can be done. In other words, they cannot get the same source unless the G90 uses a DVI card and since there is no stock DVI card, the projectors can't get the same source (a non-stock DVI card isn't part of a G90 even if it plugs in, IMO).


--Darin


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
What?? The test was supposed to show how well the G90 would handle a particular 1080P test pattern. Not how poorly the G90 would look because of what you might find in an average HT system. If that was thew case, a fair comarison should have indicated that a typical HT system would not likely pass the bandwidth necessary for proper display of such pattern on the G90, therefore a fair comparison is not possible... unlesss...


OK, Mike lets refocus this thread a bit.


The purpose of posting the test pattern was not to compare the HD2K to the G90. It was to show how the bandwidth limitations of the G90 would impact on the displayed picture.


Lets forget about the HD2K !!


Even with a video card that will pass the full bandwidth of 1080p without distortion or colouration.


I pose that the G90 will still display a picture not unlike the one that I posted due to bandwidth limitations.


Does anyone want to discuss this and possibly back it up with some pictures or samples?


You didnt reply to the comments about the video amps in the machines Mike !


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Not how poorly the G90 would look because of what you might find in an average HT system.
Hmmmm, I think William Phelps may have something to say about his projector setups being average or his home theatre being average Mike.


I recon you are balancing on a pretty loose tight rope there!


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *darinp2*
The HD2K only has DVI, so this is basically the same as saying that no comparison can be done. In other words, they cannot get the same source unless the G90 uses a DVI card and since there is no stock DVI card, the projectors can't get the same source (a non-stock DVI card isn't part of a G90 even if it plugs in, IMO).


--Darin
This is getting a bit off the track but.


I beleive Darin is correct here. The best possible delivery system that the machine can use should be used in any comparision. That is exactly what the owners of any of these machines if they can afford them would do.


If you can afford the best, you dont for wank value say "and look how good the pciture is and I am only using RGBHV ! " if it will look even better with DVI.


If I had the money to buy a HD2K. There is no way known I would use RGBHV even if it could accept it. You would be crazy. 1080p DVI pixel matched would be the only way to go.


Any digital/ CRT comparision should include the best delivery system for the machine. (meaning cables or input options) That is what the Hi End end user will buy. THE BEST.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Hmmmm, I think William Phelps may have something to say about his projector setups being average or his home theatre being average Mike.


Well look at your comment here:

Quote:

But you have to realise this is relistiaclly waht a typical person is going to have in their home in terms of setup. So I think the G90 comparision is relevant. This represents the entire video chain to the projector
I consider WilliamPhelps to be a friend, though i've never met him, we have spent many hours chatting by phone and email, so I'm not saying any thing against William himself, or his capabilities. However, I'm adamently disagreeing with the source used for that picture. And to simply say that we're using a high end professional grade CRT projector in a HT system (that it was not designed for), and using 'substandard sources' is "typical" of what one should expect, in an average HT system - this is what I'm disagreeing with, and it's not fair.


----------



## Graham Johnson

I understand where you are coming from. Don't for a moment think I am having a go at you at all Mike ! or being picky for that matter


I dont think there is such a thing as a G90 in anything but a high end system. So typical for a G90 usually means using the highest quality components possible.


Anyone with a G90 isnt going to use crap leads, source equipment or video material. So I think "Typical" applies here, dont you ?


I accept what you say about the source being not optimized. But as I said. I still beleive the results with a MP modded Nvidia card passing 100% of the bandwidth are going to be similar on the screen to what we can see in the pictures.


And that the G90 (and all other 9 inch projectors except maybe the Cine 9) have inherant issues with bandwidth that will manifest themselves in that test pattern in a similar fashion.


I am happy to revise that belief if you can prove me wrong !


----------



## RoBro

I agree that you MUST deliver an absolute perfect signal to the BNCs of the G90 to actually test its performance. Even if there would be no video card in the world that could produce such signals that would be no excuse. So if you have no video card you must take an appropriate testpattern generator (I owned a pulse generator with 50ps risetime once, so do not say this would not be possible).

The risetime of the source must be equal or shorter than 1/3 the risetime of the device under test to get the results good to some extent.

Maybe those "illegal" DVI to VGA converters can deliver an appropriate signal.


Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
OK, Mike lets refocus this thread a bit.


The purpose of posting the test pattern was not to compare the HD2K to the G90. *It was to show how the bandwidth limitations of the G90 would impact on the displayed picture*
How can you show the bandwidth limitations of something without putting the proper bandwidth in that same something.. 


Or should we continue to assume that all is well at the BNC's?


Quote:

Lets forget about the HD2K !!
Excellent idea, and while we're at it, can we also STOP all discussions on CRT vs Digital?


Quote:

Even with a video card that will pass the full bandwidth of 1080p without distortion or colouration.


I pose that the G90 will still display a picture not unlike the one that I posted due to bandwidth limitations
You keep missing the point here. You can't just simply say that the G90 has bandwidth limitations without confirming it. I can't look at a circuit and say it does not have a full five volts on its five volt rail without a method of test to confrim MY assumptions.


We don't guess, assume or speculate with electronic circuit performance, we use equipment for that. And we must use the proper method of testing to confirm our findings.

Quote:

Does anyone want to discuss this and possibly back it up with some pictures or samples?


Terry asked for the test pattern. maybe he plans to follow up on this.


Quote:

You didnt reply to the comments about the video amps in the machines Mike !
Ok, maybe I missed the essence of your question, but If a may take a stab at it, here goes:


1920x1080P is not an easy resoltion for a CRT projector. However there are several CRT projectors manufactured, that does have the bandwidth capability built into the video chain of it's projector.


The G90 definitely has the neck board for the bandwidth, and you yourself indicated that the most difficult section of the projector is the neck board, well, the G90 is using very capable 1920x1080p neck boards. this can be confirmed by the chips bing used there (VPJ15's).


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
And that the G90 (and all other 9 inch projectors except maybe the Cine 9) have inherant issues with bandwidth that will manifest themselves in that test pattern in a similar fashion.


I am happy to revise that belief if you can prove me wrong !
Cool, I wish you were at my last HT gathering, because this was proved there, and we used a similar test pattern in AVIA Pro (focus pattern), and I installed my Super VIM into Phil's Marquee 9500LC, and the results from just changing out a regular modded VIM to my super VIM, was immediately noticed by all there. But when we ran the projector through its test, it did everything exceptionally well, and it was all backed up, with the FACT that it produced 1080P sharper and clearer than 1080I and 720P. And it did all that without me putting in the specially modded neck boards.


You'll find that the biggest problem with properly producing 1920x1080P is not in the projector, but it's in the source. Until recently, nothing would actually produce a 1920x1080P signal clean enough to make a qualified CRT projector sing the praise of 1920x1080P. The manufacturers made it happen with very expensive well made generators, while we've been trying to do the same thing with $50.00 video cards, and video processors that's using $5.00 off the shelf chips.


----------



## RoBro

The VPJ15 has a bandwidth of 150MHz, so even if the preceding amps decrease the overall bandwidth a bit I think we can believe that the 135MHz sony specifies are true.

The cathode amplifiers on the Cine9 neckboards are very special ones. They are by far the most superior hig-speed high-voltage amplifiers I have ever came across. They combine very high voltage (200V), very high bandwidth (180MHz) and very high cascode load impedance (around 1kohm). Unfortunately Barco does not name these amps in their documents and you would not want to hear the price Barco requests for a single replacement amp.

Roland

P.S.:

The screenshots of Thomas' Marquee look MUCH sharper than the G90 screenshots look like, so there must be a source that can deliver a good signal to the PJ. I don't think the G90 would be much softer than the Marquee...


----------



## Graham Johnson

Hmmmm, I would love to see the William Phelps Test pattern in that comparision guys.


It is the only one I have seen that truly lets you compare the horizontal resolution with the verticle resolution on the same screen. This is where direct comparisions on Bandwidth can be drawn.


As I said earlier 1080P horizontal resolution seems way easier to acheive than the 1920 vertical resolution.


This is the demo I would like to see Mike. Looking sharper isn't always enough. This pattern defines res in both directions for comparision.


Do you have a sample of the AVIA test pattern you used in your demo?


----------



## Deja Vu

In the real world what does the G90 look like displaying 1080P? Has anyone done a direct side by side comparison between it and one of the 1080P digitals with actual video material? Test equipment may show a difference and that may be the truth for some, however, if I can't see the difference with actual video material is there some reason I should care? Too many times I have seen equipment with better specs and the price to go with it, but can't see or hear an actual real world improvement.


I think Art might have some experience with the above.


Cheers,


Grant


----------



## VideoGrabber

Grant asked:

> _Test equipment may show a difference and that may be the truth for some, however, if I can't see the difference with actual video material is there some reason I should care?_ _As I said earlier 1080P horizontal resolution seems way easier to acheive than the 1920 vertical resolution._


----------



## Graham Johnson

That holds true if you are referring to the direction of the scan.


I am referring to the direction of the the position of dots drawn on the corresponding horizontal scan lines.


The dots on corresponding lines are placed to resolve a vertical image line.


Everyone else knew what I was talking about. There was no confusion


Stop being picky and get with the program. We all know there are 1080 individual lines drawn and 1920 apparent verticle image lines drawn.


----------



## fetz

Hi


If you want to compare Projectors with these images i want to say the following for clearing up


normally i watch PAL DVDs scaled to 1152p with a good scaler. For this Testimage with the Horizontal/vertical Lines i have setup a PC to the CRT just for looking this pattern


It was a five minutes setup with a normal PC with sappihre Radeon 9600 and a cheap VGA 5x BNC cable from a TFT monitor. There is absolutly nothing expensive or tweaked.


Even The E-astig and E-Fokus isnt done........


I was happy seeing it can display 1920 x 1080 in this way.


regards


Thomas


----------



## RoBro

Could anyone generate such a pattern for Terry, so he can post a CLOSE-UP screenshot (or better two, one from the center and one from the corner) here?

I would do, but I seem to have no program that can read Clarences PNG tile.

Roland

P.S.:

Most of us would say that a 1920x1080 picture has a vertical resolution of 1080 and a horizontal resolution of 1920. Of course you test the horizontal resolution with vertical stripes and the vertical resolution with horizontal lines.

Yes, everyone knew what you were talking about, Graham, but just because we CRTers are very smart guys


----------



## RoBro

Thomas,

could you test your Marquee with the test pattern recently posted here? The mixture of squares with horizontal and vertical lines is a very good pattern to check the bandwidth of the video amplifiers as the difference in the brighness of the squares shows that regardless of the spotsize. Try defocussing the spot and you will still see the bandwidth limitation, even if the spotsize is so big that you can not see the linestructure anymore.

Should be cool to watch the squares with the vertical stripes getting darker as you increase the vertical refresh frequency in powerstrip.

Roland


----------



## Chuchuf

Yes if someone can get me the test pattern, I will test om my machine, NVidia 6600GT, G90 stock tubes, as well as on another G90 that goes out this week that has new MEC tubes. I'll try and take pictures. I can also test with DVI out of the 6600GT and into the G90.

I looked at the test pattern this morning but don't have a clue how to take that Tim did and create a full test pattern. Clarance?? If you get it donw, email it to me at [email protected] 


Terry


----------



## RoBro

Hi,

I made a bitmap tile so everyone can use this as a windows background.

BMP is uncompressed so the blacks are really black and the whites are really white. I made the stripes of 0 and 255. without the more pronounced middle stripe and without the black gap between the semistripes. Try this with different resolutions and different refresh rates. If you defocus the PJ or monitor, or watch it with narrow eyes, you can clearly see the effect. Start with 800x600 with 50Hz and you will see that the squares have the same brightness...

Roland


----------



## RoBro

Terry, you know how to fill your screen with that pattern using the windows desktop background?

Roland


----------



## Graham Johnson

$hit it works too !!! 


thanks Roland


----------



## VideoGrabber

Graham wrote:

> _Now video grabbers comments about using the same input signal for both projectors. Well I dont think this is correct._


----------



## VideoGrabber

Graham wrote:

> _Everyone else knew what I was talking about. Stop being picky and get with the program._


----------



## VideoGrabber

Graham wrote:

> _$hit it works too !!! thanks Roland_ 
_The best way to do this is to create a single quad (a 2x2 configuration) similar to what Clarence has already done, and save it as a lossless GIF or PNG. Then using the Windows desktop tiling function, fill the whole screen with it. The advantage is that you can then use the same pattern at 800x600 all the way up to 1920x1080, or whatever AR/size you like. This could be done at several intensity levels._


----------



## Art Sonneborn

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Deja Vu*
In the real world what does the G90 look like displaying 1080P? Has anyone done a direct side by side comparison between it and one of the 1080P digitals with actual video material? Test equipment may show a difference and that may be the truth for some, however, if I can't see the difference with actual video material is there some reason I should care? Too many times I have seen equipment with better specs and the price to go with it, but can't see or hear an actual real world improvement.


I think Art might have some experience with the above.


Cheers,


Grant
Yes I have. My experience with DVHS material through the JVC 5U in both my set up and Jeff's via HDMI into his Qualia 004 and it's internal processing and mine with magalink RGB cables and a Faroudja 5000 show a slightly sharper looking image in animation ( Shrek in HD).This was evidenced in a few specific things I saw right off. One was the cracks in the ash around the foot of Fiona's castle. With my set up they are there but looked gray while the Qualia they had dark black centers and gray edges( almost like another layer of resolution). I was sitting about one screen width back for both.


I have been told by Mike that my distribution amp, however, is deficient as at least one bottle neck. I certainly hope as we go forward with HD optical and I switch out some things Mike can get me to another level.


Art






As Mike has told me


----------



## Chuchuf

Tim,

Duh, I wasn't thinking. I'll try it later today.


Terry


----------



## Graham Johnson

Well in answer to the lengthy statements in question. 


The good thing about opinions is that everyone can have one. The best bit is that you can change you're own whenever you wish.


I did in fact leave the door open for mine to be changed pending evidence. Now I have provided what you guys may call unsubstanciated evdience based using a test I beleive will be relevant as a method of determining effective bandwidth.


I beleive that it largely will still be what we will see even if providing a suitable Laboratory test signal on the G90.


If you disagree really thats fine.


Prove it !!!!!!! Till there is evidence to the contary. You basically have to accept my opinion is mine.


Just remember at the end of the day. The specs of the G90 support what I am saying ! 


What we are talking about here is degree. It may not be quite as bad as the picture I posted. But I can guarrantee you it will still be there but maybe not as pronounced.


So what are you trying to say ????????????????? (are you really trying to say the G90 will not have this bandwidth limitation and the pattern will be evenly illuminated?)


Back it up with evidence !!!!!!!! (show me this pattern with the verticle and horizontal light output the same)


Then come back to us with the proof !!!!!!!!! (Display the picture here)


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *VideoGrabber*
Hey! What am I? Chopped liver? 

- Tim
You proposed it, Roland delivered it !


----------



## Graham Johnson

Just one last comment (and not a snide one at that)


What I was trying to bring to all your attention here was (as far as I know) the only valid test of the bandwidth of your video chain without getting all technical and trying to test this with test equipment.


Now correct me if I am wrong but no-one here has ever before been able to exhibit this on a system. (or at least picked up on the test pattern and what it means)


If you accept this as a valid test. Then I have acheived what I ment to do by posting the picture.


This was not so much about the G90 at all. (it just happened that the picture was from a G90) It is about displaying the available bandwidth of a system in a way that is comparative without resorting to test equipment.


You guys where all too worried about spot size ( which is largely irrelevant until the spot size causes overlap at 1080p) and not about what really mattered. Bandwidth !!


If the effect of reduced bandwidth has now been brought out on big bold patterns ( LOL) and you can see it clearly. Then I have accomplished what I set out to do by bringing it up !


----------



## ygoh

Graham,


So how many % improvement do you think we can achieve by improving on the source video board, cable, etc that is fed to the G90 ?


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Graham,


So how many % improvement do you think we can achieve by improving on the source video board, cable, etc that is fed to the G90 ?


Wouldnt it depend on how bad (or good) it is at the start ?? God only knows !!


You can only make it as good as you possibly can by having the fewest interventions of equipment and the best quality parts and products everywhere.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Then come back to us with the proof !!!!!!!!! (Display the picture here)
Amen.


I will try this tonight when I get home for comparisons between Barcos and a Marquee and take some closeup pics. It should be interesting because I am going to use my laptop which shows the pattern perfect on its panel screen to begin with.


I do not know what the neck board looks like in the Barco 800, but the neck board in the 1209 looks much bigger and is completely covered with a big metal case. Much better constructed than the neck boards in the 808 or Marquee that I saw.


----------



## Chuchuf

I took both Clarances Torture test and the other pattern developed by Tim? and just tried them on my G90 setting them as the desktop that filled the entire screen tiled. A word about he G90. Mid week last week I reset the unit and only did the focus, geometry and convergence on my 1080P 60 hz HD setup. The G90 is pretty good about translating that to other memories like my 1440 x 960 72hz and 1920 x 1080P 72 hz setup, but it always requires that you tighten up focus, geometry and convergence for the other memories. I haven't done anything except for RGB shift and RGB size for the HTPC setups.

What I saw when I put up the patterns were they were both very viewable (you had to get pretty close for 1920 x 1080P to see it. All of the vertical and horizontal lines were all decernable at both resolutions and looked nothing like the dots that were posted in Williams pictures of G90 with his pattern. I looked closely with my glasses on and cannot see any dots at all.

I'd say that the G90 has no problems at all displaying those test patterns.

Later this week when I figure out how to take a picture of this (I am not a camera person at all) and have done the focus and convergence of the G90 I will display them.


Terry


----------



## tse

Posted by Graham Johnson:


"Just for the record, I think the basic bandwidth bottle neck in almost all the top 9 inch projectors is actually on the neck board and lie's with the deflection amps and transistors used. The DV/DT of the parts is just not good enough for that high a frequency and the large drive voltages it needs to swing for the tube drive"


So right you are. If you consider that the CRTs need 100V or more of drive to make enough light and the pixels are very narrow, like 4.1nS with [email protected] the amplifier has to charge (or discharge) the typically 10pF of capacitance between cathode and G-1 in 1/3 of the pixel time. Break out the very basic formula C* dv/dt = i and you get: 10pF * 100V/1.37nS = 730mA. Almost an Amp of currrent to charge (or discharge) The K to G-1 capacitance. Ok, doesn't sound too bad but add in the capacitance of the amplifier transistors, if they have more than a few pF they add significantly more current to the load. State of the art transistors just aren't available to conduct high currents while maintaining very low capacitance. The CRT drivers are very challenging to design.


----------



## cmjohnson

Uh, the deflection amps aren't on the neck boards. In its simplest definition, the neck board's

primary function is to modulate beam current via means of powerful, very fast responding

amplifiers, and to provide support functions for the tube as well. Heater, cathode, grid 1,

grid 2.



It amazes me that in this day and age, it's tough to get RF power transistors that are

well suited to CRT drive applications. More radio systems are in operation now than

at any time in history, and over a much broader range of frequencies.


CJ


----------



## RoBro

Unfortunately most of the power radio stuff is made with amplifiers that use resonant circuits as their load resistance, so you can tune away the capacitance. But such amps can only be used for narowband stuff.

The only real broadband circuits used nowadays are used in measurement equipment and they use low voltages there.

Even oscilloscopes which used the most demanding broadband amplifiers once are now done digital and displayed on TFT monitors.

The few still available high voltage (120 to 200V) high frequency low capacitance transistors were designed in the early 90s, and I bet their figure of merrit may have doubled p to now, but as there is only small business, noone is interested in developing and manufacturing them.

SiC would be the optimum semiconductor material, and I still hope that some company brings out a pair of 200V 1A 800MHz 1.5pF transistors, but maybe they will never be born.

If I had access to Sanyos MBIT-II FBET process, I could easily make you a nice 300MHz amplifier with 150Vpp output, but even if I gave them the knowhow how to do it, they would not do because the market is not big enough.

Roland


----------



## VideoGrabber

Graham,

> _It may not be quite as bad as the picture I posted. But I can guarrantee you it will still be there but maybe not as pronounced. So what are you trying to say? (are you really trying to say the G90 will not have this bandwidth limitation and the pattern will be evenly illuminated?)_


----------



## VideoGrabber

Chuchuf commented:

> _...looked nothing like the dots that were posted in Williams pictures of G90 with his pattern. I looked closely with my glasses on and cannot see any dots at all._


----------



## darinp2

Quote:

Originally Posted by *VideoGrabber*
> _are you really trying to say ... the pattern will be evenly illuminated?_


----------



## Oliver Klohs

Hi,

to all who want to take photos of the test patterns: Good Luck !

I tried it today and the result is completely unpresentable, so I hope others will do better.

My 10PG has a problem with bandwidth, too btw., but is much better than the 1292 I have.


----------



## RoBro

Hi Oliver,

theoretically the 1292 should beat the 10PG regarding the video bandwidth. How does it come the other way?


As you have no good Photo, can you tell us up to which resolution and refresh rate the sqares look evenly bright?

Roland


----------



## RVonse

Ok, first of all I got to say this new pattern is really great for doing convergence but for some reason it is difficult to pick up with the camera. The other problem for me is that most of my projectors are in the garage so I have to use a laptop for them. Unfortunately I am limited by the video card will only do 1024 by 768. The images I got from that were very good though.


Here is what I get from the 1209 at a distance


----------



## RVonse

Here is the same 1209 up close. The image was actually very sharp but the camera was hard to hold steady. The important part that I notice was excellent black to white to black bars.


----------



## RVonse

Here is a Marquee 8000 about the same distance. The bars were starting to get mushy compared with the 1209 and you can kind of see it in the picture. Both these projector were off the same laptop, the 1209 needed the neg sync so I took it from the extron output and I took the Marquee direct off the monitor port.


Taken off my laptop and extron box I would say that 1024 is getting very close to the limitations of the Marquee bandwidth but the 1209 was still looking not only crisp but with much more contrast. It just looked steller at 1024 to my eyes about as good as the panel on the laptop except big enough to see. If I tried to make the Marquee look more contrasty like the 1209 it started to bloom the bars. So I would say 1920 would probably start to look blurry on the vertical bars.


Based on my results I would say there is something very wrong with the setup of the G90 screenshot, it should look much better than that.


----------



## RoBro

Hi,

if you try the pattern from my post ( #692 ) which is without the brighter middle stripe, it is easier to see the bandwidth limitations due to difference in the brightness of the squares with vertical stripes versus the horizontal ones.

Roland

P.S.:

To all of you:

Be very careful with these patterns. Due to the many high low high transitions the current loading of the output transistors is very high. This will heat up your output stages. Try not to display those patterns for a too long time.


----------



## Rittberg

Is it not easy to take a picture of the "resolut" pattern, the picture on the PJ is sharper than the photos .

The photos was made with a Canon G5 camera. the PJ - Barco 1209s

first picture taken 1.5 meter distance from screen, Zoom X 1 = 1080 * 1920 @ 60

second picture taken 0.75 meter distance from screen, Zoom X 4 (optice) = 1080 * 1920 @ 50.


Rittberg


----------



## RVonse

Rittberg, those screenshot of yours are excellent. And it proves that 1920 is actually resolvable.



Just for fun I used paint to compare my 1209 and Marquee at the same time.


----------



## RoBro

Rittberg,

I think I can see that the difference in brightness is more pronounced in the first picture. I wish you hadn't posted the refresh rates, so I would not have been biased.

Roland


----------



## Chuchuf

Good stuff,

So what does this tell us about the G90 pattern that William posted??


Terry


----------



## tse

A couple of shots from my test stand. Only green. Red is about the same, blue has less resolution. Test pattern shows vertical lines, one pixel on, one pixel off. Horizontal lines are one line on, one line off. [email protected] The fine vertical lines show a pixel clock rate of 243MHz. One pixel on, one off is one cycle that equals a frequency of 122MHz. This is from a Marquee 9500. The SMPTE133 image shows the other resolution bars. Middle ones are 2 pixels on 2 off and 2 lines on, 2 off. Bottom 3 pixels on, 3 off as well as 3 lines on, 3 off. If the video bandwidth is bad the top left square will not be as bright as the others.


Taking pictures of the screen wasn't too easy. I took alot of pictures and only a couple came out showing what was there.


----------



## Graham Johnson

here is my 1292 screen shot


1080p x 1920 50hz


10 metres of RG58, Nvidia 5700 ultra direct connect


Basically its as I expected.


I can see the vertical 1920 lines. But the response is definitely rolled off.


I need confirmation that those pics earlier of the 1209s are definitely on the screen at 1080p and that the screen resolution is set to 1920x1080p !! And that the PC video card is set to 1920x1808p !!


The blocks look way to big to be using our pattern as it was intended.


Can everyone please use the Robros test pattern as it will make comparision easier !


----------



## Graham Johnson

This test will probably give us more insite into the relative positions of the top 10 projectors and their ranks than any other we could have done.


Now I have to rip out the RG58 and do something about it. Also the crappy VGA socket and filters on the video card.


Can you give us details of your video chain Rittberg?


----------



## Mark_A_W

I can't see anything in your photo really Graham..


Have you got the Mitsubishi Diamond test patterns? The 3rd pattern has a 1:1 and 2:2 section in the centre and corner. I think it would be clearer. (More like TSE's images).


I'll send it to you if you don't have it.


----------



## Graham Johnson

Forget whether you can see the lines or not Mark.


What this shows is that the bandwidth is rolled off. ie; the vertical line squares vs the horizontal line squares are darker.


Whether you can see the lines within the square or not is while totally not irrelevant, is not what I am looking at !


Now what this is due to will have to be the subject of a bit of examination on my part.


----------



## RoBro

tse,


that video bandwidth must be amazing! The verticle lines are only a bit darker than the horizontal ones. Did you ever put a FET probe on the cathode and measure the risetime with a squarewave input signal? There are 0.7pF probes from Agilent ( I have one at work) that would not load the amplifiers a lot more.

Roland


----------



## ygoh

Graham, I think you made your point very clear and I agree with you that RGB bw plays an important role in vertical lines test pattern. After all, it's about the modulation from on to off every pixel. But beam spot is important too for horizontal res', if dots overlap you won't get the contrast between adjacent beam spot too.

But my question to you is: For RGB bw = 135 MHz (-3 dB), can it resolve [email protected] and [email protected] ? Do I get much better image if I improving the RGB bw to 180 MHz from 135 MHz ?


----------



## Rittberg

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Can you give us details of your video chain Rittberg?
ATI Radeon 9700Pro & MP-1 > 15 meter long RG-6 (Belden 1694U & KING BNC)


and yes, the pictures was taken on a screen resolution & PC video card set to 1920x1080P @ 60 and @ 50 ( I am from a PAL country watching the Euro1080/HD1).


Rittberg


----------



## ygoh

I agree Roland that was shockingly good contrast at that resolution. I never thought it could do that high of a resolution. I wonder that is with Marquee 9500 with 150MHz or the old 120MHz ?


----------



## Graham Johnson

Well Ygoh, if you look at Rittbergs pictures, See how the 50 hz pattern is way better defined than the 60 hz pattern.


That displays it pretty graphically. This is directly related to bandwidth. So lower frame rate is better.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Forget whether you can see the lines or not Mark.


What this shows is that the bandwidth is rolled off. ie; the vertical line squares vs the horizontal line squares are darker.


Whether you can see the lines within the square or not is while totally not irrelevant, is not what I am looking at !


Now what this is due to will have to be the subject of a bit of examination on my part.
Send me the image will you? I want to see how my pj does.


----------



## darinp2

I've mentioned before that I don't know of any CRT that can resolve [email protected] (what would be needed to get rid of film judder with 24Hz 1080p material and also avoid 48Hz flicker). It might be interesting to see this pattern with [email protected] with something like a Cine9 to see if it could do it or how close it could get though.


--Darin


----------



## Graham Johnson

Mark, look at Robro's earlier post on this thread.


There is a two square block BMP there.


I downloaded that and tiled the desktop with it.


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
I agree Roland that was shockingly good contrast at that resolution. I never thought it could do that high of a resolution. I wonder that is with Marquee 9500 with 150MHz or the old 120MHz ?
I don't think tse sees too many old Marquees on his test stand 


tse,


I doubt that you can get such a good result at 243MHz pixel clock with 150MHz video bandwidth. How high do these new Marquees really go in 3dB-BW?

Roland

P.S.:

The pattern is in post #692 of this thread


----------



## Graham Johnson

I just want someone to do these direct input pattern tests on a G90 and a Cine9 and post the results so we can finally sort out the top 3 spots on the CRT list !!


----------



## RoBro

Keep in mind that both (or all three if Marquee is to be included) have to be setup equally well (Focus, Astig, Convergence...).

John Cine9 mentioned his Cine9 being less sharp than a G90 he had seen. If you use only 3/4 of the phosphor or have bad astig that would be no wonder...

Roland

Of course, for just the bandwidth test that would be irrelevant


----------



## ygoh

What would cause John's Cine9 being less sharp than G90 ?


----------



## ygoh

I agree Graham, lets see some test pattern for Barco 909/Cine9 and the G90. Mike, you access to 909 right ?


----------



## Graham Johnson

I dont know John or his setup, but maybe the Astig isnt quite right. Or his equipment isnt too good bandwidth wize.


Impressions are damn difficult to quantify


----------



## cmjohnson

I will have to try this, too, and post shots of it. I'll take it up as far as QXGA, that is, 2048x1536, just to see what happens. I'll try it on a rebuilt, retubed 8500 and maybe both

of my 9500LCs.



CJ


----------



## fetz

Hi there


yesterday i shot some photos of my Marquee using the tastpattern KSCHMItt2 posted here in another tread


Resolution is 1920 x 1080 60 Hz. Setup is made quick and far away from perfect.

perhaps next time its better to take Green only


Videocard is radeon 9600 going Passthrough my scaler to the CRT, cheapest cable


Pictures to see under


 [URL='http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer/']Http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer/ 


go to marquee/ test


Its real difficult to make good Pictures from that.


regards


Thomas


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
If the video bandwidth is bad the top left square will not be as bright as the others.
That's... true, but I'm also not seeing black in the top left square. What I am seeing appears to be a BRAND NEW Marquee, displaying an Extron Test Pattern (which was always able to do well on that pattern when new). I have that same pattern on my shoot-out disk.


Can you show 1920x1080P with equal white and black in the top left square?


----------



## RoBro

There is no black at all in that shot. Way too high brightness (or G2) setting.

But that doesn't matter. For Video bandwidth the only thing that counts is the difference in the brightness of the squares with vertical and the squares with horizontal stripes.

My bmp tile multiplied by the windows desktop shows this a bit better as the squares are not that large and there are plenty of them. If you defocus the PJ or make narrow eyes the effect will jump on you. For that purpose it is MUCH better than any multiresolution tile.

And if the convergence is not perfect it is best to do only one color at a time.

Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Mike, you access to 909 right ?
Yes, but at present I don't have the space in my shop to do this test. However, I will have that space shortly, because we just found out yesterday, that the landlord of my shop, has a much larger two room space for me..  Cool!


The operation that owns the 909 claims that it's the absolute best thing out there for very high scan rates, and best bandwidth performance. So far I've never used it for anything other than board repair. It's in MINT condition, and the tubes look new. So it would be perfect for this.


Based on what they've told me about it, I've always been curious about what it'll really look like on the right equipment. The most amazing internal component, is the neck boards. That output chip is a totally different beast.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Ok, heres the first of my shots.


1920x1080 interlaced at 75hz. This is the centre part of the Mitsubishi diamond test pattern no 4. Top of pic is 1:1 pixels. Bottom is 2:2.


The red photographed better than green. Resizing loses some of the sharpness.


Projector is a 6 PG Xtra.


----------



## Mark_A_W

And here is Rolands bitmap tiled at 1920x1080. The resizing butchers it..grrr


----------



## Graham Johnson

The extra doesnt do a bad job interlaced does it ?


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fetz*
 [URL='http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer/']Http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer/ 


go to marquee/ test


Its real difficult to make good Pictures from that.


regards


Thomas
That is a god damn ugly test pattern Thomas. I cant see $hit about what we are trying to look at.


Can you have another go with Rolands pattern please?


----------



## fetz

Hi


I agree with you. Perhaps we can be united and take all the same testpattern, for example that one from Roland.


Only then we can compare images from differnet Projectors


I check with this pattern next time the CRT is on. Perhaps i should look for a better and shorter Videocable direct to the CRT, not through the scaler.


regards


Thomas


----------



## kschmit2

Took some pics of my NEC 6PG Plus (green tube only, to eliminate possible problems induced by convergence errors).


Ati Radeon 9600

into NEC ISS-6020G

24 ft RG59 BNC cables


Resolutions:

720p @ 59.94 Hz

1080i @ 59.94 Hz (only a temp setup)


720p screenshots:

http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4049/P1040591.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4049/P1040591.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/5628/P1040590.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/5628/P1040590.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/7536/P1040588.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/7536/P1040588.th.jpg 
http://img202.echo.cx/img202/1249/P1040554.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/1249/P1040554.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4894/P1040547.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4894/P1040547.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/89/P1040545.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/89/P1040545.th.jpg


----------



## kschmit2

and now for the 1080i screenshots:


Note, that my PJ is not set up properly for that resolution. It is just a temp setup.

Also, taking pictures of interlaced images is more difficult than taking pictures of progressive images.

http://img83.echo.cx/img83/5715/P1040557.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/5715/P1040557.th.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/3452/P1040558.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/3452/P1040558.th.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/936/P1040563.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/936/P1040563.th.jpg 
http://img83.echo.cx/img83/2990/P1040571.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/2990/P1040571.th.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/8295/P1040572.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/8295/P1040572.th.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/7560/P1040577.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/7560/P1040577.th.jpg 
http://img83.echo.cx/img83/7191/P1040579.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/7191/P1040579.th.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/5448/P1040580.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/5448/P1040580.th.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/9875/P1040584.jpg http://img83.echo.cx/img83/9875/P1040584.th.jpg


----------



## kschmit2

Testpatterns were the BMP by RoBro (resolut.bmp), and the patterns I made based on Stepans pattern:


1920x1080:
http://img248.echo.cx/my.php?image=1080prespattern4kw.png http://img248.echo.cx/img248/2513/10...tern4kw.th.png http://img248.echo.cx/my.php?image=1080prespattern3ux.gif http://img248.echo.cx/img248/9166/10...tern3ux.th.gif 


1280x720:
http://img248.echo.cx/my.php?image=720prespattern1vf.png http://img248.echo.cx/img248/954/720...tern1vf.th.png http://img248.echo.cx/my.php?image=720prespattern3mj.gif http://img248.echo.cx/img248/3496/72...tern3mj.th.gif


----------



## ygoh

Mike,


That's great, I have been waiting to hear/see the results of 909. It's just hard to find anybody who own it. I hope you will try it with 2048x1536/60Hz or even higher if possible 2500x2000/??Hz.


You said, "...The most amazing internal component, is the neck boards. That output chip is a totally different beast..." How about the Sony G90's neck boards and internal components, are they as good as the 909 based on just those components that you've seen ?


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Mike,


That's great, I have been waiting to hear/see the results of 909. It's just hard to find anybody who own it. I hope you will try it with 2048x1536/60Hz or even higher if possible 2500x2000/??Hz.


You said, "...The most amazing internal component, is the neck boards. That output chip is a totally different beast..." How about the Sony G90's neck boards and internal components, are they as good as the 909 based on just those components that you've seen ?
The G90 is using a later version Sanyo chip (VPJ15). In that series, it's the highest performing video out module/chip. Each neck board uses two of them. One drives the cathod, and the other drives G1. So they represent the best of CRT neck board design...however, with the 909. It's not using any of the known designs for video neck boards on the three eyed monsters. The earlier Barco's uses both transistors and/or video modules/chips, this is also true with Sony, NEC and Ampro. Electrohome also used transistors, but on their Marquee's they used RF power transistors (Motorola). Sanyo also manufactured most of the high frequency video transistors used in all CRT technology.


That chip being used on the 909's neck board is a whole nother story...plus, there's about 4 or 5 pots being used on each neck board. I have no idea what is being used as the final stage on a 909 neck board. I just know that it looks nothing like anything i've ever seen before. They just look very well designed and manufactured. And they weigh a ton.


----------



## Rittberg

Quote:

Originally Posted by *darinp2*
I've mentioned before that I don't know of any CRT that can resolve [email protected] (what would be needed to get rid of film judder with 24Hz 1080p material and also avoid 48Hz flicker). It might be interesting to see this pattern with [email protected] with something like a Cine9 to see if it could do it or how close it could get though.


--Darin
Due to the fact that I have another block in addition to the 50Hz (in order to watch PAL HiDef) this is another picture @ resolution of : [email protected]

The picture was taken by a Canon G5 camera, camera distance from screen = 1.00 meter. Zoom X 1.


Rittberg


----------



## RoBro

That chip that is not named is the final stage. Its absolute unbelievable how high the bandwidth is with that high of a load resistance. The effective capacitance must be incredible small.

Roland


----------



## ygoh

Mike & RoBro,


What do you guys think of the Motorola RF transistors that Marquee uses ? Is that higher frequency than the VPJ15 ? What's the highest frequency the VPJ15 can put out ? Beyind RF ?


----------



## Graham Johnson

Rittberg, This is a good comparison picture as you can actually see the HF roll off occuring.


In your previous pict's at 50Hz. It really looked quite good.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Yes, but at present I don't have the space in my shop to do this test. .
This test could be done simply by looking in the green crt with contrast/ brightness much lower. A screen setup would not really be required would it? I don't see why taking a screenshot direct into the crt would affect the results of bandwidth at all.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kschmit2*
Took some pics of my NEC 6PG Plus (green tube only, to eliminate possible problems induced by convergence errors).


Ati Radeon 9600

into NEC ISS-6020G

24 ft RG59 BNC cables


Resolutions:

720p @ 59.94 Hz

1080i @ 59.94 Hz (only a temp setup)


720p screenshots:

http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4049/P1040591.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4049/P1040591.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/5628/P1040590.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/5628/P1040590.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/7536/P1040588.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/7536/P1040588.th.jpg 
http://img202.echo.cx/img202/1249/P1040554.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/1249/P1040554.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4894/P1040547.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/4894/P1040547.th.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/89/P1040545.jpg http://img202.echo.cx/img202/89/P1040545.th.jpg
Very nice kschmit2!! We have to throw the cat amongst the pigeons 


Can't the the big boys get too carried away!


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
This test could be done simply by looking in the green crt with contrast/ brightness much lower. A screen setup would not really be required would it? I don't see why taking a screenshot direct into the crt would affect the results of bandwidth at all.
That wouldn't be a fair comparison. The bandwidth can change dramatically with output level. Usually decreasing as drive level goes up. Set contrast and brightness to normal and use neutral density filter on camera would be ok.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
That's... true, but I'm also not seeing black in the top left square. What I am seeing appears to be a BRAND NEW Marquee, displaying an Extron Test Pattern (which was always able to do well on that pattern when new). I have that same pattern on my shoot-out disk.


Can you show 1920x1080P with equal white and black in the top left square?
The pattern came from a Quantum Data 802 (GP?) pattern generator. It has a max dot clock of 400MHz so this resolution was just coasting. Your PC video card may or may not have the video bandwidth that this equipment can put out. The CRT is a regular P19LCP on a Christy manufactured chassis, HD10L lens. The images would be a little sharper with a P19LUG CRT.


I haven't got 1920X1080P programmed in the generator at this time. Will do so soon and change the tube to the 'lug and send those images.


To those that want to compare other patterns, I can't cut, paste, and tile patterns in my generator like you can with the PC. Must use SMPTE133. I sure don't want to try to use my old PC.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *darinp2*
I've mentioned before that I don't know of any CRT that can resolve [email protected] (what would be needed to get rid of film judder with 24Hz 1080p material and also avoid 48Hz flicker). It might be interesting to see this pattern with [email protected] with something like a Cine9 to see if it could do it or how close it could get though.


--Darin
I believe about any mag focus 9" CRT will resolve 1920x1080. The 72Hz just means a higher video bandwidth is required than at something like 50Hz. Same number of pixels, right?


Someone once told me that film projectors put each frame up twice so the frame rate is essentially 48Hz. I'm not really sure how that works, though.


A CRT has about 5mS of persistance. That means that 5mS after something has been drawn on the tube it's light output is about half what it was originally. So by the time the tube is being scanned in the center, what was drawn at the top has faded out more than half as far as light output is concerned. If you connect a light detector to an oscilloscope and look at the screen you can see it. Our eyes are not fast enough to see that. To us it looks like a full image.


----------



## cmjohnson

I believe that the next solution for output devices for neck boards will probably be

any of a couple of types of hybrid power amp devices that Motorola uses for their UHF

two way mobile radios, which operate at up to 520 MHz and at power levels in excess of

30 watts per device. As Motorola is the major player in the radio communications market,

you can be very sure that they are going to ensure that these devices are available for

a long, long time, or at the very least there will be an equivalent functional device available

for practically forever. I do NOT forsee Motorola leaving the radio industry any time soon,

but even if they were to do so, there ARE other radio makers.



Tse, you might want to pass that tip along to someone, just in case they hadn't explored

that market segment to see what devices are used there.


CJ


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
I believe that the next solution for output devices for neck boards will probably be

any of a couple of types of hybrid power amp devices that Motorola uses for their UHF

two way mobile radios, which operate at up to 520 MHz and at power levels in excess of

30 watts per device. As Motorola is the major player in the radio communications market,

you can be very sure that they are going to ensure that these devices are available for

a long, long time, or at the very least there will be an equivalent functional device available

for practically forever. I do NOT forsee Motorola leaving the radio industry any time soon,

but even if they were to do so, there ARE other radio makers.



Tse, you might want to pass that tip along to someone, just in case they hadn't explored

that market segment to see what devices are used there.


CJ
Motorola always made the best semiconductors. Nobody made better parts in the '80s and 90s than Motorola. They have since sold off their semi production. Now they are in the high volume cell phone and other radio market.


The only problem with what they make now is it is all low voltage stuff. A CRT needs like a hundred volts or more of drive. All these radio parts are for 12 or 28V circuits. If someone would build 200V parts that could conduct a couple of amps current with only one or two picofarads of capacitance, hey, we would buy a couple of thousand of them. The market isn't there. Nobody is interested in spending the money for such a small return.


----------



## cmjohnson

I note that Intersil makes some special purpose semiconductors that are produced in very low volumes.

Perhaps they'd be willing and able to make new 548s and 549s for something resembling a fair price?


CJ


----------



## Graham Johnson

TSE film projectors actually pull down frames to display in the gate at 24FPS. When the frame is moved the gate is covered with a shutter. This same shutter (rotating disk with blades) Also has a couple of extra blades that actually cut each frame as well.


IE: Shutter covered aperture while frame pulled down. Frame in place, shutter cuts the frame again. Then shutter covers aperture again while next frame is pulled down.


----------



## ygoh

Cmjohnson,


Output devices for neck board, are you refering to the cathode amp ?


Do you think 30 watts per device would be sufficient ?


What do you mean by 548s and 549s ?


----------



## cmjohnson

MRF548 and MRF549 are the complementary pairs of RF power transistors that

are used on all Marquee neck boards for the signal drive. Three pairs are used on each board

and as a result, a long run of projectors can eat up a pretty sizable stock of devices.


They're discontinued types, and though a decent sized stock remains, it can't last forever.


CJ


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
TSE film projectors actually pull down frames to display in the gate at 24FPS. When the frame is moved the gate is covered with a shutter. This same shutter (rotating disk with blades) Also has a couple of extra blades that actually cut each frame as well.


IE: Shutter covered aperture while frame pulled down. Frame in place, shutter cuts the frame again. Then shutter covers aperture again while next frame is pulled down.
OK, I'm on my fourth glass of Chardonnay. How many have you had?


----------



## ygoh

Cmjohnson,


So they're thesame thing as cathode drive/amp ?


And these transistors running at how many MHz ?


----------



## Tom.W

Hi Mike,

Can you post a photo of the 909 neck board ? Do you know where I can get a service manual ?


----------



## ygoh

Like to get one too


----------



## ygoh

If possible please take some pictures of the Marquee 9500 (w/ 150MHz) inside / neck board please.


----------



## RoBro

tse,


the transistors in that hybrid on the Barco 909 neck boards must be the best HV HF transistors ever made.

Mike, does it look like a hybrid with packaged SMD components like the GP-3000 power supply hybrid or does it more look like one with wirebonded naked transistors?

If they were packaged ones, one might reverse engieer thah hybrid IC...

Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,


the transistors in that hybrid on the Barco 909 neck boards must be the best HV HF transistors ever made.

Mike, does it look like a hybrid with packaged SMD components like the GP-3000 power supply hybrid or does it more look like one with wirebonded naked transistors?

If they were packaged ones, one might reverse engieer thah hybrid IC...

Roland
No, it looks like a computer CPU chip, mounted to a peice of metal, that's then mounted to a very heavy heatsink. It's been awhile since I've looked at it, but for sure, I've never seen anything that looks like it.


I'll get it from the shop today, and then do what i can to take a picture of it.


----------



## tse

I was checking out a new yoke today and while I was at it I installed a P19LUG CRT. I guessed at the yoke connections and got the vertical right but the horizontal backwards so the pictures are reversed like rear projection mode.


1920 x 1080p @ 60Hz. With video peaking set a little high. (box with one pixel on, one pixel off brighter than other boxes)


1920 x 1080p @ 60Hz. Normal peaking.


2048 x 1536 @ 60Hz. Video peaking a little high.


Marquee 9500


----------



## mp20748

tse,

you've done very well on the second photo. I can now clearly see the lines (black) in the top left pattern (as well as right). The first photo also shows a very good overall performance, because it's also very important to see how well vertical and horizontal grid lines display.


Check your PM!


------------


I've taking the photos of the Barco 909 neck board. I'll get them posted tomorrow.


----------



## RoBro

tse,

how do you adjust the peaking?

With the scope? If yes, how much overshoot (%) do you adjust for?

With a test-pattern? What is the target or what do you look at while adjusting?

Roland


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,

how do you adjust the peaking?

With the scope? If yes, how much overshoot (%) do you adjust for?

With a test-pattern? What is the target or what do you look at while adjusting?

Roland
I use the same test pattern as the photos and adjust so the one pixel on, one off box is the same light level as the one line on, one off box.


----------



## RoBro

Ha, I knew that.

First I thought that video bandwidth must be amazing, because with a flat response you would have to have 200MHz bandwidth or more to display these two boxes equally bright.


How does that peaking you adjust the amps to affect other patterns? Would you have a brighter starting pixel if you would go from black to white when white is more than a few pixles long?

Roland

P.S.:

There could be the possibility of going into saturation with the overshoot....


----------



## Lightningman

Hi guys,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
So right you are. If you consider that the CRTs need 100V or more of drive to make enough light and the pixels are very narrow, like 4.1nS with [email protected] the amplifier has to charge (or discharge) the typically 10pF of capacitance between cathode and G-1 in 1/3 of the pixel time. Break out the very basic formula C* dv/dt = i and you get: 10pF * 100V/1.37nS = 730mA. Almost an Amp of currrent to charge (or discharge) The K to G-1 capacitance. Ok, doesn't sound too bad but add in the capacitance of the amplifier transistors, if they have more than a few pF they add significantly more current to the load. State of the art transistors just aren't available to conduct high currents while maintaining very low capacitance. The CRT drivers are very challenging to design.
Hmm, not quite sure how you are arriving at 4.1nS (I get closer to 5.3nS)


-> 1/(2048x1536*60Hz) = 5.29nS


unless you are taking some overscan into consideration. However, I actually

wanted to point out a few more things.


You say 30% pixel time is fast enough. From what I know anything much above

10% is going to lead to some blurring. If you go with that, then you are no longer

looking at a measly  730mA but rather 2.5 AMPS. Going further (for the

electronic requirements)


Pixel time=4.1nS


10% of pixel time=0.41 nS


Slew rate (10 to 90%) =dV/dt= 0.8Ã—1.4V/0.41nS=2731V/Âµsec.


and that is DAMN fast!


While the slew rate is dV/dt, you also have to look at the slew-rate equation as

Im/Cm, where Im is the current that the transimpedance-input stage provides

and Cm is the Miller capacitance for a typical voltage-feedback amplifier. That's

where things start to get out of hand 


Also, remember, you don't just have a single Op-Amp in your video chain (that

is from the BNC's up to the video neck board), but rather a chain of them. While

such a setup has it's advantages, it has one BIG disadvantage. It reduces the

overall BW  For directly seriesed amps you can use the following math

to see how the overall BW drops


Bn = SQRT(n* BÂ²) /n


B = Bandwidth of a single amplifier (MHz)


n = Number of amplifiers in series


Bn = Bandwidth of the system (MHz)


e.g. if you have 4 op-amps in series and each op-amp has a single BW of 200Mhz

the total BW drops to SQRT(4 x 200Â²)/4 = 100Mhz. Thats a 50% loss in overall

BW  That kinda sucks......... Finding fast, high BW op-amps is in itself already

a tough task. Finding the same with a low noise AND designing a circuit board

for them....... well that's where it starts getting ugly.......


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## wm

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
I'm aware of the video card that william was using, with or without the filters. It'll never properly handle 1920x1080P.
Oh, not again! You apologized for a post like this last time, and here you are doing it again. You really don't know what video card I was using when I did that test. In fact I don't even remember now, it was so long ago. We had some discussions about various cards, but I have a bunch, including at least one with mods every bit as good as yours.


If the card won't handle 1920x1080p, then no card will, at least not analog, and of course that's the problem, isn't it. Getting those square waves out and all the way to the projector is very difficult with analog signals, and trivial with digital.


What happened to the DVI input for the G90? That would certainly be interesting...


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *wm*
Oh, not again! You apologized for a post like this last time, and here you are doing it again. You really don't know what video card I was using when I did that test..


Yeah I do... at least based on an email conversation with. You forgot that you asked me about putting a mod on a card that you use in a PC for test patterns only. At that time you told me what card you were using.


Now if you're saying that you're using a card other than what you told me, then in fact I'm wrong to assume based on what you told me at that time...


Now you can easily clear this up by simply posting what card you were using...


And if the cards that you're aware is not capable of getting the square wave to the projector, then you have proven our point - that test was not valid!


So what card was it?


----------



## wm

No, Mike, you don't. We already had this conversation. I had asked you about a video card months before that test, and had switched 2 or 3 times between then and the test.


As you well know, ANY video card will not reproduce a square wave perfectly on an analog output, and when you put that signal through cables of any lenth, the edges of the square wave get rounded even more.


The test was designed to show a real world difference between the two projectors, and that is exactly what it did. I'm not going back over it again. If you can rebuild the electronics of a G90 (or any CRT projector) so it can do full on full off alternating pixels at 1080p, be my guest, but keep track of the expenses...


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *wm*
If you can rebuild the electronics of a G90 (or any CRT projector) so it can do full on full off alternating pixels at 1080p, be my guest, but keep track of the expenses...
Well, if you go back through this thread and look at that 1920x1080P test pattern that tse linked to, it shows the top two sections of that one pixel on, one pixel off pattern showing perfect on and off.


So what card was it?


BTW, at my last HT gathering, we went through AVIA PRO's focus patterns - Flawless @ 1080P. And that was through 25' of Belden 1694A.


----------



## tse

Reinhard posted:


"Hmm, not quite sure how you are arriving at 4.1nS (I get closer to 5.3nS)


-> 1/(2048x1536*60Hz) = 5.29nS


unless you are taking some overscan into consideration."



Well, with a raster scan CRT system you have to have about 20% of the line time for retrace and there is about another 500uS for the vertical retrace (even if that is 200uS it doesn't make alot of difference).


"Slew rate (10 to 90%) =dV/dt= 0.8Ã—1.4V/0.41nS=2731V/Âµsec."


If you are talking about the low level stuff that is right. But, if you mean the CRT driver the slew rate is closer to 195Kv/uS. That is damn fast. Check this and see if I'm doing it right:


0.8 * (1uS/0.41nS) * 100V =195 * 10^3


That's if the step is 100V and it happens in 0.41nS.


"Finding fast, high BW op-amps is in itself already

a tough task. Finding the same with a low noise AND designing a circuit board

for them....... well that's where it starts getting ugly......."


Things are getting better there. Texas Instruments, Analog devices, National Semiconductor have been bringing out faster current feedback op-amps. I think some are up to 2GHz BW though that is at 200mV pp. But you can still get some decent drive at a couple of volts. And designing the PCB is not easy.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
OK here is what I am talking about.


1080p test pattern courtesy of Willaim Phelps.


The first is a G90. second is the JVC HD2K


Have a close look and see how well the 1080p horizintal lines are defined, Now you guys tell me where the vertical 1920 lines are ? Very poorly defined


This is where bandwidth limitations become apparent.

http://www.meier-phelps.com/temp/G90.041018-154946r.jpg 



This is a HD2K JVC

http://www.meier-phelps.com/temp/HD2...18-155917r.jpg
William,

It appears the results you observed from your G90 were much worse than expected for some reason. Because it has been seen by other screenshot postings in this thread that lessor projectors are achieving much better results.


Assuming these screenshots did originate from yourself and based on what I have seen in this thread, there appears to be some sort of serious flaw in either your video card or cabling that you used.


You should have gotten much better results than you did from the G90.


----------



## wm

I do not see much lessor projectors producing better results as you claim. tse's test pattern is not full screen 1920x1080/60hz. The signal is much simpler, just look at it with a scope. In my test pattern you can see the lines "resolved" on the G90, they just don't have the contrast that the HD2K has. That was the point.


You guys need a new hobby.


----------



## ygoh

Mike,


In post #756, you wrote:

"The G90 is using a later version Sanyo chip (VPJ15). In that series, it's the highest performing video out module/chip. Each neck board uses two of them. One drives the cathode, and the other drives G1. So they represent the best of CRT neck board design...however, with the 909. It's not using any of the known designs for video neck boards on the three eyed monsters. The earlier Barco's uses both transistors and/or video modules/chips; this is also true with Sony, NEC and Ampro. Electrohome also used transistors, but on their Marquee's they used RF power transistors (Motorola)..."


Which transistors did the earlier Barco uses ? Is it the VPJ15 ?


Did the earlier Barco also have two transistors on the neck board, one for drives the cathode and other drives the G1 ?


On the Marquee 9500LC, it uses MOtorola RF transistors, so what is the frequency/bandwidth ?


Does the Motorola also have two on each neck board, one drives the cathode and the other drives G1 too, just like the G90 ?


With your mod, you have 6 transistors. What does each do besides G1 and cathode ?


----------



## RoBro

Hi,

I had just written a huge text, when that $hitty Zone-Alarm Uptdate occupied my browser window and even after clicking the back button my text was gone :-(

So again a bit short:


Ygoh,


Barco used VPH08 or VPJ08b. Only 80MHz (they did a neat design around that chip to push it to 120MHz) but 200V, so they need only to drive cathode.


Marquee BW is around 150MHz


There are 6 MRF548/549 on Marquee neckboard. Three foe cathode and three for G1 driver amp.


Reinhard,

30% is fast enough if you add a bit of peaking. You have 70% of the pixel time left at correct levels.

The preceding amps work at much lower voltage levels, so it is much easier to keep them at a much higher BW than the output stage.


RVonse and WM,

the screenshots of tse show a much better response because the amps are just trimmed for that. As tse whote, he trims the vertical- and horizontal-lines squares to the same brightness. This introduces a lot of peaking to the amps step response.

I assume the G90 was just trimmed for maximum flat frequency response with only a little bit of peaking, and then it was not driven by a signal generator but by a PC graphics card.


I wonder what effects the trimming for same brightness has on lower frequency signals. They must have much higher amplitude than intendet to. It is a pity that tse can not put variable test patterns up on his test stand. I thought about a nice new pattern for evaluation of the video bandwidth and peaking response. If I only could get rid of my rib problems I would try the peaking issue on one of my PJs.


Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *wm*
tse's test pattern is not full screen 1920x1080/60hz.
It doesn't have to be for this. And the only reason that I can think of to have full screen alternating pixels, is to measure the frequency of the test patterns signal at the BNC's. I'm sure there's other reasons, but this is all I can think up.


Quote:

The signal is much simpler, just look at it with a scope
Nope, that pattern is the most difficult of any test patterns to reveal bandwidth, because 1 pixel on, 1 pixel off alternating lines is a PURE respresentation of square waves. And square waves are the best way to look at bandwidth. So with an alternating pixel pattern, you'll be able to visually see on the screen, what the scope sees in the electronics (on/off). I was actually amazed when I saw that tse was able to capture that pattern, showing how well the dark lines were visable at that high of a resolution. Your test pattern is much easier, because if you hooked up a frequency meter on the output of both test device (full screen alernating pixel/your pattern or any other test pattern), the alternating pixel pattern would register the highest mhz on a frequency counter, meaning that it would present the best bandwidth challenge, because it takes a super fast video circuit to keep up with that on/off switching rate of multple single pixel lines.


Quote:

In my test pattern you can see the lines "resolved" on the G90
No I can't, and that is why I've been asking about the video card and cables being used.


----------



## kal

G90's, Barco Cine 9's, MP-modded 9500LC Ultra's....


You're all forgetting about one of our forum favourites in your quest for the "Best CRT Projector".


Here's a hint:

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/revi...lie_remote.jpg 


Another hint:

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/revi...UK/Ellie_1.jpg 


An even more obvious hint:

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/revi...Ellie_rear.jpg 


Read all about the revolution here .


Who needs more then 6.5Mhz! 


Kal


----------



## zbolle

damn ist that crap. Every 10xx will do it as good as this beauty.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi tse,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
Reinhard posted:


"Slew rate (10 to 90%) =dV/dt= 0.8Ã—1.4V/0.41nS=2731V/Âµsec."


If you are talking about the low level stuff that is right. But, if you mean the CRT driver the slew rate is closer to 195Kv/uS. That is damn fast. Check this and see if I'm doing it right:


0.8 * (1uS/0.41nS) * 100V =195 * 10^3


That's if the step is 100V and it happens in 0.41nS.


"Finding fast, high BW op-amps is in itself already

a tough task. Finding the same with a low noise AND designing a circuit board

for them....... well that's where it starts getting ugly......."


Things are getting better there. Texas Instruments, Analog devices, National Semiconductor have been bringing out faster current feedback op-amps. I think some are up to 2GHz BW though that is at 200mV pp. But you can still get some decent drive at a couple of volts. And designing the PCB is not easy.
Yeah, I guess I should have made it clear that I was talking about the low (input)

end of the video signal. Sorry bout that.


As to the high end op-amps, I really have looked high and low (esp for tinkering

on and around a Marquee  ) plus at some replacements for the MRF 548 / 549

neckboard transistors and their drivers (the MRF 5943 MRF 5583). Up to now I

haven't found good replacements there. The real problem is that the spec sheets

(esp the 548 / 549) are very vague about the exact specs of these transistors.

I did find some similar transistors (MRF 544 / 545), but these too are very skinny

on true full fledged specs.


I also don't like the 2N3906 transistors used on the VIM. Those are junk box transistors

(as are their specs )


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Hi,

I had just written a huge text, when that $hitty Zone-Alarm Uptdate occupied my browser window and even after clicking the back button my text was gone :-(

So again a bit short:


Reinhard,

30% is fast enough if you add a bit of peaking. You have 70% of the pixel time left at correct levels.

The preceding amps work at much lower voltage levels, so it is much easier to keep them at a much higher BW than the output stage.

Roland
Never, EVER hit the back button  Always use Crtl-A + Crtl-C. Short of a reboot

nothing can happen to a post you make 


However, back OnT: You say 30% is okay with peaking. I don't want to "digitally"

enhance the video information. As you pointed out down below in your post, this

would have effects on other resolutions. I was talking about what is needed for a

clean, no frills, no thrills non enhanced video signal reproduction.


While it is true that the input stages run at lower voltages, they also amplify

higher than the neckboards do. Therefore any junk that they create (noise) is

also a bigger problem. It's not just the BW that needs consideration, but also

the noise. I just mentioned it all in a package, so to say.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## RoBro

If you keep the peaking limited it will just compensate for the lower risetime.

Just an example:

[email protected] is about 8ns pixel time.

If you have a pulse going from 30 to 90V and have a risetime of 2.4ns (30% of pixel time) the pulse will loose some of its brightness due to the gamma of the tube (even if the average voltage stays the same due to the falltime being smilar to the risetime, the effective current of the pixel decreases). If you adjust the amp for an overshoot of say 15% for another 30% of the pixel time you can compensate for this loss.

Of cause the edges are not 100% as sharp as they would be with zero risetime, but as the gaussian shape of the beam spot introduces a lowpass filter anyways, 30% risetime has shown to be the point from which you would not see much improvement on sharpness anymore.

You don't want to use the peaking for artificial sharpness, just to compensate for the risetime. If you overdo the peaking you will get artifacts of course.

If you have an amp that shows just the right ammount of peaking when having a 3dB BW of 150MHz, and a resulting risetime of 2ns, and increase the peaking to have equally bright hor and ver lines at 243MHz like tse did, you may get artificial sharpness artifacts or too high gain at lower frequencies. Look at the second of the two pictures posted by tse in his post #723 on page xxx of this thread called SMPTE133.JPG. The amplifier is trimmed to show equally bright lines in the upper two blocks. But look at the lower two blocks. The lower left one is brighter than the right one (make narrow eyes for that). This shows that the frequency response has too much peaking.

But even with that, this 243MHz pixel clock pattern is still AMAZING!

Roland

P.S.:

Reinhard, if you want data on the 544 and 545 I have some.

And no real videophile oses op-amps...


----------



## VideoGrabber

Kal,


that's truly bizarre. When I read the comments on the web site, I went looking to find what year (or decade) perspective they were writing from. I was shocked to see a June 2005 date on it! Holy crap!


Their comment here is telling, *"worth Â£4,000 for the line doubler alone!"*. Wow! By itself, that comment is enough to destroy any credibility they might have. But hey! It may not do more than 800x600, but it did pass the all-important "bounce test". 


- Tim


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *VideoGrabber*
that's truly bizarre. When I read the comments on the web site, I went looking to find what year (or decade) perspective they were writing from. I was shocked to see a June 2005 date on it! Holy crap!
No, that's today's date. The article date is at the bottom of the page... "December 2000"


----------



## tse

Reinhard posts:


"I did find some similar transistors (MRF 544 / 545), but these too are very skinny

on true full fledged specs."


These are the same die as the MRF548/549 just in a different package. They can't dissipate as much heat as they are not in a package that can be attached to a heat sink.


These parts are unique in their ability to have good gain at high current but with low capacitance. I believe better parts could be developed if there was a good enough market for them. I don't think there is enough profit in the deal for anyone to put out the development money.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi tse,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
Reinhard posts:


"I did find some similar transistors (MRF 544 / 545), but these too are very skinny

on true full fledged specs."


These are the same die as the MRF548/549 just in a different package. They can't dissipate as much heat as they are not in a package that can be attached to a heat sink.


These parts are unique in their ability to have good gain at high current but with low capacitance. I believe better parts could be developed if there was a good enough market for them. I don't think there is enough profit in the deal for anyone to put out the development money.
Yeah, I figured as much  I still think there is a fair amount of roll off around the

two drivers (MRF5943 & 5583), which needs some attention. I have been looking

at other PJ's to see how they do their stuff around the neckboard, but a lot of

manufacturers are using special chips there 


On the 2005 VDC Marquee's: how are you guys adjusting the trimmer caps?


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Roland,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
If you keep the peaking limited it will just compensate for the lower risetime.

Just an example:

[email protected] is about 8ns pixel time.
Thanks for the clarification.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
You don't want to use the peaking for artificial sharpness, just to compensate for the risetime. If you overdo the peaking you will get artifacts of


snip


have equally bright hor and ver lines at 243MHz like tse did, you may get artificial sharpness artifacts or too high gain at lower frequencies. Look at the second of the two pictures posted by tse in his post #723 on page xxx of this thread called SMPTE133.JPG. The amplifier is trimmed to show equally bright lines in the upper two blocks. But look at the lower two blocks. The lower left one is brighter than the right one (make narrow eyes for that). This shows that the frequency response has too much peaking.
That's exactly what I was talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
But even with that, this 243MHz pixel clock pattern is still AMAZING!
Yes. I wasn't saying it sucked at all  Rather I was trying to clarify that video

signal processÃ*ng is just a lot more than meets the eye at first glance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
P.S.:

Reinhard, if you want data on the 544 and 545 I have some.

And no real videophile oses op-amps...
Sure, send me the data on the transistors. I DO have some dataheets on all

four transistors (-44 -45 -48 -49), but ALL are very vague in exact specs. Esp

around the true bandwidth. Do you still have me freenet.de email addy?


As to op-amps, I was talking about the input stages, NOT the power stages.

I see no real reason to stay away from op-amps there. Finding the good ones

is the challenge  All the PJ's I have seen use op-amps in the lower stages

(admitingly my spectrum on different PJ manufacturers is limited  ) Building

a lower stage out of discrete transistors isn't going to make the task easier

or guarantee better results. Packing as much as possible on a single chip

DOES have some design and operating advantages (noise, supply rail similarities,

temperature drift + compensation and size to name a few). I think you would be

hard pressed achieving better results comparing a well designed op-amp to a

discrete transistor circuit (not to say it can't be done, tho).


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## mp20748

I've emailed Robro photos of the Barco 909 neck board. They're not the best focus, but it's good enough to see that wierd looking chip that they're using. He's supposed to be posting it here soon.


----------



## RoBro

Hi,


took a while to find out, but now it should work:

http://img248.echo.cx/my.php?image=imag02255ya.jpg http://img248.echo.cx/img248/4360/imag02255ya.th.jpg 
http://img95.echo.cx/my.php?image=imag02263ty.jpg http://img95.echo.cx/img95/6884/imag02263ty.th.jpg 
http://img95.echo.cx/my.php?image=imag02275bp.jpg http://img95.echo.cx/img95/9244/imag02275bp.th.jpg 
http://img95.echo.cx/my.php?image=imag02289iu.jpg http://img95.echo.cx/img95/87/imag02289iu.th.jpg 
http://img95.echo.cx/my.php?image=imag02293ao.jpg http://img95.echo.cx/img95/4089/imag02293ao.th.jpg 


Roland


----------



## Graham Johnson

Bloody hell Mike, They are some of the worst pictures I have ever seen !! LOL


----------



## tse

What value are the big white resistors? I take it that this card drives cathode and G-1? Is this the top of line card from Barco? What voltages are the output stages using? Sorry about all the questions. I'm just curious.


----------



## Stepan

Uhhh, Mike, dont you have some "macro" button on your camera? It usually has sign of small flower.


----------



## HK-Steve

The 4 Resistors are 1K ohm each 10watt.




Cheers

Steve


----------



## RoBro

200V supply, only cathode driven


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
What value are the big white resistors? I take it that this card drives cathode and G-1? Is this the top of line card from Barco? What voltages are the output stages using? Sorry about all the questions. I'm just curious.
The resistors are 1K 10 watt. I'm only seeing one 33 ohm carbon resistor, and one spark gap (that is also on that same resistor to ground). So I'm thinking this is G1 (or cathode) drive only. The Chip has 8 pins, and the supply filter cap is listed 10uf / 250 vdc


The board is from a Barco 909, which is their top of the line 180 mhz projector.


----------



## Tom.W

Me thinks a tripod is needed here !


----------



## ygoh

Thanks for the pictures Mike.


How about some picture of the Roland's test pattern, please.


----------



## VideoGrabber

> _No, that's today's date. The article date is at the bottom of the page... "December 2000"_


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
How about some picture of the Roland's test pattern, please.
That's one of the first things on my list, once I move my shop into the new space. However, for that pattern I'll need a better video card than what I have. And the absolute best thing out there for test patterns is the Matrox Parhelia...


Anyone got a Parhelia card you don't need anymore, because it's not so powerstrip friendly..


----------



## RoBro

If I only were healthy I could quickly nail together a small test generator circuit.

Would a risetime below 500ps be ok?

Roland


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
(MRF 544 / 545)


These are the same die as the MRF548/549 just in a different package.
tse,

can you tell me where you got that information from?

Roland


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Roland,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,

can you tell me where you got that information from?

Roland
Motorola writes this openly in their datasheets  

If you compare the specs (at least those that are in

the datsheet, you'll also see that it has to be the same

or very similar die. That was the way I found them)


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## RoBro

Reinhard,

Do you have the 548/549 datasheets?

I would be interested...

Roland

P.S.:

I am about to think about a special test pattern that one can use to adjust the peaking of the amplifier response to match the personal taste


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Roland,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Reinhard,

Do you have the 548/549 datasheets?

I would be interested...

Roland

P.S.:

I am about to think about a special test pattern that one can use to adjust the peaking of the amplifier response to match the personal taste
Sure, the Motorola datasheets are openly available on their site. However,

since they are obsolete the PDFs are a little hard to find. I wonder how

many 100k+ Electrohome and VDC bought before Motorola quit production .

The problem with the sheets is that they are totally vague about the true

bandwidth and the drop-off point. That's why I was excited, when you said

that you had the data on them. I didn't expect spice data, tho   


The test pattern you're making sounds like an interesting idea.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
That's one of the first things on my list, once I move my shop into the new space. However, for that pattern I'll need a better video card than what I have. And the absolute best thing out there for test patterns is the Matrox Parhelia...


Anyone got a Parhelia card you don't need anymore, because it's not so powerstrip friendly.. 
Why don't you get one from that guy that modifies them. He's on the forum here, I think his name is Fess Parker. Or am I confusing him with the guy that played Davey Crockett ..........Oh, his name is Mike Parker and he does the MP-1 cards. He ought to be able to help you.


----------



## RoBro

"A little hard to find" is a good joke. Do you know how long i have been searching yet?


----------



## cmjohnson

I've found THOUSANDS of a available MRF548s. It was the MRF549s that turned out to be

extremely rare.


VDC did make a "very large" final production run buy on these devices when Motorola told

them that they were discontinuing them.


However, VDC doesn't fabricate their own boards, or at least that's the case with MOST

of their boards. They use a contract manufacturer, and I know which one, located in

Kitchener, Ontario, the same city where Marquees were made in the Electrohome days.


Do I dare to guess that that contract board house has the transistor stock? Maybe they do.


CJ


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
I've found THOUSANDS of a available MRF548s. It was the MRF549s that turned out to be

extremely rare.


VDC did make a "very large" final production run buy on these devices when Motorola told

them that they were discontinuing them.


However, VDC doesn't fabricate their own boards, or at least that's the case with MOST

of their boards. They use a contract manufacturer, and I know which one, located in

Kitchener, Ontario, the same city where Marquees were made in the Electrohome days.


Do I dare to guess that that contract board house has the transistor stock? Maybe they do.


CJ
That's because they're STILL using the boards they got from Christie, who got them from Electrohome, when they went bankrupt and Christie bought them out. They probably have enough boards to last until CRTs are a museum relic. All they have to do is populate them as needed.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,

can you tell me where you got that information from?

Roland
Sorry, I can't. If you compare the specs you will see that they are identical except for power dissipation.


Were you looking for spice models for the 2SC3600 and 2SA1406? If so, I posted them earlier today.


----------



## RoBro

tse,


yes I was looking for them and I already saw your post, thank you.

The funny thing is that I just got the models from somewhere else about 5 hours before you posted them 

Unfortunately they are discontinued like many others :-(

The only source I know of are slaughtered CRT PJs...

Roland


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,

Unfortunately they are discontinued like many others :-(

The only source I know of are slaughtered CRT PJs...

Roland
NTE Electronics has subs for them that I've used in the past:

http://nte01.nteinc.com/nte/NTExRefSemiProd.nsf/$$Search?OpenForm 



INTE2501 / NTE2502


----------



## tse

 www.bdent.com has stock on the 3600/1406. They sell small quantities. They still have alot of the Sanyo parts.


----------



## RoBro

The NTE parts have a crappy transit frequency and a much higher parasitic caps.

But at least they still have some HV HF stuff...

Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

In my experience, the only reason to use NTE parts is if there is no other alternative part

available, and it's either a fix-or-be-scrapped situation.


I've never seen a more unreliable brand.



CJ


----------



## Brian Hampton

It was kind of nice to see WM back here in the CRT forum.



Kind of.


-B


----------



## Graham Johnson

I agree Brian,


I have a lot of time for him


----------



## RoBro

Mike, do you also have a G90?

Would be interesting to have a side by side shootout of it with the 909.

LUG tubes vs. monster-focus-coils which one is the sharpest?

Roland

P.S.: of course with interlaced signal because bandwidth is a different question.


----------



## tse

Ok, I posted admittedly crummy pictures of some high resolution patterns from Marquee 9500. I would like to see some pictures from Sony and Barco projectors running at high resolution. What can your G90 or 909 do?


----------



## cmjohnson

Monster focus coils?


I have these big Thomas tubes (a bunch of them!) with Syntronic and Discom yokes and

focus coils, and I'm about to start investigating them to see if they can be safely reconfigured

to run with Marquee drive electronics. The focus coils are VERY serious and may be able to

push P19s to some VERY fine focus levels, that is, if they can be made compatible.


The reason those tubes have those serious metal shields around them is not for shielding

as such, but because the yokes are too heavy to be mounted on the tube necks safely.

The shields are their support structure.



CJ


----------



## ygoh

CJ,


Is that what the G90 uses ? The Syntronic and Discom yokes and

focus coils or you are just talking about different focus coils ?


----------



## cmjohnson

I do not know what a G90 uses. The yokes I am referring to are used on a certain type of

projection CRT from an Evans & Sutherland projector used in some Lockheed-Martin flight

simulation systems. I have five sets of these tubes and have had some success with them

in a Marquee chassis, but with Marquee magnetics on them. I want to try the Discom and

Syntronic magnetics IF they can be made compatible.


CJ


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Mike, do you also have a G90?

Would be interesting to have a side by side shootout of it with the 909.

LUG tubes vs. monster-focus-coils which one is the sharpest?

Roland

P.S.f cause with interlaced signal because bandwidth is a different question.
No, a G90 I do not have, but I do have the 909 and a Marquee 9500.


In a week or so, I'll be setup in the new shop. Once I'm able to get the projectors in place, I'll do some test patterns of both. I'll also have to repair a board in the Barco first, but that should not take long.


I plan to take pictures of 1080P and above. I'll also try to take some pictures of scope waveforms from various areas of the video chain. No enhancements (peaking).


----------



## ygoh

But have you calbrated or play around with the G90 Mike ?


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
But have you calbrated or play around with the G90 Mike ?
No, I've never even looked on the insides of one. I sort of stay away from Sony's. they have very complex video chains. I have the manuals to some of them, to include the G70 and G90. Everytime I look at the schematic, I start to wonder if the designers were getting bonuses for the most complex design.


They just don't produce that low end black detail that a finely tuned Marquee will render, and with that shortcoming, I have no desire to play with one. There's just too much stuff in the video chain to ever expect the excellent low end performance that a well tweaked Marquee will render.


----------



## WTS

Hi,


I'd have to agree with that statement about all the crap in the video chain. Just a look through the G70 schematics and I went wow I wonder if they have enough stages in the video chain. Compared to the Marquee or the Ampro x600 there is at least 3 times the electronics to pass through. Can't imagine the noise floor could be lower than a marquee.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
No, I've never even looked on the insides of one. I sort of stay away from Sony's. they have very complex video chains. I have the manuals to some of them, to include the G70 and G90. Everytime I look at the schematic, I start to wonder if the designers were getting bonuses for the most complex design.


They just don't produce that low end black detail that a finely tuned Marquee will render, and with that shortcoming, I have no desire to play with one. There's just too much stuff in the video chain to ever expect the excellent low end performance that a well tweaked Marquee will render.
So what do you think will be the next step for Marquees?

You've modded them to heck and back.

What do you expect from them in the future?


----------



## ygoh

Can you be more elaborate on "complex video chain" ?

How can that affect the low end details ?


How is the 909 video chain by the way ?


----------



## Chuchuf

I beg to differ Mike. The change in the G Clement has a dramatic effect on the low end. That and turning the gain down to a lower setting than Sony defaults to which requires the bias to be set up correctly.

I have been able to recently get great black level detail out of the Sonys when adjusted properly.


ygoh, see I told you you were going to get a Barco.....lol


Terry


----------



## Kamel407

Terry,


I apologize if this is offensive, but could you please change your avatar? That guy from deadwood is just hideous looking!


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
No, I've never even looked on the insides of one. I sort of stay away from Sony's. they have very complex video
Do you have any opinions on Barco's video chain? Do you think it would be practical to figure out the secrets to the 909 neck boards and try to convert lower ended Barco's?


----------



## PAW

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Terry,


I apologize if this is offensive, but could you please change your avatar? That guy from deadwood is just hideous looking!
You mean that's not REALLY Terry?  Maybe it's his evil twin brother who's on Deadwood?


----------



## Chuchuf

Kamel407,


Al is my HERO!!

Funny, I had a customer who emailed me and said he liked my picture........lol



Terry


----------



## cmjohnson

I think it's interesting...and great...that MP thinks the Marquee is superior to the G90 in low level detail rendering. It makes me more sure than ever that I just happened to pick the right projector series to play with.


Mike, I'm saving my pennies. I want to ship out a pile of boards and other stuff to you so I can turn my best 9501LC into a fully Parkerized 9501LC.


CJ


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Can you be more elaborate on "complex video chain" ?

How can that affect the low end details ?
Bandwidth and gamma


For each IC or transistor that the signal goes through, it's like sending it through so many feet of cable - therefore there will be some HF roll-off, and that would be the case regardless of how great those devices are. And the more stages that you send a signal through, the harder it is to maintain excellent gamma performance, and this can also cause low IRE crushing.


The Marquee is only capacitance coupled at the BNC's. beyond that it is directly coupled to the neck boards. So it only has one clamping circuit.


OTOH. A Sony may have several clamping circuits, which means that it has pedestals floating all over the place, because no clamping circuit is 100%. Therefore the less clamping, the better chance at keeping a constant pedestal. And more constant the pedestal, the better the low end performance.


For computer presentation, a complex video chain is a non issue, because there's no real need to control the pedestal and be concerned with low end blacks, and details... but with video, it's very important to have less clamping circuits, and a simpler video path, as to not create low end IRE crushing and bandwidth limiting.


Quote:

How is the 909 video chain by the way ?
I don't know at this point, but I'm hoping to look at it soon. One thing for sure, with a bandwidth of 180mhz, it's not likely to have a complex video chain.


----------



## RoBro

Do you need a clamping circuit at all if you use only PC?

Why not DC couple and adjust it once so that 0 is black and 255 is white?

Roland

P.S.:

Of course it would have to be temperature compensated with a thermistor and at installation you have to set it once for cold and once for warm


----------



## kal

Mike's exactly right ... (of course). The more 'stuff' you put in the signal path, the more you end up messing up the original signal no matter how careful you are.


People familiar with the high end audio world understand this perfectly. Take any high end amp or preamp and look at the design. It's usually deceptively simple since all you're really trying to do is build a "straight wire with gain". This is the reason why any good preamp will never have tone controls, speaker on/off switches/etc.


Kal


----------



## WTS

Hi, And I couldn't agree more with those comments, less is better in these cases.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Roland,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Do you need a clamping circuit at all if you use only PC?

Why not DC couple and adjust it once so that 0 is black and 255 is white?

Roland
Just think of what would happen if you get the slightest amount of DC

on that line. Can you say toasty tubes.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## RoBro

Good point, Reinhard.


Ok, you just sample the voltage at the time you expect the pedestal you would normally clamp to.

If it leaves a predefined range you take care of it (shut down G2 or whatver).

As long as it stays close to black you would do nothing and the signal would not be disturbed.

Roland


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
The CRT is a regular P19LCP on a Christy manufactured chassis, HD10L lens. The images would be a little sharper with a P19LUG CRT.
tse,

as the LUG have different electron guns (I think they must have a finer cathode tip or a smaller diameter hole in the G1 electrode), is there a difference in light output versus G1-cathode voltage compared to the LCP?

I mean if I have the same voltage swing on G1 and cathode, are the LUG as bright as the LCP or dimmer or even brighter?

Roland


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,

as the LUG have different electron guns (I think they must have a finer cathode tip or a smaller diameter hole in the G1 electrode), is there a difference in light output versus G1-cathode voltage compared to the LCP?

I mean if I have the same voltage swing on G1 and cathode, are the LUG as bright as the LCP or dimmer or even brighter?

Roland
Roland,


The LUG tubes are slightly brighter than the LCP's.


----------



## RoBro

Bruce,


do they require different adjustment (other G2 range maybe like the 07MSP vs. 07MP) or are they just plug-in replacements regarding the electronics?

Roland


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Bruce,


do they require different adjustment (other G2 range maybe like the 07MSP vs. 07MP) or are they just plug-in replacements regarding the electronics?

Roland
Yes, the G2 and Gain need to be toned down a little or they will be brighter (which you don't want).


----------



## RoBro

OT: Can anyone tell me if it is possible to search for posts from a user in a specified thread?


I know that tse has whitten something here in this thread but I do not know for which words I should search. And as the thread is very long...


So is there a function that shows me all of tse's posts in this thread?

Roland


----------



## PAW

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
OT: Can anyone tell me if it is possible to search for posts from a user in a specified thread?


I know that tse has whitten something here in this thread but I do not know for which words I should search. And as the thread is very long...


So is there a function that shows me all of tse's posts in this thread?

Roland
Not that I've found. The best I've found is to use the advanced search, search by user, display by post. Then you just look at the posts with in the thread you are interested in. A little more work, especially if the person posts alot but it works. The issue is the post are displayed by date. So, you could be pages into the search to find the right post.


I just looked. You can sort the search results by user name. That might help. You could also put the title in the search. That might limit it to just the thread in question.


----------



## RoBro

I have to say WOW.


MP was completely right. Never seen such a high number of transistors doing a job that can be done by about 1/10 of them.

Seems the G90 was really a split team design. Every designer was responsible for one function and developed a board where just this function is implemented. And to make the interfacing easy they had to do all the AC coupling and DC restoring and input- and output-buffering. Really crazy. BUT they did some nice buffer designs. Unfortunately those many constant current source will not make the noise go away...

Roland


----------



## ygoh

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
No, I've never even looked on the insides of one. I sort of stay away from Sony's. they have very complex video chains. I have the manuals to some of them, to include the G70 and G90. Everytime I look at the schematic, I start to wonder if the designers were getting bonuses for the most complex design.


They just don't produce that low end black detail that a finely tuned Marquee will render, and with that shortcoming, I have no desire to play with one. There's just too much stuff in the video chain to ever expect the excellent low end performance that a well tweaked Marquee will render.
Mike, did you get to actually get to see that the low end black detail is not as good ?

Or do you conclude that from just looking at the schematic circuit diagram ?


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
tse,

as the LUG have different electron guns (I think they must have a finer cathode tip or a smaller diameter hole in the G1 electrode), is there a difference in light output versus G1-cathode voltage compared to the LCP?

I mean if I have the same voltage swing on G1 and cathode, are the LUG as bright as the LCP or dimmer or even brighter?

Roland
From the spec sheet:


Drive for 1mA anode current, G-2 set for 180V cut-off

P19LCP=84V

P19LUG=88V


So the LCP is a little easier to drive


Light output (cd/cm^2) @ 1mA anode current:


LCP

Blue=2400

Red=14,000

Green=25,000


LUG

Blue=1600

Red=12,000

Green=23,000


These numbers are as close as I could tell. The graphs are on a log scale.


I guess that there is a little less light from the 'LUG because of finer (thinner) phosphor for the smaller spot size.


But, you know there isn't really any huge difference one way or the other.


----------



## ygoh

tse,


Thanks you that was helpful, it explain why some complained that the Cine9 is not as bright as they like their pj to be.


----------



## cmjohnson

You may be interested to know that I have just completed first testing of a modded focus

yoke for Marquees. It basically consists of running a Sony focus yoke in a Marquee, but

in the Marquee focus yoke shell. It makes very significant (I would say dramatic)

improfements to the focusing ability and beam spot size on a Marquee. If the finished

Frankenyoke project meets the expectations that I now have for them, then everyone

will HAVE to re-rate all Marquees several notches higher on the list, if they have these

Frankenyokes installed.



BTW, the LUG tube are SUPPOSEDLY brighter than P19LCPs at the same drive levels.

But I haven't tested it. I guess I could, as I have a red LUG here that I have yet to

do anything with.


Try the red LUG with the Frankenyoke....that could be scary sharp!


CJ


----------



## Kamel407

Congrats CJ on trying out new and innovative projects.


----------



## cmjohnson

You're going to be the first person (outside of myself) who gets a set of the Frankenyokes

in your projector, Eric! Assuming the project survives full operational tests, that is!


Hey, I need a tester, don't I? 



CJ


----------



## Kamel407

rise, Rise, RISE!!!


you know I'm always down with whatever


Can't wait to test it out on the NN/MP-5 combo when its ready.


I'm working on upgrading the HTPC as well.


Eric #1


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You may be interested to know that I have just completed first testing of a modded focus

yoke for Marquees. It basically consists of running a Sony focus yoke in a Marquee, but

in the Marquee focus yoke shell. It makes very significant (I would say dramatic)

improfements to the focusing ability and beam spot size on a Marquee. If the finished

Frankenyoke project meets the expectations that I now have for them, then everyone

will HAVE to re-rate all Marquees several notches higher on the list, if they have these

Frankenyokes installed.


CJ
What kind of Sony yoke? I thought the G90 focus yokes were supposed to be the size of coffee cans? So how did you squeeze those coils into a little Marquee shell? Did you just do the focus coils without the 2 dynamic astig coils?


----------



## cmjohnson

To be honest, I'm not 100 percent sure of the make of these coils, and I refer to them as AmPro/Sony yokes as they came out of an AmPro 4200 chassis, and I THINK they're made

by Sony. Does KF-2211K sound like a Sony part number?


I've seen yokes that were substantially identical that were surely Sony yokes before,

and these definitely have that Sony build quality and design thing happening, so I am

fairly confident that they ARE Sony yokes. Right down to the modular plug and the

sardine can key style collar tightener, they look very Sony-ish in every detail.


These tests were done without dynamic astig coils, as I used yokes from a Marquee 8000

(no astig), but I believe that the astig coils from a suitable Marquee focus yoke can be

transferred over as well, though of course I'd need to check into that.


CJ


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You may be interested to know that I have just completed first testing of a modded focus

yoke for Marquees. It basically consists of running a Sony focus yoke in a Marquee, but

in the Marquee focus yoke shell. It makes very significant (I would say dramatic)

improfements to the focusing ability and beam spot size on a Marquee. If the finished

Frankenyoke project meets the expectations that I now have for them, then everyone

will HAVE to re-rate all Marquees several notches higher on the list, if they have these

Frankenyokes installed.



BTW, the LUG tube are SUPPOSEDLY brighter than P19LCPs at the same drive levels.

But I haven't tested it. I guess I could, as I have a red LUG here that I have yet to

do anything with.


Try the red LUG with the Frankenyoke....that could be scary sharp!


CJ
The LUG tube ARE brighter! Those DF yokes aren't made by Sony, they're made by a Japanese company that I can't recall at the moment, but, Barco uses the same company's yokes. I never got around to it, but the Barco 808 yokes with go into a Marquee and should perform MUCH better than the one that EH used.


----------



## cmjohnson

I'm not referring to the DEFLECTION yokes. I'm referring to the FOCUS yokes, which

are the ones that I've swapped out to get impressive improvements in focus ability.



CJ


----------



## ygoh

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
The LUG tube ARE brighter! Those DF yokes aren't made by Sony, they're made by a Japanese company that I can't recall at the moment, but, Barco uses the same company's yokes. I never got around to it, but the Barco 808 yokes with go into a Marquee and should perform MUCH better than the one that EH used.
But tse just post the spec from MEC (Panasonic), I wonder where did you get your measurement ?


Who made the DF yokes for Marquee ?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
I'm not referring to the DEFLECTION yokes. I'm referring to the FOCUS yokes, which

are the ones that I've swapped out to get impressive improvements in focus ability.



CJ
All the pieces (DF yoke, sub and fous coil) are from the same company, the geometry is better also.


----------



## stefuel

What is a "LUG" tube?


Chip


----------



## Clarence

P19LUG... the Barco Cine 9 tube:

http://img201.echo.cx/img201/1733/barcocine9da.gif


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
What is a "LUG" tube?
P19LUG... the Barco Cine 9 tube:

http://img201.echo.cx/img201/1733/barcocine9da.gif


----------



## cmjohnson

Thomson Tubes & Displays makes all the magnetics found on Marquees. Their deflection

yokes are found on AmPro projectors which have Panasonic tubes, and they provide yokes

to many other manufacturers as well. Or they did, as some of them are obviously not

doing that anymore.


The P19LUG tubes are also used by VDC in the Marquee 9500LCSIM.


CJ


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
What is a "LUG" tube?


Chip
It's a 9" P19 tube that can produce a slightly higher resolution than say a standard LCP.


----------



## ygoh

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Bandwidth and gamma


For each IC or transistor that the signal goes through, it's like sending it through so many feet of cable - therefore there will be some HF roll-off, and that would be the case regardless of how great those devices are. And the more stages that you send a signal through, the harder it is to maintain excellent gamma performance, and this can also cause low IRE crushing.


The Marquee is only capacitance coupled at the BNC's. beyond that it is directly coupled to the neck boards. So it only has one clamping circuit.


OTOH. A Sony may have several clamping circuits, which means that it has pedestals floating all over the place, because no clamping circuit is 100%. Therefore the less clamping, the better chance at keeping a constant pedestal. And more constant the pedestal, the better the low end performance.
Marquee 9500 is AC coupled at the BNC, how about at the video / neck board, is it AC or DC coupled ?


----------



## RoBro

There is some switch called clamp on the videoboard, but I do not know if it does any dc restore or what else.

The rest ic very straightforward

Roland


----------



## mp20748

Yes, the first stage has DC restore after the AC coupling.



RoBro,

I'm planning on setting up the Barco 909 next to my Marquee 9500LC, but first I'll have to build a high bandwidth RGB splitter. Once that's completed, I'll display both projectors using the same test patterns. My test pattern generator is not programmable, so I'll have to use the provided (odd ball) resolutions. For instance I have a 1800x1440 test resolution that has multiple test patterns. I'll use that as my top end resolution, and then I'll select a lower resolution. I'll have to repair a board in the 909 before I'm able to do this, so after repairing dozens of boards in it, I'll finally request the service manual.


The test generators 1800x1440 resolution looks real good on my 9500LC. I only wish I could run a similar resolution on my HTPC (Gforce 5950), but that card's (actual) bandwidth is not the best there, so we'll have to use the pattern generator.


----------



## ygoh

Mike,


How about at the video / neck board, does it have another CA coupling and DC restoration again ? Or only one set at the BNC and that's it ?


When you modded your M9500, do you change the amp for cathode and G1 all together or some components inside of it ?


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Mike,


How about at the video / neck board, does it have another CA coupling and DC restoration again ? Or only one set at the BNC and that's it ?
No, there's only one restore circuit from the BNC's>, but one of the CRT's elements (cathode or G1) is cap coupled at the tube.



Quote:

When you modded your M9500, do you change the amp for cathode and G1 all together or some components inside of it ?
Some components only.


----------



## ygoh

So, one of the CRT's element is cap coupled and there is no coupling nor dc restoring on the other element, it comes straight from the BNC ?


How does having too much stages with AC coupling and DC restore could destroy a good gamma curve ? I understand how it make the pedestal uncertain, but gamma ???


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
So, one of the CRT's element is cap coupled and there is no coupling nor dc restoring on the other element, it comes straight from the BNC ?


How does having too much stages with AC coupling and DC restore could destroy a good gamma curve ? I understand how it make the pedestal uncertain, but gamma ???
Curve, did I say curve?


----------



## ygoh

Mike,


No you dodn't say gamma 'curve'. You said just 'gamma', I meant voltage to current curve.


----------



## RoBro

Mike,


IMHO both amps are DC coupled. There are Cs in the cathode line, but they are bypassed for DC by the current sense transistor and the overcurrent sense optocoupler.

So there is a DC restore on the first stage and one DC restore on the output stage (the sample voltage is taken at the emitter of the NPN output transistor of the cathode drive stage).


Roland

P.S.:

From all the amps that drive both cathode and G1 it is the most clever design that I have seen. It only has a little low voltage range.


----------



## Lightningman

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
It's a 9" P19 tube that can produce a slightly higher resolution than say a standard LCP.
God, I just nearly had a heart attack   The first time I read the post,

I thought Bruce had just written "slightly higher resolution than say a standard

LCD"


Phew!! Glad I re-read it


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lightningman*
God, I just nearly had a heart attack   The first time I read the post,

I thought Bruce had just written "slightly higher resolution than say a standard

LCD"


Phew!! Glad I re-read it 
   I don't think I would EVER say "LCD", but, on the other hand,....... if there's anything that will eventually overtake the CRT, it will be the D'ILA.  Yet, they're always (they think) "improving" things. They stopped using the xenon bulb, which is what gave it excellent color temp. It's probably the most interesting technology to come along since the CRT. The real problem with these digitals (except for the ones made by companies like Christie) is that they are made like throw aways. They don't lend themselves to service and maintainance. On the other hand, some of the CRT projectors were physically made to last forever, with just the replacement of the tubes necessary. The reason why some industrial companies still use CRTs is because hour for hour they require less service and maintenance. The problems you see here on the forum is usually the result of improper setup to begin with, or tweaking things they know nothing about causing other problems. If you look at some of the hours on CRT projectors coming from the government, which other than worn out tubes are still working, proves they must be tough.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Bruce,


Agree 100% on what you wrote. Two things (aside from image quality, which

someday might be licked) always bugged me with digitals. One was the price

of the bulbs and the heat that they produce. The second was, as you pointed

out, being non serviceable items. The heat radiating from the lamp is going to

take it's toll on the electronics. Either they will have to find a way to make them

(optically) more efficient or find a colder source of light.


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## cmjohnson

You may be interested to know that I ran a set of Frankenyokes in a Marquee 8000

with roasted tubes last night. The range of focus available from these yokes is HUGE.


No doubt you've noticed that the zone focus adjustments, particularly the outer zones,

don't do a whole lot on a Marquee. Sometimes you can move the focus from 0 to 100

and barely see a difference in focus. With these Frankenyokes, the dynamic range of

adjustment that is available is amazing. They're very efficient, and do seem to give a

finer focus than the stock yokes.


CJ


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lightningman*
The heat radiating from the lamp is going to

take it's toll on the electronics. Either they will have to find a way to make them

(optically) more efficient or find a colder source of light.
To include placing the cheapest components in that heat trap, really makes for a very expensive disposable technology.



Now on image quality. Why are digitals so much sharper than film? Everytime I see a digital in operation, it reminds me of a cheap CD player - Too Sharp.


Film is, and was meant to be NATURAL.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lightningman*
Hi Bruce,


Agree 100% on what you wrote. Two things (aside from image quality, which

someday might be licked) always bugged me with digitals. One was the price

of the bulbs and the heat that they produce. The second was, as you pointed

out, being non serviceable items. The heat radiating from the lamp is going to

take it's toll on the electronics. Either they will have to find a way to make them

(optically) more efficient or find a colder source of light.


Regards,

Reinhard
You've got that right about the heat!!! And the smaller they try to make them, the worse it seems to get. I don't know WHY they think everyone wants to carry their projector around in their notebook case. 


Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You may be interested to know that I ran a set of Frankenyokes in a Marquee 8000 with roasted tubes last night. The range of focus available from these yokes is HUGE.


No doubt you've noticed that the zone focus adjustments, particularly the outer zones,

don't do a whole lot on a Marquee. Sometimes you can move the focus from 0 to 100

and barely see a difference in focus. With these Frankenyokes, the dynamic range of

adjustment that is available is amazing. They're very efficient, and do seem to give a

finer focus than the stock yokes.


CJ
I've discovered that the permanent magnets seem to lose power with age. If you use a new all new magnetics, you don't see that problem. Originally I thought it was a problem with the focus circuits, but it's not.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
You've got that right about the heat!!! And the smaller they try to make them, the worse it seems to get. I don't know WHY they think everyone wants to carry their projector around in their notebook case. 





I've discovered that the permanent magnets seem to lose power with age. If you use a new all new magnetics, you don't see that problem. Originally I thought it was a problem with the focus circuits, but it's not.
Techie dude,

Currect me if I'm wrong, I know you will , exactly which permanent magnets are we talking about. If we are talking about "focus coils" then we are talking about electromagnetics. If the focus coils are showing signs of failure, I would suggest that it's the fault of the insulation of the wire used to create the windings inside. With heat and age the insulation on the strands of wire begins to break down, requiring additional current to operate properly. This is true of all electromagnetics be it motor, transformer right down to the simple electromagnet used at a junk yard to pick up scrap iron. If you are refering to the astig rings, that's a different story. Hold on. I'm stepping out to grab my flame suit 


Chip


----------



## Art Sonneborn

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You may be interested to know that I ran a set of Frankenyokes in a Marquee 8000 with roasted tubes last night. The range of focus available from these yokes is HUGE.


No doubt you've noticed that the zone focus adjustments, particularly the outer zones,

don't do a whole lot on a Marquee. Sometimes you can move the focus from 0 to 100

and barely see a difference in focus. With these Frankenyokes, the dynamic range of

adjustment that is available is amazing. They're very efficient, and do seem to give a

finer focus than the stock yokes.


CJ


I love the Frankenyoke thing but when finished the PJ will need a name to ..... any ideas yet ?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
Techie dude,

Currect me if I'm wrong, I know you will , exactly which permanent magnets are we talking about. If we are talking about "focus coils" then we are talking about electromagnetics. If the focus coils are showing signs of failure, I would suggest that it's the fault of the insulation of the wire used to create the windings inside. With heat and age the insulation on the strands of wire begins to break down, requiring additional current to operate properly. This is true of all electromagnetics be it motor, transformer right down to the simple electromagnet used at a junk yard to pick up scrap iron. If you are refering to the astig rings, that's a different story. Hold on. I'm stepping out to grab my flame suit 


Chip
Oil man dude, (aka Chipper)


There are two magnets in the assembly, an electro magnet and a permanent magnet. It's the PM that weakens. I once read a warning by Electrohome saying not to allow the focus coil to get near any strong magnetic fields or the coil would need to be replaced. When I inquired about it, they were unable to tell me WHAT or HOW the problem would manifest itself, but I guess this must be it.


----------



## RoBro

I doubt that a bit.

if the permanent magnet looses gauss, then you would correct that with a higher static electonic focus setting.

I think the higher range for electronic settings is due to the higher winding count indicated by the higher resistance measured by CJ.

But of course, lost gauss stress the electronics or may even focussing impossible.

Roland


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
I doubt that a bit.

if the permanent magnet looses gauss, then you would correct that with a higher static electonic focus setting.

I think the higher range for electronic settings is due to the higher winding count indicated by the higher resistance measured by CJ.

But of course, lost gauss stress the electronics or may even focussing impossible.

Roland
I see that you're unfamiliar with the Marquees magnetics.


----------



## cmjohnson

As I understand focusing magnets, it goes like this:



The permanent magnets generate a ring-shaped magnetic field that constricts the electron

beam. The active electronic focusing coils generate a ring-shaped magnetic field that

cancels out the field generated by the permanent magnets. By adjusting the strength

of the active coil's drive signal, you adjust the amount of squeeze being exerted on the

electron beam.


That's it in a very basic sense. There are at least two active coils in the focus coil

assemblies that I've seen taken apart so far, and some had four, with three of them

clearly running in parallel. I am not exactly clear on the function of each of the multiple

coils, but if someone knows and wants to enlighten me, please feel free to do so.


I've heard them referred to as static and dynamic focus, so I can just guess that the

static focus coil is the primary one, used to set the overall focus level, and the dynamic

one would be used to add or subtract a little more or less field strength in order to achieve

perfect focus at the edges and corners. Sounds about right, maybe?



CJ


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
I've heard them referred to as static and dynamic focus, so I can just guess that the

static focus coil is the primary one, used to set the overall focus level, and the dynamic

one would be used to add or subtract a little more or less field strength in order to achieve

perfect focus at the edges and corners. Sounds about right, maybe?



CJ
That's about right. The PM magnet is part of the static system and when it weakens, it reduces the affect of the electronic dynamic focus in the corners. Maybe the extra coils you're seeing are the one with and without electronic stig (8000 vs. 8500).


----------



## RoBro

the permanent is the basic field. you set the eM coils to zero current and slide the magnet forth and back until best center focus is met.

Then you can touch up this with the static focus setting. The electronics send the current for that through the static coil. it has high impedance because it has many windings which allows you to adjust the magnetig force with usage of very little current.

for the dynamic focus the inductance of the static coil is too high as you need to change the field strength very fast (some PJs scan over 150khz). Therefor there is the dynamic coil which has much less windings and so lower inductance so the current can be changed faster. But it needs more current and so the electronics driving it get very hot.

On the GP series you have 3 small ICs for static focus and 3 Hybrids plus fat transistors on big heat sinks for the dynamic focus...

Roland


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Oil man dude, (aka Chipper)


There are two magnets in the assembly, an electro magnet and a permanent magnet. It's the PM that weakens. I once read a warning by Electrohome saying not to allow the focus coil to get near any strong magnetic fields or the coil would need to be replaced. When I inquired about it, they were unable to tell me WHAT or HOW the problem would manifest itself, but I guess this must be it.
I just happen to have a focus coil here on a tube on my desk. I have to decide if I want to trash it to find the permanent magnet inside. What kind of magnet are we looking for, a composite magnet or an iron one?



Chip


----------



## RoBro

you are looking for some cylindrical magnets placed between two iron ring plates

Roland

What kind of coil is it?

Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

Depends on the focus coil design. The Thomson design consists of eight bar magnets (Alnico, I think) in a cage assembly with two keeper plates on the ends. Think "squirrel cage".


I found a damaged yoke like I'm using for this yoke mod, and it uses alnico half ring magnets,

two on each side to form complete rings. They sandwich a permeable iron ring and the ends

are ferrite discs.


In all cases, the coils are in the center of the core assembly, except for the high-Z coil

on the Thomson yoke, which is cemented to the face of one of the keeper plates.


Other designs will vary slightly, of course.


Ceramic, alnico, rare earth, I'm sure all are usable in focus magnet assemblies.


CJ


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You may be interested to know that I ran a set of Frankenyokes in a Marquee 8000

with roasted tubes last night. The range of focus available from these yokes is HUGE.


No doubt you've noticed that the zone focus adjustments, particularly the outer zones,

don't do a whole lot on a Marquee. Sometimes you can move the focus from 0 to 100

and barely see a difference in focus. With these Frankenyokes, the dynamic range of

adjustment that is available is amazing. They're very efficient, and do seem to give a

finer focus than the stock yokes.


CJ
The Marquee uses a resonant circuit for the dynamic left and right focus modulation. There can't be a big difference in modulation between the left and right side or the circuit doesn't work. So even when the adjustment is at "0" there is still alot of signal present. The difference between "0" and "100" is something like 20%. That's why it looks like it doesn't do much.


"Roland

P.S.:

From all the amps that drive both cathode and G1 it is the most clever design that I have seen. It only has a little low voltage range. "


Electrohome was awarded a patent on that design.


----------



## tse

Be careful if you take apart the magnetic assembly and put it back together. I'm talking the metal end plates and core parts. I've seen that done and it causes the electron beam to deflect at a 90 degree angle and actually burn a hole in the tube neck as the electrons go to the grounded metal yoke clamp.


----------



## cmjohnson

Nice!


Yes, you MUST check polarity on each of the individual magnets when reassembling the

structure. If they're not all set the same, it won't work right.


CJ


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
From the spec sheet:


Drive for 1mA anode current, G-2 set for 180V cut-off

P19LCP=84V

P19LUG=88V


So the LCP is a little easier to drive


Light output (cd/cm^2) @ 1mA anode current:


LCP

Blue=2400

Red=14,000

Green=25,000


LUG

Blue=1600

Red=12,000

Green=23,000


These numbers are as close as I could tell. The graphs are on a log scale.


I guess that there is a little less light from the 'LUG because of finer (thinner) phosphor for the smaller spot size.


But, you know there isn't really any huge difference one way or the other.
Do you have the spec for P19LQF ?


Is there a web site that I could go to for this info ?


----------



## RoBro

The blue efficiency of the LUG should be lower due to the smaller spotsize. This increases current density and as we all know, blue efficiency drops at high current densities (thats why some PJs have a built in defocus option for blue.

Roland


----------



## KennyG

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Chuchuf*
Robert,

Surprisingly I have never seen an ampro.

Yes forgot a few. Revised:


24. Sony VPH-1031

23. Electrohome ECP3xxx/4xxx

22. ECP3xx1/4xx1 (with ACON)

21. Barco 801

20. Sony VPH-1252

19. Sony VPH-1272

18. Sony D50

17. NEC 6PG (or GE Imager equivalent)

16. NEC PG9200 Xtra

15. Barco 808

14. Electrohome Marquee 8000/8500

13 Barco 1208

12. 808s

11. Barco 1208s

10. NEC XG nonLC

9. Sony 1292

8. Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC

7. Sony G70, NEC XG-LC

6. Barco 1209

5. Barco 1209S

4. Marquee 9501LC

3. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

2. Marquee 9501LC/MP modded

1. Sony G90


Terry
\\


Having owned, or setup several pj's in the 5 through 15 section of Terry's revised list, then also owning an Ampro 3600.

I can tell you the 3600 goes anywhere within the 10 to 15 area. It's colors are exactly the same as 11 thru 15, it's as sharp, or sharper than all of them, IMO it's the sharpest pj I've ever lived with. However it's not as 3-D as the Marquees or XG's within that range.


----------



## Clarence

Yeah, I've got a 3600. We added it in one of the later lists. I think this is the most recent version:

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000........EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Mark_A_W

You almost need to divide it into performance bands...


Video only

ES Data

EM air coupled

EM LC 8"

EM LC 9"


Something like that (?).


It's a bit tricky as there is no real tube size difference between 7" and 8", 8" is usually EM focus (I think 12xx tubes are bigger than G70 ones in reality).

But there definitely is a difference in tube size from 8" to 9" (P16/180's to 09MX/P19's I suppose).


....murky....


----------



## Kamel407

I like the original "Good, Better, Best" theme. This is great for newbies like me, a very good guide. There was at one time a street price gauge but I am guessing prices are changing slowly.


Certainly you could break it down even farther for the real techs though.


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
The Marquee uses a resonant circuit for the dynamic left and right focus modulation. There can't be a big difference in modulation between the left and right side or the circuit doesn't work. So even when the adjustment is at "0" there is still alot of signal present. The difference between "0" and "100" is something like 20%. That's why it looks like it doesn't do much.


"Roland

P.S.:

From all the amps that drive both cathode and G1 it is the most clever design that I have seen. It only has a little low voltage range. "


Electrohome was awarded a patent on that design.
They were awarded for what design ?


----------



## cmjohnson

The resonant circuit as used for multi-zone focus modulation.




Even those "peformance bands" aren't all that accurate. For example, having owned

a Sony 1270 (ES focus), I can say that it wasn't really all that far behind a Marquee 8000

in any significant way. It was definitely a data grade unit and then some.


CJ


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *gmgav*
They were awarded for what design ?
I think he was refering to the neck boards used in the Marquee's. And if Electrohome was awarded for the neck boards design, they truly deserved the award.


Truly you got to give the designers their props there, because they could have done like so many others and simply used video modules (Sanyo). which would have been cheaper and would have saved big bucks in R&D. But it seems that wanted to do better, and they did. And though so many fault Electrohome for not making much of a change to the video chain in the Marquee over the past ten years - I don't.


What could they have done to improve the video chain?


At the time the projector was first introduced, they were using the highest bandwidth semiconductors available, and as the chips got better, they upgraded with the best. The original Op Amps were CLC409's and then they were replaced with HFA1100's (Harris), and then they went with the highest bandwidth chip at that time, which was the CLC449 (National).


The neck boards are using Motorola RF transistors, and they are the only video out transistors that I've ever experienced that high temperature did not degrade them.


Twelve years later... who has used a better video chain in their projector, and who has designed their own non video module 'high bandwidth' neck boards?


----------



## cmjohnson

And to add to that, I wonder if you could design and produce an affordable neck card today

that would be substantially better.


The video driver amps would be a BIG problem. All I can think of as a replacement solution

would be to use a digital pulse width modulation system for the drive amp, running at some

obscene frequency, and using amps that are nearly microwave transmitters. And that would

not be particularly affordable.



Mike, I'm sure I could look this up myself, but it might take a while. So I'll ask you, and

maybe you have the answers: What was the actual usable bandwidth of early Marquees,

what were the bandwidths when first H1100s and then CLC449s were put in, and what

is it now in the latest versions with nothing but CLC449s in use, including in all places on

the VIM board?


How does the addition of the peaking trimmer caps affect the bandwidth of the VIM, too?


CJ


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
And to add to that, I wonder if you could design and produce an affordable neck card today

that would be substantially better.


The video driver amps would be a BIG problem. All I can think of as a replacement solution

would be to use a digital pulse width modulation system for the drive amp, running at some

obscene frequency, and using amps that are nearly microwave transmitters. And that would

not be particularly affordable.



Mike, I'm sure I could look this up myself, but it might take a while. So I'll ask you, and

maybe you have the answers: What was the actual usable bandwidth of early Marquees,

what were the bandwidths when first H1100s and then CLC449s were put in, and what

is it now in the latest versions with nothing but CLC449s in use, including in all places on

the VIM board?


How does the addition of the peaking trimmer caps affect the bandwidth of the VIM, too?


CJ
You're right, there couldn't do it better for the video chain. BUT, their focusing coils system, video amp (higher bw), dynamic astigmator and convergence/geometry circuit could do a lot of improving.


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
I think he was refering to the neck boards used in the Marquee's. And if Electrohome was awarded for the neck boards design, they truly deserved the award.


Truly you got to give the designers their props there, because they could have done like so many others and simply used video modules (Sanyo). which would have been cheaper and would have saved big bucks in R&D. But it seems that wanted to do better, and they did. And though so many fault Electrohome for not making much of a change to the video chain in the Marquee over the past ten years - I don't.


What could they have done to improve the video chain?


At the time the projector was first introduced, they were using the highest bandwidth semiconductors available, and as the chips got better, they upgraded with the best. The original Op Amps were CLC409's and then they were replaced with HFA1100's (Harris), and then they went with the highest bandwidth chip at that time, which was the CLC449 (National).


The neck boards are using Motorola RF transistors, and they are the only video out transistors that I've ever experienced that high temperature did not degrade them.


Twelve years later... who has used a better video chain in their projector, and who has designed their own non video module 'high bandwidth' neck boards?
What did do different at the neck board that they got awarded for ?


----------



## WTS

Hi, I see the Barco 909 uses lots of HFA1100's, I guess they feel it's a pretty good opamp.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Hi, I see the Barco 909 uses lots of HFA1100's, I guess they feel it's a pretty good opamp.
WTS,

How do you know this? Do you have the schematic prints for the 909? If so, please tell us what the neck boards looks like. What is the name of the chip they use on the neck board? Do they split the video between cathode and G1 or just run it to cathode?


I'm very curious about it.


----------



## tse

The patent was for the neck card amplifier design. It's called something like a mirror cascode amplifier. The motorola transistors were designed especially for video output stages. Their max gain frequency is 1.2GHz (if I remember right). They can block 100V and conduct 400mA with only a few pF of capacitance. Sanyo developed parts that can block 80V and conduct 500mA with slightly more capacitance with a max gain frequency at 800MHz. CRT projectors need parts that can handle higher voltage than the Sanyo parts. I think that is why the Marquee neck cards can do what they do. The Motorola parts are very good.


Electrohome developed a very good neck card design but kinda blew it with the VIM design. It's bandwidth was less than the neck card's. Don't discount the peaking cap/resistor change. It almost doubles the bandwidth of the VIM.


The Barco design uses a hybrid module that drives only the cathode.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
The Barco design uses a hybrid module that drives only the cathode.
I can't speak for the Barco 808 series but I do have the print for the 1208 that has the "big black box" neck board using discrete components. It clearly shows that after the video comes into the box they use a differential amp that splits it and then the video gets amplified to BOTH the cathode and the G1.


So it would appear this is done very similar to the way Marquee did it.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
Electrohome developed a very good neck card design but kinda blew it with the VIM design. It's bandwidth was less than the neck card's.
They did manufacture a better Vim, but they later stopped using it.


mike


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
I can't speak for the Barco 808 series but I do have the print for the 1208 that has the "big black box" neck board using discrete components. It clearly shows that after the video comes into the box they use a differential amp that splits it and then the video gets amplified to BOTH the cathode and the G1.


So it would appear this is done very similar to the way Marquee did it.
Yes, they as well had a discrete design. However their design was somewhat hindered by the limited video power transistors available at the time, and if my memory is correct, they were the same Sanyo transistors that tse mentioned.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Hi, I see the Barco 909 uses lots of HFA1100's, I guess they feel it's a pretty good opamp.
Other than other Barco 909 owners, who died and left the 909 as the "leader" in inovative video circuit design? Everything about it is cheesy, right down to their Rube Goldberg scheimpflug adjustment design and LC housing. The only thing I like about the Barco is their roomy chassis design, which makes it easy to work on.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Other than other Barco 909 owners, who died and left the 909 as the "leader" in inovative video circuit design? Everything about it is cheesy, right down to their Rube Goldberg scheimpflug adjustment design and LC housing. The only thing I like about the Barco is their roomy chassis design, which makes it easy to work on. 
The only one that has more room inside is the nine inch AmPros.

OK, I closed the cover. Where did I leave my truck with the utility body parked  ?


Chip


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
The only one that has more room inside is the nine inch AmPros.

OK, I closed the cover. Where did I leave my truck with the utility body parked  ?


Chip
Chipper.


AmPro, is that a projector?  Never saw one.  It sounds like it might be a good candidate for a VDC rebuild.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Chipper.


AmPro, is that a projector?  Never saw one.  It sounds like it might be a good candidate for a VDC rebuild.
Ohhhhh Nooooo. No rebuilds in my projector. You'd never let me hear the end of it  .


Chip


PS Yes it's a projector, with an in-law appartment


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
Ohhhhh Nooooo. No rebuilds in my projector. You'd never let me hear the end of it  .


Chip


PS Yes it's a projector, with an in-law appartment 
I figured that even a VDC rebuild was good enough for an AmPro.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
I figured that even a VDC rebuild was good enough for an AmPro.  
Now you're getting nasty. Move you're face closer to the screen. I'm going to reach through and give you a *****-slap 


Chip


----------



## WTS

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Other than other Barco 909 owners, who died and left the 909 as the "leader" in inovative video circuit design? Everything about it is cheesy, right down to their Rube Goldberg scheimpflug adjustment design and LC housing. The only thing I like about the Barco is their roomy chassis design, which makes it easy to work on. 
Hi Techman,


I didn't say they were better than any other, I was just saying that with all the hype about the 909 being the one to beat, they sure used alot of HFA110's, which is flat to only 100Mhz.


And whats wrong with the Ampro x600 series, if you haven't seen one then you can't comment or knock on it.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Hi Techman,


I didn't say they were better than any other, I was just saying that with all the hype about the 909 being the one to beat, they sure used alot of HFA110's, which is flat to only 100Mhz.


And whats wrong with the Ampro x600 series, if you haven't seen one then you can't comment or knock on it.
Walter,

Don't worry, Bruce loves to jump at the chance to bust my balls. He's welcome in my house any day. I actually look forward to the little zingers directed my way 


Chip


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Hi, I see the Barco 909 uses lots of HFA1100's, I guess they feel it's a pretty good opamp.
Where did they use the HFA1100s at ? Do you have the service manual or 909


Mike, you have the 909, did you see them ?


----------



## gmgav




WTS said:


> Hi Techman,
> 
> 
> I didn't say they were better than any other, I was just saying that with all the hype about the 909 being the one to beat, they sure used a lot of HFA110's, which is flat to only 100Mhz.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> Sorry Walter, I look it up and yes they do use a lot of HFA1100s at the early stages in the video chain.
> 
> *Description
> 
> 
> The HFA1100 is a high-speed, wideband, fast settling current feedback amplifier built with Intersil's proprietary complementary bipolar UHF-1 process. It operates with single supply voltages as low as 4.5V (see Application Information section).
> 
> 
> The HFA1100 is a basic op amp with uncommitted pins 1, 5, and 8.
> 
> 
> This device offers a significant performance improvement over the AD811, AD9617/18, the CLC400-409, and the EL2070, EL2073, EL2030.*
> *Key Features
> 
> 
> Low Distortion (30MHz, HD2) -56dBc
> 
> -3dB Bandwidth 850MHz
> 
> Very Fast Slew Rate 2300V/Âµs
> 
> Fast Settling Time (0.1%) 11ns
> 
> Excellent Gain Flatness
> 
> (100MHz) Â±0.14dB
> 
> (50MHz) Â±0.04dB
> 
> High Output Current 60mA
> 
> Overdrive Recovery*


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
And whats wrong with the Ampro x600 series, if you haven't seen one then you can't comment or knock on it.


lol   



You tell him Chipper.


----------



## gmgav

tse,


What did Marquee 9500 uses right now for the op-amp ? HFA1100 or CLC449 ?


----------



## WTS

Ah,okay all in good fun I'm sure. Maybe just alittle jealous.


----------



## RVonse

While we are still kind of on the subject of neck card components could I ask some of you knowledgable folks another question?


There was an inconclusive discussion on this thread here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=532369&page=2 about neck board chips found on the Barco 808 neck cards. I only know for sure that the BG808 uses whats called a VPH06 chip. Another forum member (I think his name was Roland) claims the VPH08 and VPJ08b chips were used as well (but perhaps only in the higher bandwidth 808s?). So what exactly is the difference between the VPH06, VPH08, and VPJ08b? I would love to know if there could be any way to custom retrofit a later chip in place of the VPH06 to achieve 120Mhz bandwidth in the non s Barco 808?


Does anyone know where to find spec sheets on these specialized chips? Maybe it would be feasible to buy 3 of the later version chips and swap out the VPH06s?


----------



## RoBro

Hi,

the VPH08 and VPJ08b are used in all the higher Barcos from BG808s over the whole 12xx series.

They are rated 80MHz, but Barco used a special circuit around the amplifier chips to push the bandwidth to 120MHz.

Seems the VPJ08b is the successor of the VPH08 with the same or very similar performance.

ALL the VPx chips were discontinued by Sanyo long ago :-(

They don't even have the datasheets anymore. I know that because I got the 4 very last VPJ08b that Sanyo had.

Barco must have big stock of them as the Cine8 still uses them. Seems like the same situation as VDC with the Motorola Transistors on their neckboards.

Too bad all those transistors and amplifiers are not being made anymore :-(((

Roland


----------



## WTS

Hi,


I just had another look at my input card for my 3600(Ampro) and it uses the same HFA1100 opamps as the 909, but it only has one in the video chain before it hits the neck boards. The 3600 schematics says it used HFA1106, so they must have did a slight upgrade.


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Hi,

the VPH08 and VPJ08b are used in all the higher Barcos from BG808s over the whole 12xx series.Roland
Appreciate your reply Roland. So are you saying they also used this higher ended chip in the Sony 12xx series too? I beleive what you say but it is very curious to me that Sony would use a better chip for their 7" ES focus product than Barco used for their 8" ES product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
They are rated 80MHz, but Barco used a special circuit around the amplifier chips to push the bandwidth to 120MHz.
Does anyone happen to have the schematic print on this? I would love to see how they accomplished such a feat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
ALL the VPx chips were discontinued by Sanyo long ago :-(

They don't even have the datasheets anymore. I know that because I got the 4 very last VPJ08b that Sanyo had.

Barco must have big stock of them as the Cine8 still uses them. Seems like the same situation as VDC with the Motorola Transistors on their neckboards.

Too bad all those transistors and amplifiers are not being made anymore :-(((

Roland
If they used those chips in the lower ended Sony ES focus projectors then it would stand to reason that there may be quite a few around in junk projectors. Sony made a lot of 12xx projectors and even the good ones are selling cheap on ebay these days. So maybe there are chips to be had for cheap!


----------



## RoBro

Bob,

sorry I have not written enough details.

I meant the Barco 12xx loke 1208, 1209 and all the s, /2 or /2s types.

The sony use lower grade VPH06 or similar.

Roland


----------



## RVonse

Thank you for setting me straight Roland. Oh well, my plans for a nice upgrade on the neck boards don't look so good any more.


----------



## stefuel

Surely there must be a cross ref to an amp that is close or better. If not, couldn't you design a high bandwidth amp circuit on a daugher board to take it's place?


Chip


----------



## RVonse

Thats a super fine idea Chip! But to get it done I probably need to start with some sort of schematic print for the neck board of the BG808. I have the print for the BG1208 but not the BG808.


Does anyone out there have it?


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
The only one that has more room inside is the nine inch AmPros.

OK, I closed the cover. Where did I leave my truck with the utility body parked  ?


Chip
Ampro always tried to please everyone, even the strange people that wanted images that were 24" wide. The case had to be that big to allow for the red and blue tubes to pivot that much.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *gmgav*
tse,


What did Marquee 9500 uses right now for the op-amp ? HFA1100 or CLC449 ?
Can't remember right now. Will check it out and post next week.


----------



## cmjohnson

I'm sure they're using CLC449s until they run out, and then maybe that Dallas op-amp that

Mike Parker has checked out.


The CLC-449 is an obsolete type now.


CJ


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Hi,

the VPH08 and VPJ08b are used in all the higher Barcos from BG808s over the whole 12xx series.

They are rated 80MHz, but Barco used a special circuit around the amplifier chips to push the bandwidth to 120MHz.

Seems the VPJ08b is the successor of the VPH08 with the same or very similar performance.

ALL the VPx chips were discontinued by Sanyo long ago :-(

They don't even have the datasheets anymore. I know that because I got the 4 very last VPJ08b that Sanyo had.

Barco must have big stock of them as the Cine8 still uses them. Seems like the same situation as VDC with the Motorola Transistors on their neckboards.

Too bad all those transistors and amplifiers are not being made anymore :-(((

Roland
You are right. The CRT driver components are very specialized and production of them is winding down with the shrinking of the CRT monitor industry. This might be what kills the CRT projector.


----------



## fetz

Hi


I have some doko for the Sanjo VPh on my site. Further, go to / barco for the Scans of the amplifier Board from the 808


regards


Thomas

http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer


----------



## WTS

Hi CJ,


What Dallas opamp would that be?


----------



## cmjohnson

Ask MP. I don't specifically recall, and he has experience with it, not me.



CJ


----------



## ygoh

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
Hi,


the VPH08 and VPJ08b are used in all the higher Barcos from BG808s over the whole 12xx series.

They are rated 80MHz, but Barco used a special circuit around the amplifier chips to push the bandwidth to 120MHz.......


Roland
How do you add the bw, when the lowest bw components usually determine the overall bw ?


----------



## RoBro

they put the VPJ08b into a feedback loop. this loop increases input level if the VPJ BW is too low.

Roland


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fetz*
Hi


I have some doko for the Sanjo VPh on my site. Further, go to / barco for the Scans of the amplifier Board from the 808


regards


Thomas

http://home.arcor.de/thomasfetzer
Thomas,

Really appreciate your reply! You certainly have a valuable site for the study of the Barco 808 neck board, very nicely done on your part. Thanks so much!


As I study the Barco prints (and I have seen this on their 1208 too), I wonder what they mean when they list some of the resistor pots ending in E? For example the value of the cut off and gain potentiometers are listed as 200E. Does anyone know what the E stands for? Perhaps it just means 200 ohms? I have sort of injured one of mine with the screwdriver. They are pretty cheaply made pots, so I wouldn't mind changing them out for something better but I am unsure of the values.


----------



## cmjohnson

More than likely it describes the taper of the resistance element. Probably linear rather than

audio taper/logarithmic.


CJ


----------



## RoBro

maybe E just means E0 which would be ohms, just like E3 would be kiloohms...

Roland


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
they put the VPJ08b into a feedback loop. this loop increases input level if the VPJ BW is too low.

Roland
Roland, what would be the disadvantages of increasing bandwidth this way in compare to just using the high bandwidth op-amps ?


----------



## gmgav

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
I'm sure they're using CLC449s until they run out, and then maybe that Dallas op-amp that

Mike Parker has checked out.


The CLC-449 is an obsolete type now.


CJ
Mike, which Dallas op-amps they are planning to use ?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *gmgav*
Roland, what would be the disadvantages of increasing bandwidth this way in compare to just using the high bandwidth op-amps ?


Your wallet would remain heavier.!


----------



## RVonse

I have had a few moments now to study print differences between the 808 (non s) neck boards as compared to the 1208 with discrete components. What I favor about the 1208 design is that it splits the video into cathode and G1 separately. But unfortunately I also see a potential weakness because there is a blocking capacitor in both video paths which is a chance for poor performance after some aging. OTOH, the 808 design is a very direct coupled path but it only goes to cathode. So I guess they both have their plusess and minuses.


I also notice (thanks to info from Thomas) that the VBJ06 normally specs out at a bandwidth of 70Mhz but Sanyo also made a chip called the VBJ15 which supported a whopping 150Mhz. And Sanyo says the VBJ15 came in exactly the same configuration and package type (SIP-9SMVP) which means you could literally pull and swap the chips and be perfectly fine for connectivity.


But finding (3) VBJ15's would no doubt be a problem. It would surely be a fun experiement, I imagine with very impressive results too.


I would also love to look at the 808s neck board prints if anyone happens to have them. It is very interesting to me how Barco set some of this stuff up.


----------



## fetz

Hi


i have a little Version of the 808s Neckboard added. I am sure that i have the whole one laying around here, but cant find it.


For the VPJ15 ( I think its mounted on the 1292, perhaps also on newer 1209s) ask Sony or Barco.


The amplifier schematics for the 1209s i have also, but unfortunatly not here now.


regards


THomas


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Bob,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
I also notice (thanks to info from Thomas) that the VBJ06 normally specs out at a bandwidth of 70Mhz but Sanyo also made a chip called the VBJ15 which supported a whopping 150Mhz. And Sanyo says the VBJ15 came in exactly the same configuration and package type (SIP-9SMVP) which means you could literally pull and swap the chips and be perfectly fine for connectivity.
I don't want to be the boo-man, but I seriously doubt that would work that

easily. You'd have to check if the supply voltages & current are the same.

Depending on the PSU, you'd might end up with the need for more decoupling.

Even if you could get all that up and running, you'd still need more work on

the rest of the PJ to up the total bandwidth.



Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Graham Johnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
I also notice (thanks to info from Thomas) that the VBJ06 normally specs out at a bandwidth of 70Mhz but Sanyo also made a chip called the VBJ15 which supported a whopping 150Mhz. And Sanyo says the VBJ15 came in exactly the same configuration and package type (SIP-9SMVP) which means you could literally pull and swap the chips and be perfectly fine for connectivity.


But finding (3) VBJ15's would no doubt be a problem. It would surely be a fun experiement, I imagine with very impressive results too.


I would also love to look at the 808s neck board prints if anyone happens to have them. It is very interesting to me how Barco set some of this stuff up.
Bob, I think this would be a bit of a useless quest seeing the spot size of the 808 would preclude the projector of reaching resolutions that it could use the bandwidth on.


Unless it was going to be transplanted on an 9 inch LC Barco that is.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
Yeah, I've got a 3600. We added it in one of the later lists. I think this is the most recent version:

Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000........EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._
Where does the Electrohome Marquee 8111+ w/ACON fall?


I noticed Curt mentions the 8110 is 8" 1200 1600x1200 110MHz EM


Also, why is the Sony G70 1700x1200?


Here's a .pdf on the Marquee Specs

http://www.crtprojectors.co.uk/elect...uee_9500lc.pdf


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Bob, I think this would be a bit of a useless quest seeing the spot size of the 808 would preclude the projector of reaching resolutions that it could use the bandwidth on.


Unless it was going to be transplanted on an 9 inch LC Barco that is.
Graham, you may be right but I do have to wonder since the wider BG1208 and the BG808s both use the same 180dvb22 tubes and high voltage section as the older BG808 (non s) yet their neck boards run at 120Mhz. Why would Barco put a better neck board on these higher performing projectors if it was for nothing?

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Reinhard*
I don't want to be the boo-man, but I seriously doubt that would work that

easily. You'd have to check if the supply voltages & current are the same.

Depending on the PSU, you'd might end up with the need for more decoupling.

Even if you could get all that up and running, you'd still need more work on

the rest of the PJ to up the total bandwidth..
I agree with you on the challenge of making sure the new chip was fully functional but at least they were made by the same manufacturer and the data sheet does show a very equivalent working Vcc voltage. But I dissagree with you that the front end would need any changes because it is all the same as the 1208.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
Bob, I think this would be a bit of a useless quest seeing the spot size of the 808 would preclude the projector of reaching resolutions that it could use the bandwidth on.


Unless it was going to be transplanted on an 9 inch LC Barco that is.
Oh I dunno, you can never have too much bandwidth. Especially if you prefer higher refresh rates.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Where does the Electrohome Marquee 8111+ w/ACON fall?


I noticed Curt mentions the 8110 is 8" 1200 1600x1200 110MHz EM


Also, why is the Sony G70 1700x1200?


Here's a .pdf on the Marquee Specs

http://www.crtprojectors.co.uk/elect...uee_9500lc.pdf


OT For a laugh, and shameless bump on my above question


Check out my little mini fun poke at QQQ

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&post5852497


----------



## kal

The 8110 should go very near the 8000. It's very similar.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
The 8110 should go very near the 8000. It's very similar.
Thats what I thought, but based on the specs in the master list, it would seem the specs would be closer to the 8500, of course this is based JUST on those specs alone.


----------



## kal

Sure, put it closer to the 8500 if you like. It's all very subjective.


These PJ's, for all intensive purposes for HT use, can be made to look the same:


Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM


The XG may have an advantage as it's the only one with colour filtering out of the box... but that can be added to the others as well.


Take this list with an extremely large grain of salt, as it all depends on what's important to YOU.


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Looks like I've just solidified my Eric #1 spot.


I made a big purchase this weekend.


One of those "Can't Pass Up" opportunities.


Now I'll be able to truely take advantage of the NN/MP-5 combo.


Eric #1


----------



## ygoh

WHich projector is that ?


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
WHich projector is that ?


Electrohome Marquee 9500LC


----------



## ygoh

Where is the post where Eric put that ? Same thread as this or .... ?


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Where is the post where Eric put that ? Same thread as this or .... ?
I am Eric


----------



## ygoh

Oh Sorry


----------



## Kamel407

No Problem, I've edited my Signature so people know who the real slim shady is!


----------



## ygoh

Are you thinking of the MP mod ? Pretty reasonable if you ask me


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ygoh*
Are you thinking of the MP mod ? Pretty reasonable if you ask me
Absolutely


The plan is to modify the heck out of this thing over time. I don't have to put it up right away either since it is my 2nd PJ.


----------



## cmjohnson

Yes, I sold Eric one of my two 9500LCs. By the time it's installed, it'll be sporting a full set

of MP mods (Yes, they will be done by MP himself) and it'll be tweaked and tuned to the hilt,

as good as I can make it. I think there's a good chance that I'll be putting in some

selected Chris Stephens upgrades as well. And if I can find the focus yokes I'm looking for,

that is, the astig-equipped version of the yokes I used to make FrankenYokes for an 8000,

then I'll put in FrankenYoke IIs and then he'l have the sharpest focusing 9501LC on the planet!


It has perfect tubes. 


CJ


----------



## Ericglo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Looks like I've just solidified my Eric #1 spot.


I made a big purchase this weekend.


One of those "Can't Pass Up" opportunities.


Now I'll be able to truely take advantage of the NN/MP-5 combo.


Eric #1
Maybe, if you consider Miami part of the U.S.. I sure as hell don't. Of course, you may be #1 Eric on the whole forum and in the U.S. with that pj. There is one problem though, you still don't have a screen. Taking that into consideration may put EricL back on top.


In the end, I win either way!


Ericglo

Eric #3 with my NEC PG


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
Maybe, if you consider Miami part of the U.S.. I sure as hell don't. Of course, you may be #1 Eric on the whole forum and in the U.S. with that pj. There is one problem though, you still don't have a screen. Taking that into consideration may put EricL back on top.


In the end, I win either way!


Ericglo

Eric #3 with my NEC PG


Unfortunately, due to the size of the picture, and the different aspect ratios, I do not believe a screen would be an advantage for my setup.

I'd love to have a 1.85:1 Torus, but I use 4:3, 16:9, and 1.85:1.

The masking system to switch between aspect ratios would just add more money and aggravation. So I am sticking with what I have now.

A 10' 4:3 MMud WallScreen with no masking.


----------



## cmjohnson

Hey, Da-Lite just called! They accepted your offer!






CJ


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
Maybe, if you consider Miami part of the U.S.. I sure as hell don't. Of course, you may be #1 Eric on the whole forum and in the U.S. with that pj. There is one problem though, you still don't have a screen. Taking that into consideration may put EricL back on top.


In the end, I win either way!


Ericglo

Eric #3 with my NEC PG
I don't care what you say! I am king!


"Arthur: I am your king!

Woman: Well, I didn't vote for you.

Arthur: You don't vote for kings.

Woman: Well, how did you become King, then?

Arthur: The Lady of the Lake,... [Angel chorus begins singing in background] her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. [Angel chorus ends] That is why I am your king!

Dennis: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Arthur: Be quiet!

Dennis: But you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

Arthur: Shut up!

Dennis: I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

Arthur: Shut up, will you? Shut up!

Dennis: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!

Arthur: Shut up!

Dennis: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!

Arthur: Bloody peasant!

Dennis: Oh, what a give-away. Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about. Did you see him repressing me? You saw it, didn't you?"


----------



## Ericglo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
I don't care what you say! I am king!


"Arthur: I am your king!

Woman: Well, I didn't vote for you.

Arthur: You don't vote for kings.

Woman: Well, how did you become King, then?

Arthur: The Lady of the Lake,... [Angel chorus begins singing in background] her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite, held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water signifying by Divine Providence that I, Arthur, was to carry Excalibur. [Angel chorus ends] That is why I am your king!

Dennis: Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

Arthur: Be quiet!

Dennis: But you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!

Arthur: Shut up!

Dennis: I mean, if I went 'round saying I was an emperor just because some moistened bint had lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!

Arthur: Shut up, will you? Shut up!

Dennis: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system!

Arthur: Shut up!

Dennis: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!

Arthur: Bloody peasant!

Dennis: Oh, what a give-away. Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about. Did you see him repressing me? You saw it, didn't you?"
So are you the woman in this little diatribe?


Ericglo


----------



## Ericglo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
A 10' 4:3 MMud WallScreen with no masking.
Why don't you try some Barium Sulfate mixed with a flat base for a much better painted wall. Goo is another option. If I were investing in such a nice pojector, then I wouldn't ruin it with MMud.


Ericglo


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
So are you the woman in this little diatribe?


Ericglo
"ARTHUR: Old woman!

DENNIS: Man!

ARTHUR: Man. Sorry. What knight lives in that castle over there?

DENNIS: I'm thirty-seven.

ARTHUR: I-- what?

DENNIS: I'm thirty-seven. I'm not old.

ARTHUR: Well, I can't just call you 'Man'.

DENNIS: Well, you could say 'Dennis'.

ARTHUR: Well, I didn't know you were called 'Dennis'.

DENNIS: Well, you didn't bother to find out, did you?

ARTHUR: I did say 'sorry' about the 'old woman', but from the behind you looked--

DENNIS: What I object to is that you automatically treat me like an inferior!"


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
Why don't you try some Barium Sulfate mixed with a flat base for a much better painted wall. Goo is another option. If I were investing in such a nice pojector, then I wouldn't ruin it with MMud.


Ericglo
I'm done spending money this weekend


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Hey, Da-Lite just called! They accepted your offer!






CJ
I'm Da-Lited about my new purchase!


----------



## flyingvee

Mostly a bump, so I can easily find this monster, and finish reading. But also, somewhere around page 25 (?) there is a very nice pattern attached. THANKS. put it on my desktop, and I now have phase and clock properly set on both of my LCD moniters. Had NO idea they could be that far off - effects of improper settings are grossly obvious using that pattern.


Thanks again - if that is all I get off this forum all year, I can still consider myself fortunate.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *flyingvee*
Mostly a bump, so I can easily find this monster, and finish reading. But also, somewhere around page 25 (?) there is a very nice pattern attached. THANKS. put it on my desktop, and I now have phase and clock properly set on both of my LCD moniters. Had NO idea they could be that far off - effects of improper settings are grossly obvious using that pattern.


Thanks again - if that is all I get off this forum all year, I can still consider myself fortunate. 
I agree 100%, both of my CRT purchases were mostly based off of the information on this thread.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Wow!!


You're not in Melbourne are you? (Hint,hint )


Azzad (Aaron) is the one you want to calibrate it. Or Benny (Russ), but he specialises in NEC's.


Mark


----------



## kschmit2

congrats on the Cine 9


----------



## kal

Wow! A Cine9! I concur: Make sure to get a someone very familiar with Barco's to set this one up.


Take a lot of pictures and start a new thread here!


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Gino-Cine9*
Just wanted to thank you guys for the posts in this thread. It was difficult choosing a projector for my home theatre. So many differnet opinions etc... The only thing i knew was it had to be a crt.


After spending countless nights searching reviews etc... i came across this thread. And since reading, i made a big purchase on a 'basically' NEW Barco Cine9


It has given me great comfort reading through this thread that i made the right choice, it was a lot of $$$ to depart with!


Thanks again and I'm sure i'll be asking/posting many questions to you experts on how to get the most from my HT


It will be arriving via courier in a few days direct from Barco... can't wait!
Gino,


Obviously you are a wise man by choosing a CRT, and of course, the Cine9.

But with all of the hype about high end LCD and DLP technology, what led you to make the CRT decision?


For me it was a year of research and participation on this forum that led me to CRT, I would love to hear your analysis.


Thanks,


Eric


----------



## Kamel407

Ladies and Gentlemen,


This makes for 1000 replies to this thread.

Could not have been done without all of you.

I'm sure the majority of current members have replied to this thread in one way or another, and if not, they have participated in Clarence's Home Theater thread.


I believe Gino-Cine9 summed it up nicely!

Without this forum, I'm sure there would not be as many happy CRTers in the world!


----------



## emdawgz1

Eric, i saw that this thread started w/ you debating btwn a G70 and a 9500, and now i see that you own a 9500 lc (nice) 


How'dja get it and around what did it cost'ya?



Most importantly, Hows the picture?


----------



## barco4ever

I have also got a Cine9. I produces an awsome picture. I got Per Jhonny on this forum to calebrate it for me. The problem now is that I have moved and dont have room for the PJ. Therefore I am now planning to move once more in order to get the Projector innstalled again. I bougt it From Henry in England18 months ago. It had about 1100 hours on it and was the shop's demo PJ. It was pretty expensive!!!!!I uset it only about 50 hours total before I had to move. I used almost anly DVHS material and I must say Beauty of Japan looked stunning!!!


My setup was not optimal because I put the PJ up in the livingroom so the black level could have been even better. (these things I have been told by Per Jhonny and other experts that visited me).


BTW I am glad to see that I chose the right projector in the end.

I have previously owned: seleco 195

seleco 310

seleco 800

Barco 808s

Barco Cine9



"internal battle among my friends and I, led to constanly upgrading and loosing money. I do not dear to tell you what the Cine9 cost me. But I can give you an estimate: loook at the price of a 9 9 9 Sony G90. multiply that price with 3 and then you aren't to far away....


I have been reading the forum for about 2 years now, but I have not written more that a couple of times myself. I just want to have the best equipment but are not into all the technical stuff. I try to learn from all of you experts here on the forum and I have got a lot more knowledge as a result of hundreds of hours of reading. I just want to say thank you to all of you on the forum because of all the help you provide for others!!!!


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *emdawgz1*
Eric, i saw that this thread started w/ you debating btwn a G70 and a 9500, and now i see that you own a 9500 lc (nice) 


How'dja get it and around what did it cost'ya?



Most importantly, Hows the picture? 


Ya know,


I first started out by just trying to find a sweet deal. Clarence had me hooked on trying to find an old used 8xxx series for $300 in the newspaper. Of course, not only did I not have knowhow of projectors, or fixing them, I didn't know anything about liquidations, etc.


Finally after a year of debate, I started chatting with Curt about a 1270 he had available, which was in my price range. I respect Curt very much, his help to this forum is top notch. At the time though, I was very back and forth on making a decision of buying a projector or not. Let me tell you, I am a VERY frugal spender, and up until 2 years ago, I wouldn't even have spent $500 on a projector. I was THIS () close to buying a projector from Curt, until a little birdy told me about CJ, who was local and could mount a PJ for me.


I was notified that a tech in the area (cmjohnson) was very close to my house (1 hour drive). I drove to his place, where he sampled a few projectors to me. I was impressed both by the picture quality of his projectors, his audio setup, and his passion for electronics. The first 2 hours I was there, he showed my the inside of a few CRTs, how they work, and then he sampled a few movies. I knew I found the right guy since half of the jargon he spit out, I knew nothing about at the time.


We came to an agreement on a price for the 8111+ (I had always wanted a Marquee from the start, my first post mentioned the 8500), and soon after, he delivered the PJ to me, mounted it, converged it, and helped with wiring, and placement of my HT. He spent most of the day at my place to help me. I was so impressed I gave him a healthy tip, and a healthy lunch.


Since then I've logged an avg of 4 hours a day on my PJ. I threw a DVD Burner, a Radeon 9600 Pro 256MB Vid card, and a Revolution 5.1 sound card in my pc. I bought a NN, and I bought an MP-5. I ordered a HD-DVR, and I got the Hi-Def cabling for my Xbox, oh yeah and the gamecube.


To say I was hooked, was an understatement. I've been inviting complete strangers over to check out my setup, just so I could keep them from making the mistake of buying overpriced displays. I'm even trying to convince my best friend of NOT going digital, though he is more stubborn than me.


My favorite DVDs to show people are The Incredibles and Fifth Element (Superbit)


But of course, a dream turned into a hobby, turned into an addiction.


I ended up taking another PJ, a 9500LC from CJ. He gave me an offer I did not want to pass up. I had planned to buy a 9" PJ in 3 or 4 years. But of course, now I can make it a reality. Here is CJ's explanation of the 9"

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Yes, I sold Eric one of my two 9500LCs. By the time it's installed, it'll be sporting a full set

of MP mods (Yes, they will be done by MP himself) and it'll be tweaked and tuned to the hilt,

as good as I can make it. I think there's a good chance that I'll be putting in some

selected Chris Stephens upgrades as well. And if I can find the focus yokes I'm looking for,

that is, the astig-equipped version of the yokes I used to make FrankenYokes for an 8000,

then I'll put in FrankenYoke IIs and then he'l have the sharpest focusing 9501LC on the planet!


It has perfect tubes. 


CJ
The PJ is at CJ's for now, like he said above there are plans for more modifications and tinkering. I'm not at liberty to disclose the purchase price, but if CJ wants to post the sale price of the 8111+ and the 9500LC, he is more than welcome to.


Next weekend, I plan to bring my equipment to CJ's house so he can test it all out on the 9500LC. I might even bring the 18 samples of DaLite material I received just for fun.


Of course, everyone is invited to come see the 8111+ I have at the house, if they're ever in Orlando for vacation. And hopefully sometime in the near future, I'll have the 9500LC and the 8111+ ceiling mounted side by side.


I plan to use the 9500LC for movie watching (preferably 2.35:1) and the 8111+ for HDTV, Computers, and Gaming.


I don't have an HT, per se. I just had CJ mount the PJ in my LR (living room). So the video will soon be as close to fantastic as I can get it. Next will be the audio, and I'm sure there will be plenty after that.


I hope this answers most of what you asked. Please feel free to ask anything you'd like. I'm always happy to answer questions. I'm the luckiest non-technical electronics CRT guy in central fl.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
For me it was a year of research and participation on this forum that led me to CRT, I would love to hear your analysis.

Eric
Hah    any YOU wanted to leave this forum? Your already addicated. Too

late    (hehehe)


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lightningman*
Hi,




Hah    any YOU wanted to leave this forum? Your already addicated. Too

late    (hehehe)


Regards,

Reinhard




The only reason I want to leave this forum is so I don't try to look for that "extra 10%" I can get with another upgrade, or another tweak, or another screen, or etc etc etc.

Of course! your personality and participation is what keeps me here daily!


----------



## Person99

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Let me tell you, I am a VERY frugal spender...I threw a DVD Burner, a Radeon 9600 Pro 256MB Vid card, and a Revolution 5.1 sound card in my pc. I bought a NN, and I bought an MP-5. I ordered a HD-DVR, and I got the Hi-Def cabling for my Xbox, oh yeah and the gamecube.
I just have to say that your idea of VERY frugal kinda cracked me up. And I thought Robert Wood and Clarence were frugal!


Dave


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Person99*
I just have to say that your idea of VERY frugal kinda cracked me up. And I thought Robert Wood and Clarence were frugal!


Dave
Yes, I've lightened up since 2 years ago.

What has changed though, is I rarely go out partying anymore.

Last time, I went to Miami with a couple friends from the UK I dropped $1500 in a weekend. Of course, the memories are PRICELESS.


Now, I'm a workaholic, own a couple houses, possibly about to pick up a couple more. So I'm still frugal, its just my budget has changed!


Heck, when I was 18 I thought making $8 an hour at UPS was HUGE! Now I couldn't survive on it.


History on the PC

Its an Athlon 1Ghz that my old roomate left behind, so technically I only spent about $250 on it to get those parts in there, and I could resell the computer for $400 or $500.

I think the NN is still a great deal for the price. Modding it will make it more valuable.

The MP-5 speaks for itself.

HD-DVR was a free upgrade on Brighthouse


Plus if I were to sell the house, I could leave everything and bump the house price up another $15k to $20k and start over


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Ya know,


I first started out by just trying to find a sweet deal. Clarence had me hooked on trying to find an old used 8xxx series for $300 in the newspaper. Of course, not only did I not have knowhow of projectors, or fixing them, I didn't know anything about liquidations, etc.


Finally after a year of debate, I started chatting with Curt about a 1270 he had available, which was in my price range. I respect Curt very much, his help to this forum is top notch. At the time though, I was very back and forth on making a decision of buying a projector or not. Let me tell you, I am a VERY frugal spender, and up until 2 years ago, I wouldn't even have spent $500 on a projector. I was THIS () close to buying a projector from Curt, until a little birdy told me about CJ, who was local and could mount a PJ for me.


I was notified that a tech in the area (cmjohnson) was very close to my house (1 hour drive). I drove to his place, where he sampled a few projectors to me. I was impressed both by the picture quality of his projectors, his audio setup, and his passion for electronics. The first 2 hours I was there, he showed my the inside of a few CRTs, how they work, and then he sampled a few movies. I knew I found the right guy since half of the jargon he spit out, I knew nothing about at the time.


We came to an agreement on a price for the 8111+ (I had always wanted a Marquee from the start, my first post mentioned the 8500), and soon after, he delivered the PJ to me, mounted it, converged it, and helped with wiring, and placement of my HT. He spent most of the day at my place to help me. I was so impressed I gave him a healthy tip, and a healthy lunch.


Since then I've logged an avg of 4 hours a day on my PJ. I threw a DVD Burner, a Radeon 9600 Pro 256MB Vid card, and a Revolution 5.1 sound card in my pc. I bought a NN, and I bought an MP-5. I ordered a HD-DVR, and I got the Hi-Def cabling for my Xbox, oh yeah and the gamecube.


To say I was hooked, was an understatement. I've been inviting complete strangers over to check out my setup, just so I could keep them from making the mistake of buying overpriced displays. I'm even trying to convince my best friend of NOT going digital, though he is more stubborn than me.


My favorite DVDs to show people are The Incredibles and Fifth Element (Superbit)


But of course, a dream turned into a hobby, turned into an addiction.


I ended up taking another PJ, a 9500LC from CJ. He gave me an offer I did not want to pass up. I had planned to buy a 9" PJ in 3 or 4 years. But of course, now I can make it a reality. Here is CJ's explanation of the 9"




The PJ is at CJ's for now, like he said above there are plans for more modifications and tinkering. I'm not at liberty to disclose the purchase price, but if CJ wants to post the sale price of the 8111+ and the 9500LC, he is more than welcome to.


Next weekend, I plan to bring my equipment to CJ's house so he can test it all out on the 9500LC. I might even bring the 18 samples of DaLite material I received just for fun.


Of course, everyone is invited to come see the 8111+ I have at the house, if they're ever in Orlando for vacation. And hopefully sometime in the near future, I'll have the 9500LC and the 8111+ ceiling mounted side by side.


I plan to use the 9500LC for movie watching (preferably 2.35:1) and the 8111+ for HDTV, Computers, and Gaming.


I don't have an HT, per se. I just had CJ mount the PJ in my LR (living room). So the video will soon be as close to fantastic as I can get it. Next will be the audio, and I'm sure there will be plenty after that.


I hope this answers most of what you asked. Please feel free to ask anything you'd like. I'm always happy to answer questions. I'm the luckiest non-technical electronics CRT guy in central fl.
How do you go from your self discription of "frugal" and not looking to spend $500 on a projector, to buying a 9500? Maybe you should have bought an 8500 and used the difference to find a good shrink, before it's too late.


----------



## Lightningman

Hi Eric,


Actually I was jabbing at you because of your comment on that one thread

a few weeks ago that got a little ugly and was later zapped by the mods

(you said you where gonna leave and I said don't) 

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*


Of course! your personality and participation is what keeps me here daily! 
Now where is that blushing icon when you need it? 


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Lightningman

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Maybe you should have bought an 8500 and used the difference to find a good shrink, before it's too late. 
AHhhhhhhhhh, BUT you don't know what he paid for the 9500 and it's

WAY too late for a head doctor anyway   


Regards,

Reinhard


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lightningman*
Hi Eric,


Actually I was jabbing at you because of your comment on that one thread

a few weeks ago that got a little ugly and was later zapped by the mods

(you said you where gonna leave and I said don't) 




Now where is that blushing icon when you need it? 


Regards,

Reinhard


Ehh I forgot about that thread. I was PISSED! But once it got pulled, I pretty much forgot about it. I think everyone else let it go too. Perhaps I should have quit then! I COULD have had the money for a shrink!


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
How do you go from your self discription of "frugal" and not looking to spend $500 on a projector, to buying a 9500? Maybe you should have bought an 8500 and used the difference to find a good shrink, before it's too late. 


Better that I invest my money in projectors, than to blow the same money on women! C'mon now how many of us have blown thousands of useless dollars on women that could have gotten us a nice boat or pair of jet skis by now.


----------



## Person99

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Better that I invest my money in projectors, than to blow the same money on women! C'mon now how many of us have blown thousands of useless dollars on women that could have gotten us a nice boat or pair of jet skis by now.
Uh, I don't really want to "sleep" with jet skis.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Person99*
Uh, I don't really want to "sleep" with jet skis.


I'm sure there's a couple guys out there that would trade their wives in for jetskis


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Better that I invest my money in projectors, than to blow the same money on women! C'mon now how many of us have blown thousands of useless dollars on women that could have gotten us a nice boat or pair of jet skis by now.


ANYTHING is better than blowing thousands of "useless" dollars on women. 


As for Person99's remark, you shouldn't be spending ANY money to sleep with women.......unless you're desperate. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
I'm sure there's a couple guys out there that would trade their wives in for jetskis
WITHOUT A DOUBT!


----------



## CaspianM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
ANYTHING is better than blowing thousands of "useless" dollars on women. 


As for Person99's remark, you shouldn't be spending ANY money to sleep with women.......unless you're desperate. 




WITHOUT A DOUBT! 
Unless he wants to watch all those DVD's all by himself!


----------



## Person99

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
As for Person99's remark, you shouldn't be spending ANY money to sleep with women.......unless you're desperate. 
I sort of took it a little less literally!


As for someone swapping his wife for a jet ski--if he would do that, I'd say he didn't choose his wife too wisely!


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Person99*
I sort of took it a little less literally!


As for someone swapping his wife for a jet ski--if he would do that, I'd say he didn't choose his wife too wisely! 


LOL, I'm 27, I don't have a wife!


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ArtisTech*
Unless he wants to watch all those DVD's all by himself! 
Are you implying that you have to pay to have a woman (or your wife) watch DVDs with you?  

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Person99*
I sort of took it a little less literally!


As for someone swapping his wife for a jet ski--if he would do that, I'd say he didn't choose his wife too wisely! 
If someone looked it literally, they need to do a reality check.......before they call the shrink. Everyone knows that a Jet-SKi is worth much more than a wife.


----------



## cmjohnson

There are some things that a woman can do for you that a projector can't, and afterwards,

you can always fire up the 9500 and watch a good movie.



Which makes me note....the day will come when you can buy HD porno DVDs. The mind boggles.

I wonder, do you really WANT to see porno in HD? Too much (visual) information, maybe?



I'm not into pornos, myself. Ted Nugent said it best: "Explicit sex, it ain't my cup of tea,

unless of course, it's happening to me!"



CJ


----------



## REWJR

10. Barco 808/808s

9. NEC XG75/85/110

8. Ampro 3xxx/4xxx

7. Electrohome Marquee 8500LC

6. Sony G90 ( never accurate color even with filters)

5. Sony G70 ( better color than G90 )

4. Barco 1209

3. NEC XG1352LC

2. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

1. Marquee 9501 LC + C.S. mods

0. Marquee 9501 LC + C.S. mods double stack ( WOW ).


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
\\Ted Nugent said it best: "Explicit sex, it ain't my cup of tea,

unless of course, it's happening to me!"


Ted Nugent Quote #562 from CJ


----------



## Chuchuf

Ron,

It isn't color filters you put on the G90?? it's the G CElement that gets changed so that the G Primary is as accurate as the 9500. The R is already there. With the proper G CElements you will get one of the flattest 6500 calibrations available from a FJ CRT.

Barco 1209 has no colored CElements (the G & R are clear) so it isn't even in the running for accurate colors (or even in the same league) as the others on your list that are listed around or above it. You have to add those colored filtered CElements to even be close.

On your Marquee choicem they also do not have a colored R CElement and the R primary is wrong without it. I don't know if Chris Stephens add's the R CElement when he set's up the 9501 with his mods.


Terry


----------



## stefuel

I'll go out on a limb here and say if you have any 9"LC that does not have red and green c-elements installed, you are cheating yourself. I've heard from others quoting, but not directly from Walter Allen that the 4600HD does not need them. I put them in anyway and it made a night and day difference.


Chip


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *REWJR*
10. Barco 808/808s

9. NEC XG75/85/110

8. Ampro 3xxx/4xxx

7. Electrohome Marquee 8500LC

6. Sony G90 ( never accurate color even with filters)

5. Sony G70 ( better color than G90 )

4. Barco 1209

3. NEC XG1352LC

2. Marquee 9501LC Ultra

1. Marquee 9501 LC + C.S. mods

0. Marquee 9501 LC + C.S. mods double stack ( WOW ).
This is quite the weird list, I must admit. Care to give some reasoning for the order?


Your HT page mentiones that you run a Hitachi PJ-TX100 LCD PJ (not cheap either I think). So why not CRT? (You certainly seem interested in it!)


Kal


----------



## cmjohnson

The 4600HD uses the same red P19 tube series, with the same phosphor, as every other P19

tube type in the series does. YES, you'll want a red C element for best color rendering with

one of these units.


CJ


----------



## Ray Cendroski

I didn't want to jump into a thread this huge, but it looked like a good time to preview a little project that has taken me 2 years to pull together:


A re-tubed Ampro 4600 with 3 new P19LUG tubes (same as Cine 9).


It just saw "first light" a few days ago, and I'm really pleased by what I see so far.


Ray


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ray Cendroski*
I didn't want to jump into a thread this huge, but it looked like a good time to preview a little project that has taken me 2 years to pull together:


A re-tubed Ampro 4600 with 3 new P19LUG tubes (same as Cine 9).


It just saw "first light" a few days ago, and I'm really pleased by what I see so far.


Ray


Congrats Ray,


Thats a very pretty picture!


Let us know how it does for you!


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ray Cendroski*
I didn't want to jump into a thread this huge, but it looked like a good time to preview a little project that has taken me 2 years to pull together:


A re-tubed Ampro 4600 with 3 new P19LUG tubes (same as Cine 9).


It just saw "first light" a few days ago, and I'm really pleased by what I see so far.


Ray
Cheater!  It's easy to get a good picture with P19LUG's.


----------



## Ericglo

Wow, it took Terry exactly 14 minutes to correct REWJR. His Spideysense must have been tingling.



Ericglo


----------



## RoBro

With the price of 3 new LUG in mind you should have spent the $125 for the red C-element also...

Roland

P.S.:

I am glad we are back on topic


----------



## Ray Cendroski

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RoBro*
With the price of 3 new LUG in mind you should have spent the $125 for the red C-element also...

Roland

P.S.:

I am glad we are back on topic
I did spend $110 on the red C Element (see picture). I didn't do the green for fear of driving it any harder than I needed to. Maybe later....


Ray


----------



## cmjohnson

Get the green C element. If you're driving the tubes hard enough that the addition of it would cause early wear, you're driving the tubes too hard anyway.


You've got the best tubes in one of the best projectors going. Now why would you not

spring an extra hundred bucks to get the color rendition right?


You ARE in pursuit of the best picture possible, right? That means color rendition, too!



CJ


----------



## RoBro

Argh, sorry, I meant the green...

Roland


----------



## stefuel

Because of my small screen size, I don't run my PJ hard. I did the green first as I had it in stock. I hung the projector as is and then pulled one tube at a time for LC fluid and cleaning. I started with the blue cause it was the worst. I did the green second putting in the green C-E. When I saw the improvment in greens, it was a no brainer to order the red.


Ray, how much were the P19LUG's?


Chip


----------



## Ray Cendroski

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You ARE in pursuit of the best picture possible, right? That means color rendition, too!



CJ
Yea, you're right. I almost didn't get the red, but felt guilty about it. Fortunately the Ampro's C elements are pretty easy to swap in place. Let me see what I can do.


Ray


----------



## Ray Cendroski

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
Ray, how much were the P19LUG's?


Chip
Chip,


I got lucky on the blue and red, but paid over $1000 for the green one. To say they are rare is an understatement. Trying to find the tubes is why it's taken me over two years to pull this together.


I'm trying to drive a 6' x 10.5' rear view screen, so burning crt's is a big concern. I'll keep my 4200 for regular duty, and hopefully use the 4600 for prime viewing. My dream would be to solve the problem with a 4600 stack.


Ray


----------



## REWJR

"This is quite the weird list, I must admit. Care to give some reasoning for the order?"


I have always thought the G90 was over priced and overhyped as for the barco 1209 some people feel it is the top CRT but IMHO the " King of TV " is the Marquee 9501LC with proper mods and calibration ( like Vision 1 double stacked 4 years ago at CEDIA ) with Panasonic D5 showing Geisha girls in kimonos ...


That picture is forever etched in my mind as the pinicle of 1080P display ..


"Your HT page mentions that you run a Hitachi PJ-TX100 LCD PJ (not cheap either I think). So why not CRT? (You certainly seem interested in it!)"


Kal


I own the Hitachi TX-100 because that is what I can afford as for my father REW he has the double stack 9501LC's with 10 ft wide hi-power screen ...


As for wanting a CRT yes i have seen that they are superior in every way in a dark basement with hi-power screen double stacked can achieve over the Stewart min luminance figure of 16 FL . This to me will always be the holy grail of projectors...


Alas I bought the best in my price range ...I intend to flip it for a newer D5 1080P version with HQV processing either onboard or external ( Lumagen maybe ) .


----------



## AVWERKS

Very nice Ray!

That going to look great with LUG's, next you'll be wanting to take out the H1100's on the input card to keep up with them!...


I use a high gain screen on the 4600 along with a Green C element and even though you will get better colors you will also affect contrast swings, it seems to squash the light to dark transistions somewhat compared to one without, take your pick! The high gain has brought back the saturated red (more than the green for some reason) but I might give in to a red C element next time around

The Sony 1292 suffers the most because it has both red and green C elements that don't do much for it considering it has a low output (Sony's own spec's) That creates the worst possible condition for dynamic swings. It's just a high resolution flat presentation with colors that just don't pop out


The rear view screen should give you back plenty of gain if you go with the high dollar fresnell setup's

That would be an ultimate setup, far better than any FP IMHO


David


----------



## tse

To see Ampro products so far up on the list of the best of the projectors just fills me with pride. To think that little company with it's dumb ass managment could even come close to designing products that were close to what Sony, NEC, Barco could design is an amazement. Wow!


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
I'll go out on a limb here and say if you have any 9"LC that does not have red and green c-elements installed, you are cheating yourself. I've heard from others quoting, but not directly from Walter Allen that the 4600HD does not need them. I put them in anyway and it made a night and day difference.


Chip
Is a P19 tube needing color correction any more than the 180dvb22's or about the same?


----------



## cmjohnson

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
To see Ampro products so far up on the list of the best of the projectors just fills me with pride. To think that little company with it's dumb ass managment could even come close to designing products that were close to what Sony, NEC, Barco could design is an amazement. Wow!



Interesting way of putting it...! 


But I must agree that some bad decisions were made by them. Probably the

worst of them was their failure to take great pains to ensure that all the tricks and

tips involved in manufacturing the light valves (GreyHawk) were completely

documented as well as any input the employees who made them would have had

regarding this. Critical knowledge that was NOT documented regarding their

manufacture, but which was known to the techs who built the LVs, was LOST

and you know what THAT caused! Two solid years of junk LVs and a field

replacement cost to AmPro of $25,000 PER PROJECTOR, and yet with no GOOD

light valves available again until almost the very end!


The tech room in the second building had shelves and shelves full of CRT/LV

assemblies that had been taken out for defects. I truly wish I knew who

(if anyone) ended up with them. I could have a little fun messing with some, again.



Another thing that amazes me about AmPro projectors is that technologically,

they were five to ten years behind their competitors, yet delivered (CRT)

projectors that could stand toe-to-toe with the other brands. Their circuits

were yesterday's news, particularly in manufacturing technology, but I guess

they worked just fine, as long as you kept them cool, that is!



BTW, P19s use the same phosphor types as 180DxBs, so the color correction

would be the same, if implemented.





CJ


----------



## WTS

Hi Ray,


Way da go, you finally pulled it off, good to hear, I guess we'll have to work on getting you one of those special boards we're working on.


Damm, now I'm jealous.


David,

Those HFA1100's are the same ones that are populating the Barco 909. The original schematics for the x600 said HFA1106's but mine has the HFA1100's in it so I suspect Rays does too. I'm not so sure if they're the same as the original HA1100 which were in the Marquee's either, those were made by Harris, these are made by Intersil/Elantec, don't know if there is/was a connection there.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Those HFA1100's are the same ones that are populating the Barco 909. The original schematics for the x600 said HFA1106's but mine has the HFA1100's in it so I suspect Rays does too. *I'm not so sure if they're the same as the original HA1100 which were in the Marquee's either*, those were made by Harris, these are made by Intersil/Elantec, don't know if there is/was a connection there.
They're the same chip. Intersil owns both Harris and Elantec Semi's.


----------



## Ray Cendroski

Thanks to all for the advice and kind words about the 4600 tube project.


Walter - I'm really getting excited about the special board. I'll try to get this thing set up so as to be ready. Keep up the great work!


Ray


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ray Cendroski*
Chip,


I got lucky on the blue and red, but paid over $1000 for the green one. To say they are rare is an understatement. Trying to find the tubes is why it's taken me over two years to pull this together.


I'm trying to drive a 6' x 10.5' rear view screen, so burning crt's is a big concern. I'll keep my 4200 for regular duty, and hopefully use the 4600 for prime viewing. My dream would be to solve the problem with a 4600 stack.


Ray
What is the problem with doing a 4600 stack?


Chip


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
What is the problem with doing a 4600 stack?


Chip
I would guess the biggest problem is getting two 4600's that stay on long enough to converge them.


----------



## WTS

Oh, that was a low blow, not nice techman.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
I would guess the biggest problem is getting two 4600's that stay on long enough to converge them.
No no no no no, OK it's bitchslap time... 


Chip



Actually, I think he's got to find one with the converge on green funtion which is an option. Mine has the full package of options 


Chip


And it's staying right where it is.


----------



## Ray Cendroski

What I meant was to drive a large screen with a 4600 stack to run at lower contrast and prolong tube life.


The 3600/4600 come standard with converge on green.


The 4600 I replaced the tubes in has over 30k hours on it and it's still going strong with no problems. Plenty of "on" time.


Ray


----------



## RoBro

All those storys about moving convergence. How silly.

Roland

P.S.:

Last time I looked for the convergence I found it in the kitchen


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
I would guess the biggest problem is getting two 4600's that stay on long enough to converge them.
Well, one undeniable fact of the AmPro, I don't think there's an easier projector to service. I don't think there is a board in it that can't be swapped out in ten minutes.


I know Bruce will have a snappy comeback to that one cause he likes to pick on us poor deprived AmPro owners. You know, us 9500LC wannabee's 


Chip


----------



## cmjohnson

Marquees are just as easy to service, but AmPros do have the advantage that you can set

up your service bench INSIDE the projector. 


CJ


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Marquees are just as easy to service, but AmPros do have the advantage that you can set

up your service bench INSIDE the projector. 


CJ


You heard it first HERE Chipper.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
You heard it first HERE Chipper. 
Oh sure,

You let somebody else do your dirty work for you, Mr Snappy-come-back. 


Chip


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
Oh sure,

You let somebody else do your dirty work for you, Mr Snappy-come-back. 


Chip
  


Gotta love friendly family feuds!


----------



## Kamel407

I've got a friend who lives in the SE US with me (Florida) who is looking to get a decent CRT in the (up to) $500 range. He's got a throw distance of around 10' and is looking to push a 108"-120" picture. Can anyone make recommendations as to the best PJ that fits this description?


----------



## techman707

He's not going to get much of a CRT for $500, unless he got lucky on Ebay. Especially for that screen size, anything someone would try to sell him wouldn't have very good tubes. Your buddy had a 1270 with good tubes, that's about it.


----------



## Person99

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
I've got a friend who lives in the SE US with me (Florida) who is looking to get a decent CRT in the (up to) $500 range. He's got a throw distance of around 10' and is looking to push a 108"-120" picture. Can anyone make recommendations as to the best PJ that fits this description?
There has been a recent thread about this with one other guy who is looking in this bargain basement price point. You might want to check out that thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=560270 


Bottom line is that trying to get a nice machine at that price point is frought with risk. for a couple hundred more, one can get a good 7" machine. Of course, the 7" machine is not going to be bright do a 120" screen. Almost all PJs will require a throw longer than 10' to get that size pic.


Dave


----------



## Ma171aC

well, i'm the friend, and i was mainly asking due to the throw my Barco Vision is requiring with its Plastic lenses.


Anyone know if i can switch them out for something glass, maybe color corrected with a slightly shorter thrown?


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
I've got a friend who lives in the SE US with me (Florida) who is looking to get a decent CRT in the (up to) $500 range. He's got a throw distance of around 10' and is looking to push a 108"-120" picture. Can anyone make recommendations as to the best PJ that fits this description?
The only thing that would fit the bill (throw distance, screen size, price) would be a used digital.


A used digital would have the brightness you'd need for a screen that size and would have the zoom feature needed.


Kal


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RVonse*
I would also love to look at the 808s neck board prints if anyone happens to have them. It is very interesting to me how Barco set some of this stuff up.
Hey Bob - I mentioned it in another thread, but if you want schematics of the 808s 120Mhz (black box) neck boards take a look at the service manual I posted here:

http://www.curtpalme.com/Zenith1200.htm 


Page 6-53. They use the VPJ08b amps.


Kal


----------



## Clarence

I've had a few questions about a certain 4200G lately and someone sent me this link to fill in the bandwidth blank...
http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/s...threadid=86432 


I should break out the 4600 separately, but I won't change the order of the list while I have one in the Marketplace... then again, maybe the 4200G and 6PG should be rated muuuuch higher 


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Kamel407

Whats the difference between the 4200 and the 4600


----------



## techman707

The price!!!


----------



## Semisentient

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Whats the difference between the 4200 and the 4600
400?






... don't mind me, few do...


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
The price!!! 


>smacksmack


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Semisentient*
400?






... don't mind me, few do...


>pokes eyes


----------



## erikjohn

ahhhh....


----------



## ChrisWiggles

i believe it's spelled "nyuk"


----------



## RVonse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Whats the difference between the 4200 and the 4600
They are both 9" EM machines but the 4200 is a much older version. The 4200 motherboard was based on the 2xxx series whereas the 4600 was based on the 3600 series chassis. The 4600 is the very best Ampro there is.


----------



## tse

A question. Which is the better projector? The one with an adjustment for fine tuning all set-up parameters or the projector that has only the basic adjustments for geometry, convergence, color balance... ect?


----------



## Clarence

I've got a feeling that whichever one you set up would out perform the other. A well tuned 4200 might hold it's own against a typical 4600. I wish you were closer... I'd love to see what this 200 hour 4200G is really capable of.


----------



## Dr.Rich

Kamel:

The Vision One, as stated before on this forum is a top notch 9 inch crt projector. On Audiogon there is a Vision One, the Vidikron rebadged Faroudja DVP 3000 processor, and the Chief electric ceiling winch that will electrically raise and lower the projector for service (VERY handy). His price is extremely reasonable. Go to Audiogon and search for Vision One and you'll find it. It was originally part of an all Pipedream, Plinus surround system. Essentially 100K Plus and change. That package will do 1080P. Check it out.


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Dr.Rich*
Kamel:

The Vision One, as stated before on this forum is a top notch 9 inch crt projector. On Audiogon there is a Vision One, the Vidikron rebadged Faroudja DVP 3000 processor, and the Chief electric ceiling winch that will electrically raise and lower the projector for service (VERY handy). His price is extremely reasonable. Go to Audiogon and search for Vision One and you'll find it. It was originally part of an all Pipedream, Plinus surround system. Essentially 100K Plus and change. That package will do 1080P. Check it out.
With 6000 hours on the blue tube, I'd recommend asking for pictures of the tube to ascertain tube wear before plunking down any money.


Or just look for a good M9501LC (which is all the Vision One is).


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Thanks guys, for those who didn't know, I purchased a Marquee 8111+ W/ACON 1 year after starting this thread, and a Marquee 9500LC 6 months after that.


----------



## cmjohnson

FYI, a Vision One is a STOCK 9500LC with a fancy case and a few changes to the menu software. And it includes a red C element, which is special order for a 9500LC.


An MP modded 9500LC (with red C element) will outperform a Vision One. So get your

Vision One modded!


CJ


----------



## Mark A. Gonzalez

And you can still buy a Vision One case for your Marquee. I don't remember how much they cost. Does anyone remember?


----------



## cmjohnson

It's about a grand.



CJ


----------



## Mark A. Gonzalez

Who sells them?


----------



## Dr.Rich

About a grand? In 1999 I inquired about a vision one case. This was prior to Runco purchasing Vidikron. I spoke to David Wolf who was with Vidikron at the time and he quoted me 4000.00 for a case. And, you cannot buy just the part that's cracked. You have to buy the whole case, which is 4 or 5 sections. They sited paint problems and not willing to have a case out in the field with sections that did not match. My case was damaged during shipment ( I'm the second owner). My case was also black. A tricky match I guess. If things have changed, that's terrific. I'm living with the crack. Are replacements available now in sections? Are they really only a grand?


----------



## cmjohnson

Nine3Media.com.


Talk to Matt.


CJ


----------



## Clarence

It's been a while since I added to this list, but now that I own and love a G90, maybe I'll put it back on the top of the list like it was originally. And Dave asked me ( here ) to add the Barco Cine series; so I need the specs.


Just a reminder that this list is very subjective. But I trust our subjective ranking over trying to compare based solely on biased mfr specs.


And there's a huge untangible factor of spare parts availability, stereotyped reputation for reliability, and even the number of owners of similar projectors here in the forum to provide help.


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco Cine 7

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco Cine 8

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Barco Cine 8 Onyx/Zenith Pro 1200X

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## Semisentient

Yup, get ready to move that 1292 up when Mike Parker gets his streaking fix + mod done!





James


----------



## cwm9

The Ampro 4200/4600 and NEC XG/LC should probably have their listed resolutions dropped to 1600x1200 in order to match their other 8" cousins. My understanding is that these are the addressable resolutions, so this is really misleading.


----------



## wh0rse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cwm9*
The Ampro 4200/4600 and NEC XG/LC should probably have their listed resolutions dropped to 1600x1200 in order to match their other 8" cousins. My understanding is that these are the addressable resolutions, so this is really misleading.
the 4200 and 4600 are top of the line 9 inch machines


----------



## B.Hegelstad

I added the Barco Reality 909 and i think it's about right 


Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco Cine 7

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco Cine 8

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Barco Cine 8 Onyx/Zenith Pro 1200X

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM

Barco Reality 909...........9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM ( With RED and Green Colorfilter )
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


----------



## CaspianM

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cwm9*
The Ampro 4200/4600 and NEC XG/LC should probably have their listed resolutions dropped to 1600x1200 in order to match their other 8" cousins. My understanding is that these are the addressable resolutions, so this is really misleading.
If they do then they would be obligated to lable the p and i too.

Manufac spec is not a perfomance rating.

You may find some pj's resolve even 720 better than the same class PJ,s.


----------



## geisemann

In my quest to make in image as good as the 909 I sold this year. I started with a 1209 and used 909 tubes did the focus mod and replaced all the caps with high grade special caps.


I saw a lot more color quality and matches the pantone better on a 1209 vs the 9500LC. However if you do the mike parker mods it might get close.


I have to say the image is stunning and maybe even better than the 909. Have to do a side by side test however.


Greg

www.eisemann-theater.com


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *B.Hegelstad*
I added the Barco Reality 909 and i think it's about right 
Feel free to submit your own versions/additions to the list, but I'd prefer that you remove *quote=Clarence* when you change the list, especially if your change puts a projector above my precious G90.


----------



## cwm9

Quote:

Originally Posted by *wh0rse*
the 4200 and 4600 are top of the line 9 inch machines


Oops, you're right. Just the NEC then.


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco Cine 7

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco Cine 8

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 1200x1600 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Barco Cine 8 Onyx/Zenith Pro 1200X

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM

Barco Reality 909...........9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM ( With RED and Green Colorfilter )


----------



## geisemann

The 909 is a better projector than the G90


I have tested both


Greg


----------



## Z-Photo

Great - now you guys are going to get Clarence looking for the Best - again.


Of course he will have to buy 20 to get to that next level...


----------



## tse

Does anyone remember the last side by side "shoot-out" of CRT projectors at the Infocomm trade show? How did things stack up then?


----------



## MadMrH

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
I have to say the image is stunning and maybe even better than the 909
Greg ,


Are you saying the 1209 with 909 tubes and mods is better than the 909?


or did I misunderstand you?


If the 909 had mods too would that then be top of the pile again?


Cheers,


----------



## cmjohnson

So how long do you figure it will be before the majority of the G90s in North America eventually end up in the hands of AVS forum members, anyway? 


I can see it now...maybe 2 years from today, the G90 Member's Club represents every

North American-designated serial number except the few that got scrapped or destroyed.


As time goes on, more and more of us will be joining the 9" club but at the same time,

this forum will attract progressively fewer and fewer new CRT enthusiasts. The entry

level CRT market will dwindle to nothing and only the big guns will survive. The day will

come when every serious CRT enthusiast left here will be a 9" machine owner.

Maybe.


I've got my 9501LC with brand new tubes and I like it!


CJ


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
Feel free to submit your own versions/additions to the list, but I'd prefer that you remove *quote=Clarence* when you change the list, especially if your change puts a projector above my precious G90.
Sorry! Clarence it will not happen again


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
In my quest to make in image as good as the 909 I sold this year. I started with a 1209 and used 909 tubes did the focus mod ...
Hey Greg! You've mentioned this focus mod a couple of times on the forum now... any chance you'd release the Barco service sheet for this by chance?

Quote:

... and replaced all the caps with high grade special caps.
*ALL* the caps? Or just specific ones in the signal chain and a few other places? Just curious. What brand caps if you don't mind me asking? Nichicon? Panasonic? Black Gate? Something different?


I did the same in my former BG800 (not quite a 1209 of course) by replacing 50-70 caps with Panasonic high temp/higher voltage caps, and then replaced a bunch of the in-signal coupling caps with Black Gates. Big difference in stability (the panasonic's) and colour (the black gates).


Kal


----------



## Ridebreck

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
So how long do you figure it will be before the majority of the G90s in North America eventually end up in the hands of AVS forum members, anyway? 


I can see it now...maybe 2 years from today, the G90 Member's Club represents every

North American-designated serial number except the few that got scrapped or destroyed.


As time goes on, more and more of us will be joining the 9" club but at the same time,

this forum will attract progressively fewer and fewer new CRT enthusiasts. The entry

level CRT market will dwindle to nothing and only the big guns will survive. The day will

come when every serious CRT enthusiast left here will be a 9" machine owner.

Maybe.


I've got my 9501LC with brand new tubes and I like it!


CJ
Boy wouldn't that be nice? All I need is a pay raise and I'll be right there with ya, buddy  .


----------



## WTS

Hey Greg, let us in on what you did to that 1209.


----------



## geisemann

Well before Barco went bad. I made a friend in Barco Engineering. He sent me all the engineering updates and changes to improve the picture. Most were done by 1999 on the S series however there are more and the list and updates are quite substantial. The most important one is modifying the focus board to provide a razor sharp image.


I found the 909 tubes to be very sharp and the 909 seems to possibly have a little noise in the power supply that the 1209. Also the 909 has a very cheap case.


The 909 however has amazing black levels and 9 pole focus to provide a super sharp focus and digital adjustments all over the screen and the convergance is simply perfect better than any projector. Thats where the G90 suffers in convergance.


If you put a 909 tube in a 1209 you get the focus but not necessarily the control of the 909 has. I found however that the 909 was designed for simulation proposes and has the extra control to allow multiparing. For home theater these extra features are nice but not always necessary.


Also Barco had a option to make the convergance perfect on the 1209 ..Converg on green board they are not allways common.


I if you put a converge on Green board in a 1209 you can get that control that its lacking.


When you stand back and view a 909 VS a 1209 with 909 tubes the difference is getting very very close and in some cases I thought the 1209 might have better color .. I have to test it again.


However the 1209 with original tubes and old caps and no converge on green board it will look worse than a 909.


One thing also is Barco used cheap caps in the 1209 series. MARCON they are horrible. If you recap the video section takes a lot of caps!! a few hours.


The 909 used much better caps because I think MARCON went out of business.


I use the NICHON uhe or upw and special high frequency bi polars.


And once this done the 1209 picture has much much better detail and Color variation and you donâ€™t have to use special amps and color adjustments. The picture looks good with default settings where before you always has to boost the contrast brightness and color settings.


Greg

PS


you can see the mods on my website
www.eisemann-theater.com ( go to projector modifications)


----------



## kal

Thanks for the information Greg!


The cap replacements you did on the RGB driver board (see below) is exactly what I did on my projector in the past. Only difference is that I didn't replace all of the inputs - I left the H/V lines and the composite and s-video as is as they don't affect image quality when using RGBHV (port 5). So I just did the 6 bipolar e-caps on the very right that cover the RGB lines.

http://www.eisemann-theater.com/imag...ithnewcaps.jpg 


I can't make out the brand/type of those blue "special high frequency bi polars"... Care to enlighten us?  (I had used Rubycon Black Gate's myself but I'm starting to wonder if that was the right thing as I'm not sure of the freq response of these things as they're most meant for audio use).


Kal


----------



## geisemann

Well not to release too manny secrets.


For normal I use

http://www.mouser.com/catalog/624/530.pdf 


and I replace the final output stage 7621175 and RGB board and the CRT neck boards.



For Non-Polar The audio type is perfect because it has excellent high frequency specs. If you use a normal one the curve at high frequency cuts off limiting you color bandwidth.

http://www.mouser.com/catalog/624/544.pdf 


use the high frequency or audio


Also remember caps have a 1-10k hour life and they degrade with time as well.


Mouser only has two types.

the 105c is like 1.10


( to be honest both should work great) the 105 might be more stable but this area of the projector doesnt get as hot .)


The other boards only use 105 use the thermo probe on your multimeter.


the 85c is like $.70



Most projectors run at 15-70khz so the higher frequency specs the better and I do the H an V because it can create more image stability.


When Barco did the RGB bandwidth specs they used a new caps.


The bandwidth will degrade to nothign with old caps.


GREG


----------



## Z-Photo

Greg,


Any thoughts about using Kemet Tantalum Caps in these locations? How much to mod a focus board (BG 808)?


Pete


----------



## B.Hegelstad

As you know Greg i have done these upgrades on a 1209s also, you should also change all capacitors on the neck boards for better stability and even cleaner and sharper image.

But better than a 909 thats more wishing than reality i think


----------



## kal

Good info Greg. Thanks!


Some extra info for others reading here: If you look at the Nichicon (and most other e-cap) specs, you'll notice that the larger the diameter of the cap, the longer it lasts. So while it may be hard to fit the shorter/fatter caps in some circuits... TRY! (The picture I posted above from Greg's site is a good example - those blue caps are about x2 the diameter as the caps they replaced).


Kal


----------



## geisemann

Hi Bjorn,


I am glad you like the 909  I bet you got that from a good source!!!


I hope everthing is going well with that and the new tube are burning in correctly.


I agree however the 909 is the KING however with all the modifications ( caps, converge on green, and Vpar mod) the 909 high rez tubes you have to see the quality its very very close like I said. I did many tests with many people said that they could not tell much of a difference. My audience is very picky they are all engineers. I fell both are excellent projectors however if you donâ€™t want to pay 20k for the 909 a full mod 1209 909 is an excellent choice to save lots of money.


If you want the best money can buy the 909 is the only deal for you but I always trying to find ways to save money and get the same quality picture as the very expensive 20k sets. My main problem is itâ€™s hard to locate the 909s chasis however the 909 tubes are easy to get.


As for the focus mod its Barco engineering service update 227 on module R762271s some of this is incorporated in the S projector however.

"Improvement of the shape of the HPAR signal to improve focus"


Its surface mount so you have to be carefull. You need to order a 11V z a few caps and a few resistors. I mod it further improving the Hpar by replacing with high frequency caps that allows a better H par according to the service manual the cleaner the Hpar the better the focus. You also migh try cleaning the power source to this module to clean the signal further. I have to experiment and pull out the scope to see the signal differences.


I would just do the barco service update 227 and put hq caps on the module. The focus difference is nice!



Any thoughts about using Kemet Tantalum Caps in these locations? How much to mod a focus board (BG 808)?


I looked up the specs on the wet Tantalum before they are impressive however at $15.00 each you might want to use the other ones. These are used in very high heat areas where stability is critical for frequency dependent satcom or power related items or more important military applications.


Please do a compairson if you want between the HQ HF electolitics vs Wet Tantalum. It might be over kill to get a $15.00 cap. At that point the difference is not going to show up and you spent 15* the amount.


Also the audio caps have a constant curve in the high frequency range that means the colors will be more consistant.


With over 100 caps to replace it will get $$$


Please do try it and report back what you find but I dont see the point in spending that kind of money the caps will outlast you and cost more than your projector might be worth.



Greg


www.eisemann-theater.com


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Yes Greg!


Both 909 I got from you is burning in beautiful and the sharpness increased a lot after a few hundred hours. I have also modified the cooling system so itâ€™s very quiet, and 1080p 16/9 now gives clearly visible lines on a 100" screen.


The 1209s is a beautiful projector but at 1080p you are really pushing it and that shows in the picture, while the 909 at 1080p is like running it on half speed it doesn't get hot at all and it there is no problem with the picture width and other issues like the 1209s has.


With the 909 I got better colors much better black the geometry is 110% and the picture has a 3D feeling like nothing else it is just amazing, and any day now I get the worlds most advanced video processor Crystalio II


----------



## geisemann

I have to test. I have to say I did notice when I was running at 2000+ on the 1209 if you didnt use the fans at the higest speeds the image went to muck. IE leaving the cover open to now allow the circurts to cool correctly.


Did you ever check if your fan mod provided the same cooling flow as the orginals. I ran the 1209 I rebuilt at 2000+ and it seemed very nice and stable. I am not sure what refresh you were using.


But where are you getting 1080P movies.


I dont think anyone as the BW to broadcast 1080p.


The best I could get was true 720p movies from the source not upscalled.


You have to burn me a few copys of DIVX or something at true 1080p so I can use for a demo. 


I have seen some nice trallers at 1080p


GREG


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
But where are you getting 1080P movies.


I dont think anyone as the BW to broadcast 1080p.


The best I could get was true 720p movies from the source not upscalled.


You have to burn me a few copys of DIVX or something at true 1080p so I can use for a demo. 


GREG
It's my Crystalio that upscales all my sources to 1080p


----------



## geisemann

WOW,


I have to see a demo some day of your "Super Scalling"


I was happy at 720p


Greg


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
WOW,


I have to see a demo some day of your "Super Scalling"


I was happy at 720p


Greg
720p are ok for 8" but not for 9" you should buy yourself an Crystalio II when it is released next month!


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
WOW,


I have to see a demo some day of your "Super Scalling"


I was happy at 720p


Greg
Greg, I'll have to bring over my hotrod laptop playing 1080i HD files scaled up to 1200p. Looks sweet on MP's 9500 and my G90... I can only imagine how it'll look on your 909.


You'll never want to watch upscaled DVD again.


I just got my HD Snazio .ts player 10 minutes ago!!!  Gotta go check it out!!!


-Clarence


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
Greg, I'll have to bring over my hotrod laptop playing 1080i HD files scaled up to 1200p. Looks sweet on MP's 9500 and my G90... I can only imagine how it'll look on your 909.


You'll never want to watch upscaled DVD again.


I just got my HD Snazio .ts player 10 minutes ago!!!  Gotta go check it out!!!


-Clarence
Yea! 1080i scaled to 1080p or 1200p looks great on my 909 but i like the doubling i do from 1080i to 1080p.


I have had a few customers testing the ts players with not so good results, it would be nice to hear how it works out for you Clarence!


----------



## Clarence

I'm messing with connecting the snazio player via wireless/WEP now.


I should've brought a crossover cable from work and hardwired it to my htpc.


----------



## B.Hegelstad

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
I'm messing with connecting the snazio player via wireless/WEP now.


I should've brought a crossover cable from work and hardwired it to my htpc.
I am feeding my D-VHS Player with ts files but wireless was to slow, the only thing that works for me are hardwire it.


----------



## secstate

Agreed I just finishing wiring my house with CAT5e though I am only running 100Mbps right now I have no trouble streaming 720p or 1080i from my media server to my HTPC. Wireless is only good for audio streaming in my opinion and maybe low bandwidth video, too much overhead, interferance etc.,to get anywhere near the theoretical limits of wireless.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *B.Hegelstad*
I have had a few customers testing the ts players with not so good results, it would be nice to hear how it works out for you Clarence!
Still no luck playing files from my HTPC. It sees my wireless server and the .ts files on there. It sees the HTPC with the hardwire ethernet crossover cable (I found one... it pays to be a geek), it gets hung up on the fact that it can't find the internet using the HTPC and it doesn't display the shared video TS files.


But it plays back .ts from DVD-R just fine and I also did the secret remote sequence to allow DVD upscaling... FWIW, it's as good as my Momitsu.


I'll add my additional snazzio results to the main snazzio thread ( link ) in the DVD Players Forum, but just to bring this post slightly back on topic, I'm still amazed by the crisply resolved scanlines on this G90 at 1280x1024.


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *B.Hegelstad*
I have had a few customers testing the ts players with not so good results, it would be nice to hear how it works out for you Clarence!
Still no luck playing files from my HTPC, but I still haven't RTFM. It sees my wireless server and the .ts files on there. It sees the HTPC with the hardwire ethernet crossover cable (I found one in my storage closet... it pays to be a geeky packrat), it gets hung up on the fact that it can't find the internet using the HTPC and it doesn't display the shared video TS files.


But it plays back .ts from DVD-R just fine and I also did the secret remote sequence to allow DVD upscaling... FWIW, it's as good as my Momitsu.


Cliff's been playing with the iodata this week and says it does a nice job with .ts files.


I'll add my additional snazzio results to the main snazzio thread ( link ) in the DVD Players Forum, but just to bring this post slightly back on topic, I'm still amazed by the crisply resolved scanlines on this G90 at 1280x1024.


----------



## MadMrH

Pete.....


tell us about your new toy.........



MONDAY you say....why wait till then...................




C - Your G90 still sucks!


----------



## geisemann

1200p on a laptop....


ummm...


I think we have all gone crazy with resolution.


I have a Nvida top of the line with 64 intell and it looks good and downloaded lots of 1080p demos. However I heard the new scallers being relased have more taps and I/O and are superior to HTPC.


The new Crystalio II like Bjorn was talking about ...what do you think? Anyone do a

test?

http://www.crystalio.com/spec.html# 



PS I found a guy with Brand new Barco tubes in the boxes but they are only 180DVB he has 45 tubes if anyone wants any. I only use P16 in the 8 inch



Greg


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
1200p on a laptop....


ummm...


I think we have all gone crazy with resolution.
Because of the LCD screens on laptops, they always look best when run at the 'native' resolution. 1920x1200 is not an uncommon native resolution for larger laptops these days. My work laptop (Dell Precision M60) runs at this rez. Anything lower looks soft/weird due to the scaling artifacts.


Kal


----------



## Clarence

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
Because of the LCD screens on laptops, they always look best when run at the 'native' resolution. 1920x1200 is not an uncommon native resolution for larger laptops these days. My work laptop (Dell Precision *M60*) runs at this rez. Anything lower looks soft/weird due to the scaling artifacts.


Kal
Exactly. My laptop is the Dell M70, 1920x1200 native.


----------



## Graham Johnson

None of the projectors have the bandwidth to do 1080p let alone 1200p.


Running at greater than 1080p is pointless as the verticle resolution will suffer greatly. the only reason to go higher resolution than 1080p is if you can see scan lines at your seating position. I highly doubt if any of these projectors will let you do that.


Even if they did, it would be a reason to adopt egg shaped Astig dots to close up the scan gaps between the lines to increase the brightness of the picture.


----------



## NIN74

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
None of the projectors have the bandwidth to do 1080p let alone 1200p.


Running at greater than 1080p is pointless as the verticle resolution will suffer greatly. the only reason to go higher resolution than 1080p is if you can see scan lines at your seating position. I highly doubt if any of these projectors will let you do that.


I think Bjorn get's scan lines on 1080P with his reality 909 PJ, that have 180 Mhz bandwidth.


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
None of the projectors have the bandwidth to do 1080p let alone 1200p.


Running at greater than 1080p is pointless as the verticle resolution will suffer greatly. the only reason to go higher resolution than 1080p is if you can see scan lines at your seating position. I highly doubt if any of these projectors will let you do that.


Even if they did, it would be a reason to adopt egg shaped Astig dots to close up the scan gaps between the lines to increase the brightness of the picture.
 http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&post5762603


----------



## Graham Johnson

If you remember TSE I was a contributor to this thread as well. My point is still valid.


I know you can peak the frequency response of the video amps to show those lines easily. Doesnt mean the response is linear any longer.


I any case, for an out of the box G90 this is still a valid reason to keep the response limited to 1080p


----------



## NIN74

I'm just wondering when Art will throw out his G-90 and stack two Barco Reality 909 instead


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
If you remember TSE I was a contributor to this thread as well. My point is still valid.


I know you can peak the frequency response of the video amps to show those lines easily. Doesnt mean the response is linear any longer.


I any case, for an out of the box G90 this is still a valid reason to keep the response limited to 1080p
1920 x 1080 resolution clearly demonstrated. If you look back a page or so you can see 2048 x 1536 resolution clearly demonstrated (well, the pictures could be better). The VDC 9500 can definately resolve these formats.


----------



## Rittberg

Is it possible to switch in a 1209s the neck boards to the 909 neck boards ?


Rittberg


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Graham Johnson*
None of the projectors have the bandwidth to do 1080p let alone 1200p
That was so true for the 20th century..


----------



## Dr.Rich

I may have missed something, but aren't LCD displays fixed pixel displays and isn't current technology limited to 768 for horizontal resolution? So how does an LCD display show anything higher than 768 without downconverting it. Does a laptop with an LCD display really show resolution greater than 720P?

So 768 or 720 or seven whatever, my point is LCD displays are fixed pixel displays. Can someone clear this up for me?

Thanks.


----------



## cmjohnson

In order, YES. NO. It can't unless its native resolution is higher.


LCD displays of 1600x1200 native are not uncommon these days. Some notebooks have displays that are 1600x1200 and there are several desktop PC displays (LCD) that are 1600x1200 or greater.


But why are you even talking about LCD displays in the CRT front projection forum?



CJ


----------



## Mark_A_W

1920x1200 is a common notebook res these days - I find it painful to use really, it's getting silly.


The Sony SXRD pj's are at 1920 x 1080, but that's not quite the same as LCD.


----------



## geisemann

The 909 Neck boards look a lot like the 1209s.


To mod a 1209s 909 resolution would be to place the 909 tubes in the 1209 and then get the high end VPH chip that resolves the 180. The chips are rated by bandwidth and most are electrically identical so a swap should work fine. That assumes the back end can support the 180.

http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/a...postid=1819807 

OR

http://www.tenfourltd.com/pdf/SY103A_e.pdf 


Just replace the chips with vpa-18 or higher in place of the 1209 vpa13 130 mhz and


notice 18 stands for 180 13 stands for 130

replace the caps.......


Fun times making your projector better. There are tons of things to do and not enough time.


Greg


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
Just replace the chips with vpa-18 or higher in place of the 1209 vpa13 130 mhz and


notice 18 stands for 180 13 stands for 130

replace the caps.......
If my memory serves me right, the VPA18 is supposed to be a triple video driver, that's used in CRT monitors and such.


Upgrading or replacing the Sanyo video chips to other/or similar sanyo chip is not as simple as it seems. Each chips model has special eaqualization requirements, that would require specific components in it's external peaking circuitry. If these circuits are not properly equalized after the change, a higher bandwidth chip would less likely produce a higher bandwidth than the original lower bandwidth chip it'll replace.


----------



## geisemann

Hi Mike,


Hows it going I have not said hi in a long time I hope you got a new house.


I agree the back end has to support it. The video circurts around it should be the same however the RGB preamps or RGB driver board in the 1209 has to have transistors rated at the 180MHZ. If not they have to be replaced and then you get involved in a lot of circurt mess.


I think it might be fun to experiment to replace the VPA-13 with a VPA-18 just to try it and see what the results are.


I might do that at some point to experiment.


I have found great results by replaceing the capacators in the RGB drivers and the input boards in the 1209 and that seems to really increase the bandwidth and color depth and also doing the focus mod that barco recommends.


Using the 909 tubes made a big difference as well. There is an extra grid in the 909 tube and I make a mod on the board you get the razor sharp focus and you can see the scan lines at 1280p. I did an experiment and removed the mod to the neck board and the lines seemed to become blured just a little. The tube seems to be a general just swap other wize. But I did notice at very high rez if you connect g1 and the extra g2 tougher it produces a slightly sharper image not sure why. Charlie at VDC said they were a direct swap so I have to call him to discuss.


I also tryed the same tube in a electrohome and swaped the pins on the neck board and it worked very well too. Nice sharp image.


GREG


----------



## WTS

Hi Greg,


You keep talking about the focus mod that Barco recommends, would it be possible for you to post it or a link to it as there are a few of us that are interested in this mod/update by Barco.


Thanks


----------



## geisemann

Its surface mount. So you have to be carefull.


Greg

 

InfoT227.pdf 93.2236328125k . file


----------



## WTS

Hi Greg,


Thanks for the info, now to see if it applies to the 1200x.


Walter


----------



## Z-Photo

Greg,


The Kemet Tantalum caps have done a nice job. I was not able to replace all the ones recommended in the video chain. Due to the scarity of rating for these particular caps. The next boards I mod will be done with all the same brand (the ones you referenced) through out the video chain (including the amp driver).


But since I just got a new projector in (BG 1208s/2) I might be preoccupied with my honey.


----------



## Person99

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Hi Greg,


Thanks for the info, now to see if it applies to the 1200x.


Walter
Hey Walter, I'd be curious to know what you find, but my gut is that it does not since it targets the older R762271 board found only in the 120x chassis and not the newer R7625035 used in the 808s that the Z1200X has.


Dave


----------



## WTS

Hi Pete,


What do you mean by " the scarcity of ratings for these particular caps". So you like the Kemet caps but the next mods you'll use different ones? The Kemets are alittle more pricey I suppose.


----------



## WTS

Hi Dave,


It looks like the 1200x has the mods inplace, except for the zener which the SB says should be changed to an 11v from a 9.1v, unless the schematic got it wrong.


----------



## secstate

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Person99*
Hey Walter, I'd be curious to know what you find, but my gut is that it does not since it targets the older R762271 board found only in the 120x chassis and not the newer R7625035 used in the 808s that the Z1200X has.


Dave
You are correct my Data 808s (circa 1997) with the H-Shfit/Focus board number R7625035 has this mod from Barco already on it.


----------



## geisemann

Yes the S has the mod,


This is a item to make your non-s to have the high rez focus of the S unit.


IF you look at the S shematics the mods are allready on them. I did a lot of research on this so thats how i verfyed the service release.


I purchased the 11v from mouser and other parts and it only took an hour or so.


BTW I tested last night replacing all the neck board caps and noticed much less noise and better black level.


I finanally finished the RGB out board too totaly and much better color as well and in combination with the input boards the picture is amazing now with the 909 tubes and color correction.


Too bad I cant enjoy as a customer allready bought if from me on to the next 1209 that I have.


I am still going to try the VPA -18 chip at some point to see if the bandwidth increases and makes the 1080p scan lines even more visable. I found a place has them for $35.00 each


Greg


----------



## Mark_A_W

What has the bandwidth of the video amplifiers on the neckboards got to do with the appearance of scanlines? Do you mean the appearance of 1920 pixels along the scanline?


----------



## WTS

Hi Greg,


So what caps did you replace on the neckboards, all the e-caps, what brand of e-cap did you replace them with.


Thanks


----------



## Z-Photo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *WTS*
Hi Pete,


What do you mean by " the scarcity of ratings for these particular caps". So you like the Kemet caps but the next mods you'll use different ones? The Kemets are alittle more pricey I suppose.
Walter,


I could not find the Kemet Tantalum caps in all of the need voltage/mf ratings. I have been able to find the electrolitic caps in just about anything.


I like the kemet - price is not too much of an issue - I would just like to stick with one brand through out the entire video chain.


Pete


----------



## WTS

Hi Pete,


Ah okay, yeah I'm not sure off hand what values those are available in, then its also a matter of who stocks what.


Greg,


I should have asked, these pjs thats you're replacing this caps in and seeing huge improvements in, how many hrs are on these units.


Thanks


----------



## RoBro

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
I am still going to try the VPA -18 chip at some point to see if the bandwidth increases and makes the 1080p scan lines even more visable. I found a place has them for $35.00 each


Greg
Greg,


IIRC the 18 has not enough maximum operating voltage.

The higher they go in frequency, the lower their maximum voltage gets :-(

Thats why the custom chip in the Cine9/909 is so special.

Roland


----------



## Tedd

Since we're talking Barcos here, I'm curious just how much list "ground" a set of colour corrected and filtered hd144s would add to an BG808?


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Tedd*
Since we're talking Barcos here, I'm curious just how much list "ground" a set of colour corrected and filtered hd144s would add to an BG808?
Not sure I follow. How much list "ground" ? What does that mean? You mean how much does it cost to add a set of HD144s to a BG808?


Kal


----------



## geisemann

I have sold 909 projectors and worked on them and the 909 does have a werid chip. The old 1209 used two VPA-13's like a push pull system.


I think the VPA-18 chip might work have to see what they are running the chip at and see what the voltages are.


Looks like the only think aval is the VPJ15 150MHZ at 120v

http://www.tenfourltd.com/pdf/SY103A_e.pdf 


Maybe not worth a change to just get 20 extra mhz



There might be a sub too I might look around and try to order some to see. Would be nice to see and do a 1080p test. The problem is getting sources that high. I did download some nice 1080p special hi-rez images.


Also with the S mod I go a step further and replace the caps on the Focus board at the same time I do the mod. If you have a S projector just do the caps.


Remember some of these differences dont really show up unless you are running at 1080p and most likely using the 909 tubes. The video path color difference will be good but remember I am using color corrected elements that show more color depth to begin with. IE cap changes will show up more color quality with color correction. I found the most difference in the input and output boards. I did do the Neck boards and it seemed to improve the black levels and reduce noise at 1080p but the difference was hard to detect and didnt seem to improve the color.


I was running the 1209 last night at 1080p with the new caps mods etc. Was super stable and didnt even get that hot. Seemed to even have less power supply interference than the 909.


Greg


----------



## Tedd

Kal, I was wondering if the addition of colour corrected and colour filtered lenses might change the order of Clarence's list. I know the cost involved, but haven't yet hung the 808 and added the hd144s...


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Tedd*
Kal, I was wondering if the addition of colour corrected and colour filtered lenses might change the order of Clarence's list. I know the cost involved, but haven't yet hung the 808 and added the hd144s...
Ah - now I get it. That wold all depend on how much someone values 'correct' colours I suppose. In fact, the entire list is very subjective really. I think that it would be very easy to move a PJ up or down 4 or 5 rungs based on someone's own personal needs.


Kal


----------



## geisemann

I just ordered two 180 MHZ VPA18T chips ( in the 1209) going to be close as its rated at 90V max and the supply is 110.


Whats intresting is the S projector only has a VPH08 ( 80MHZ)


I am beginning to think Barco cheaped out and over drove the VPH08 or the 1209s never really did the higher BW as good as the 1209. In the 808 the VPH06 allways went bad.


Its possible Barco didnt think it was necessary to have the super complex 1209 neck board and the tubes didnt resolve it annways. However a 1209 with the 909 tubes might just.. Intresting theory.


People in the forum complained about the 1209s having issues with very high res? and the 1209 I tested was perfect.


Have to test.


Going to try. If the projector blows up I will let you know.


Greg


----------



## RoBro

They have a special circuit around the VPH08 to boost it to 120 MHz.


You will loose 40% of the light output if you reduce the voltage from 110 to 90V (Gamma 2.5)

Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

You mean LOSE, not LOOSE.


Sorry to be the spelling nazi, but that particular mistake is one that drives me up the

wall, across the ceiling, and back down the opposite wall.


CJ


----------



## Mark_A_W

Fair go, is your German PERFECT CJ?


----------



## WTS

Hey "losen" up there CJ.


Yes they have peaking components around the VPH08 to extend its BW to 120Mhz.


----------



## groucho

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
You mean LOSE, not LOOSE.


the spelling nazi
vat un looser


----------



## Person99

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Sorry to be the spelling nazi,
Telling a German that you are sorry to be the Nazi. You're a little off aren't you?


----------



## geisemann

its 40 V p-p outpput is the only thing that drives the CRT


sooooo----


if the chips are over built my theory they might take the 110v or a 90-100 v regulator in line with the chip if it gets too hot. A special heat sink should do the trick.


it might blow... I like to experiment.


I call it overclocking your projector like you do with a microprocessor.



I did do a test with old 1209 vs 909 tubes and the difference is stunning at 1080p


With the 909 tubes in the 1209 it looks like you are actually in the room when I did the 1080p demo. Best picture I have seen on any projector except the 909 but they are too hard to get so I keep sellign the ones I get in.


Charlie at VDC has lots of 909 tubes too for 1100 for new.


I know the 909 tubes can do bit more so the extra BW would be nice.


Greg


----------



## Ericglo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *geisemann*
I call it overclocking your projector like you do with a microprocessor.



Greg
Doesn't that void the warranty? Keep up the good work Greg. Hopefully, between you, MP, and tse at VDC the state of CRT can continue to evolve for the better.


Ericglo


----------



## RoBro

Why not loose 40%? The other 60% would remain fixed 


Roland

P.S.:

I don't like Nazis, but I will make an exception for you, CJ.


----------



## cmjohnson

Didn't notice he was German. Just thought he was yet another of, apparently, millions of Americans who don't know the difference between LOSE and LOOSE.


CJ


----------



## MadMrH

Potatoe !


----------



## pietnoeck

Hi,


So if I understand correctly, an older 1209 or 1209/2 with 909 tubes will be better than a 1209s without mods and as good or better as a Cine 9 ?


----------



## geisemann

Well the S had a some changes.... They used a higher rez tube in some cases a better focus module and produced a sharper image and schemflug.


However the differences between the 1209 and 1209s seem to diminish when you do the focus update. In fact I use small washers for the schemflug on the 1209 to get the perfect corner focus its just a little harder than the S but with washers you can get the 1209 to have perfect corner focus. If you never move your projector manual vs. more automated schemflug doesnâ€™t make a difference.


I have to say however a 1209 with the s mods seems more stable as the RGB amps were of the 2 chip design and it might provide a better platform to upgrade.


Also many people complain of the ring problem with the 1209s and very high frequency resolution problems where I have never seen this issue with the 1209. The build quality of a 1209 seems very good except the caps.


My rating from my experience::


1209 = 7.0


1209 with color correction = 7.5


1209s= 8


1209s with color correction = 8.5


1209 with 909 tubes, S modifications and color correction =9.5 ( maybe soon higher if the 180 MHZ bandwidth modification amps work and seems to have less power supply noise than the 909)


Cine 9 or 909 = 10 ( perfect projector amazing focus, control and convergance is perfect only bad things are Case quality and cheap paint, Rear fan module defect and some power supply noise in the picture at high rez and parts are next to impossible to get, however they never seem to have any problems. Also picture is so sharp that it shows up a lot of defects with your equipment so you have to have $$ equipment and it also picks up stray emi from the internal circurts of the unit)


----------



## geisemann

The chip worked for about 1 hour before it blew out. As expected as the 180 MHZ chip only runs on 90V and the 110V.



It will need some power supply modifications and gain adjustments to the amp I will get to that later this month as I am overloaded before doing the circurt changes I wanted to be sure it would work. See the pictures below of the difference. I was using the highest setting my new Nvidia would resolve. I belive it was 2000 * 2000 p and I had to zoom into the screen it was so small. I had to use the 909 green tube that was not even broken in so the difference will be greater when the tube is fully burned in.


Notice the difference in the clarity.


----------



## Person99

Very impressive Greg.


----------



## erikjohn

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
>> But a list is fun to look at I guess


I still say any given projector could argue it's way 3/4/5 spots up or down based on condition and setup.


But I'd agree this list is about as entertaining and useless as:

4. Floyd

3. Stones

2. Beatles

1. Zeppelin
Very close to my list:


5. Stones

4. Floyd

3. Hendrix

2. Beatles

1. Zeppelin


EJ


----------



## pietnoeck

Hi,


Is there any difference between a 1209/2 and 1208/2 chassis and is it possible to do these mods on a 1208/2 with 9" tubes installed ?

There is one for sale overhere.


----------



## mp20748

What is the best CRT Projector out there


Mp Modified 9500LC.....and I'm willing to prove it.. 


Oops, forgot all about the Barco 909.. I'm going to have to get back to you on this one.


----------



## pasey25

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
What is the best CRT Projector out there


Mp Modified 9500LC.....and I'm willing to prove it.. 


Oops, forgot all about the Barco 909.. I'm going to have to get back to you on this one.





lol,


nice to see you're not all choked up by that modesty thing...


----------



## Clarence

The OT rock group and guitarist rankings have been moved to here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=617446


----------



## Mastiff

Good morning, Clarence!  Good move! As for the topic, I really want to look at the Barco Reality that's in Norway right now. I think that would probably rank up there...


----------



## NTHEZONE

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mastiff*
Good morning, Clarence!  Good move! As for the topic, I really want to look at the Barco Reality that's in Norway right now. I think that would probably rank up there...
 That website does not work but try this one here!


----------



## Mastiff

Thanks! I had forgotten to edit that one. Annoying, I had such a good address, but then now.nu went bankrupt, it seems.


----------



## Kamel407

So which is better


Quadded G90s or Quadded MP 9500LC Ultras?


----------



## cmjohnson

Since very few people would even be inclined to A/B compare both quad setups, in fact,

it's probably never happened, and never will, it's probably a moot point.


I'd make a better machine than EITHER by interfacing the G90's focus/astig yokes to the 9500,

FrankenYoke IIs. You'd get G90 focus characteristics and Marquee signal chain purity.


I firmly believe that the Thomson magnetics found on Marquee are only fair in performance.

There's room to improve focus at least, and I've already proven that well to my satisfaction.



CJ


----------



## Clarence

If you're seriously considering something to that scale, it'd be worth a plane ticket to see Art's G90's and Tim's blended M9500's.


What size screen would the quad setup be for?


----------



## Kamel407

I live fairly close to VDC and TSE, perhaps a 1 day rental would suffice to check out the marquees


----------



## cmjohnson

I'm not sure they do that....



CJ


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
I'm not sure they do that....



CJ


well find out!


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Clarence*
I've had a few questions about a certain 4200G lately and someone sent me this link to fill in the bandwidth blank...
http://archive.avsforum.com/avs-vb/s...threadid=86432 


I should break out the 4600 separately, but I won't change the order of the list while I have one in the Marketplace... then again, maybe the 4200G and 6PG should be rated muuuuch higher 


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog

Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES

Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog

NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM

BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES

Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES

Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES

Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES

NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM

Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES

Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES

Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES

Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES

Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES

Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES

Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES

Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES

Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES

Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES

NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)

NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)

NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM

NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)

Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM

NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM

Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM

NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM

Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM

NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM

Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM

Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM

Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
_* *Disclaimer*: my list is based only on subjective opinions._


Curt has an Ampro 4000 listed as a 9" LC

Where does that fall in this list?


----------



## mikecazzx

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
I keep seeing Marquee 8500

What's the best?

I'm gonna keep an eye out in the local classifieds
The best CRT is the one someone else is responsible for setting up and maintaining.


----------



## Ericglo

Don't tell tse. He will have the Ampros moved up the list. Judging from his comments, I would have to say the 4600 should be moved above the G70.


Ericglo


----------



## RoBro

CJ,


ever tried the '92 yokes?

Roland


----------



## cmjohnson

No, since I never got any...


I got some DEFLECTION yokes, but that's useless to me. I need the focus/astig yokes.



CJ


----------



## Z-Photo

I still got a full set of Ampro 3600 magnetics I have been trying to give away....


Wheres a junk collector (aka Chip  )when you need one...


----------



## tse

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
I live fairly close to VDC and TSE, perhaps a 1 day rental would suffice to check out the marquees
VDC don't do rentals. There aren't any projectors sitting around with nothing to do. We make 'em then ship 'em.


If you and CJ, or any of the forum inhabitants would like to cruise by the factory for a little tour (tues or thurs after 5PM) let me know and we'll check it out. Can't show any of the Top Secret stuff, though.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tse*
VDC don't do rentals. There aren't any projectors sitting around with nothing to do. We make 'em then ship 'em.


If you and CJ, or any of the forum inhabitants would like to cruise by the factory for a little tour (tues or thurs after 5PM) let me know and we'll check it out. Can't show any of the Top Secret stuff, though.
What if I brought hot babes?


----------



## tse

Hmmmm??!!!!


----------



## Ericglo

Tue or Thu, that is not fair. I will be up there in two weeks for a convention. I would definitely like to see the inner sanctum.


Ericglo


----------



## rajdude

How about the Ampro 4200?

*How does it compare with the G70? Better or worse?* 


Eric commented that the 4600 may be better than the G70.


----------



## 316

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
Don't tell tse. He will have the Ampros moved up the list. Judging from his comments, I would have to say the 4600 should be moved above the G70.


Ericglo
I would rate my 4600HD above any of the 3 G-70's that I've had and as good if not better than my 9501LC Ultra. The Ultra should pull away once I get the new tubes in but the special thing about the Ampro is the focus. The sharpest picture I have seen to date with the exception of Blendzilla. I am baffled as to why this machine gets no respect. HVPS problems or no HVPS problems, the picture cannot be ignored and based on that belongs in the top 5-6.


I would drop the 4000G somewhere between the D-50 & 6PG Xtra I'll be setting one up here again in a week or so for a guy who will be picking it up in a few weeks.


Another thing that I personally would do to my list:


1 909 (undisputed champ?)

2a G-90/MP Modded 9501LC Ultra

2b 9501LC (switch any 3 below and you would hear no argument from me)

2c Ampro 4600HD

2d 1209s

X fill in blank

X

X

3a G-70 (see 2b)

3b XG/LC

3c 8500LC

X

X

X

4a fill in blank

4b

4c


Seems that most agree, 909 is tops so I would pace it at the top.

The others are debateable but are still in the same camp (1a,1b, etc).

The level drops (2a, 3a, and so on) but a quality picture is still very obtainable all the way down the list.


Then again, who are we really kidding here? EVERYBODY knows that a digital really belongs at the top of any list if we are being honest.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *rajdude*
How about the Ampro 4200?

*How does it compare with the G70? Better or worse?* 


Eric commented that the 4600 may be better than the G70.
The G70 is a MUCH better projector than the Ampro.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *316*
I would rate my 4600HD above any of the 3 G-70's that I've had and as good if not better than my 9501LC Ultra. The Ultra should pull away once I get the new tubes in but the special thing about the Ampro is the focus. The sharpest picture I have seen to date with the exception of Blendzilla. I am baffled as to why this machine gets no respect. HVPS problems or no HVPS problems, the picture cannot be ignored and based on that belongs in the top 5-6.


I would drop the 4000G somewhere between the D-50 & 6PG Xtra I'll be setting one up here again in a week or so for a guy who will be picking it up in a few weeks.


Another thing that I personally would do to my list:


1 909 (undisputed champ?)

2a G-90/MP Modded 9501LC Ultra

2b 9501LC (switch any 3 below and you would hear no argument from me)

2c Ampro 4600HD

2d 1209s

X fill in blank

X

X

3a G-70 (see 2b)

3b XG/LC

3c 8500LC

X

X

X

4a fill in blank

4b

4c


Seems that most agree, 909 is tops so I would pace it at the top.

The others are debateable but are still in the same camp (1a,1b, etc).

The level drops (2a, 3a, and so on) but a quality picture is still very obtainable all the way down the list.


Then again, who are we really kidding here? EVERYBODY knows that a digital really belongs at the top of any list if we are being honest.  
You have a VERY strange list.  For the record, I DON'T agree that the 909 is the "undisputed champ".  Personally, I wouldn't own a Barco.


----------



## 316

What can I say, I'm a strange guy and.....its MY list! 


Get your own list!   


Oh, now you went and did it Bruce, No Barco


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *316*
What can I say, I'm a strange guy and.....its MY list! 


Get your own list!   


Oh, now you went and did it Bruce, No Barco  
Yep, it's YOUR LIST and that's MY opinion.


----------



## 316




----------



## kal

While we're arguing over the list, I'd add the following:


Zenith 1200 (aka Cine 8 Onyx)....... 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM


It's pretty much on par with the following:


NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 2500x2000 120MHz EM

Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM


(All are colour filtered, LC, 8", 120Mhz). The Zenith 1200 is as sharp (if not sharper) then the XG I had for a while (and the XG I had was not LC!).


The Zenith has the added bonus of being the quietest of the 3 by a long shot.


Kal


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
While we're arguing over the list, I'd add the following:


Zenith 1200 (aka Cine 8 Onyx)....... 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM


Kal
Does the Zenith 1200 have the "exact" same specs as the Cine 8 Onyx?


----------



## rajdude

while we are arguing over these ...I have another comment...

*What is the most reliable / fewest problems....*


From what I see here at AVS...maybe the late model big gun Sonys are the most reliable. No one posts any problems with their G90 . I see VERY few problems about a G70.


But I guess there are only 2-3 people here with G90s


In the same light..the worst will be Ampros, right ?


----------



## Z-Photo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *rajdude*
while we are arguing over these ...I have another comment...

*What is the most reliable / fewest problems....*


In the same light..the worst will be Ampros, right ?  


You did not hear it from me....... 


But I might agree....


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Does the Zenith 1200 have the "exact" same specs as the Cine 8 Onyx?
Exact same specs? No, because Zenith wrote them.


For some odd reason Zenith chose to spec their machine as 75Mhz bandwidth (instead of 120Mhz like the Onyx). My guess is that Barco made them do this for some reason?


Exact same circuitry part for part along the entire signal path from the BNC inputs out to the tube pins? Yes. Same tubes, HD-215 lenses, filtered C-elements, etc.


This is why I would consider the machines identical.


There are a couple of other differences however:


- The Onyx has a built in (crappy) doubler.

- The Onyx scans to 110Khz. The Zenith is software limited to 75Khz. This is not really an issue as 75Khz is high enough to do 1080p/60Hz which is considerably higher then the machine can resolve anyway. The fact that the bandwidth is the same in both is more important for pic quality.


The 75Mhz bandwidth spec for the Zenith might just be a typo in their literature for all I know!


For more info see here:

http://www.curtpalme.com/Zenith1200.htm 


Kal


----------



## CaspianM

Nec XG 1352 is a 150 MHz unit not 120 according to my service manual.

Nec XG 852 is 110 MHz.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *StealthZ*
You did not hear it from me....... 


But I might agree.... 
I have a giant pile of beach sand for YOU to pound 


Look at all the recent Barco and Marquee problem threads  . But NOOOOO, one AmPro gives someone a hard time and it's DUMP ON AmPro TIME 


Do a search. Go back as far as you want and count each individual Am Pro problem thread. You will probably find less than twenty without going into the archives. I'll bet you will find more than that with Marquee's only going back a month  . Same goes for Barco. 


Chip


----------



## madpoet

Ahem... Chip, that's because there's only 20 Ampros left on the planet 


Sorry, I couldn't resist (and you know I love my new Ampro!)


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *madpoet*
Ahem... Chip, that's because there's only 20 Ampros left on the planet 


Sorry, I couldn't resist (and you know I love my new Ampro!)
Yep and I may just have to set that one up so that it get's all the credit it deserves.

Of course it will never be respected by Pete. He's been on a tear since he tried one and couldn't get past the


Code:


 thing :rolleyes:

I know, it really sucks when you have to think ;)


Chip


----------



## Z-Photo

Not the Ampro Code(s). 

I had just gotten that out of my head...... arrgggghhhh


Does Raj's thread count for only one. With the wierd problems he has been having it should be 10 at least.


George Bush hates the Ampro people.


----------



## Per Johnny

I have had the pleasure of trying out a Barco Reality 909(2002 model, NEW LUG crts) and a Barco Cine 9(2003 model, 700hrs and color-filtering). 


Both are fantastic machines, but I have found the Cine 9 to have a little better gamma, and color-temp-tracking, in fact with the factory-preset 6500 it tracks almost perfect to D65 within +50/-200 degrees.


The Cine9 is also much quieter than the 909, so I will keep the Cine 9.


The Cine 9 is with wide margin the best projector I have seen, and I have tried most of them. I will not proclaim that it is the definitive projector, but if any are better, they will be DAMN good.


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Per Johnny*
...I have found the Cine 9 to have a little better gamma..., and color-temp-tracking, in fact with the factory-preset 6500 it tracks almost perfect to D65 within +50/-200 degrees.
Interesting info! Thanks! Did you end up using the built-in gamma adjustments at all? I'm assuming the gamma adjustments in my unit (Zenith 1200/Barco Cine 8 Onyx clone) are the same as yours, that is, the following controls are given: Blue Gamma slope & breakpoint, and R & B midlights.


I found the controls to not offer any value in trying to track D65 perfectly (in my case). The only that may have proven useful would have been to reduce B midlight (to reduce the blue hump), but the value was already at the minimum.


I'm also surprised that yours tracked D65 so closely. Mine (with new tubes) was considerably off to the eye and to the colorimeter. See here for my before & after graphs.


Kal


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
I have a giant pile of beach sand for YOU to pound 


Look at all the recent Barco and Marquee problem threads  . But NOOOOO, one AmPro gives someone a hard time and it's DUMP ON AmPro TIME 


Do a search. Go back as far as you want and count each individual Am Pro problem thread. You will probably find less than twenty without going into the archives. I'll bet you will find more than that with Marquee's only going back a month  . Same goes for Barco. 


Chip


Calm down Chipper, if you're happy with your Ampro, that's all that counts.........sucker.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Calm down Chipper, if you're happy with your Ampro, that's all that counts.........sucker. 
The truth hurts, don't it? 

Bite me 


Chip


----------



## Per Johnny

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
Interesting info! Thanks! Did you end up using the built-in gamma adjustments at all? I'm assuming the gamma adjustments in my unit (Zenith 1200/Barco Cine 8 Onyx clone) are the same as yours, that is, the following controls are given: Blue Gamma slope & breakpoint, and R & B midlights.


I found the controls to not offer any value in trying to track D65 perfectly (in my case). The only that may have proven useful would have been to reduce B midlight (to reduce the blue hump), but the value was already at the minimum.


I'm also surprised that yours tracked D65 so closely. Mine (with new tubes) was considerably off to the eye and to the colorimeter. See here for my before & after graphs.


Kal
Yours results with new tubes is very odd. I have always had very good results with the 808s chassis when it comes to color-tracking with new tubes. Even with very worn tubes, I have had better results than those.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
The truth hurts, don't it? 

Bite me 


Chip
It sure does..........don't it Chippy.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
It sure does..........don't it Chippy. 
I don't know. We'll just have to ask Stinky Pete 


Chip


----------



## Z-Photo

Thats Pistol Pete


Thank you very much.....


I had another Ampro Carcass (nice one Clarence  ) - but thankfully I was able to trick the Trashman into taking it.



I will stand by my statement - An Ampro is better than a Digital. (but that is all the good news for Ampro owners I have)


----------



## madpoet

Bah. No 808 Retro parts for you!  As a funny aside, I jokingly said to Terry (who's coming Monday!) that I wish I had new tubes for my Ampro so he could tune that one. He said Ampros are honestly the only projectors he's never even seen


----------



## Marshall F

Quote:

Originally Posted by *StealthZ*
Thats Pistol Pete
He was a fine son of Minerva.


Five apples,


Marshall


----------



## Z-Photo

Quote:

Originally Posted by *madpoet*
Bah.  As a funny aside, I jokingly said to Terry (who's coming Monday!) that I wish I had new tubes for my Ampro so he could tune that one. *He said Ampros are honestly the only projectors he's never even seen* 
Lucky SOB.... 


I have never seen a working one - only dead (digital dead even) ones.


----------



## Kamel407

whoever started this thread needs to be shot!

and whoever dredged it back up needs to be whipped

and whoever is a hot chick in this forum needs to come to my house


Update!


I'm putting all of my houses up for sale.

If a buyer wants to keep the home theater for my asking price of the house, I'll let em have it.


If that happens I might wait a few years and then pony up the cash for a doublestack Mike Parker special.


So far marquee has done me very well.


Oh and as far as 8" showing a soft 1080p.

My 8111+ with NN(1080p), 8300HD and MP-5 has been talked about in my entire building since the superbowl.

It looks excellent! Even at ~~135"

Total video investment since Q12005 is less than $2000

Probably put about 1000 hours on it already


----------



## Ericglo

I haven't followed the Ampro threads closely. Has there been any problems other than the pwer supply? Didn't Scott give a solution for that?


If a G70 doesn't have the abilities of a NEC XGLC or a Marqee 8500LC, then shouldn't it be at the bottom of the LCs?


Ericglo


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
I haven't followed the Ampro threads closely. Has there been any problems other than the pwer supply? Didn't Scott give a solution for that?


If a G70 doesn't have the abilities of a NEC XGLC or a Marqee 8500LC, then shouldn't it be at the bottom of the LCs?


Ericglo
You need to get out more.  There is NOTHING that the Marquee or NEC do ant better than the G70.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
You need to get out more.  There is NOTHING that the Marquee or NEC do ant better than the G70. 
This is a good statement based on opinions, but can a G70 handle the higher scan rates that an 8500 can, and can someone do the same test with an NEC?


I surely would like to see some determining reference for the list, rather than the manufacturers exagerated specs, or just because someone believes a particular projector is better (mines is better than yours thing). Technically, it was always done using test patterns and other verifiable methods. I say it's all opinions, and until we're able to post actual patterns (as what tse did), the list is bogus.


We're no longer looking at our beloved CRT's for how well they can do 720P or 960P. For the most part the bar for the BEST CRT has been raised by the 1080P digitals for Higher performance HDTV. The list should start out listing those sets that handles 1080P best. And hopefully this can be verified using a means or method.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
This is a good statement based on opinions, but can a G70 handle the higher scan rates that an 8500 can, and can someone do the same test with an NEC?


I surely would like to see some determining reference for the list, rather than the manufacturers exagerated specs, or just because someone believes a particular projector is better (mines is better than yours thing). Technically, it was always done using test patterns and other verifiable methods. I say it's all opinions, and until we're able to post actual patterns (as what tse did), the list is bogus.


We're no longer looking at our beloved CRT's for how well they can do 720P or 960P. For the most part the bar for the BEST CRT has been raised by the 1080P digitals for Higher performance HDTV. The list should start out listing those sets that handles 1080P best. And hopefully this can be verified using a means or method.


Don't confuse the already confused.  The 1080p post by TSE is NOT on the same 8500's (infact it's a VDC 8510 not an Ehome) that the readers of this forum have, which will NEVER reproduce the test patterns that TSE posted. I'm sure that in addition to the special tubes, there are many changes to the deflection circuitry.


While the scan rates that the G70 can handle are as good, if not better than most 8" machines, the tubes it uses will NEVER do 1080p either.


----------



## HoustonHoyaFan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Don't confuse the already confused.  The 1080p post by TSE is NOT on the same 8500's (infact it's a VDC 8510 not an Ehome).
What would it cost me to buy a VDC 8510?


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Don't confuse the already confused.  The 1080p post by TSE is NOT on the same 8500's (infact it's a VDC 8510 not an Ehome) that the readers of this forum have, *which will NEVER reproduce the test patterns that TSE posted*. I'm sure that in addition to the special tubes, there are many changes to the deflection circuitry.


The 9500LC that I have in my shop was not a VDC product, nor does it have anything in from VDC, but it'll easily reproduce that same pattern, and I can do it at any scan rate the VDC's CRT's can, any of them.


Again, I've been showing perfect patterns on my 9500 (non VDC), and I've been showing it at 1800x1440 @70hz. This is unheard of for an 1996 model Marquee 9500LC. Now, if I'm able to get 1440p @ 72hz (80khz) on a 9" 1996 model Marquee, why can I not get a perfect 1080P on an 8" Marquee?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *HoustonHoyaFan*
What would it cost me to buy a VDC 8510?
Maybe TSE can answer that in his 1080p thread. One thing is for sure, it costs the big bucks and you won't find one on Ebay.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
The 9500LC that I have in my shop was not a VDC product, nor does it have anything in from VDC, but it'll easily reproduce that same pattern, and I can do it at any scan rate the VDC's CRT's can, any of them.


Again, I've been showing perfect patterns on my 9500 (non VDC), and I've been showing it at 1800x1440 @70hz. This is unheard of for an 1996 model Marquee 9500LC. Now, if I'm able to get 1440p @ 72hz (80khz) on a 9" 1996 model Marquee, why can I not get a perfect 1080P on an 8" Marquee?
That's what I'm going to come with Terry to see, if you get an 8500 to 1080p.


----------



## mp20748

Oops, that was the wrong rate. I forgot that's not the rate that tse was using, so I fired up the projector again, and put in 2048x1536 @71.8hz... that projector showed that at 115khz.


Again, every pattern in the generator is perfect. The sharpness is still as sharp as when Clarence and Pete witnessed it at 1800x1440P @70hz.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
That's what I'm going to come with Terry to see, if you get an 8500 to 1080p. 
I'll have an 8500 waiting for you..


----------



## 316

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
...

I surely would like to see some determining reference for the list, rather than the manufacturers exagerated specs, or just because someone believes a particular projector is better (mines is better than yours thing). Technically, it was always done using test patterns and other verifiable methods. I say it's all opinions, and until we're able to post actual patterns (as what tse did), the list is bogus.


...


Exactly my point, when I said "its my list".

First of all, I do not trust manufacturers specs. They may be correct but then they may be inflated (I believe the latter). Watts are a big one in audio as an example. In CRT we have lumens on what a white screen? (I could be wrong but used to illustrate my point) Who watches a white screen? An example of how specs can mislead is harmonic distortions (again using an audio analogy). Its not the amount as much as it is even or odd that irritates our ears and causes fatigue.



Unless each projector is setup under like circumstances and then measured using the same methods, in its proper category its all nutin but opinions,,,,, in my opinion. 


One more thing, I can guarantee you this, and it is an absolute fact,

I am the last person qualified to make any sort of projector list.


I really think this is all just for giggles anyway's and most of us know that it is VERY subjective.


----------



## mp20748

Update!


I have the same (or very similar) pattern that tse is using. My pattern is showing 3 vertical lines and 3 horizontal lines in that same group. My video (Gforce 5950) card (or cables) are failing at 1536P @ 72hz. I get the same thing that tse gets. At 1440P @72hz through the same card and 25' of cables, I get the top two horizontal and verticals out of the 6 group to show the single pixel lines. So at 1440P 72hz, I get the full pattern (all six) to show lines.


I'll put the 6600 back in, but will do it when I can get a true 75 ohm BNC's connected.


This is all being done at 16:9 aspect ratio


Where are the threads (links) to the test patterns that were discussed on this sometime ago?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Oops, that was the wrong rate. I forgot that's not the rate that tse was using, so I fired up the projector again, and put in 2048x1536 @71.8hz... that projector showed that at 115khz.


Again, every pattern in the generator is perfect. The sharpness is still as sharp as when Clarence and Pete witnessed it at 1800x1440P @70hz.
You should make it clear that you're talking about a 9" projector here.


----------



## cmjohnson

Of course, Scott will know more about the 8510 than I do, but...as I understand it...the 8510 is an "industrially packaged" (meaning, "cosmetics optional" 8500LC. It SHOULD be the

same projector (outside of the packaging) as a current generation VDC 8500LC.


The LNN tubes are reportedly the 8" equivalent of the higher resolution P19LUG tubes used

in the highest resolution 9" machines. Capable of higher resolution. And of course, you

have liquid coupled optics, and all the boards in it are going to be the latest, most

advanced revisions in production. I'll presume that the bandwidth of the entire PJ has

been pushed well out to levels not available on any Marquee that actually was made

by Electrohome.


There has been some speculation as to how an MP-modded Electrohome era Marquee

stacks up to a dead stock current revision VDC made example. As VDC has actively been

improving the performance of the Marquee line for as long as they've been in control of it,

(which I greatly commend VDC for doing!), this particular subject greatly interests me.


I'd like to see a shootout between the two PJs, if VDC has any slightest interest in doing it.


I would be very glad to provide my own personal 9501LC, with Mike's latest (rev. 2) mods

installed, and 120 hours on new tubes. Let VDC set it up per factory specs (and even

pay them to do it because they always do it RIGHT) and then match it against a new

9501LC on a level playing field.



I doubt that this would happen, but the offer is open. It would be interesting, and isn't

that reason enough to do it?


My suspicion is that Mike's modded VIM and neck boards will probaby STILL have

an edge in black level and low level detail resolution, as that's probably more

of a home theater priority than it is a simulation priority.


Incidentally, as for pricing for the 8510, all I can say there is that VDC issued a

press release a few months ago announcing that Boeing had ordered 350 PJs

from them for 7 million bucks. The math says 20K a copy...but I don't know

which model(s) Boeing is buying. And I'm SURE that Boeing is getting a power

buy on them, too. Last I heard, single 9501LCSIMs were retailing for about

45 grand each. By bunches and the price per unit will drop considerably.




CJ


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
You should make it clear that you're talking about a 9" projector here. 
Do the math. If a 9 incher can properly resolve 1440P at 16:9 aspect and do it @ 70hz. 1080P @ 60hz on an 8 incher should be cake..


----------



## Kamel407

...frothing at mouth...


#1 Quad Stacked MP(v2)9501LC(Ultra)s


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
Do the math. If a 9 incher can properly resolve 1440P at 16:9 aspect and do it @ 70hz. 1080P @ 60hz on an 8 incher should be cake.. 


   We're a come'in, so crank up the ol' 8500.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
   We're a come'in, so crank up the ol' 8500.


Great!


The test pattern that tse used is a standard, though I prefer to include the single horizontal and vertical pixel patterns at the top. There's a few other patterns out there, to include the one that WM used.


This has been a very interesting revelation. Everything I understood about proper line resolving for CRT's has changed over the past year. In no way would I have ever believed that an 9" CRT tube could resolve above 1200P, and my best measurements on that was always when done at 4:3. Even when I was setting up the 9500LC's at 1200P, there were some softening noticed. I always considered this to be a more film like image, that also help smooth out the noise that was in the video chain.


After the the presense of tse to the forum, and his insistance on looking at addressable resolution (tube) rather than ansi (tube/electronics). We found out that a tube was truly capable of resolving higher resolutions. So any shortcomings from not getting at those resolutions, must be in the electronics. Plus, both VDC and Barco were listing their resolutions based on the tubes (addressable). In fact, Barco uses one set of numbers for both 909 and 908 super high resolution CRT projectors... I thought about this, and looked at the fact that both companies had taking their bandwidth performance far beyond what was commom to us. And that made me think that there was something to what tse had raised. At first I thought the guy was nuts, but my sources who know of him quite well says that he definitely knows his stuff. So from there I concluded that I had some unlearning and relearning to do.


Now, I have a very similar 9500LC that i could only get to resolve around 1200P @60hz before the changes, to it now being able to resolve upwards to 2000P (4:3). And this is not something that I'm claiming. This is something that I've been proving for months. As you know, I always get someone to sign off on everything that I do.


I also found out why some of the CRT projectors in the 90's were not really capable of these very high bandwidths. one was cost cutting, the other was thecomponents made at the time.


I now have a Barco 808 in my shop, that has VPH06 as a single drive output. this projector failed teribbly under testing, yet it's a very popular projector. I'm going to look at putting a VPA18 in place of the VHH06's. If I'm successful...


I'll stop here..  ... can 8" CRT properly resolve 1080P at 16:9? At this point I don't know for sure, but two very competent engineers says that it can, And I have fully believed them both. but only if I can increase the performance to the tube... Done!


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
I now have a Barco 808 in my shop, that has VPH06 as a single drive output. this projector failed teriibly under testing, yet it's a very popular projector. I'm going to look at putting a VPA18 in place of the VHH06's. If I'm successful...


I'll stop here..  ... can 8" CRT properly resolve 1080P at 16:9? At this point I don't know for sure, but two very competent engineers says that it can, And I have fully believed them both. but only if I can increase the performance to the tube... Done!



I'm open to seeing anything, but, just from experience, unless there are circuit changes and perhaps tube changes, I don't know how the "standard" projectors that we dicuss here all the time can "look" any better, no matter what we agree that they can actually resolve. 


As for the Barco BG808, I have one sitting here right now that I just installed new P16LNQ tubes in. I have to tell you that I hate the service menu of that projector, it's really clumsy. However, the yokes and coils are really good quality, bu the bandwidth is very low compared to other pj's. If only we could take the best features of each projector and make one Super Projector.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
I'm open to seeing anything, but, just from experience, unless there are circuit changes and perhaps tube changes, I don't know how the "standard" projectors that we dicuss here all the time can "look" any better, no matter what we agree that they can actually resolve. 


As for the Barco BG808, I have one sitting here right now that I just installed new P16LNQ tubes in. I have to tell you that I hate the service menu of that projector, it's really clumsy. However, the yokes and coils are really good quality, bu the bandwidth is very low compared to other pj's. If only we could take the best features of each projector and make one Super Projector. 
Not a bad idea


Other than Mike Parker, Scott from VDC, and Chris Johnson, who else puts time into trying to improve the insides of a CRT? Perhaps we could get some more discussion going with the real hardcore techs and turn the super projector into an affordable reality.


----------



## cmjohnson

Eric, thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am in no WAY in the league of Mike and Scott and should not have been mentioned in the same sentence with them.


I know my skill level. It's enough to get me in trouble a lot but sometimes I can find something useful to contribute.


Now, if I'd actually managed to get that job at VDC that I tried for, maybe by now I'd be

making some more significant improvements, but if I did, it'd probably be a VDC company secret anyway and I couldn't say much about it.


Even if they DID offer me a job now, I'd probably decline it. The job I have now is pretty decent and the benefits are excellent and hard to beat, these days.



I think a new 9500LCSIM, with the right mix of MP mods and Chris Stephens' mods, and

better focus yokes, could be the ultimate projector.



CJ


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Eric, thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am in no WAY in the league of Mike and Scott and should not have been mentioned in the same sentence with them.
Chris,


Even with the naysayers and disbelievers, you still managed to have a few creative ideas and come out with your "Frankenyokes" which I've heard are an improvement. Therefore, I think your contribution and future contributions could help in this instance.


A Thread full of "Techs" willing to "Brainstorm" and "Constructively Criticize" for the benefit of "Improvement".


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
I'm open to seeing anything, but, just from experience, unless there are circuit changes and perhaps tube changes, I don't know how the "standard" projectors that we dicuss here all the time can "look" any better, no matter what we agree that they can actually resolve. 
On the Marquee, unlike some other CRT projectors, there's very little need to make changes to the circuits. They used the best design aproach possible. The Marquee was designed using discrete components in the neck boards. so it was not limited to the bandwidth limits of the Sanyo chips at the time of design. They also used the highest bandwidth chips available at the time, so not much was needed there. the problem was the components used at the time, to include that there was a bottleneck in the video chain that gave them a problem. There's a lot I can share on this once you get here, but there are things that I can't discuss on an open forum, but the changes that i've made has been confirmed and praised by a former electrohome employer. I'll also prove that once you get here.


Quote:

as for the Barco BG808, I have one sitting here right now that I just installed new P16LNQ tubes in. I have to tell you that I hate the service menu of that projector, it's really clumsy. However, the yokes and coils are really good quality, bu the bandwidth is very low compared to other pj's. *If only we could take the best features of each projector and make one Super Projector*. 
Not into redesigning these things, some features are what they are, but some of these projectors can be made to perform better. it's not the redesign as much as it is to find the right components to repalce the ones that were used years ago.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *cmjohnson*
Eric, thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am in no WAY in the league of Mike and Scott and should not have been mentioned in the same sentence with them.

CJ
I don't think my name should be mentioned in the same sentence with Scott. He's on a whole different level above me technically. I'm just a tech guy, who some had said that I've just been somehow gifted with the ability to find certain problems.


----------



## Kamel407

Mike, when are you coming to visit Florida?


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Mike, when are you coming to visit Florida? 
I have a brother who lives down there. I would like to make it down there this year when it warms up, but before the hurricanes start doing their thing.


----------



## Prehjan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MYoung*
Sony Vidimagic.


hehe...


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
I have a brother who lives down there. I would like to make it down there this year when it warms up, but before the hurricanes start doing their thing.
Perhaps a trip to VDC is in order, I'd take a day off for that.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Perhaps a trip to VDC is in order, I'd take a day off for that.
I forgot to mention that I would want to put VDC on my do to list while there.


----------



## Ericglo

I guess I am guilty for starting this whole 1080p 8" thing. On the pj, Scott used it because it was available. I think he would have used any 8" pj available, this just happened to be the one.


On upgrades, I don't know the Marquees so someone will have to fill in the blanks. I asked Scott last week what it would take to upgrade a 1996 or newer 9500 to current VDC specs. He said a new VIM, neckboards, and HDM. Plus, some software upgrades. I don't know if this would apply to the 8500s or not.


I would definitely like to see a pj shootout. If everyone gets together to do, then I would like to make the trip. I know tse said no one has emailed him about a tour after my visit. I am sure it would be fun and enlightening.


Ericglo


----------



## cmjohnson

Uh, Mike, the MP5 is a very respectable technical achievement and the best HD component to RGB transcoder in the industry. Don't sell yourself short.


CJ



Quote:

Originally Posted by *mp20748*
I don't think my name should be mentioned in the same sentence with Scott. He's on a whole different level above me technically. I'm just a tech guy, who some had said that I've just been somehow gifted with the ability to find certain problems.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Ericglo*
I would definitely like to see a pj shootout. If everyone gets together to do, then I would like to make the trip. I know tse said no one has emailed him about a tour after my visit. I am sure it would be fun and enlightening.
OK Weird, I just posted this 5 minutes ago but I guess it did not go through.

I'm not available to visit during the week, but I do have weekends off if Scott would be available to host a group of us.

Unless Mike came down for a day, I'd take the day off for that.


----------



## erikjohn

Just a thought on the list. Cliff mentioed that his XGLC did 1080p better than his G70. Possibly needs to be a change on the list.


EJ


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *erikjohn*
Just a thought on the list. Cliff mentioed that his XGLC did 1080p better than his G70. Possibly needs to be a change on the list.


EJ
Just a thought, I think you've been out in the Florida sun too long.


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
Just a thought, I think you've been out in the Florida sun too long. 
Ya right. What would you know about being out in the sun to long? You've been locked in a padded cell since Nov. 2002 


Chip


----------



## Z-Photo

After seeing Tims BLENDZILLA - I would say that PQ has a new standard.....


Rudy my butt.... 


Pete


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Z-Photo*
After seeing Tims BLENDZILLA - I would say that PQ has a new standard.....


Rudy my butt.... 


Pete
Can Tim blend 4 G90s? Thats my goal in a few years  unless of course Mike Parker makes a personal visit to sway me over to 4 MP9500LCUs 


Next time I have a top o the line Marquee and Mike's down, I'll invite him Scott and Chris over for some drinks and tweaks


----------



## Z-Photo

4 ???


Why would you want that screen ratio?


----------



## linecircle

a blend stack?


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Z-Photo*
4 ???


Why would you want that screen ratio?
Can you not converge 2 stacked PJs on each side and blend their converged projections?


----------



## Z-Photo

That would be 4:3 (again)


HD is not normally broadcast in that. Other than a bigger 4:3 -I do not see what it would get you.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Z-Photo*
That would be 4:3 (again)


HD is not normally broadcast in that. Other than a bigger 4:3 -I do not see what it would get you.
I was thinking more like a converged 2.35:1


Are you thinking I ment blending all 4 PJs?


----------



## Z-Photo

The stack would make the PQ softer.... and you would be slamming the convergence /geometry...


Talk about a nightmare to upkeep..


Pete


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Z-Photo*
The stack would make the PQ softer.... and you would be slamming the convergence /geometry...


Talk about a nightmare to upkeep..


Pete
Even if the stack was inverted?


----------



## linecircle

If you mean two on the ceiling, two on the floor, that's a big loss of ideal seating area...


----------



## RGBHV

Just do some suspended (floating) seating between the two stacks. ;-)


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *linecircle*
If you mean two on the ceiling, two on the floor, that's a big loss of ideal seating area...


nahh that was just a joke.


However, expanding upon your "crop and scale" post, could you do just that I wonder with the blendzilla to go back to 16:9 with 4 PJs


----------



## linecircle

How short would you have to be to maintain the pj's projection angle though?


I was also thinking if sidemounted pjs with the yoke rotated 90 degs would work. Probably push the units beyond what it was engineered for  Unless you project a rotated image, but then you'd have vertical scanlines, which might look terrible.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *RGBHV*
Just do some suspended (floating) seating between the two stacks. ;-)
Yes of course! I forgot to mention my CRT HT would be in the new Space Condos!


Anyway, anyone know if there's any CRT out there better than the G90 or MP2-9500LC-U?


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
Ya right. What would you know about being out in the sun to long? You've been locked in a padded cell since Nov. 2002 


Chip
Chipper, there's NO OIL used in Florida, so people like you can't get off on us.  Better get back to work or the "boss" will have your a$$.


----------



## Kamel407

My account will probably be suspended, and this thread may be locked or deleted entirely, but it will not prevent my post to propogate to whoever is subscribed.


I don't appreciate my threads and posts being deleted, OT or not.


Kysersose, I plan to email Alan right now, with this thread as the link.


Please let me know why SOME off topic posts are left intact while others are deleted.


Either get rid of them all, or let them all stay.


My advice, provide an OT forum.


How is posting an Off Topic post breaking the Forum Rules, as I will state them here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Alan Gouger*
Rules. New to the forum, Read. In the AV industry, Read. Need a refresher, Read!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules, Not knowing them does not excuse improper behavior.


Religion.

Please keep Religion off this Board. This includes your signature. It will not be tolerated.



Politics.

Please keep all politics off this board. This includes your signature. It will not be tolerated.



Are you a Dealer/Retail/Trunk Slammer or Installer of HT products.

No mentioning of sales. Do not play the game, I have this projector coming in this week or sitting in inventory. Or I have this hanging in my store. This lets people know you are a dealer in a about face way which translates to sales. Do not post a signature promoting your business.



No power buys without permission.

If you are here to use this board for financial gain in anyway without permission please leave.



To everyone

Please treat the manufactures who post here with respect. We like to encourage them to be here to help support the users of this site. Remember, it is not what you say but how you say it. (This goes towards all members.) Please remember AVS Forum should be a fun place to enjoy and learn more about our passion of A/V.



Anyone not following the rules may have their PM and email privileges suspended & or account closed.


If you have any questions regarding the above please drop us a PM or email.



Thank you.


----------



## madpoet

There is an OT forum. It's available to Gold Club members.


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *madpoet*
There is an OT forum. It's available to Gold Club members.
If that is the case, then I stand corrected. I did not realize that there was extra priveledges for Gold Club members, had I known I might have subscribed.


----------



## Clarence

I'm not knocking it, but the Gold Club's Coffee House (aka OT forum) isn't too active... 6 posts in the last 30 days. Nothing like the OT topics here.


There are times where OT gets pretty thick around here. And most of you honored the no politics, no religion, nothing offensive. Non-interesting OT threads fall off the page on their own in 12-24 hours. OT also keeps the long-time CRT experts entertained and peeking in... otherwise it's the same newbie questions 90% of the time.


But let's not further risk this valuable thread getting deleted. Alan's request is clear:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=652663


----------



## Z-Photo

Will my projector accept HD component in?



YES - if it is a BARCO.......


----------



## MadMrH

Yes you are right, it is very slow in their.......but in time maybe things will speed up......


I only really went gold for 2 reasons.....


1 - to help support this site and


2 - So I could occasionally make some childish reference to my gold member


----------



## MadMrH

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Anyway, anyone know if there's any CRT out there better than the G90 or MP2-9500LC-U?
I would like to think Cine9


And soon the MP Barcos will be on the streets


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Yes of course! I forgot to mention my CRT HT would be in the new Space Condos!


Anyway, anyone know if there's any CRT out there better than the MP2-9500LC-U?
I wonder if TSE does mods outside of work.


----------



## tse

VDC pays for most of my work. They own the results of it. I can't see where it would hurt VDC to post some mods but somehow I've got the feeling that someone would get their drawers twisted in a knot if I did. When VDC bought the Marquee line, Christy/Electrohome was shipping projectors set-up for VGA. 640 x 480p @ 60Hz. We've come a long way, baby.


----------



## GEBrown

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Z-Photo*
Will my projector accept component in?



YES - if it is a BARCO.......
Ummm . . but not exclusively. Sony's can accept component in with a Sony IFB-12A card or later model 3rd party card.


My 2 cents


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GEBrown*
Ummm . . but not exclusively. Sony's can accept component in with a Sony IFB-12A card or later model 3rd party card.


My 2 cents
Sony D and G series accept component video on their primary input without needing the IFB-12A board.


----------



## Graham Johnson

please explain?


Unless they have an input card of some description. (apart from video in terminals) how do they accept a component signal?


----------



## linecircle

I took it to mean the primary input as in the same place you would send it RGB.

The NEC XG 852 and XG 1352 has this ability too.


----------



## Mark_A_W

Eh? Where you bin Graham?


The D50/G90/G70 have 1 set of built in RGBHV inputs (not cards like the 12xx) which will accept component when you pick it from the menu.


Then it has a card slot (maybe not D50, I forget) where you can put an IFB 12 if you like as well. Or a 10/11/etc.


You never played with a G70? I thought you had...


The G series also disregards the jumper settings on the IFB cards and controls them via firmware.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *linecircle*
I took it to mean the primary input as in the same place you would send it RGB.

The NEC XG 852 and XG 1352 has this ability too.
Right, just as you say on the XG's, the Sony D and G series have it built in to their circuitry. The IFB-12A card, while allowing component input either in slot B or in a Sony PC-1271 type switcher is just an interface, it doesn't actually have any component circuitry on it, since it's built into the projector.


Graham is just being difficult.


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mark_A_W*
Eh? Where you bin Graham?



The G series also disregards the jumper settings on the IFB cards and controls them via firmware.
The D50 will also disregard the IFB-12A jumpers and is controled by menu software. It's only the 12xx that require the jumper settings. The IFB-12A card is also used some other Sony equipment (besides the PC-1271 switcher), but I've never used it in any.


----------



## Stevoscopy

Looks like I have 19 upgrades to go. 1252 is the best CRT I have seen... (Not counting the FrensZilla.)


----------



## GKevinK

Anybody have any idea where the DWIN HD-700 would sort into the list?


----------



## kal

GKevinK:


Probably in the bottom 1/3 of the list:


Dwin 500: 7" EM focused, no colour filtering, about 600 lines resolvable, dead silent, small.

Dwin 700: 7" ES focused (yes, ES), about 600 lines resolvable, dead silent, small.


They're both really small and silent, if that matters. If your screen's pretty small they'd probably do pretty well.


And when I mean silent, I mean DEAD silent: The 500 has NO fans, the 700 has one that you can't even hear.


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Has there been a MP2-M9500LC-U vs G90 shootout?


----------



## Clarence

Not side-by-side, AFAIK.


But I've stated many times that IMHO, from repeated personal observation, MP's 9500 clearly resolves better at resolutions above [email protected]


But at or below 1080p, either one is a winner.


----------



## mp20748

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Has there been a MP2-M9500LC-U vs G90 shootout?
From what I've seen and experienced so far, they both have equal strengths and weaknesses. I just prefer to think of the two as equals, and not one being better than the other.


----------



## Tom.W

Hi Mike,

Could you elaborate a bit on the strengths and weakness's of both and is it in the design or execution of the design that makes the difference ?


----------



## techman707

This is the ENDLESS thread!  Although it was probably started by a digital person (like QQQ) looking to create a problem, the bottom line is this:


The BEST projector out there is the one that YOU own and is in good condition with good tubes and WELL SETUP. There isn't a projector out there that, if setup right, won't make a DVD look terrific. With that said, let's go WATCH SOME MOVIES!!!!!


----------



## Tom.W

Guess you are correct and with that said both of these projectors are two of the finest and most expensive devices ever made . Ok, Im gonna watch a movie now ! Good idea..


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
This is the ENDLESS thread!  Although it was probably started by a digital person (like QQQ) looking to create a problem
Stirring up the pot again?


----------



## Kysersose

Let's just carry on and try to keep this thread afloat. (If that's what you want)


Thanks guys,


Kyser


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamel407*
Stirring up the pot again?  
No, that's your job.  I'm not the Kamel.......one hump or two?


----------



## GKevinK

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
GKevinK:


Probably in the bottom 1/3 of the list:


Dwin 500: 7" EM focused, no colour filtering, about 600 lines resolvable, dead silent, small.

Dwin 700: 7" ES focused (yes, ES), about 600 lines resolvable, dead silent, small.


They're both really small and silent, if that matters. If your screen's pretty small they'd probably do pretty well.


And when I mean silent, I mean DEAD silent: The 500 has NO fans, the 700 has one that you can't even hear.


Kal


Thanks Kal... what gets my attention is the silent part. I have a 1272Q right now that I'm pretty pleased with aside from the noise (measured currently at 56 dB using the same parameters noted in the related sound level thread)... using a 91" 1.85 ratio 1.5 gain screen. If the HD700 is equal to the 1272Q in brightness and focus ability, I'd think about making the switch to be able to hear my surrounds again. I do wonder whether it has comparable converging capabilities. My 1272Q does ok with 720P ( I don't mind it being just a teensy soft ), but I wouldn't want to give up 720P in a big way.


I'm also considering pursuing the options for fan changeout and resistors/zener diodes to slow the fans down.


Kevin


----------



## stefuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by *techman707*
This is the ENDLESS thread!  Although it was probably started by a digital person (like QQQ) looking to create a problem, the bottom line is this:


The BEST projector out there is the one that YOU own and is in good condition with good tubes and WELL SETUP. There isn't a projector out there that, if setup right, won't make a DVD look terrific. With that said, let's go WATCH SOME MOVIES!!!!! 
Bruthie

Are you sure you wouldn't like to re-consider that last remark to exclude AmPro? 


Chip


----------



## techman707

Quote:

Originally Posted by *stefuel*
Bruthie

Are you sure you wouldn't like to re-consider that last remark to exclude AmPro? 


Chip
Now Chippy, you better than anyone should know that one man's excrement is another man's gold.  The Ampro stays in!


----------



## Kamel407

I saw the new and improved CRT Primer, and I've got to say its great info.

I even learned some extra stuff about the HMDI/HDCP compliancy


----------



## Chris Bigos

Hey Mr Mod! Why have all my posts in this thread been deleted......? Why?


----------



## Tom.W

Hi Chris,

I'm not sure that question is allowed ? I would also like to know why my PM box disappeared ? Is that allowed


----------



## Kysersose

Deleted the last few extremely OT posts.

If anyone has any issues with their account please email or PM the owner (Alan Gouger) and/or the Admin (David Bott).


Thanks,


Kyser


----------



## kal

Anyone have any objections if I put this list up on Curt's site?


While I would keep the order more or less the same, I would actually split it into 3 higher level groupings:


Entry Level PJ's (7-8" ES)

Intermediate Level PJ's (8" EM, 9" ES)

High Performance PJ's (9" EM)


(With standard disclaimers on how it's a subjective list and that you should always weigh in your own requirements before picking a PJ ... blah blah blah...)

Code:


Code:


Sony VPH-1020/1030/1040.. 5.5"..450-500..480i..10MHz ES Analog
Electrohome ECP2000...... 5.5"..725......540p..30MHz ES
Sony VPH-1031............ 5.5"..500......540p..30MHz ES Analog
NEC DP-1200................ 7"..600......540p..30MHz EM
BD600.....................5.5"..850..1024x768..30MHz ES
Ampro 2000............... 5.5"..725 1280x1024..65MHz.ES
Sony VPH-1251.............. 7"..650 1024x768...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1252.............. 7"..700 1280x960...40MHz ES
Sony VPH-1270.............. 7"..650 1280x1024..40MHz ES
NEC GP-5000................ 9"..600 1280x1024..70MHz EM
Electrohome ECP3000/3100..5.5"..725 1280x1024..50MHz ES
Barco BD 800................7"..850 1024x768...50MHz ES
Electrohome ECP3500.......5.5"..725 1280x1024..60MHz ES
Barco BD 801................7"..900 1024x768...75MHz ES
Barco 708................ 5.5" 1200 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Barco BG 800................7"..850 1600x1200..60MHz ES
Barco BG 801................7"..900 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1271.............. 7"..650 1600x1200..75MHz ES
Sony VPH-1272...............7"..700 1600x1200..85MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4000/4100....7"..725 1280x1024..65MHz ES
Electrohome ECP4500.........7"..725 1280x1024..70MHz ES
Sony D50..................5.5"..800 1280x1024..75MHz ES
Barco Cine 7
NEC 6PG.................... 7"..800 1280x1024..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 601, Runco 900)
NEC 9PG.................... 7"..800 1600x1200..70MHz EM (aka GE Imager 901, Runco 980)
NEC 6PG+....................7"..850 1280x1024..75MHz EM
NEC 9PG+....................7"..850 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC PG6200 (6PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1280x1024 100MHz EM (aka Runco 980 Ultra)
Barco BD 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BD 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
Barco BG 808................8" 1250 1600x1200..75MHz EM
NEC PG9200 (9PG Xtra).......7" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Ampro 3400/3600.............8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8000....8" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 808s.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco BG 1208.............. 8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
NEC XG75/85 nonLC...........8" 1100 1600x1200 110MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500....8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Barco BG 1208s/2............8" 1250 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Barco Cine 8
Barco BG 1200...............9" 1230 1600x1200 120MHz EM
Ampro 4200/4600.............9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 8500 LC 8" 1200 1600x1200 100MHz EM
NEC XG/LC.................. 8" 1100 1200x1600 120MHz EM
Sony G70....................8" 1200 1700X1200 120MHz EM
Barco Cine 8 Onyx/Zenith Pro 1200X
Sony 1292.................. 9"..700 2000x1600 135MHz EM
NEC 10PG....................9" 1000 1600x1200 100MHz EM
Electrohome Marquee 9000....9" 1200 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209..................9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Barco 1209S................ 9" 1250 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC..............9" 1300 2500x2000 120MHz EM
Marquee 9501LC Ultra/MP.... 9" 1300 2500x2000 150MHz EM
Sony G90....................9" 1300 2500x2000 135MHz EM
Barco Cine9................ 9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM
Barco Reality 909...........9" 1200 2500x2000 180MHz EM ( With RED and Green Colorfilter )


----------



## Kamel407

Sounds good to me, would be a very good addition.


----------



## Marshall F

Kal, where would the Zenith Pro 2000 fit?

Maybe b/w the 8000 & 808?


I'm partially kidding, but also wondering how it would compare...


Where is your 1200?


----------



## Marshall F

Maybe also add an AC / LC column...


----------



## Ericglo

The G70 should be dropped below the NEC and Marquee for its inability to do 1080p.


Ericglo


----------



## geisemann

The Barco 1209 and 9500 are the best.


unless you can get ahold of a 909.


Greg


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Marshall F*
Kal, where would the Zenith Pro 2000 fit?

Maybe b/w the 8000 & 808?


I'm partially kidding, but also wondering how it would compare...
Good question... No idea! It's so rare that nobody seems to know anything about it... I've certainly never heard it discussed here much...


I'm partially kidding, but also wondering how it would compare...

Quote:

Where is your 1200?
On my ceiling in the basement.





Oh! on the LIST! I get it... it's in there... look again.


Kal


To everyone else: It's a very subjective list for sure... we'll never come to an agreement over it, so that's why I want to do it with 'groups' of PJs together since it'll be mostly for newbies.


People like us that know *exactly* what we want in a PJ would never look at this list anyway so it's not for the pro/enthusiast anyway since all we do is bicker. 


As far as groupings go, here are some examples: PJs like a Barco 800 and Sony 125x/127x would be listed together in the same 'group', PJ's like a Barco 808 and Ehome 8000 would be together... G90/1209/9500 will listed together... etc.


I'll still list the base specs, but it'll be more like a set of 4 or 5 groups of PJs with 5 or 10 models in each group.


Kal


----------



## Belcherwm

Kal,


I think you're on the right track with your groups.


----------



## nidi




geisemann said:


> With my NEW Set Of MODS
> 
> 
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> how much is the bandwidth after your mods to the neck boards for
> 
> 
> the Marquee ? did you use those chips you talked about a couple of
> 
> 
> months back (180 MHz ??)
> 
> 
> Michael


----------



## PAW

Should the NEC XG/LC be 1600x1200 instead of 1200x1600?


----------



## CaspianM

I agree. I mentioned that a couple of times.

The listing for XG is misleading. I understand it is subjective but which XG is the listing for?


Based on the service manual XG 85 is only 110 MHz and is 1600x1200 dot addressable resolution. XG1352 is listed as 150 MHz (I know many says it is bogus) but the addressable resolution is 2500x2000. It has been mentioned lately that XG1352 can do better in resolution than G70 with a listed 120 MHz bandwidth.


----------



## GEBrown

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
. . . .


As far as groupings go, here are some examples: PJs like a Barco 800 *and Sony 125x/127x would be listed together in the same 'group'*, PJ's like a Barco 808 and Ehome 8000 would be together... G90/1209/9500 will listed together... etc.

. . . .

Kal
One of the things that came out of the last discussion about the Sony's at least was that the 07MSP tubes in those PJ's are actually 8", not 7", so would they be listed as 8 inchers?


----------



## Mark_A_W

Yeahbut they are ES focus - that makes them 7" to me (not that it matters).


Hey and why is the Marquee 8500 above the XG AC? Marquee's not colour filtered, so it's not as good.


And why are the 6PG Xtra and 9PG Xtra split? They are almost identical - both colour filtered and both have EM focus.


The difference between a 6PG Xtra and an XG751 is pretty minor - I have both. XG is sharper, but that's hard do see even with HD material. So to me the difference within a "group" is fairly small.


7" ES and below


8" EM focus

8" EM focus + colour filtered

8" EM focus + Liquid coupled (fit coloured C elements!)

8" EM focus + colour filtered + Liquid coupled


9" EM focus + Liquid coupled (fit coloured C elements!)

9" EM focus + colour filtered + Liquid coupled


Even then not all are equal within a group - some units underperform, some are fantastic....


----------



## kal

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GEBrown*
One of the things that came out of the last discussion about the Sony's at least was that the 07MSP tubes in those PJ's are actually 8", not 7", so would they be listed as 8 inchers?
Yup. The CRT Specifications pages I put up already do that. NEC PG's are 8" as are Sony 125x/127x machines.


Kal


----------



## geisemann

The mods don't improve the BW on marquee that much but the color depth and shaddow detail is improved over 90%.


The best way to get a sharper image out of the marquee is replace with high rez tubes. The BW of the neck boards is allready good but the VIM needs a lot of work.



See my website to look at the mods.

www.eisemann-theater.com


----------



## cmjohnson

I have noticed that even the best lenses, like HD10-GT17s, don't deliver the image with the utter clarity of what's on the tube face. Around 1080p I can still see scan lines if I'm looking at the tube face directly, but the GT17s won't QUITE resolve those scan lines to the same degree. There's a distinct loss of definition, and this is with lenses that are focused to the phosphor grain.


I'm curious about other lens options that nobody has ever tried yet. Like using a very high quality condenser lens mated up with a Minolta 3-chip DLP type lens, mounted in a customized holder. Of course you'd need THREE.


I'm thinking that the outer shells of beat-up HD10s would be a good starting point for a mount such as this.


I've used a DLP lens like that as a compact telescope, in conjunction with a suitable eyepiece. The clarity of the image is remarkable. Those are FINE optics, probably several

times better than those in any HD10 series lens.



CJ


----------



## kal

Well, I finally got around to creating the "CRT Projectors Rankings" page on Curt site.


I started a new thread on it as this one's going all over the place and I don't want to hijack it ... see here:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7520991 


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Looks like the price ranges have changed, anyone care to edit the price ranges?


Heck maybe I should upgrade to a Marquee 9500LC Ultra for a couple smackers and get it modded by the pros!


----------



## kal

Price ranges? What price ranges? I purposely didn't any prices on any of my lists as they change constantly.


Kal


----------



## Kamel407

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kal*
Price ranges? What price ranges? I purposely didn't any prices on any of my lists as they change constantly.


Kal


I hope you didn't, I was refering to the first few pages of this thread ;o)


----------

